fv1609

Roger that is tough. One would have thought that they would count into the van so many tea chests & count out the same number on delivery. I think when I next have to do this, I will take a photo of the items going into each box as an aide memoire as to where I packed what & also as some sort of evidence that those things that were packed should still be there at the point of delivery. By 290 I imagine you mean FT290, so that must over 30 years old. So maybe there are some cheap ones floating around still?

This is true & one of a several reasons I don't normally bother. But there are occasions when there is a really nice picture of something very rare & it is worth buying it for that picture alone. Expensive for a single picture perhaps, but this is the sort of figure one could easily have to pay to buy a picture from a museum. Unfortunately modern journalistic practice seems to consider that it is clever to spread a nice picture across a spine so you can't cut it out or they superimpose text, paper clips or other photos over part of the picture you want. So that cuts down on the magazines I buy or club magazines I keep. I am currently going through hundreds of magazines trying salvage nice unmolested pictures, but there are precious few.

It's working for me, but now it has a Cherished Vehicle logo that keeps shifting around. I'm sure it was clean of that earlier when I watched all through.

Richard when you write a message if you scroll down & click on "Manage Attachments" you can upload the file to here & is attached to your post.

Provisionally yes according to the UHB as amended Nov 1962. But I have a 1964 ISPL, what is the Contract No. for yours?

If you don't get an answer on here, try on this: http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/

A rather lower power one (200 watts?) for £39.99 http://www.rmcybernetics.com/shop/cyber-circuits/pulse-generators/induction-heater-circuit http://www.rmcybernetics.com/projects/DIY_Devices/diy-induction-heater.htm

110 volts though

The full photo was given to me for publication in http://www.registrostoricolandrover.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=186:land-rover-half-ton-a-sankey-trailer&catid=60:book-store&Itemid=111 Incidentally there is a bulk purchase under way on here: http://forum.militarylightweight.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2664 But you'll have to be very very quick!

That looks very impressive Andy. But I couldn't see anything about the basic power source. In one picture you can just see a cable folded down out of view. The video doesn't show us that end of the gadget, to presumably enhance the magic effect, but you can see power distribution panel to the left of the work bench with a cable coming from it. I don't see why they are so secretive about not mentioning the power source. But being but for the US market I assume it must be 115v. Andy is your friend in the UK, how did he manage the power source?

I expect yours was one of these five.

I can't explain WV11378, but it seems to me "Contract/Warrant No" is dual purpose. In this instance 006741 is the Warrant No. rather than the Contract No. i.e. the authority for transfer from presumably the Army. One might wonder why there is a space for the Contract No. if it is not going to be quoted especially as the Army became the Single Service Manager on 1st January 1976. The answer is that this is a record card for "Equipment" not necessarily just for vehicles. Where equipment was supplied directly to the RN then I expect the actual Contract No. would be quoted. Certain equipment such as concrete mixers, generators etc carries an Equipment Registration Mark in a similar fashion to the registration of vehicles. The reason for this change was that an ERM makes it much easier to account for & keep track of equipment in the way that vehicles were managed.

John here's something to be going on with. I'll do the other one when I can, but this one is only two pages. What attracted me to your request was that you had described the EMERs correctly. So often you hear people talking about say EMER N250 which is meaningless. Without defining the subject, it is about as useful as going to a library asking to read Chapter 7 of an unspecified book :-D

Sean that Humber mount is the only one I have seen. But the owner said it was from drawings he made of one he had seen some years before & this was his interpretation of it. I don't know what the real thing was like but I wonder whether this mount is perhaps not rugged enough. Anyway my recollections was that the frame he made up was anchored to the roof fittings. These can be seen better on this Humber.

Just found a photo I didn't know I had. This is a view of the operating part of the shack 30 years ago. The rest of the shack was the work bench & lathe - so essential for microwave items. All the microwave stuff was in the loft remotely operated from down here. I had no HF antenna & the HF rig was solely used as the I.F. on 28 MHz which extra filters to give me a nice selection of bandwidths. The 2m rig was transverted to 70cm & 23cm in the shack.

Humber 1 Tons had them as well. I'm not into guns but these fittings are for guns of some sort. I have a picture somewhere of two guns mounted over the passenger hatch.

Yes pretty much that Wally,well done. Just blue for the jackets: Jackets, serge, unlined (blue) With Trousers, serge, unlined (ordinary) 6 sets of these clothes with 25 Handkerchiefs, cotton were carried on each troop ship irrespective of number of troops carried. These were Clothing Regulations 1953.

Yes Wally spot on, well done! Just this remaining subsidiary question: 'V' was to be marked on the clothing of VD patients. Can anyone say how such patients would be identified on a troop ship?

It looks a bit like that Billy but all these symbols are markings of various sorts. This is one is the letter "I"

Charlie you didn't need to peep, because you are correct!. Well done! Items, particularly clothing, that are condemned for disposal should have an inverted broad arrow as close as possible to the upright broad arrow identifying them as Government property. So as items 1 & 2 are in effect the same you have got item 2 correct as well! So that just leaves us with this:

It was a bit more striking than that Tony.

Charlie I think you might have been peeping :-D:-D :-D As many know by now I label the photo info with sometimes unusual or slightly misleading content to see who peeps. So by now few people take the image info seriously. But one answer has been lurking there for the taking! So Charlie, 5 is actually correct! Well done :-D 'V' was to be marked on the clothing of VD patients. Incidentally can anyone say how such patients would be identified on a troop ship?

Seems plausible Bernard but it's not that.

Ah well we've saved a few for you. :-D