Larry Hayward

Antarmike's comment concerning the P-47 is valid, as I have been in contact with many P47 pilots over the years who confirm how well it stood up to punishment from German light Flak. One pilot said that his aircraft was hit by flak or enemy fire on about half of all the missions he flew in NW Europe but he always returned to base! The P-47 first flew in 1941 and the P-47D onwards could carry 2x 1000lb bombs and enough fuel to range all over NW France down to Brittany. That compares very well with a lot of the two engined light bomber types that were in use up to that time. If fact after WW2 the USAF concluded correctly that it was far better to have single seat fighter bombers to give pin point close support to ground troops than multi engined aircraft like the Boston or Marauder, and this is pretty much standard throughout the world's airforces now. Apart from bombing accuracy the multi engined types could not fight as fighters after dropping their bombs and if they got the chop from flak it meant the loss of more men! On a similar note I once read that during WW2 there was very serious thought by someone in the AM or Bomber Command to replacing most of the heavy bomber fleet with Mosquitos in that they were faster, only carried two crew and only two Merlin engines, thus reducing losses. Apart from the use of Lancs etc for dropping the bigger bombs, I think that it would have been a good strategy. By saving crew training it might have been possible to mount 1,000 aircraft raids with just 2,000 crew and by using just two Merlins per aircraft the number of aircraft could have increased. After all the Mossie could later carry a 4,000 lb cookie and in the majority of cases it was not the amount of bombs each aircraft carried that mattered it was the weight of bombs dropped on the target that counted. Just like the T-34 or Sherman it often proves decisive to have quantity not just quality - but with the Mossie the RAF nearly had both.

Hi John, I have the full history of my Lightweight Land Rover provided by the Museum of Army Transport before it colsed and the records went to Deepcut. My Lightweight 49HG92 was used by the 4th Field Regt RA from November 1982 before going to the 7th Para RHA in March 1984 and they used it till December 1990 when it was sold off.

Another 'myth' of WW2 is that the USA had no idea that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbour. That dastardly attack was a complete surprise - I think not! And what 'luck' that all the US Navy Carriers, that were essential to operations in the Pacific, just happened to be out at sea at the time! It's an interesting thought, how things might have been if the US Navy had intercepted and sunk the Japanese Carriers on the way to Pearl Harbour. US public opinion might have accused their own side of starting an unnecessary war and blamed the military for attacking a poor defenseless Japanese Navy 'just out on manoeuvres' in international waters. As it happened the 'surprise' attack was so shocking that US was able to join the war on the Allies side - for which GB must be truly thankfull, as without them we would never had won WW2

Hi folks It might be a good idea for someone to list the vehicle types that could suffer the same fate as Jack's GMC - well at least a list of the most common MVs in preservation.

Those wet weather doors do look good! As for water on the roof I have often thought that a few extra bungee cords could help remove the valleys that form in the canvas. Has anyone tried that solution on a Dodge? For anyone worried about authenticity, you would only need the bungees in place while travelling home because if it peed down with rain so much on the way to a show - you'd probably turn round and going back home!

Well it seems £16 Million for the Tank museum is another example of how we all get ripped off indirectly as I bet some of the funds are coming from the Lottery. It never ceases to amaze me that after £16 Million or £22 Million or what ever - we still end up with a museum that looks no better than a B&Q DIY store! I be they don't pay £22M. All the expense usually goes on those ever so modern arched steel beams and other unnecessary features. I wouldn't be surprised when the works done to find one or two vehicles suspended from the ceiling just to improve the visual impact!

Sounds like they are pneumonia wagons then - just like British 15 cwts with aero screens!

Don't get me wrong I like the London Transport Museum - but what amazes me is how it can cost £22 Million to refurbish the museum. No doubt there was some public money going in to it from the Lotto, GLA or TFL but it must have been drinks all round at the architects / building contractors when they got that contract! What a rip off! Just think what kind of MV museum our members could put together with that money and solve a few members lack of storage too.

Sorry Guys Page 165 of Mark Cooks book on the Lightweight shows a photo of a Danish Army Lightweight not a Dutch one!

