10FM68
-
Posts
626 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Events
Articles
Store
Downloads
Posts posted by 10FM68
-
-
http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/gb%5Erets.html
Try this link and you will find the badge - there is a Sapper link - RE small boats. So could REDI be RE DIVING rather than Driving? Though there should be an S or an E after it rather than an I(school or establishment), if I remember rightly.
And, yes, RSME is Royal Engineers, Chatham has been their home for a very long time. Definitely not REME. Though I see the National Archives refer to 12 RSME Regiment as being 12 Royal School of Mechnical Engineering Regiment, but I think this must be a typo.
10 68
-
Hi all, in need of a RTR Stable belt in a med. or large to fit a 34" waist. Have tried all the usual sites and companies with no joy, they seem to be like rocking horse s** t lol. Hopefully someone will help me in my quest for this elusive belt.
Cheers Steve.
Shouldn't be a problem. I just googled "military belt RTR" and several sites popped up offering them for around the £20 mark.
10 68
-
See if you can get hold of a copy of each of the 4 volumes of "Warpaint" by Dick Taylor. They cover all these details from 1903 to 2003 with plenty of illustrations. Dick served in the RTR having worked his way up the ranks and certainly knows his subject.
10 68
-
Were these two photographs taken on the same occasion? I ask because the second photo seems to be rather different. It is difficult to tell, but, judging from the peaked caps of the two officers present, they look more like guards officers than gunners. The standard British Army officers' Service Dress (SD) cap tends to be fuller than the two shown - with a broader crown and larger peak. But officers of guards regiments favoured caps with smaller crowns and shorter peaks (see photos of FM Alexander, for example). The officer on the left appears to be a major, with a single crown on his epaulette (though he may be a subaltern with a single star, but, as he is part of an "observing" group rather than a "doing" group, I'll plump for his being a major!) His jacket doesn't seem to be standard issue as it has a built-in hood, but it isn't the issue parka. Again, this points to a more senior officer as it could be a personally tailored item. It is worn over, probably, issue combat trousers with blanco'ed anklets which have polished black leather straps. The officer in the vehicle - which seems to be an Auto Union Munga - is wearing a greatcoat with brass buttons. The third soldier is in either a set of denim overalls or, more likely, one-piece coveralls - there appear to be loose ankle straps and he hasn't got them tucked in to anklets. He seems to have a brassard on his right arm and a standard issue dark blue beret. The final individual seems to be a civilian in a trilby. Are they watching a demonstration? As I say, I think the vehicle is a Munga, which points to BAOR, or more likely, Berlin Brigade, but did the Munga in British Army service have the spare wheel on the RHS? Anyway, that's the best I can do - over to others for their opinions.
10 68
-
Sorry got it wrong on the 78th are you saying this champ 1952/53?
Most BE registrations were 52/53 starting with 00BE01 and most Champs, about 5000, with BE registrations were registered in those two years. I didn't look up the individual vehicle. But, I have done now and, this actual Champ, according to the Austin Champ Owners Club, being 95BE47 is actually quite late in the batch so its DIS is later - 1955. But, early fifties, with, according to their site the last one, 17BF88, being registered in 1956.
10 68
-
At the time of the photograph it was serving with the 78th division
No, by this time 78 Div had been disbanded over 10 years. The battleaxe formation sign was taken on, post-war, by 11 Inf Bde with HQ in Minden. So, as this is clearly a Royal Artillery vehicle and if it is in 1958 then it will be from 19 Field Regiment RA also based in Minden, West Germany and equipped with 25 Pdrs. The white "X" on the badge on the radiator grille suggests it is the Battery Commander (BC) of the 2nd Battery (red in 2nd quadrant - lower right after 1st which is top right) (possibly 28 Fd Bty). The 95BE47 is of course, the vehicle registration number - as found on B vehicles registered during 1952/3.
10 68
-
Pretty sure this isn't for a Sankey, so it may be for an older military trailer. Anyway, I saw it on eBay and thought it might be of interest to someone.
