fv1609

Mark unfortunately, H1/8010-99-910-6646 has been obsolete for a while. What we need is a Vocabulary of Army Ordnance Stores Section H 1 (a) Paints, dopes & varnishes from the late '50s. I know there was one in 1957, but I only have later incarnations that do not list it. If a VAOS was found, it very likely would indicate the standard to which it was formulated, this would pre-date DefStans so would most likely be a CS (Chemical Specification) laid down by the Director of Chemical Inspection (CI). This was a branch of the War Office Inspection Organization under the control of the Assistant Master-General of the Ordnance (Inspection) (AMGO (I)). I have catalogues of Government publications from 1894-1984, although if I eventually found it, there would be little detail other than the title. The chance of unearthing the right CS is remote, not helped by the added confusion that CS Specifications were also issued by the Air Ministry that first appeared in 1936 and relate to Civil Specifications. I used to use 50 micron aluminium oxide for micro-sandblasting. So that was pretty fine & probably as small a particle as you could easily get. I suppose you could mix some of that in & if it wasn’t giving a noticeable texturing, move onto larger particles.

I've just found my copy of Equipment Regulations 1959 Pamphlet No.9 Steel helmets: "Paint, finishing, textured, matt, brushing, olive drab. One coat will suffice if the existing paint is in fairly good condition, but if the metal is visible a priming coat of H1/8010-99-910-6646 should be applied first." To me that suggests the previous paint would have been similar but if it was DBG (which would mean high gloss) then a primer would have been required for good adhesion. Of course the OD would be not everyone else's OD but British OD as defined in BSC 381C No.298 introduced in 1949

I can't lay my hands on the appropriate Equipment Regulations 1955, but the definitive painting requirements for 1962 are in EMER WORKSHOPS N 251. Steel helmets:. Paint, priming, red oxide/iron/zinc chrome brushing. Paint, finishing, textured matt, olive drab Note textured matt, not just matt as in general stores & war equipment.

Don't know if any of this is relevant, can't find anything that ties in exactly with your sockets. Electrical services were not just fire control but intercom, loudspeakers, heater for hydraulic oil etc

I don't have a lot of EMER INSTRUMENTS but looking in the Index A 000 the only Bofos reference is B 540-549 Carrier, dial sight (Bofors) M 109. I'm not into armaments so have no idea if that is relevant, I do actually have the Technical Handbook that appeared in the earlier series EMER INSTRUMENTS & SEARCHLIGHTS B 540- 544. Could do a page or two from that if you think it would help. If that is not relevant, is the instrument given any other designation that might be used in other guns?

More likely it would be in EMER INSTRUMENTS, I'll have a look.

Thought there might be something there but nothing, so I need to dig out EMER ARMAMENT B 520-529 40/70 AA Equipment Ordnance, QF, 40/70 Mks 1 & 2 on Mounting & 40/70 AA, Mks 1 & 2.

There may be some coverage in EMER RADAR & FCE K 460-469 Control Gear for Equipment 40/70 AA L3. I'll take a look when I get a chance.

Kev there is a little bit of coverage on pages 1 & 2 in Tabby 03: I extracted the info for that & the Heliograph from the user handbooks.

As for range: 2 miles Naked eye (Daylight) 3-4 miles Telescope (Daylight) 6 miles Naked eye (Night) 12 miles Telescope (Night) Not so good as a Heliograph that under ideal conditions could be up to 70 miles.

Don't know about L.A.M. but C.A.V. were part of Lucas

I think you will find it is Mk II rather than Mk 11. L.A.M. is the manufacturer, other companies made them including C.A.V.

Not B60 or B80

An interesting read although the fpelling is a bit strange in places.

Can't remember a bleed nipple but don't you have the complete assembly? I have the installation EMER for them but not easily accessible at the moment, maybe able to dig it out at the weekend.

Norman the fluid will be defined in Army Code No.13068 Servicing Schedule, Humber 1 Ton. Jan.1974 (Revised 1990) but I think it is OM-13 I think I should be able to tell you the part numbers for the seals as I think they are mentioned in the EMERs covering the vision blocks. You may well know this, but it is widely believed that the vision blocks were an integral part of the Op Bracelet upgrade (ie to Mk 2). But that is not so, the hydraulic vision blocks were a later upgrade. The Mk 2 originally used the existing visors with Periscopes No.17 Mk 1 or Mk 3 (don't know what was wrong with Mk 2!) which were then overlaid with a large steel sheet with a side flange & of course an 'ole for the visor.

There are EMERs relating to recovery eyes for various wheeled vehicles, I can only find one for lifting eyes. I don't have my DEF STAN collection to hand but I would think there would coverage there & perhaps traceable back to a STANAG. I'll look when I next get a chance.

Chris ok thanks. Yes there is indeed a shield & if I relax tracking then the page opens & displays as it used to on the laptop. However on the PC there is also shield showing tracking is blocked, but despite this it still lets the pages display fully. So seems a bit odd.

Yes it was renamed to that in 1949 after the big 1948 rewrite.

Chris thanks for coming back. I can't find any settings/options that might help. Both PC & laptop were updated to the latest version of Firefox at the same time a few days ago. I have compared the settings on both & they seem identical.

According to the records I have: 626 Camouflage Grey was not added until 1988 629 Quaker Grey 632 Dark Battleship Grey became Dark Admiralty Grey in 1949 Prior to 1948 the previous standard of 1931 used only two digits, so of those there was just 29 & 32. (At that time 26 was Middle Brunswick Green later to become 226)

For some days now I can no longer get the full page to display & just shows the bare bones without the "skin". I find it difficult to navigate. The problem is only on the laptop, on the PC where I am now everything is normal. I cleared my cookies on the laptop, but that has made no difference. Whether I use the existing bookmark or follow a link from an email notification, it is just the same. Both devices use Firefox & don't get this problem on any other site. Any ideas please?

Post #82 http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/showthread.php?t=25034&page=3 Is an interesting one for the brown water can denyers as brown persisted into the immediate post-war period. It interesting to see a documented starting point & for some documented continuation of brown, see my post on 10th August 2011

Nigel as you know the internet is riddled with guff that the Hornets were modified Pigs, which is utter nonsense. One would be tempted to think that the Hornets would have been based on FV1602 having a FFW facility already but an oil fed 25A dynamo was of no use. The Hornets were built from the FV1601, the weedy 12A dynamo was of no use either as 100A alternators were fitted & the engines were redesignated as B60 Mk 5F. The internet & even EMERs state it was a Mk 5A, which is wrong, if you look at Hornet engine plates they are restamped 5F. There is a wealth of nonsense out there, even airborne related sites get so many things wrong. So many sites copy from each other & make unfounded & extraordinary assumptions. Even copying data from official Hornet publications is misleading because they were written before the Hornets went into production & relate to the prototypes. An accurate description of their development & deployment is covered in Hornet specific chapter in the limited edition book The Parachute Squadron RAC 1965-76.

Yes and yours had a unique history, I don't think any other Humber went through so many structural & role changes, from being a 310125.01.777 !!