Did they make wet weather gear for Dodge Weapons Carriers in WW2, as I have never seen any photos of Weapons Carriers with this gear fitted? Obviously these vehicles had a tilt but what was used to protect the driver and passenger side openings? Anyone got any photos?

My earliest memory of MVs must have been in 1961/62 when at a small age I went for a wonder all on my own, near RAF Upavon were my father was stationed and was given a lift home by some soldiers in a Morris C8 FAT. I remember being scared to touch what I thought was a bomb on the back seat which in fact was a WD issue fire extinguisher! Souch inoscence in those days, they were probably TA soldiers, who saw me as just a young child walking along the road and though it would be best if they took me back home to my mum!

Plain Military, I think the Dutch did have different colour camo nets to the British Army. If you get Mark Cooks excellent book ' The Half Ton Military Land Rover' you will see a good colour shot of a Dutch LW in service on page 165. The nets on it do look different from anything I have seen in British Army use even taking in to account the real foliage on it too.

Thanks for the links. So from what I see the collection is owned by Kevin ? and it is in the UK. No doubt the location of the collection is secret to keep it safe from 'parts collectors' but it would be nice to think that one day it would be open to some of us HMVF members who do keep our hands to ourself!

Who or what is the Wheatcroft collection and which country is it in? I have seen mention of the Wheatcroft collection, which seems to be rather secretive and on a web site I saw some time ago it didn't mention any address / location for them! I assume they are similar to the SDKFZ people who own the Jagdpanther & various German Half Tracks which regularly attend Military Odyssey - but is anything seen at MV shows from the the Wheatcroft Collection?

The worst thing for any novice MV owner is getting started on a problem especially when they do not have a good knowledge of mechanics or even a good manual & spares source. A guiding hand can be as good as a guardian angel. The web is a wonderful friend too but not as good as a mate who stands over you and tells you do this do that. So I wonder if some of the experts could give lessons in their given field of expertise? Perhaps military vehicle club meetings could be held at someones garage instead of the pub or perhaps someone could give talks & tips on owning a certain type of vehicle at MV shows. After all if you go to Beltring for the week I'm sure there would be time for a few of these. As a movement we need to help new people or else!

Reading the thread on Balham reminded me that when I was at school over thirty years ago I was taught History at 'O' Level and the period we covered was 1815 to 1945. When it came to WW2 I was taught that Germany invaded Poland in 1939 but it was only much later that I learnt that the Soviet Union also invaded and even Slovakia sent troops to support the Germans. I wonder why they missed out the Soviet Union etc from our text books?

I think the story is true- no Red Arrows needed for 2012 Olympics A committee of unaccountable little***** could quite easily have made the decision to exclude the Red Arrows - and it stands to reason that if they don't want the Red Arrows for 2012 they would not need to be in discussions with them! Why is it we let such people have such influence over us!

TooTallmike, I appreciate your anger at the lack of interest in this issue but in truth I like driving my MV and working on it - and not searching the Houses of Parliament or GLA sights for new legislation! And as the Jim Whyman of the FBHVC said - the original proposal had been that vehicles 25 years old would be exempt AND THIS WOULD BE A ROLLING DATE. For this reason the FBHVC made no representations over this issue at the time! But then the GLA went back on its word and adopted 1973 just because Gordon Brown wanted a few quid more from historic vehicle owners a few years back. So please do protest - as the creeps who get in positions of authority will never know. If everyone of us wrote in to our MP I am sure it would have some effect and the threat of road pricing. I going to write anyway and also complain about the way Ken Livingstone has been granted powers far in excess of his job that makes London in to 'Ken's Kingdom' without any scrutiny.