10 68
-
Hi Chaps,
Have a question regarding the use of the post war holdall/washroll. I've seen from photos of kit layouts that the simple off white canvas type seems to have been in use into the '50s. I'm interested as to whether anyone can advise on use of the later rubberised green types, both '44 Pattern' and the '50s type which I believe has an extra pocket. Seen the latter dated as late as the '70s, have a 1978 example in the collection.
Basically interested in usage, was it common to carry these in the field? Were there prescribed contents and specific pockets for specific items?
Attached is a work in progress of a holdall to accompany '60s kit layouts, critique would be appreciated, considering exchanging the aluminium soap dish for a plastic example. Shaving cream and KFS in pouch are missing.
Your photo looks fine. I was issued an identical one in 1976 (and I still have it tucked away somewhere). As has been said, no one was interested in its contents after basic training, but, you were expected to have certain items of washing and boot cleaning kit in your webbing and you could use one of these to hold them if you wished (many people used simple plastic bags!) I'm not sure about your soap dish - the shape seems to me more like a spectacles case than the aluminium soap dish I had. But, actually, a civilian one would have been more common by then. I don't think many people would have kept their KFS in one, though, far too inconvenient. Most people kept their KFS much closer to hand - in the Energa rifle grenade pouch on the side of the 58 Pattern ammo pouch was pretty common.
1068
-
Braithwaite Tower.
You should get hold of copy of "Soldier" for January 1961. The feature article is called "War in the Desert" and described Exercise NATATION. Troops involved included Pathfinders from 1 Gds indep Para Coy2 Para, 41 Para Lt Bty RA, 2 Tp 9 Indep Para Sqn RE, 2 coys of RIF, a Yorkshire bn from Gibraltar and 2 RTR.
The front cover shows a Saladin of 2 RTR "Afridi" and in the article is a picture of an Explorer NNBD70 towing a Leyland Hippo, 56YY78.
10 68
-
This from Ben Fogle's "Land Rover - The Story Of Car That Conquered The World" - William Collins 2016
Chapter 4... "The British government knew that the Land Rover would be invaluable to success in the Southern Ocean, and more than 600 emergency Series III Land Rovers had been ordered by the government. They were commissioned to a reduced spec called CL meaning Commercial. They were loaded aboard one of the merchant ships, Atlantic Conveyor, which got hit by an Argentine Exocet missile. All 600 Series IIIs ended up on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. The impact of their loss cannot be overstated: indeed it introduced "yomping" into the English language, necessitating soldiers to take to foot where once they would have travelled by wheel".
So there you have it. It's in black and white, in a book, so it must be true!!
10 68
-
The only problem I can see is that they are still illegal for road use in the UK. There was a long article about it a fortnight or so ago in Classic Car Weekly. Even some bulbs which carry the "e mark" apparently aren't legal as the mark applies only to the construction, not to the use. It seems that they have to be correctly matched to lenses to make them legal as they emit their light in a different way from conventional bulbs. All of which is a shame as I too was considering them for all the reasons expressed above. But, given insurance companies' enthusiasm for avoiding paying out if there is anything at all untoward on the vehicle, I decided it wasn't worth the risk. I am sure we'll get there in time, but it seems, just not yet. Which also leaves the question about their availability through motor factors and specialists.
10 68
-
Well as there is no Dad's Army this Saturday, here is a little teaser.
These are the results of German research in WW2, something that the Allies apparently knew nothing about.
I have googled various bits of the answer & there seems to be nothing about this wartime research out in the internet.
Well, there is this from Wikipedia about the Junkers Jumo 223 which, according to the heading, is what your experimental performance figures are about.
The Junkers Jumo 223 was an experimental 24-cylinder aircraft engine based on the Junkers Jumo 205. Like the Jumo 205, it was an opposed piston two-stroke diesel engine. It had four banks of six cylinders in a rhomboid configuration, with four crankshafts one at each vertex of the rhombus, and 48 pistons. It was designed for a power of 2,500 horsepower at 4,400 rpm, and weighed around 2,370 kg.[1]
Only one example is known to have been built. It is rumoured to have been taken to Moscow after the war, where development may have continued.
