fv1609

Hello CW actually I've been trying to untangle my futchells from my swingletree, next Windscreen will explain that I hope. AL nice pictures, good to see pictures of pigs without flags. Been trying to get 2 Humbers ready for the season with particular emphasis on trying(!) to stop leaks. In case there is any doubt:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB11.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB13.jpg[/img]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB08.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB09.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB10.jpg[/img]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB05.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB06.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB07.jpg[/img]

Piet, I have been rummaging around. It is a bit complicated because the DAF stuff is in AESPs & some of that is in fiche. The CB stuff some is in EMERs & some later documents are in AESPs & some of that is in fiche. Furthermore some EMER/AESP files have bits missing but are in another file which has some of the missing bits but not some of what was in the other files, so in all its taken about 4 hours! I started to get worried as some mods for other CBs specifically stated it was not an authority to fit the Marshall’s body to the DAF. But I have found it! Here is the official info from AESP 2510-C-030-811 Mod Instr No.56. Also a few dimensions which are common to the C300 series.The images are not too clear even on the fiche. But if there is something you can’t read let me know. Maybe if you download them you can magify them up a bit in a photo editor. I can't get it to load all the pics in one go, so here it is a few at a time http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB01.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB02.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB03.jpg[/img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/CB04.jpg[/img]

Yes there is always an EMER somewhere! There was a range of accessories to mate various bodies to various vehicles. Different combinations of kit were used to fit the circumstances. Which combination best describes your set up? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/WVCOO502.jpg[/img] That was for the actual installation of the fittings. The loading & unloading of bodies is covered in: Army Code No. 14917 for 3-ton body Army Code No. 13979 for 1-ton body Later changes were no longer covered in EMERs but transferred to AESPs in octad 2510-C-010 to 2510-C-030. I have these as well but they are in microfiche, which is a pain.

Tony the CES is the Complete Equipment Schedule that lists the items that should be fixed to or issued with particular vehicles of a given type or contract. The number is just the Army Code No. of the publication. AC Nos for CES are invariably 5 digits starting with 3 or 4. This particular one covers vehicles in Contract No. W01 2074 for Ambulance, 4 Stretcher, Rover, 4x4 2310-99-893-4673 (1054-0750) LHD, 2310-99-893-4673 (1054-5750) Tropical, 2310-99-893-5716 (1054-2750) Tropical, LHD, 2310-99-893-5717 (1054-6750) LHD, Crash Rescue, 2310-99-893-6019 (1043-9100) RHD applies where it is not stated, the number after the NSN is the Asset Code

If you've now decided on a yellow turret....................................... http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/BATUSFerret3.jpg[/img] Unusual is difficult. My first show with my prototype Shorland APV that was grey was dismissed because it was grey. My first show with my RUC pig was ignored/ridiculed because it was grey (depicting 1962-3 when they were grey). Yes I know it might have been me that was being ignored/ridiculed, but put it this way, it was worse with a vehicle in a funny colour!

and just to confuse the issue........ http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/BATUSFerret2.jpg[/img]

British Army Training Unit Suffield. Range Safety Officers wanted to be identified & not shot at!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/BATUSFerret.jpg[/img]

Just a normal 0.2 mfd, that is a distributor one. But not a car suppression one, as it needs to withstand up to 300 volts. Should be just a few quid. Yes independant verification of you fitting it would go a long way to reassuring me Paul & no trick photography!

The condenser! You may well have a carb problem. But for the sake of a couple of quid change the condenser before you spend your Christmas bonus(!). This has two advantages (1) Peace of mind that you have replaced it before forking out a lot of money on a carb (2) It will shut me up - should be worth it ;-)

Cos he's got something to hide ;-)

The bogey man

There seem to be three strands to this debate. One is just about anonymity, the other about criticism & another about criticism away from the forum about the criticsm. Although I have always signed with my name, I have now dropped the fv1620 bit, as it serves no purpose. When I signed up I thought a pseudonym was required. To use a respected forum such as MLU you are obliged to use your own name, so my ID can be trawled from there anyway. The anonymity I do find strange. It is a bit like trying to converse with someone at a club meet who insists on wearing a hood over his head all evening. You can converse but it does seem strange. Although I have to say there are a number of pleasant people with stage names with whom I regularly communicate & seem ok & probably perfectly normal. But I still do wonder who they are & where they are & have I actually already met them in real life? There have been criticisms of clubs on the forum & I can understand the annoyance felt by these club officials that this criticism takes place publically sometimes from people without a real name. It has been suggested that these club officials come on the forum & answer their critics using their own names, whilst some of the critics have not used their full real names in the first place! Although I only belong to only one of the two clubs often mentioned, I have a great deal of sympathy for these club officials. Some points raised are important some seem to be less so. One might think why does an official not just respond to the criticism & that would put an end to it. I think it is felt that a public brawl would do the particular club no good at all as it would drag on & on. The correct thing to do, as Lee did a while back, is to contact an official of the club directly & privately with the matter of concern. (In case the WW2/PW issue is mentioned. I should point out that some 15 years ago I had to conduct a lobbying campaign because I couldn’t get articles published in Windscreen as they were on post war subjects. I did a lot of campaigning & things have now changed enormously & at the last tally I had written over 300 pages for the mag. So pressure by traditional means does work.) I think it would be difficult for a club official to come on the forum & be target for flak & be expected to be answerable for every aspect of club policy or administration. Before I retired I belonged to a job related forum, from time to time there would be criticism of our professional body. One paid official of the body did take the trouble to come on in his own time & answer criticisms. The trouble was that this individual then became the target for a whole range criticisms & grumbles. He was expected to give comprehensive answers whilst being subjected to personal abuse & ever increasing niggles about this & that. Most of the points could have been sorted out with a phone call to people who dealt with particular areas of responsibility. This one person found every evening was totally consumed in going on to the forum. It consumed vast amounts of energy, adrenalin & time. Because every response was countered by another criticism & if that is not responded to effectively it could be seen as a sign of weakness & so it would go on with each party feeling they had to have the last word. So I have now done what I thought I wasn’t going to do & that is spend an hour & half waffling. I should explain it takes me longer to write things than normal people as I am fairly dyslexic & everything has to be checked rewritten over & over again otherwise it ends up like a Borat posting! I think I must get out more & perhaps do something to a vehicle whilst it isn’t raining!

All perfectly reasonable. I agree, have the b*lls to put your name to what you say.

Game's over Jack, I'm afraid Richard has spoilt it by being too clever again :-D

Yes well done Richard, you were the one I thought would get it. I gave too many clues out at the end, i didn't realise you were still up. I thought you had gone bed or been overwhelmed by the turkey :yay: :yay: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/colourcode1.jpg[/img] Although you will see that much of the Champ engine below is incorrectly painted. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/DSCF2950.jpg[/img]

Yellow with illegible tags either end Yes and.... Nope, well obviously they were painted to requirements of Naval Engineering Standards but not relevant to this group of paints in Army useage. I think we need to cue Andy Williams (assuming he's not dead) "We are almost there"....

Wire colour codes? Nope

Neil has got that some colours were was used to mark pipes & inside vehicles. Richard has got that some colours were used to paint engines. So you're almost there................................................ :coffee2:

Nope. They had special flags: British troops - yellow flag, white disc Native troops - yellow flag, black disc British troops in India - yellow flag, red disc

Well yes, just a few of them.

Nope