Dear Friends, I make no appology if you have read this elsewhere but it is vital we all protest before this spreads to the rest of the UK! Greater London Authority is at it, just like the Government - targeting law abiding vehicle owners when the criminals will carry on as normal! If you have not heard the GLA has decided to introduce a LEZ that will target older vehicles that do not meet new emission standards. Work on the scheme is to start in Feb 2008 possibly with a start date of 2010 for trucks, buses and large vehicles and will cost an owner of such a vehicle £200 A DAY (YES £200 a Day!) to drive within the GLA - thats anywhere inside the M25. Failure to pay meets with a £1000 fine. The problen for us is that the scheme is to be extended to other vehicles - ie Cars and PLG types like Land Rovers by 2012! What has infuriated the historic vehicle owners is the fact that the B*****ds at the GLA say that the cut off point will be 1973 for exemption and not a rolling 25 year age for the vehicle - just because one ex-chancellor we all know decided to stop the exemption for car tax at that date! As the FBHVC said - history does not stop at 1973. The GLA says that a poll was carried out - but as any Fascist knows you can ask a question in a particular way to get the result you want - I bet they never asked 'Should there be a ban on historic vehicles in London built since 1973? No doubt the people who have been allowed to run the GLA think that anyone who owns a historic vehicle must be middle class and therefore an easy target. It may spread to the rest of the country too, so write to your MP now! At the very least we should get the 1973 end date replaced by a rolling 25 year date for all historic vehicles and remember if its spreads then nearly half the stuff seen at Beltring will be off the road! Rant definately not over!!!

IMBS but why did the Bristish Army go for a gloss deep bronze green colour on most of its vehicles postwar right through the 1950's, 1960's and even in to the 1970's. After all they must have learned something about camo in WW2 and the Soviet & other Warsaw Pact armies were quite a threat at the time?

Bodger Baz, My Dad was in the RAF in the Far East in support of the Forgotten 14th and came home in 1946. He remembers seeing quite a few Japanese Generals arriving to surrender, in bomber transport aircraft that had to be painted white with green crosses on them, as a term of surrender. The aircraft in your photos looks to be a Mitsubishi Ki-57. My Dad also remembers that their swords were later retained and he could have had one but couldn't be bothered! If only he had known that some of the swords carried by these Japanese Officers were 400 years old! By the way, the Spitfire in the last couple of photos is a Mk XIV of 273 Sqn, which disbanded in Saigon on 31st January 1946. The other aircraft is an Auster

I should have said that the Commando Unit involved was an Army unit and nothing to do with the Royal Marines. Incidentally i do not think that Hitler issued orders to have Captured RMs shot - only the Army Commandos.

According to Windscreen, the FBHVC has got wind of another proposal from the Government in the form of a Private Members Bill from Graham Stringer MP who wants to deal with anti-social use of motorcycles and quad bikes etc. Apparently the Bill if passed would make it illegal to own an unregistered motorcycle or other vehicle. As far as I can see those that would be most likely to suffer would be law abiding people who own historic vehicles or who are are restoring them - and not the yobs who ride around on unregistered vehicles! Presumably if you had a vehicle as SORN with DVLA that would be registered- and in order as long as you had it off the road - but if you had some kind of basket case project that wasn't registered yet then could fall fowl of the law. The FBHVC pointed out to the MP in question that it is the irresponsible USE of unregistered vehicles that is the problem and not the OWNERSHIP of such vehicles! If the proposed Bill became law I would imagine that owning a collection of working vehicles in a museum would be illegal too! As ever it seems that existing laws are in place to tackle the issue so let's hope the ORVR Bill never gets passed!

In the terms of killing of POWs in WW2 most people would think of SS atrocities. However I was recently talking to a friend who's father died recently. Before he died he told his son of a time when he was in the Commandos in NW Europe. Sometime after D-Day he and some other Commandos came across some British Grenadier (?) Guards holding a handfull of German soldiers prisoner. Earlier in the war Hitler had decreed that all captured British Commandos should be shot if captured, so there was no love lost between the Commandos and any Nazis. The Commandos had had a rough time of it on D-Day, so when they discovered the POWs were SS an argument broke out between the Commandos and the Guardsmen, with the Commandos demanding they hand over the SS soldiers. The Guardsmen refused but as the Commandos were in greater numbers and threatened to shoot the Guardsmen if they did not get out of the way, they stepped aside and the Commandos shot all the POWs. I don't doubt the story is true and it is probably not the only time it happened It makes you think

Thanks But why not stencil 'Do not drain' on the bonnet? I have also seen Prestone 43 - is this number related to the year?