10 68
-
Unfortunately this restoration project will be up forsale shortly due to ill health, I have just come out of hospital this evening following a back injury / slipped disc and back in April I had AF / heart failure.
That is very sad to hear as you have been doing an outstanding job and producing a fascinating blog of your efforts. I have much enjoyed this thread. But... look after your back, you only have one and you can't do much without it! So, good luck for the future and enjoy the lighter work on your other projects.
10 68
-
Yes, welcome indeed. I too knew Hameln very well in those days - between 77 and abut 82 I managed to find myself in one wood or another in that area each autumn. Got to know the Weser valley reasonably well - Alfeld area in particular, I think - I remember the distinctive smell of the sugar beet factories, on full pelt as the farmers brought in trailer-load after trailer-load of beet.
Those was the days of, "the water sandwich", "the hockey stick", the "finger valleys" and various other shortcut expressions for the geographical features in those parts. I missed Crusader 80 as I was in UK, but Iron Triangle is a name I remember. It is indeed very difficult to believe it was all so long ago and, when you think of the way NATO exercised over private and, even in the streets of the smaller towns and villages, it is like another world. Who can forget the reserve demolitions at bridges where even main roads crossed the Weser - fascinating stuff for us at the time, let alone 14-year-olds!
10 68
-
Markings are for the Jeep of Lt Col. P Serocold, Commanding Officer of 2nd Derbyshire Yeomanry. Markings were drawn up with the help of the 2DY OCA who showed picture of finished Jeep to PS. He initially commented that he didn't know that anybody had taken a colour photo of his jeep during the war - which was quite pleasing
You're very fortunate to have the accurate details. I also see what you meant, it was the CO's Jeep and, of course, held, on his behalf by HQ Squadron rather than being the vehicle of the Squadron Leader of HQ Sqn.
10 68
-
It's great to see Jeeps in British markings! But, being just a bit pedantic about British military terminology, if I may; COs - commanding officers - commanded battalion-sized units. Squadrons, batteries, companies and the like (sub-units) were commanded by OCs - officers commanding, while troops, platoons and sections were commanded by, troop commanders, platoon commanders and section commanders respectively. Not that the military always get it right - certainly nowadays you will often hear soldiers referring to, for example, their "troop OC"!
10 68
-
The (fuller) info on the other site says '441 Battery, 124th Regt RA, F and E Troop Comanders Vehicles', maybe this has some bearing on the red/blue position? But thanks for the info, interesting stuff.
If you google "441 Battery, 124th Regt RA" you will find a PowerPoint presentation on them which includes photographs of some of the officers (you might be able to match faces) and another close-up of a Bedford MW 15cwt with the same 24720 number on the right front wing. Should be suitable confirmation of the unit identity. Given that the regiment seemed, from the ORBAT included in the PPT, to be awash with 15cwt trucks, quite why poor old F and E tp comds had to share a truck is beyond me! But I still don't think the markings quite add up as 441 Bty was the second bty of the regt, so the red is still in the wrong quadrant. All interesting stuff.
10 68
-
This is interesting. Certainly the vehicle is Royal Artillery and, from the “44” belonging to a field regiment RA of an infantry division in NW Europe 44-45. But the RA identifying plate has the red in the first, ie top right, quadrant making it the first, or senior, battery of the regiment whereas the “GE” suggest it is the vehicle of the gun position officer (GPO), the “G” of the 5th, the “E”, Troop which would be in the 3rd battery (so the red quadrant should be bottom left, which it isn’t!). Ho Hum!
None of this answers your question, though.
Your question is, however, answered in Dick Taylor’s “Warpaint” books, which are an excellent reference for this sort of thing. Have a look at pages 122 - 127 in Volume 4 where he describes these numbers as allocated to each unit within the field force, irrespective of their size - thus each unit had a unique numerical identifier which could be used for movement control or identification.
