paulbrook

Ooo I took my test on one of those in the middle of Hull on a friday morning. A gentlemans truck for anyone who hasn't driven one. Synchromesh gearbox and everything. Heres the very one that got me on the HGV road... Now let me see - do I have some space in the shed????

I got a special tool (for a different vehicle) made up by Melco Tools - but I dont seem to be able to find the contact details at the mo. I'll keep looking but someone else out there may have them to hand

It was par for the course as it happens. Cpl B mc B was in fact ex infantry (tank transporting had lots of re-badged folks) and ex fusiler to boot - hence the nickname "Budgie".... I keep asking folks when they are going to write the book about the tank transporter fraternity (the stories are endless) but then it occurred to me that maybe I should. Like a certain Tp SSgt (now sadly passed away to that big drag in the sky) who appeared (fuming) around the side of a trailer to berate the breakfasting crews. "Right" he said, pointing at the beast tied to the ramp of the trailer "who's is that ****ing greyhound?" "Errrrr yours Staff...." came the reply "You won it last night in that drinking game with the German civvies...." oooo the hangovers we had......

Talking of tyres Ill tell you a little story (should be in the Antar section but never mind). One of the bugbears of tank transporting in Germany was bridge heights; a Cheiftain on a 60 ton trailer was 4.24 m. So great care had to be taken with routes and bridges in particular, both going over them (weight) and under tham (clearance). We used to have bridge maps but they were still all checked first. Well not quite. Once upon a time on Ex Lionheart (1982) some 3 Sqn transporters were detached to the REME for ECP duties (Equipment Collection Point) ie battlefield recovery. One Cpl - lets say his name was Cpl B Mc B was tasked with recovering a stolly with crane, which he promptly then got jammed under a bridge. "Let the tyres down" said the troop staffy before roaring off on his Triumph bike. A couple of hours later he returns to find Cpl B just finishing off re-inflating the last of the 26 tyres on the Antar and trailer........

You do see military DROPS carrying 20ft containers, but they are a long way short of 15 tons. And I am not 100% sure but I think that a drops payload is 15 tons including the weight of the rack. Deep in my memory I recall that the max load for a container on a MMLC is 10 tons. The locking lugs mentioned previously are more than strong enough, but lashing a big load requires lots of lashings (as I remember a full load of ULC (ammo pallets) required 8x5ton straps, one over each pair of ULCs side to side, then one threaded through the bottom of the third pair and one through the bottom of the forth pair) because of the need to spread the point loadings along the securing points of the rack. Each ULC by the way was/is 1.5 tons, making 12 tons in all. Similar complex lashing arrangements were required for differing loads, hence my reference to JSP71 earlier. An ISO rack though has twistlocks. Not mentioned so far is the effect on axle weights of having a 15 ton payload that is not equally distributed along the rack, with perhaps 60-70% of the weight at one end or another. Unlike a Foden the loadbed length of a rack is very limited (just over 19ft) so putting max payload not evenly distributed is going to overload front or rear axle pairs. OLP for a DROPS is half way down the rack (ie 9ft 9in). Unless the C of G of your 13.5 ton (allowing 1.5 ton for the rack) load is slap bang on the OLP you are overloaded somewhere.

One answer (there are others) to both the previous questions is application of the appropriate number of spanset lashing straps.... Although for rack stacking we always used to stack them front to back to front and so on - so you ended up with A frames at both ends. Not pretty and the RSM wouldnt like it but fast and safe. All racks have pockets for forks - although you can only use them if the rack is unladen. Happy (and RSM freindly) stacking can therefore be acheived with a volvo or similar fork lift..

Mmmmmm nice I wonder if that is the one that I used to spy a long time ago in a little place near Pompey...

The selection progression for the axles and locks is the same on both trucks as far as I can remember. It didn't used to be, the trials Fodens had a set of toggle switches that allowed you to make it up as you went along. But when Foden saw the Scammell set -up (and with a little encouragement from us in the trials team who were all for a little squaddie-proofing) they decided to copy it. Fundamentally the Foden is more stable, it has much stiffer suspension for the same payload and a significantly wider track; widening the track of the Scammell would have been a great idea, but that was the one that had to meet C&U regulations (the IMMLC didn't)

With you there Andy 110%..... I can't think of any post war ex military vehicle that needs greater respect (particularly as it is fully road going). As you say, in the hands of the initated it is a marvelous machine, but the converse is equally true. Worth noting too all you potential owners that certainly in the last few years (and Andy will back me up on this) the entire fleet across the world has had to be grounded a number of times due to major defects (steering gear, cross member cracking, gearbox mounts etc etc etc.). Just because it is clean, bright and lightly oiled does not mean there isnt an issue lurking somewhere.. Goodness listen to me. I sound like the bloke off dads army. We are not all doomed thankfully, but just watch what happens to our hobby if and when something terrible happens.

