fv1609

Here's another rear shot http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/30KB7703.jpg[/img]

Apparently the vehicle is circa 1935. But I don't know the date of the photo itself, I agree with others that the flats look very 1960s. Does anyone know the vehicle that this thing is based on? I have no idea at all.

Hmm yes & thats what HMG realise as well: http://www.modoracle.com/news/Cenotaph-Ban-On-Wounded-War-Heroes_14541.html?category=all

The anode is IR sensitive, when IR energy hits it then it releases electrons that are detected by a silver-caesium oxide photo-cathode 5mm away causing it to glow. Rotary converters would work but that level of power was not needed. The tube needs 3kv but some were selected to withstand 6.5kv, which gave more sensitivity with a brighter glow. The actual current needed was minimal 0.000000001 amps. The problem with the Zamboni was that it had to be absolutely dry & they had a high internal resistance of 10 gigohms. A vibrator supply was preferable for a vehicle installation. In fact there were two vibrators, one to supply the Lucas 12v ignition coil & another to go to a transformer for the filament of a Mullard HV1 valve diode rectifier. The HT ac supply went to the anode & the DC was drawn from the filament which clearly had to be floating WRT earth, so you couldn't tap this off from the battery.

Given the slump in commercial property prices in the area I think he will be relieved to carry on for at least a while.

I usually try to watch the 11 o'clock bit on the telly, glory & marching doesn't mean much to me. But what chokes me up is when the blind & limbless march by. That's what war is all about. I missed it this year, but was in Homebase where I stood to attention for 2 minutes, most people caught on.

I agree with Robert, you won't be disappointed. I was there a couple of weeks ago. There are 2 adjacent shops & another a few doors down. Not only are there upstairs, back rooms & annexes, there is a double cellar with stock up to your shoulder. In fact you have to crawl on your stomach to move around as you can't stand up. I found NOS WW2 mule saddlery of various sorts, even respirator bags for horses!

AFAIK Tony the only units with a direct battery HT were the Zamboni piles used in hand held devices like Type K. With virtually no current drain as the tubes were cold cathodes, each cell of the battery was a thin coated disc about the diameter of a 2p piece. Vehicle based power units were a vibrator giving awful square waves into an ignition coil to get the HT. In fact one system tried was powered by the ignition system of the vehicle - not very successful! My Tabby Type E is now powered by a little transistor inverter around a small toroid I found in TV set & a Cockcroft-Walton multiplier to get the required HT. Very little battery drain now & very portable.

Andy, hello again we met on Tabby, were you at MAT until the last? I just wondered if you knew what happened to their Mk 1 Shorland? Although it later saw Army service in the UDR (& it did get some peculiar markings on it at MAT), it was originally a RUC vehicle. All but two of the RUC ones were cut up, that one & mine. Just wondered where it went.

Andy, I wish Timewatch or a history channel would do a documentary on it there is a lot to tell. We all know about the wonders of radar etc but IR both near & far were largely overlooked by GB. In R V Jones's book the govt attitude to proper exploition of IR is summed up in the chapter "Inferior Red". The Tizard committe seemed more excited by defending the country with baloon mounted aerial mines & plans to floodlight the whole of southern England every night to spot bombers than triffle with IR. despite Jones demonstrating that far IR could detect aicraft engine heat at some useful distance. The first night vision system by Baird, Noctovision was never properly exploited. The US DD were not interested in RCAs IR vision system, the British (Admiralty) were only interested in IR for signalling & the German military authorities were not impressed with the IR developments of their scientists. But what do scientists do, they talk to other scientists & in the mid 1930s a series of detail description were published on how to make IR systems. The British role was to adapt what the Germans had done, but refine it to mass produce IR kit, which in the end never got used in anger!

