fv1609

Oh yes, issued to the RUC in 1961 & fitted with 2in mortars for border security.

Nope, quite the opposite really.

This may help.

What, when & who?

Note quite yours I'm afraid I got all excited as I have some history on 12 ZS 44 & 12 ZS 94 which had an interesting role.

It holds a lot of interest & wish when the Tank Museum turned it down I could have moved in on it. But given where it is & the state it is now in, the time, logistics & cost, don't make it viable for me. One has to be realistic. I am retired eyesight & back are not so good & I seem to feel the cold out in the sheds more. I am attempting to rework the Shorland that hasn't been driven for 12 years, one Pig needs an engine replacement, the Hornet silencer is bust again, both trailers are rusting away, the RUC pig is not really finished yet, the Wolf needs a derusting & so it goes on. I get hooked on article & with image adjustments they can easily run up to 150 hours each. Besides I am still living in a caravan after 6 months of builders at work on the house & no electricity in the workshops. So it would be nice if someone could rescue it but it can't be me unfortunately.

Oh that's rather sobering, I was at school with the one on the right. He had bright ginger hair in those days!

Yes Army Code No.33579 & an ammended CES for NI.

It's just that I have taken a particular interest in British IS vehicles & built up info on them. This one I have been aware of for 15 years, gradually getting in a worse state. I have 2 ex-RUC vehicles a pig & a Shorland. Up until recently I had a prototype APC that was trialled by the RUC.

It is a Commer APC built in RUC workshops in the period 1959-60. Most were APCs, but a few were water cannon & prison vans. I believe this vehicle to be 3599 XI issued 14/1/60 withdrawn after the Hunt Report on 15/1/70. Some were issued to the Army & acquired FK & BT registrations. This one did not enter Army service & was stored at Long Kesh up until 1975. I believe it was offered to the Tank Museum but was declined & ended up as a range target. Its chassis no. was 81A3117 with an engine no. 5QX3196. It was painted grey. These vehicles were much liked by the RUC, it is interesting that these were built 2 years after the Humbers were acquired. The Commers were considered easier to maintain than the Humbers & were acquired at a time when there was anxiety about spares as they were then obsolete. What wasn't grasped was that although the pigs based on the FV1609 were obsolete, the production of the Army APC FV1611 had only just been completed the pig was very much a current vehicle & so there should have been no shortage of spares. What a sorry state for it to end up in. I would have loved to own one of these Commers. I like the crude functionality of improvised armour.

Bill, ah well then you have an open field as to markings for that period. That bypasses the old chestnuts about what was meant to be done & what some units actually did!

Yes it was a bit sneaky, but I think you like em that way ;-) I think I saw you comment somewhere to that effect 8-)

Trick? Moi? Yes well done Richard, I sort of thought it would be you that would spot that! It was interesting because both got posted at the same time, this one got less response. Surprisingly nobody pursued questions about its size. I had to reduce it & turn it otherwise it would have been too obvious. If nothing had happened tonight I was going to post something like. Noddy said to Big Ears "You're a bit green at this here is a picture to ginger you up". As the MoS designation I believe was Green Ginger & in service was referred to as Big Ears. Here are the airportability drawings:

What a terrible shame. What is to happen to the exhibits that won't get displayed ever again? Will there be an opportunity to acquire anything? I particularly remember a Vigilant & a Malkara, but the most poignant exhibit I saw was not on official display. It was a homemade Israeli flame thrower for attacking British troops.

Hmm not seen it yet :dunno:

Hello Clive. Nice to have a double pig owner. Can we see some pics please? Especially the Mk 1 with its genuine very rare canvas ;-) Maybe you could give some tips to Jerry (hardyferret) about fitting a barricade ram, he had the other one off me.

Only if you go everywhere in 4WD, so for roadwork you just go in 2WD. The problems that resulted in an average 80 pigs being in for repair at NI workshops at any one time were due to rear wheel stations problems. Many of the recovered pigs had not had the modified lubrication mods done. The 'stronger' Chobham joints failed due to the clips holding on the articulating pads breaking or unclipping. Pigs & GS vehicles were cannibalised to recover the 'weaker' Tracta joints which were more reliable. When Birfield joints were later fitted to Mk2 pigs, the joint reliability improved, but axle breakage increased!

A slightly better view of it.

Bill, you need to decide on a more specific period to depict. The Defence Review 1975 formulated the "one Army" concept. TAVR & Regular units would be intergrated & indistinguishable, other than by one inch high markings on the front wing. This meant abolishing the fancy unit & arm of service badges, the changes were rolled out in 1977. In those days that was under CRAOC instructions & is confirmed by current regulations in the Joint Service Road Transport Regulations JSP341. But still this anonymity of unit vehicles is voided by some units with distinguishing markings eg Desert Rats, Scottish units. I can understand their pride, but does fly in the face of the Regulations & give an enemy some detail of who is where, which is what it was meant to avoid.

Yes well done absolutely spot on. BTW The picture above was taken from the same FVRDE pic as yours. Those books seem difficult to scan an image without the 'moire' effect. I used to go down in dpi to reduce the effect, but the above picture I scanned at 600dpi. I do find different photo editors do show vary varied results in 'moire' when you edit them.

Nope

Nope

Nope

Nope

Nope