Jump to content

Noel7

Members
  • Posts

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Noel7

  1. British Military Land Rovers [Taylor & Fletcher] says the first LHD military land rovers known to have been built as such were produced under 1955 contracts, probably a hardtop for a military attache, and a soft top effectively as a prototype for future orders for BAOR. Looking at the photo, I would have expected the speedo to be on the driver's side, so could this be a conversion from RHD?
  2. 854s as built had a fairly large autovac tank under the nearside windscreen and a radiator which projected further forward from the cab. There were 853 Matadors as well.
  3. From 1/1/49 UK military vehicle identification numbers changed to a new system using plates in the style nnLLnn [n=number, L=letter]; before that the army used a system with a letter indicating the type of vehicle, followed by a serial number. Different pairs of letters were allocated to the three services, and to different types of vehicles. Prior to 1949, rebuilt softskin army vehicles were given a new identity , and initially this continued under the new system. The numbers allocated to such rebuilt vehicles were from 00RA01 onwards, allocated when the contract was let, so 25RA37 is a pre-1949 army softskin vehicle rebuilt under a very early contract. Hope this helps.
  4. The character fonts and colour of the plate look a bit unusual for a UK military ERM, and both A and Y are characters in Cyrillic alphabets, so perhaps it isn't UK related?
  5. I don't know with certainty, I admit. My point is that is that vehicles purchased and delivered before April 1940 would have been a Norwegian responsibility, while vehicles purchased at the start of hostilities in Norway would probably never have been delivered. Either way, Norway surrendered after two months of being on the wrong end of what was effectively a blitzkreig by the Germans, with virtually no opportunity for removing their vehicles to the UK and no obvious reason to do so. A lot of recently arrived allied vehicles had to be abandoned. You referred to the confusion produced by the British Army having two generations of Q4. The same is true of the Q2.
  6. Tractors [mostly semi-diesel] were manufactured in Germany from the early 1920s onwards, and petrol-engined cars from before WW1, so useful knowledge for working on tank engines is not impossible, but spare parts and the necessary tools for making repairs might be an interesting problem, especially for the T34... Incidentally, a T34 would not have been seen in Germany, apart from captured examples for evaluation, until quite late in 1944.
  7. The German occupation of Norway only ceased with their general surrender on 8/5/45, so the vehicle can only have gone there after the war, based on the information on the plate. Commer also produced a post-war Q2...
  8. And the crane manufacturers are Les Ateliers de Bondy, Seine, who seem to have produced quite a range of machinery, much of it self-propelled. No idea on the chassis, though.
  9. The crane is French, and the chassis looks as though it might have been made for it. It also looks as though it might have been three axle originally, with larger rear wheels, as the solid tyred ones look rather small?
  10. Definitely not 1962. This number series started with KA in 1982, so 1982/3 most likely. The Challenger 1s are in 78KF or 79KF, so 79KF27 would seem to be correct.
  11. I had a Notification this morning. I thought it might be important, but no, it was telling me I have been 'awarded' badges. The whole thing seems very childish. I despised such meaningless "rewards" when I was a child, and my views haven't changed. I would like to prevent any such Notifications from the awards system if I could, but apparently I can't, so I have to live with the irritation it causes, or leave.
  12. These are probably post-war photographs. After WW2 vehicles based overseas continued to carry numbers on their bridge plates but UK based vehicles carried yellow bridge plates without numbers, as their weights didn't matter in the UK. I don't know the date the instruction was issued; out of curiosity, can anyone tell me, please?
  13. 88YW52, 91YW18 and 91YW56 were K6 gantries, so 91YW17 is highly likely to be a K6 and probably a gantry. You could try the RLC archive to see if they have a record card for this VRN. There may be a charge for this.
  14. Some YW were apparently not used; of those that were, I know of Bedford QLD GS, Bedford OY and Austin K6 3 ton gantry. However, I have a big gap in the middle, and another at the end, which I can't account for. Hopefully someone else may be able provide more info.
  15. This body is consistent with that of a 1900 Nottingham Corporation Tramways double decker, according to the illustration in Wikipedia.