I remember about 25 years ago, someone with an ambulance pig showed me a letter of authority from IRRC giving him authority to display their trademark even though it was a preserved vehicle. So I wrote to IRRC asking for permission outlining the fact that under our Vehicle Use & Construction Regulations my vehicle was clearly defined as an ambulance & the job I was in at time, our law provided me the right to use such a vehicle as an ambulance for certain purposes. I had a rather aggressive reply from a French lady who seemed to construe that I would be charging people to be patients in my ambulance & the IRRC was free to user & it was all incompatible. Furthermore it was the responsibility of the national Society to grant permission, which they would not grant to a vehicle such as mine. I used to belong to the British Ambulance Preservation Society, they had a ruling from St Johns that you could display the St Johns insignia if you were a BAPS member & it was all done in the best possible taste. BRC would countenance such an arrangement. When I sold my ambulance the next owner suffered an official complaint from BRC as his ambulance was parked on the road outside his house. Shortly after he sold the vehicle. There has been talk that the Red Cross, Red Crescent, Red Star of David etc would lapse & a symbol such as a Red Diamond would be assumed worldwide thereby negating the offence & humiliation occurring if a patient of non Christian origin is taken an ambulance that has a Red Cross. What seems to be forgotten that it is not representing the crusaders Red Cross as such, but the Geneva Convention provided that the symbol to be adopted was that of the reverse of the Swiss flag, as a lasting compliment to the country for establishing the framework for the Convention. So the point that I am getting to, is that when the Red Diamond becomes internationally adopted, does that mean that the Red Cross symbol has no more validity & it can be freely used (unless it caused offence to an individual that saw the symbol not appreciating its historical basis)?

Andy, I too have handled Tabby equipment & have several different types & a significant collection of wartime documents & corresponded with IR enthusiasts around the world. I had my first bit of Tabby equipment I think exactly 50 years ago, although as a boy I couldn't get it to work but that is another story! I stand by what I said in http://www.hmvf.co.uk/pdf/Tabby01.pdf The main references for that article were drawn from these documents that I have: AFV School, Lulworth. AFVP/MSC/45 How to use your eyes in the dark. Medical Research Council Laboratory 1945 Barr & Stroud Ltd. Development drawings. Receivers, Tabby, Type ‘E’, Periscope No.1. July 1945 Barr & Stroud Ltd. Development drawings. Tabby Type ‘M’ (Tank Periscope) April 1945 Director of Tank Design. Night driving equipment installation kit specifications. December 1942 Military Science Today. Lt.Col.D.Portway R.E. Circa 1944 Ministry of Supply. Record of R&D. Report No 8.300. Ultra-violet light for vehicle lighting & reconnaissance 1939-41 Ministry of Supply. 118/156 Instructions for operating Equipment Tabby Type ‘E’ 1943 Ministry of Supply. 118/157 Instructions for installing Equipment Tabby Type ‘E’ Churchill. May 1943 Ministry of Supply. 118/159 Instructions for installing Equipment Tabby Type ‘E’ Crusader. May 1943 Ministry of Supply. 118/160 Instructions for installing Equipment Tabby Type ‘E’ Cromwell, Cavalier, Centaur. July 1943 Ministry of Supply. 118/DOT Instructions for installing Equipment Tabby Type ‘E’ Mk II & III Most Secret War, British Scientific Intelligence 1939-1945. R.V.Jones. 1978 RAC School of Tank Technology. Notes on Infra-red. 1960 RAC Specialised Armour Establishment. Trial Report Vol. 2. 1951 War Office Code No.7019 Visual Training. Pamphlet No.1. Observation & Concealment. 1946 Wheels & Tracks. Tabby night-driving equipment. 1995 The book you are refering to I think is 118/DOT. That covered : Austin 6x4 Ford WOT2 Churchill Types I-VI Ford WOT6 Universal Carrier No.2 Mk II Lloyd Carrier Tracked Towing C Sherman Mk V & Mk III Daimler Armoured Car Mk I Lloyd Personnel Carrier Mks I & II LVT was not included in that publication but more hastily made diagrams were later produced as an appendix to instructions on how to install various equipment for the Rhine crossing. This included a DF system based on 19 Sets known as Ground Aerial System developed by Lt-Col L.Rhys-Jones GSO 1 (Technical) 79 Armoured Div & some REME officers who are not identified. The installation work for all this equipment was undertaken by Workshop (1 Brigade Workshop REME). Although Tabby was installed it was intended as a back up to the 19 Set “coming in on a beam” method. Accounts of the crossing indicate that the 19 Sets worked well & Tabby was not needed as Artificial Moonlight was used to good effect. The first reference to the use of the term Tabby, I can find was Dec 1942. RG equipment was the term used before that. I have a MoS schedule of contractors, R&D (Admiralty & EMI), inspectors, contracts, design, production, WO liaison. All the names of individuals concerned including their telephone numbers! But RG equipment is the term they used not Tabby. Even when the converter tubes were made they were given RG numbers which later assumed CV type numbers. Even Tabby Type E binoculars were originally designated RG Binoculars Type 6. BTW I already have a scan of 118/156, which are general Tabby Type E operating instructions. When I get time I’ll ask Jack to put them in a pdf & post them up for general perusal.

