10FM68

Apparently the March 1976 contract with Rover was for around 500 chassis cabs for ambulances, because it was always intended to have an ambulance based on the 1 tonne.  New orders for Solihull were necessary to keep the 1 tonne production line going, once the initial 1971 contracts had been fulfilled, although the body for the ambulance version wasn’t ready.  

In fact the actual contract for the ambulance bodies wasn’t let to Marshall’s until December 1979 so the chassis cabs themselves remained in storage (receiving the CC registrations while they were there).  Marshalls then took delivery of the first batch of these chassis cabs in 1980 and first deliveries to units followed in 1981.  I don’t think these were re-bodied former GS vehicles (FL reg) so there shouldn’t have been any need for rebuilding them at Solihull.

10 68

4 hours ago, ruxy said:

There is one main exception that comes to mind , however for exact build dates / conversion / change to Reg. plates - I would have to trawl through several reference books.

This concerned quite a large batch of  Land Rover 101"  GS that had been kept in storage with just delivery mileage.  ISTR they were either  ==FL--  or  --FM--  , they were taken from storage and sent to Marshall (Cambridge) for conversion to Ambulance  -  returned to service on   --GJ--  plates IIRC.

Looking at what has been written on the subject it seems that the early contracts for the Land Rover 1 tonnes were placed in financial year 1971-72 (hence FL) and that covered the majority of the straightforward ones – the GSs, FFRs and w/winch models, some of which were later given signals bodies.  The next large contracts were awarded in 1975-76 and these were, therefore, allocated GJ and it was this batch which contained the majority of the ambulances, so they were, correctly, GJs from the start. 

But you are correct in that a large number of these spent a long time in store and, while there, many, all?, carried different registrations.  For some odd reason, they were allocated CC plates – for chassis cab (CC previously had been allocated to “A” vehicles in the 50s).  Some of these can be found in the Merlin archive.  Once in service, however, they wore GJ registrations. 

Perhaps the FL change you’re thinking of was the 40 odd FLs which were transferred to the RAF and given AM plates.  There were no FM plates on 1 tonnes, but AM ones did appear again in Army service after 1982 when the registration system had gone tri-Service and the vehicles found themselves back with the Army having replaced previous withdrawals.  Some very late 1 tonnes carried KB and KJ registrations which had been rebuilt from chassis cabs while one or two were in service with BT plates (a Vampire currently for sale on Milweb is probably one of these).

10 68

Have a look at the list of asset codes for Rover 9s and Rover 11s in the Fletcher/Taylor book.  There are a total of seven vans mentioned.  Looking at them at least four of them clearly have a SIGINT connection – one being DF and three being EW/Y and six of the seven being FFR.  I suspect these were the forerunners of the 1 tonne Vampire and Intercept Complex wagons.  The use of the word van may, therefore, imply both a non-removable hard top and a rear door, (rather than, say, a catflap) probably no side windows and with  suitable security for the highly classified material they would have held. 

Other asset codes do show hard tops for both Rover 9 and 11, eg 1711-1762 Truck, Utility, CL ¾ ton 4x4, Plain Hard Top, Rover 9, while 1711-1766 is similar but Rover 11.

All together there appear to be eight CL asset codes for the Rover 9 and Rover 11, if you include the RAF ones.

10 68

12 hours ago, 59Prototype said:

Is it possible to date a vehicle more or less from the number as it is with civilian registrations? 

Graham

 

To answer your  question, as far as army vehicles in the period 1950 - 1982  are concerned, yes.  It is possible to get a good idea about the age of a particular vehicle from its equipment registration mark (ERM).  It is also possible to get an idea about the type of equipment it is.  As others have said, this doesn’t apply to RN vehicles as they re-used numbers, nor so clearly to RAF vehicles as the numbers involved were a lot smaller than was the case for the Army, though they did divide up their allocated series into different vehicle types (--AB-- were staff cars, for example, while --AL--included recovery vehicles).

But, looking at the Army system which was in use between 1950 and 1982 the pattern is fairly clear and easily followed.  Then, between 1982 and 1993 the system saw vehicle ERMs from all three services merged and, at the same time, no distinction was made for the type of vehicle - they were all registed --KA-- to --KL--.  And, since 1993 a new system has been in place which is tri-Service, as before but has pairs of letters bracketing a pair of numbers, eg AG23AA.