  16. To drive a motor vehicle anywhere in a Road Traffic Area [not just public roads, so car parks, railway premises, etc.] in the UK you must comply with the requirement to be licenced, taxed and insured, and display a current set of registration plates applicable to the vehicle. Current plates issued by foreign states are accepted for a restricted period after entry to this country, so temporary visitors on such plates are OK [and they do not have to look like UK plates], but after that the vehicle must be registered in the UK. German WW2 military plates are not current, and therefore not legal. Displaying one, rather than a current UK plate, in an RTA area would probably invalidate your insurance as well. One reason for registration is so that the authorities can trace the registered keeper in case of accidents, criminal activity, and so on. As usual, there are exceptions, but none that are relevant here, so far as I know. Outside RTA areas these rules don't apply, of course.
  17. Collecting used bus tickets on exit in the way the railways did wasn't a practical proposition with a bus full of people getting on and off in the rush hour. The tickets had serial numbers and the office would record which conductor had which numbers for each value ticket and the conductor would have to complete waybills at each terminus, which the office would check against unused tickets returned and money handed in [and the conductor would have to make up any shortfall]. Tickets would be manually clipped or punched on issue [no machines in the early days], and the conductor shown a ticket issued earlier would know it wasn't from his batch, so both office and conductor had checks against fraud. What neither wanted was unused tickets going absent. Given its location on the platform the only potential user, officially at least, was the conductor, so I would suggest that each conductor had a padlock and key issued to him, and kept his stock of spare tickets locked in the box.
  18. C E & S are C Eastgate and Sons. An internet search engine will produce quite a few hits on the name, some for this style of lamp.
  19. It's described as built 1949/50 and ex-army. It's certainly green [apart from the wheels] and the build date is OK for an FT35, but the only army Clansman I am aware of was the 1951 FT103N 6x4. Just out of curiosity, can anyone enlighten me, please?
  20. To amplify the previous response a little, the army allocated separate number series for vehicles in existence when the 1949 series started and those ordered thereafter. The RAF did not; it allocated the second letter [the first was always A until much later] dependent on the purpose of the vehicle. The very low number suggests the vehicle was in existence before 1949; in fact, so far as I know, the K2 ambulance was not produced after 1945.
  21. I'm no expert, but I don't think that a party wall agreement is actually altogether relevant. The argument is about access. When your seller [I presume it is the same person as is selling to you?] sold land to the builder, that sale agreement should have included a full specification of what rights of access the owner of the remaining land had over the land then sold. These rights would then be binding on all subsequent owners of both areas of land. The important question is did that sale agreement provide for access by motor vehicles, and, if so, what sort? If, just for example, it restricted access to private cars, it won't matter whether your lorry is a commercial vehicle or not, you would not have the right of access with it. [Don't expect the builder to know the details, as he is not likely to be a legal expert!] Your solicitors should be able to explain before you buy the property what your rights of access actually would be if you do buy; if they can't, keep asking until they do. As utt61 implied, the discussion won't go anywhere until you know what the legal situation is.
  22. According to the Legacy Vehicles website it's the former 55BD02, now GSK499.
  23. It isn't just the size of the trailers; the 3 ton and 6 ton couplings are different and not compatible, although similar in appearance. Couplings designed by other manufacturers but intended to work with Scammell couplings have the same issue over rating, but may differ from Scammell's versions in appearance because of the need to avoid problems over Scammell patents. Just to compound the issue, there were a few 6 ton MHs with 3 ton couplings.
  24. Looking at the badges, I think they may be Canadians?
  25. The registration is Dorset, late war or just post-war. Robert Thorne still exist, and are timber merchants in southern Dorset, having been so engaged since the 1880s. I would suggest that the photo is probably of a nice new heavyweight pole trailer they bought circa 1945, as part of their business included supply of round timber, and nothing to do with the army.
×
×
  • Create New...