Heres the video of the gate guardian one arriving here: I must say I did mutter a small "bloody hell" to myself when the driver called me and told me the way he was coming (which would take him through the town of Appleby) He seemed to manage OK though and I got quite misty eyed remembering my Antars threading though Hameln in amongst the german population! Its a funny thing though - the one in Steves pictures looks a hell of a lot better than the one in my shed, but it isnt really, as the "good" one is a testament to the incredible qualities of Army paint and black nasty. Still, we will get the one here sorted in no time at all!

It has a high centre of gravity due to the LHS and flatrack set up. The system was designed to carry ammunition, nothing else, (where the centre of gravity of the load is about 2' off the loadbed and the weight is spread evenly) although in service it did carry lots and lots of other stuff. But each load was trialled and a positioning and lashing scheme devised, and in some cases there were additional measures (such as only being able to load/unload on level paved surfaces). I know - I used to have to do it (much more boring than it sounds I can tell you..) and each scheme was put into a publication called JSP71. If it wasn't in the JSP, it didnt get carried. The real dangers are loading and unloading where the C of G of the load goes even higher, and as any tipper driver will tell you it can be very dicey when you have propelled a big weight skywards, especially (in the case of DROPS) one that is sort of dangling off a hook thing rather than being positively located. Maybe I should set up a DROPS operator course - anyone interested?

This baby landing in my shed...

See my logo..... But in business terms (for me) the more derilict the better.

Here we go.... http://s484.photobucket.com/albums/rr206/RustyTrucks/Antar%20Mk%203/

I did of course mean to say "chemical metal". I really must remember to fully engage brain before typing..... The reasons that it is better than araldite (although for small cracks thats great) is that it is stiffer when mixed up and can be shaped better than straight epoxy, which gets runny as it warms. It is also a bit easier to shape when it goes off.

Plastikote spray paint - B&Q And use plastic metal not araldite to fill cracks and replace lost outer covering. If the inside has rust /grind/dremel back to clean the metal and kill the rust. total cost for that wheel - less than a tenner.

Oh and the "before" picture....

Heres one I did a while ago...

How bad is it? You would be amazed how easy it is to do them yourself you know When I have a mo I'll post some info on here

Dont worry - theres nowt I need that I cant make, apart from maybe a bivvie cover.

Ill trust you - that'll save me a job looking on monday then :-D The other one is over in Yorkshireland, but if I think on Ill ask someone to get it for me. As for playing with Antar wheel bearings in the bath I am seriously impressed.....Normal kids would have had a rubber duck or a slightly knackered Airfix HMS Hood but ooooh no - not in Fazakerley!

You could get all the new vehicles we have in Afghanistan in 2 or 3 RoRos. As I said, cost isn't an issue in transportation terms. One of the real issues is the fact that all this stuff was purchased (and is supported) by a thing called the Operational Contingency Fund (used to be the Conflict Prevention Fund) or whatever it is called this week. This is HM Treasury funding not MOD - it comes on top of the MOD budget. If they come back and remain in service they have to be "taken into core" in other words the Defence budget has to start paying for them. And as the Defence budget is already spoken for, there is no money to do that unless something else is cancelled. So in many respects you can see MH Treasury arguing that they should go into defence (and the defence vote therefore take the hit) whilst MOD might be saying - er - sorry George, not our purchase not our problem. As taxpayers (especially in the current climate) we should be saying Oi! Stop messing around with our money. If we dont put our collective feet down we will end up paying twice or the Army (and others) will have to do without decent kit that has been a long time coming. And the kit is very very very good indeed. Apart from SPRINGER Which although fun is just plain daft for what it was bought for.

I'll tell you on Monday - if I remember to have a look!

Oh and by the way a MASTIFF III is about £1.5 million; you can get a lot of shipping space for that. And the military still have a couple of RoRos of their own, so in my view (and I do know a thing or two about it) the economic equation doesn't add up. Giving the Afghans decent kit does make sense however.

There will be many (even in the military) who will want to do this - bringing them back would make it difficult to justify "new" projects like FRES. I remember there being a similar idea to gift the Iraqis SAXON...Luckily the Iraquis said no thanks..