Yes well done, you have good eyesight. Thats it then, those are all the errors as a result of me tinkering, any other speeling mistacks or inappropriate use of paint are original. Here is the original, you will see I had to move the trailer to get it within eyesight on that image size. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/RNEOD.jpg[/img]

It isn't the answer Richard, but you raise a valid point. The VRNs shown are correct. But like you I felt that the Army assumed the role of Joint Service responsibility for MT in the 1970s. But over the years I have seen countless newly comissioned RN vehicles, not with an Army VRN, but a recycled RN VRN. The RM seem to conform but RN don't! For the final error, you do need very good eyesight but it is legible.

Yes well spotted that man, so just one more 'error' to spot, will it be you Richard to guess em all? Your reputation is in the balance ;-)

Despite the fact that you ought to be at work now ;-), very observant today. Yes there has been a bit of tampering going on! Yes of course you are right it is a LEYLAND not a LELYAND! The odd blue lamp is ok it is just sticking in from the Rover on the right.

Yes I find it very difficult to untangle who does what with EOD units comprising, RLC, RE, RAF & RN. This unit comprised the white wheelbarrow vehicle & two Rovers (each with dinghy) & their matched trailers. I saw them at Portsmouth 10 years ago & asked the question. Their patch was Weymouth to Brighton in the sea & so many miles inland. RAF seem to be airbases & so many miles around. I asked the same question of a RLC unit in the summer & I think they do the rest of the country not covered by RAF & RN, to include IEDs & small ordnance & it seems RE do big ordnance & wartime stuff. I was lucky to get the pics that I did as they all suddenly disappeared on a shout.

The trailer is associated with the Rover out of sight. But you are on the ball with trailer/prime mover. Unlike the Army that makes a trailer have its own identity, these RN EOD trailers, like civvy trailers, carry the VRN of their parent vehicle. So the registrations are all correct.

Gosh you get up early/stay up late! The trailer is associated with a Rover which is out of sight on the right. The position of the markings is correct & the Rover does have its fair share of red bits. There are 3 faults remaining.

100% correct but only found 40% of the errors ;-)

Yes well done Richard, an easy one but......

Is there anything mysterious in this picture? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/RNEODb.jpg[/img]

Richard, Mk 7 or maybe Mk7/1 difficult to tell given the level of preservation. I think same Mk as at Arborfield. Jerry , get your hanky out, this was the best of two just decomposing at Bovy 15 years ago.

Took 13 minutes well really, I thought you were slipping. yes well done Richard wheelbarrow it is Any ideas on the Mk & where was it in preservation? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v684/fv1620/wheelbarrow01.jpg[/img]

No this all neat & coiled up, 101 wiring is all over the place!