Looking at the Army from 1950 to 1982.  The vehicle serial number was split with a double letter, eg 01CC34.  This pair of letters, which began with BA, (all the As having been allocated to the RAF), gave a clue both to the accounting year, (or years for slow-filling numbers), when the contract was placed for the vehicle and, broadly, the type of vehicle (so individual vehicles may be a few months to a couple of years younger than the ERM implies). 

The letters were issued more or less sequentially, though there were gaps and exceptions.  Generally, letter pairs lasted longer in the early years than later – so BA, for example was used on “A” (armoured) vehicles between 1950 and 1955, BB on “A” vehicles between 1955 and 1957.  BC, on the other hand, lasted only for 1950 and 1951.  But it was allocated to “B” (soft-skinned) vehicles and, clearly, they were bought in considerably greater numbers than “A” vehicles.

But, looking into the late 1960s, for example, the sequence had reached F, with FA being applied to “A” vehicle contracts from 1967-68, FB, 1968-69 and FC 1969-70.  FC, FD, FE and FF were also allocated to “A”  for succeeding years up to 1972-73 while "B" vehicles, over the same period were FG for 1967-68, FH, 1968-69 and FK 1969-70, FL and FM were also allocated to “B” vehicles (for 1970-71 and 1972-73).  There was then an unused gap between FM and FU with FU to FZ being used for “C” (engineer plant) vehicles for the years 1967-68 up to 1972-73.  And so it went on until 1982 when KA was introduced across the whole MoD fleet, irrespective of Service or type of vehicle.

Examples?  Well, 02FF60 was a Spartan APC (an “A” vehicle) from contract year 1972-73,  10FM68 was a Series 3 FFR Land Rover (a “B” vehicle) from 1972-73, 01FX35 was an Aveling Barford dump truck (a “C” vehicle) from 1970-71. 

The actual serial numbers of the vehicles then ran from 0001 to 9999 with each letter pair, though not all would necessarily be used.

Exceptions?  Lots!  And there were lots of gaps and unfinished runs as well.  But, examples of divergences from the “A”, “B” and “C” vehicle route included:

CP which was issued to construction plant used by the Royal Engineers,

CV captured vehicles from the Falklands campaign,

BT was used for vehicles transferred from RAF or RN to the Army, as well as a number of other applications such as the M2 rigs of 28 Amphibious Engineer Regiment, civilian cars carrying civilian numberplates etc,

SP for special projects,

TC – box bodies or transportable containers

TG – towed guns.

The majority of letter pairs from the end of the alphabet were used for applying to vehicles already in service when the new system came in, thus any remaining WWII vehicles would be RA-RH and YA to ZY, with pairs again split into certain types.  Parts of the series XA-XZ were used for vehicles based in the Berlin Brigade and paid for by the German government.  PB and MW were used for vehicles based abroad (eg on Cyprus) but owned by the Ministry of Public Buildings and Works, (later the Property Services Agency, PSA).

And so it went on.  There is a lot more to it than this, but this is an outline sketch of the basic system.

The whole issue is expanded in Dick Taylor's "Warpaint, Colours and Markings of British Army Vehicles 1903 - 2003 Volume 1 which is the most easily accessed source, though there may be one or two discrepancies, particularly with dates as applying to some exceptions.

Hope this helps

10 68 

The red commando dagger on the black shield is the formation sign of 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines.  The other sign red and blue split vertically is the arm of service sign with the white line being a figure 1.  What the 1 stands for is the key to identifying the unit the vehicle was actually owned by but, unfortunately, I can't help there as I don't know which numbers 3 Cdo Bde used for its units.at that time.  But, there must be a Royal on here somewhere who can tell you.

10 68

This is an outstanding project.  It has been fascinating from the very start and worthy of a book of its own.  I have been really enjoying following your skills and talent across the whole restoration spectrum.  Fantastic - let's hope you make Brighton - you deserve to.

10 68

1 hour ago, ploughman said:

 

Then a TA vehicle first in Scotland with 32 Sig Regt (v). Based in Glasgow.

From 9 - 3 - 78 to 1-4-80 then on the 22nd April 80 to 38 Sig Regt (v) in Sheffield

Is it possible from the B Card to identify the actual unit or Squadron the vehicle was attached to?

Are the red inked notes anything to take heed of?

