soleil

Many thanks:) Never would have guessed. The vehicle did come off a farm.

Ruxy kindly put a link to a pic of what I believe is this on post 6 of this thread which I've copied below for convenience: He also posted a link for the corresponding catalogue entry: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/70000251

Thanks for all your help and interest. It's been a pleasure.

Thanks for both bits of info. In layman's terms for civvies like me you're saying the fire extinguisher would have been replaced in 1993 for a different type? (There is only one service date on the one fitted and that is 1992.)

Many thanks for getting back to me. For a grand and a half I have some nice parts and a repro will be cheaper to repair as I'll be able to junk the rusty stuff & replace instead of recondition. I don't suppose you have any idea why there are so many holes - what is missing? Anything you could tell us about the vehicle / concept would be most interesting. No rush because I'm in no rush to do anything with it, and thanks again for your quick reply. Now I'll have a good think what to do with it. Any suggestions from other people???

Thanks. The higher res picture I have shows HRC2495 embossed on it. It appears from research on the web HRC2494 is fitted one side and HRC2495 on the other. One current Ebay listing in the US says "Please note they also fit the 1993... Range Rover Classic". The vehicle also has rear disc brakes, which as I noted in the initial spec were not standard Defender fitment until 1994. Convoy op in Feb 1991. No idea on the development times of these things, and Land Rover were obviously doing everything they could to help out our lads with staff in theatre etc., but it looks very, very marginal... The seats and steering wheel are also subsequent replacements or hot off the production line. Curious because one seat base has some camo overspray. I think I need serious help figuring this one out!!!

Thanks:) I have a soft spot for the Oz SAS variants too. Never dreamed I might own something like this.

As you probably know, there is a post on the radios here: http://hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/showthread.php?52339-Unusual-Land-Rover-radio-setup It is a minimalist set-up whereas I'm guessing Walts tend to go OTT. And if the radio setup is sensible, as is the GPMG setup, why go off the beaten track with the axe holder / rock slider / external jerry can holders / side aerial? There is a replica Dinky (pics on the web, by a Sue IIRC), and surprise, surprise, that has expanded steel mesh baskets down the whole side. The Japanese have a saying 'the nail that sticks out gets banged in', i.e. best play it safe. That will probably happen, ta. Contacting Barry Pocock/Neil Mitchell and Dunsfolds are other obvious moves as they have been able to examine genuine examples all over. The vehicle was in the same neck of the woods as the Bovington Tank Museum and apparently taken to some local shows, so it is possible there are photos of it more complete and in better nick. At the end of the day I want to play it safe. i.e. be certain this vehicle is not genuine before altering it, because if it is genuine it is not "one in a million" but one of six or so ever made, possibly the only one of its type, one of two surviving, and the only one not altered with OD paint and in private hands. It makes any "rare" Aston, Jag etc. distinctly common! I don't have the loot to do anything with it at the moment, so I'm in no rush one way or the other. I suppose I should take some comfort from the fact no-one in hundreds of views has replied "sorry mate, it is an obvious turkey because...";) Few more pics: Close-up of side aerial bracket (also posted in radio thread). Note too close weave camo net with scrim stitched on Sun compass Unusual rear wheel hub. What I call the 'pointy cap' is missing from the centre: I do not know if it has just not been screwed back in or is more significant. It is missing from both sides on the rear axle; present on both front axles. Note too the orangey paint I have referred to and the white paint underneath Wing top passenger side. In red are washers with remains of straps just visible below: green indicates area of paint wear, presumably from whatever was lashed on I am surprised no-one has commented on the SA80 mounts. Can they be used for M16s too? SA80s are not normal SAS carry, though when I was in the UOTC at Leeds just before the Gulf War we shared a base with B Sqn and their sentries carried them. Do the SAS Reserves also get to choose their weapons???

Close-up of side aerial bracket

I cannot recall another, or think why they might want one in the desert of all places! Break open packing cases on the convoy op??? I could say that few SAS vehicles are identical, and if it had nothing new it might be a bit suspicious, but I fully appreciate these are weak arguments.