Dick Taylor says he has lists of these numbers extending to over 400 pages, but, regrettably the examples he has offered in his book do not include 24720. But, there is a photograph of an RA Canadian Ford or Chevrolet Quad with a similar number, 24300, in Italy in 1943 and that is identified as belonging to 146 Field Regiment RA.
But, if the fact that your number is not included in his book, Dick Taylor makes ample recompense by informing us that 18132 identified No3 Boring Unit. 51704 meanwhile was at the other end of the spectrum as it was 204 Independent Rivetting Company. 61977 was that of the New Zealand Matron in Chief and 64713 belonged to No8 Pig Farm (Breeding)!
All good stuff, eh?
10 68
-
I have a donor 88 civilian that could provide most of the missing bits.
You've already made up your mind, haven't you? And quite right too!
10 68
-
Robin. This is the M201 - first in this group - that I regret selling
If you can own a Jeep and resist the temptation to wrap rope round the front bumper then you have my vote to edit CMV!
10 68
-
Thanks Robin - I still like old Land Rovers and have enough leafers to drive a different one every day of the week but I like other stuff a lot - sold my Hotchkiss M201 at a tough time but wish I hadn't... - and here's a Jeep picture from our epic trip to Egypt and the LRDG's stomping ground
It's one thing to find wrecks in the desert, but it must be unusual to find one which still has the driver in it...
10 68
-
So the consensus of opinion is there isn't a reliable supplier of Russian Vehicles or spares in the uk or eastern Europe. I've tried a few and not had any responses back either.
No, looking at the replies, with one exception, people seem to have offered their useful contacts - as I did. I had excellent service from Tarmot, who willingly sent me stuff whenever I asked for it. But they're in Poland which is Central Europe, so perhaps you don't mean them!
10 68
-
As everyone else has said, you can only judge the flag to be 'upside down' if you can orient it in relation to a pole - which in this case you can't.
Generally it is accepted that, in the absence of a pole, the broad white stripe is at the top on the left - as on the back of the teeshirt, which is correct. The following link will add to the debate and clear up a few myths!
http://www.flaginstitute.org/wp/british-flags/the-union-jack-or-the-union-flag/
10 68
-
Some people such as self , consider a 7.50x16 on a 88" as not a good idea on a Lightweight - enough said. A Lightweight is actually undertyred on potential max. payload / mass on 6.00x16 - hence the requirement of a good 6.50x16 at a realistic price.
The choice(s) in total - very little going ,,
The 7.50x16 was standard fit on many Lightweights used by foreign armed forces, so one must presume Solihull had no issue with them. But, the British Armed Forces preferred 6.50x16. And that is why I offered the link to the tyres from Northants Tyres. As I say, they aren't cheap, but they are reasonabl and who wants to drive on roads on cheap tyres anyway, particularly in a vehicle with a heavy chassis and old-fashioned safety features, to say nothing of the old-fashioned handling?
They work out at about the same price as the 7.50x16 Michelins which many Lightweight owners fit, so they are a realistic alternative for those, like you, who prefer 6.50x16 and are looking for a tyre which closely resembles the Goodyear Xtragrip which, nowadays, is available only in the Far East, I understand.
10 68
help with landrover markings
in I may be stupid, but......
Posted
Well, looking again at the picture of the crest, I think you can see from the spacing of the letters that it is probably not an "I" at the end, but an "E" - RE Diving Establishment. (If it were an I then the R at the beginning is too far to the left). And REDE fits the B Card RSME and there you have t - a vehicle which spent all its Service life with one unit.
Good luck with getting a badge, though I see REDE was merged in 1995 with the RN Diving School - this from the RE website, "The Royal Navy and the Royal Engineer Diving Establishment combined their diver training assets to form the Defence Diving School (DDS) at Horsea Island in September 1995. The site itself is an outpost of HMS EXCELLENT, and comes under the Command of The Maritime Warfare School. Diving Training Unit (Army) (DTU(A), formerly Royal Engineer Diver Training Wing) is an integral part of this Joint Service Unit and moved from HMS VERNON (what is now Gunwharf Quays)."
10 68