 

Your B Card tells you that it was in HQ Sqn of 32 Sig Regt, but, doesn't elaborate for 38 Sig Regt. You can look up both units on line as they still exist today and still in their original locations.  The red ink is used when a vehicle is cast - hence the last entry when it went to MVS.  The annotations in red on the other lines are simply highlighting of particular aspects of the transaction accounting - they are all the same on all B Cards, so, no, no particular significance. The UIN of A3402A is in pencil as this changed as the vehicle moved between units and is correct for 38 Sig Regt.  The suffix is an A for a major unit ie battalion-sized.  Sometimes, there can be other suffixes, B and C, for example where sub units (company-sized) have taken something on charge directly and independently of the major unit.  But, not in this case, so you can't tell from the B Card which sub unit held it.  The chances are it moved between sub units anyway.  But, it was well looked after wherever it was!

10 68

1st Guards Brigade were part of 3rd Division between 1956 and 1960 when they were the strategic reserve.  As such they were heavily involved in operations and exercises in the Mediterranean and North Africa during that period. 

This picture could have been taken on exercise in Cyprus (work-up training for the Kuwait crisis), or Libya, (1960 Ex STARLIGHT) for example. 

The date on the windscreen is an ordnance storage marking which should have been removed once the vehicle entered unit service, but, quite often they stayed in place until they wore off naturally through cleaning. 

 The arm of service marking here is the Guards' Blue/Red/Blue with a standard infantry figure 8 for the seniority of the battalion in the brigade.  It is unusual, for there to be both brigade and divisional signs on the vehicle, but, the Guards often do things just a little bit differently from infantry of the line. 

And, yes, I agree the cap badge does seem to be the GSC.  It could be that the individual is a former warrant officer commissioned into the GSC.

10 68

Have a trawl through Google maps.  There are various combinations, but the closest is 925 Price Street DICKSON PA.  But there is also Pierce Street Philadelphia and a place called Dickinson Narrows.

10 68

1 hour ago, ruxy said:

Within  26100001  (on)  , there was a RAF  Contract  6/VEH/7188  -  Mk.2 (1997cc)  Cargo . 472  qty. Rovers -  so it would pay you to enquire at the RAF Museum - where the £fee = nil / or contribution.

I mentioned that in my post above, but that sequence runs out at 26104027 which is prior to the PO's 26104345, so if the book details are accurate, it shouldn't fall into that sequence.

10 68

Well, if your chassis number falls in the sequence 26101191 to 26104942 then, according to the same source it could be one of 1,900 Mark 2s with a contract date of 13 June 1951, but in the registration range 00BH01 to 19BH00 BH was for vehicles registered in 1953-1954 - I only gave you details of the 1952 batch.  But, according to the registrations, there were only 1,900, but the chassis batch includes 3,751 numbers - so 1,851 of them aren't accounted for.  Whether yours is one of the 1,900 or the remaining 1,851, I couldn't say.  Or, of course, there may be a mistake in the book.  So, don't give up yet!

10 68

If you look in James Taylor and Geoff Fletcher's book on Leaf-sprung British military Land Rovers you will find that army chassis numbers for 2 litre 1952 models were in the series:26100001 to 26100200. There were, of course, further RAF ones in the series 26100520 to  26104027 and 3610019 to 36103109.  There were also a few in RN service.  So, have a look and see whether yours is among that pretty large batch of, what, 1100 vehicles.  Not all of those RAF chassis numbers are from 1952, though, and even the army ones, which have BD registrations, will overlap from 1951.

10 68

Quote: "Looking at the photo I posted it seems there is a row of small windows along the side of the body, very much like the photo in this link, so I am inclined to think it is an impressed civi horsebox similar to this!"

I think you are on the right lines.  I spent an hour or so yesterday trawling through books of 1930s lorries and buses and the closest I could come up with were horseboxes.  It seems to me that, whatever it is, it is pantechnicon-sized - too big to be a caravan and I am sure both visible wheels are from the same vehicle, so it does have quite a high body above the cab.  This matches horseboxes, buses and furniture vans.  But, for a furniture van the back should really be vertical and this one isn't, suggesting coachbuilding - which goes towards buses, but the wheelbase looks too short unless it's a single-decker, in which case the body is then too high.  Horseboxes were often owned by the wealthy (or railway companies) who would be most likely to have coachbuilt bodies and, as your picture shows, bodywork over the cab.  So that's where my money goes.

10 68

It looks an excellent example.