Many thanks for your careful consideration. I think there are too many missing bits for a Walt and this vehicle was put together quickly to be functional, whereas a restorer or Walt would have more time and go to greater trouble to make it look good. IF it is genuine then GPMGs + V8 + jerry can holders + sun compass + winch is obvious SAS, even though the couple of known pictures show more modern weapon mounts and mesh not solid external baskets. I am not going to pretend this was a first line vehicle, or given the known photos referred to, even a second line vehicle, but one knocked together at short notice for the reservists for the wadi convoy op behind enemy lines is, to my mind, the most likely. Morrison's book 'British Land Rovers in the Gulf' - which I bought for obvious reasons - does show some weird stuff by other units: thin pink stripe camo akin to a zebra (p57); recce vehicle with square section improvised roll cage (p54); weedy narrow disruptive patterning (p51); RAF Regt in Series 3 with single GPMG, no rollover protection & limited jerry can storage behind the tailgate (p30). Compared with these mine is well specced. Given all the mods I think it was disposed of shortly after the war (the fire extinguisher service date of 1992 is suggestive though obviously not definitive). Because it does not look like any of the known vehicles I think it was unrecognised both on disposal and after: previous owners saw it as a bit of lad's toy but not SAS Special so it got neglected. The previous owner told me it was ex-RAF. He said he was a retired Land Rover dealer and he bought it from another Land Rover dealer who got it from/was in Birmingham. All hearsay, and it might just be a massive coincidence, but 23 SAS (v) Artists have (had? - I am not current) their HQ in Birmingham. Are you referring to the bracket on the diff? This is what I did on my civvie Series 3 - choose some bumperettes which looked to be a close fit, trim the outside surfaces so they did not extend below the rear crossmember and bolt on. Looks way better than this vehicle and it required nothing more sophisticated than a hacksaw and vice. Though not shown as clearly the Hi-Lift jack mount - if that is what it is - is just as tidy. Bob Morrison, in a quick reply to me (he was going to have a closer look over the Xmas hols), said he believed the Dinkies were based on diesels - that is where the D(inky) came from - and as the convoy lorries were diesels thought the V8 engine was wrong. My line of reasoning is: 1) SAS Mobility Troop would be most familiar with V8's and so able to fix them quicker; 2) already in theater (on the convoy op) we have SAS V8 DPVs, SAS Unimogs and the four tonner resupply lorries - why introduce a fourth engine variant with yet another set of spares?; 3) the four tonners were carrying petrol for the SAS anyway, so more petrol instead of diesel for their Dinkie escorts would not be a problem; 4) my vehicle with a mix of 6 jerry cans petrol & 2 water can go 100 miles behind enemy lines at a cross-country 5mpg without resupply anyway; 5) a V8 gives greater performance. Shortly after the Gulf War the paras obtained some diesel recce vehicles but found the performance sub-par: I can't imagine the SAS lugging less or putting up with poor performance. One of the things I am most convinced of is the bonnet is not original: rusty as blazes underneath; OD paint with a muddy brown wash over it (none of the yellow or other paint colours underneath, only bare metal); holes from where the bonnet hooks were before they got moved to mate with my bonnet catches; and no holes, straps etc. to store any other gear. That being said, I don't know how a wheel mount suitable for sand rims would differ from standard. I am not convinced it is required either because one of the things the SAS discovered is whilst where they trained was sandy, the Iraqi desert is stony. They would have known this if knocking up a vehicle quickly during the war. Agreed. I can't think of a better explanation. I am reminded of the Sherlock Holmes quote: "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Personally I find it hard to think of an innocent explanation. Sorry, no idea what a "Marconi Sahib assessment" is? (I am new to this lark.) Overall, some military parts look old, which might be explained as all what they had left, whereas some civvie parts (seats, steering wheel) are latest civvie spec, which might be explained by the fact Land Rover had their own staff in theatre (photo of one in that BM book again) and could get parts there real quick. Won't be anytime soon. The condition is worse than it looks and I am very cash poor for a few years - not helped by paying for storage for it. I wasn't looking for a vehicle but saw it and some of the features caught my eye. Of course, if it is genuine, I am not going to see another one, so it was now or never. That thought has also crossed my mind: a light undercoat to lighten the OD without using up limited stocks of camo paint. Yours David

Hi, You can see the gist of the side aerial mount and its setting here. I also have a close-up photo of the bracket if that would help.

Crude hole chopped in transmission tunnel: linkage visible below Crude rear bumperettes do not fit properly; again more functional than pretty. Note rear tow ring and camo sprayed mudflap and rear crossmember Paint layers over rear wheel where a jerry can basket was fitted. Bright yellow and OD with possibly a bit of blue just below the hole Paint layers by windscreen showing dark green, red, orangey sand (on rubber windscreen strip), blue immediately next to it, bright yellow, camo grey and yellow sand camo (on spotlight) Camo sprayed engine components I don't think this vehicle was ever going to be stripped down and RTUed!

Front winch bumper looks reinforced inside: original thickness at top, wider at side and bottom even allowing for delamination Bracket on front diff around rear steering arm No gearbox crossmember visible. Possible fixing holes on chassis rails bottom left, where the exhaust U-clamp bolts are pointing Not sure what the red highlighted bits are for underneath vehicle front Wire coiled around flexible brake hose

More pics: Seatbox driver's side. Note camo paint on seat frame, holes for jerry can storage tray, strap for same and no VIN plate Brake box VIN plate. Slight smear of sand paint on it Front chassis driver's side with plate over VIN and underseal/paint Front GPMG mount. Dash speaker, red paint and odd gear lever base also visible Axe stowage by filler cap Possible stowage for Hi-Lift jack on opposite side of vehicle (note wider retaining strap). Both have drainage holes Atypical mount for side aerial instead of the usual mast