10FM68

No, I'm afraid I can't help there. I don't have any detailed knowledge of these vehicles (or anything else, much, come to that) only external details. But, I'm sure someone on here will be able to help.

In summary, though there will be others on here more expert in this department than me: the early ones had civilian pattern wheels, wooden bodies, oval, meshed cut-outs in the bonnet sides, larger headlamps and, probably other differences. Later ones had WD-pattern split rim wheels of a different size, steel bodies, smaller headlamps and the cut-outs in the bonnet sides were punched with a pattern. And, of course, there would be differences in markings and paintwork. Here are comparison photos. I cannot acknowledge ownership - if any - as I don't know. They came from the internet.

I thought that's what I had given you above, "There are currently no MOT rules surrounding tyre age for private passenger vehicles", which is what I thought you had asked for, "from above The maximum tyre age for MOT is 10 years . That's news to me , is this TRUE / FALSE ? Comments."

And quite early on as well. The census number is L553227 and just chalked on, a six figure one, the camouflage is mid-war, so that suggests that Bedford may have pushed on closer to the 300,000 mark by the end. The Bedford OY behind still has the early style civilian wheels. What would you say - late '41, early 42? Plenty of interesting detail as well - the headlamp brackets still fitted as a pair, for example, the radiator blind, direction of tyre tread - absence of hip ring?

Funnily enough, I have just come across this picture from Alamy - might be the proof you were looking for!

A cursory glance at Google offers the following: from one of the tyre manufacturers: There are currently no MOT rules surrounding tyre age for private passenger vehicles, but tyres over 10 years old at the time of the test will be failed if they are on any front steered axle, or any rear axle of a minibus with a single wheel fitment. From MOT Tester: From 1st February 2021: Tyres aged over 10 years will be banned on all single wheels of minibuses (with 9 – 16 passenger seats) along with the front axles of lorries, buses, coaches. The legislation also applies to commercially operated vehicles – HGVs and PSVs Tested by DVSA.

I was a member of EMLRA. I haven't visited for several years because it had gone down hill so badly. Very little activity, the site was difficult to navigate and every query seemed to be answered by only one or two people. So I lost interest and, when I tried to log in recently, was unable to do so. I shan't bother now. Sadly, too much has moved across to Facebook. By and large, Facebook communities are vibrant with loads of active members, but trying to track themes and threads is hopeless and, I think, the casual nature of Facebook makes for a lack of politeness from posters and, it must be said, the organisers while it is obvious that they are full of people who really know nothing about the subject under discussion - and probably learn little because of the thread continuity difficulty. I have been astounded by the rudeness I have seen on one or two MV-related Facebook sites - I wouldn't dream of joining. But, things aren't perfect on the website-based communities, either. Photobucket, in particular, did a lot of damage. I have toyed with the idea of joining one or two others - but they are so frustrating - really interesting threads start then simply wither away - few members bother to take things forward. MLU, for example - loads of really interesting threads, most have lost all their photos and they just die, sometimes without the last question even being answered. They leave a lot to be desired.

You can't trust colourization AT ALL. It is sad that it has become so commonplace as it distorts history and, in a generation or two's time, no one will know what the real colours were and will simply believe what they see. Most of it comes from the USA so brown boots are all too commonly applied to British soldiers because they assume, perfectly naturally, that other armies dressed similarly to their own- which is true, of course but only to a degree. There is a popular picture of a rifleman from 43 Wessex Div which has been colourized - the whole top layer of wooden furniture is coloured black as the colourizer clearly thought it was the exposed barrel. It ought to be banned! The same problem exists in the modelling world and in modern paintings of WW2 subjects - very few seem to be able to manage to get the colour of British BD correct and nearly all the vehicles are too light in shade. But, yes, cracking pictures full of interesting details (no studs on the soles of tank crew boots, for example) and Giles, of course, is beloved by generations who were brought up on his Christmas annuals!

Ah lolly sticks... I hope I didn't post any! But, yes, Bovy has a special place in the hearts of anyone interested in our hobby. And for other reasons too - it was just outside Bovy that I first saw a Morris Commercial Quad - still in use - with Dorset County Council and where I saw my first, very early (1967/68) Lightweight Land Rover. I was very taken!

What a fascinating collection you must have. I liked the Bovington pamphlet - but I can top that with my three bought a while back (probably late 50s/early 60s) and, what is interesting to look at is the limited number of exhibits in the hall and how they were displayed (basically in simple rows. And Tiger 181 was just another German tank in those days!

Well, no, but you have pointed me in what I suspect is the right direction. Looking at the Tachikawa Ti-54 on Google I found the SNCAC Martinet - a French aircraft which has the right shaped engine nacelles and seems to be rather close. What do you think? Photo courtesy Frenchwings. - not identical, perhaps one or two differences - the DF loop and vent above the window, and, it is possible the nose isn't quite as 'Roman', but certainly close.

It is possible, of course, but it is really quite common to find it in pictures taken in the 50s. There are two likely possibilities: ignorance or bull! It is quite possible that some MT NCOs either knew no better or thought that it would look good - as, I suspect, is the case of the RMP Escort Jeep above. - simply a soldier getting a bit enthusiastic with the white paint. It is also possible, I suppose, that it was done so that oil leaks were easier to spot - but we're strating to stretch things a bit now. But, as you say, I don't think it was done for any official reason. I have several photos of a unit in Malaya with brand new Fordson E2 binners and they all have white front diffs, as do the units Ford WOT6 Mashy wagons. Now, as we're making no progress with the General's motor, can anyone help with identifying the aircraft in this picture? Look at the engine nacelles - they rule out the usual suspects: Anson or Oxford.

Absolutely - you've given me an ID of the unit - it was, as I suspected, TA, but, also an ID on another photo I have which is of the DAC on the ranges - I had it down as another unit altogether. Interesting also to see the ther phots and to see how clear they are. It is a period I am most interested in, so it was very pleasing to see the other photos. Many thanks, Noel.

That's what the ones at the rear are for, certainly, but that wouldn't exlpain why the front ones are painted white.

Any ideas at all on Horrocks' ride? Here's another one - a couple of questions: does anyone know why some British vehicles had their frnot diffs painted white as well as the rear ones? It is much more common in photos than it ought to be, I would have thought as I can't think of any good reason why. Here's an example - a K9WD - probably from a TA push. This photo is also interesting as it shows that the brightwork on the radiator, which is normally missing on service vehicles, is either still there, or has been replaced. And who, I wonder are Penny's Light Horse?