It is a Truck, Utility, CL ½ tonne 4x4 Rover  Series 3.  07GN04 should be one of a batch of some 300 delivered in the accounting year 1976 – 1977.  CL, or Commercial, Land Rovers were, basically, civilian pattern vehicles with some minor modifications or additions to make them compatible with other military vehicles.  All would have, for example, a military fire extinguisher.  Most, though not all, had a military tow hook and NATO trailer socket fitted to the rear.  Generally, they were fitted with civilian pattern lights.  Most had the “deluxe” bonnet with the rounded edges.  Some had large recovery loops fitted to the top of the front dumb irons above the bumper. Some were fitted with a bonnet locking hasp and staple – a civilian optional extra and most had civilian pattern canvas tilts (though, of course, these were easily changed in service if damaged for the nearest equivalent in the stores).

Early examples were issued in standard Land Rover green with galvanised parts left unpainted while later ones were in satin “NATO” green, with, again, the galvanised parts left unpainted.  Markings would have been minimal – RHD ones would have the district marking, then an oblique stroke and a number - something like “SEDIST/23” in white on the front wing and the rear above the lights. They didn’t have bridge circles.

Most were used for driver training and domestic duties, such as security patrols, carrying the dog handlers, providing the duty vehicle etc. although some, particularly those on the strength of Territorial Army units often found themselves being camouflaged black and green and used in more military roles, albeit for home defence, or, occasionally, for reinforcement of BAOR.

The other identifying features were, firstly, the civilian pattern fuel filler cap just behind the driver’s door.  Military-specification Series 3s didn’t have this – they had two fuel tanks with their fillers under the seats, so not visible externally.  Secondly, the rear cross member which was of civilian pattern.  It was divided, approximately into thirds: the centre part was parallel top and bottom with a large hole in it to take the PTO.  The two outside sections had their bottom edges tapered upwards towards the vehicle sides with a small “grab handle-style” bumper on each side.  A military cross member was parallel across the whole rear of the vehicle with no large PTO hole and a pair of substantial rectangular bumperettes in place of the grab handles.

But, bear in mind, there were a lot of them and that meant a lot of variations – so the comments above are only a generalisation – they do not hold good for every vehicle!

And, yes, 3TRRE had a number of them in 56 Sqn at Church Crookham where they replaced similar Series 2A CLs

10 68

Looks like an FV2700 10-ton semi-trailer.  There's an example of one being towed behind a Thorneycroft "Big Ben" in Bart Vanderveen's book. 

10 68

Sorry, Wally - you beat me to it!

2 hours ago, ploughman said:

If Listed as being a 1978 vehicle will it be near the limit for road tax?

What would you recommend as being the priority things to check up on and what to do about them?

What is the address to get its history?   Read it often enough but not noted where to send off to.

Is there a date at which Matt green took over from DBG?

Best sources of parts? Not needed yet but you never know.

Thanks in advance. Will post photos and details when I collect it.

 

 

 

Yes, you'll be free of road tax next year, provided you register it as an historic vehicle. Have a look on the DVLA site follow from www.gov.uk for what you need to do.

Priority - bulkhead/footwells and rear cross member rust badly and, if a Lightweight, vent panel.  But watch for corrosion wherever steel meets aluminium.  Remember, it is a 40 year-old vehicle - older than WWII vehicles were when they were being restored in the 70s - so things will be worn, but, just about everything can be replaced.

www.rlcarchive.org

yes, second half of 70s - certainly 1979 was matt green - best way to check which yours was is to look somewhere it won't have been repainted by the military or by a PO - inside the dashboard, for example.

For parts - get yourself a copy of the illustrated parts catalogue so you can trace part numbers.  Then put those numbers into search boxes on dealers websites and you'll start to get an idea of where to go.  Try Craddocks, P A Blanchard, LR Series, Paddock Spares, Totalparts and you'll find a host of others.

And enjoy!

10 68

Rather than 48 Gurkha Bde, I think the sign is more likely to be 5 Bde - a white key crossing left to right over a white bayonet.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiXieP-8LzYAhVHC8AKHSqlBfoQFggpMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F5th_Infantry_Brigade_(United_Kingdom)&usg=AOvVaw0L5f_i11ePledmFWHHaOds

10 68

Sorting out time-lines for the contraction of the TA post-war is a real nightmare.  Have a look at this site and see the dates for changes among the RA TA units, for example: http://british-army-units1945on.co.uk/

There is the added confusion of the fact that, at around the same time, many regular infantry battalions were brigaded and made to replace their regimental cap badges with brigade ones - you may remember the outcry - the Argyles, for example, when they deployed in Aden in 67 gave up their brigade badge (the crucified moose)  and insisted on wearing their traditional Argyles cap badge - further adding to the dislike of their CO by the authorities, as it happened.  But these brigades were short-lived and most unpopular. 

It is really tricky trying to sort things out with British Army formations because, as is said above, sometimes divisions and brigades were not field force formations, merely administrative organisations.  A similar thing happened much later when the districts became "regenerative divisions", I think they were called - so 1 Div and 3 Div were active, while 2, 4 and 5 basically the former UK military districts.  I can't remember the full details now, but I'm sure they're accessible somewhere on the internet.

10 68

Yep, that would cover it - top right 51 Highland Brigade, below it 52 Lowland Brigade, then 53 Welsh Brigade.  I won't do them all, but the one you're interested in is there.  A brown AOS sign later than 1961 would be the junior, of three - the others having red and green squares - brigade HQ or one of its constituent infantry battalions the numbering should be 54 - 58, with 54 the bde HQ and the other three numbers its infantry battalions.

10 68

It is indeed Close Support and the "66" on the Red/Blue RA ground also indicated a divisional Close Support Regiment and for a TA District at that time.  If the Arm of Service (AOS) sign is contemporary with the Scottish Saltire, then it probably belonged to the TA in Scotland, but I can't find in my books the timeline for 52 Scottish Brigade who used the Saltire, so I don't know what that formation might have been in the 1960s.  I'll keep looking!

Further looking comes up with at least six possibilities: 275 to 280 Fd Regts RA(TA).  Difficult to tell as there were major disbandments, amalgamations and reorganisations in the TA Gunners between 1954 and 1961 and the detail I have isn't clear which of the regiments belonged to 51 Highland Brigade of 52 Lowland - both were, it seems, by this time administrative districts for TA units in Scotland. And none is described as a close support regiment.  Still, it's a start, perhaps.

10 68

And thank you also, Clive.  All very interesting - one of the pleasures of refurbishing a military vehicle - of any kind and age - is the detective work which goes with it.  It would have been nice to have had the various documents which went with my vehicle, as it is I have only the B Card, showing its service with two London-based TA regiments.  But, it's all intersting stuff.

Many thanks 10 68

Again, I am much obliged, Richard.  I suspected that was the meaning of "EC" - though, as you say, by the time my engine was reconditioned, Eastern Command had gone and SEDIST was in its place.

Many thanks

10 68

Lizzie,

I am sorry to see you go and would ask you to reconsider.  Yours has been a most fascinating, informative and lively thread which enjoyed a good following.

I'm afraid one of the downsides of the internet is the ease with which photographs, music and much more can "leak" from its origins and appear elsewhere with no credit to the originator,  but we all know that anything we put on the web is in the public domain, for better or worse, and it will be there long after we are gone and no longer matter - but, in this case, these photographs will have been your contribution to greater knowledge for us now and for those who come after us.

But, annoying for you though it is, I'm sure you agree that, in historical terms, it is better that these photographs are out there "in the wild" than locked in a dusty drawer to be thrown out by unaware or uninterested relatives after the aged owner dies.   

Keep back those you want to use in your book, of course, but, don't regret the spread of those you have posted - you have the satisfaction of knowing where they came from, while members of the Champ fraternity (I'm not one, by the way), will have gained enormous pleasure from them as well and I am sure there are many other places where your photos are appearing and being enjoyed - places we've probably never even heard of!

As you have said, you enjoy this thread, it won't work without your contribution, so get back in the saddle and keep this thread going, which is, after all, at the very core of Historic Military Vehicles.

And, yes, I am sure I shall buy a copy of your book in due course!

10 68

Richard, if you would be so kind as to indulge me a bit further.  When the engine was reconditioned, it was then preserved and traces of the stencilling on the rocker cover remain, though not enough to read it all.  I should like to reproduce it on my finished engine so would it have said something like this, "PRESERVED EC02 08/85"?  And was there any significance in the colour of the stencilling?  Mine is red, but I think I have seen more in black.

Thanks again

10 68

My goodness, that was quick - many thanks for that, Richard.  I remember the barracks there in the 80s - Rowcroft, I think it was.

Much appreciated

10 68