Adrian Dwyer

Morning all.  Just came across these photos of the original owner of the original Mk8 goggles.  He was an instructor on the B-24 and B-25 and a contemporary of Blag. He finished his war in the far-east: having flown his B-24 there from the west coast of Canada to China (I have his logbook recording the epic).  What a man!

Not that I plan to wear it but I do like things to be complete; has anyone got neck/brow padding pieces for the Dan Dare helmet of the 70s-80s?  They are attached by velcro and make the helmet no less uncomfortable but do help to limit wobble!  Images attached.

Many thanks.

A

Morning all,

Re: the Dan Dare helmet, does anyone know if it is possible to acquire the replaceable padding pieces for the brow and the neck?  I've attached a couple of images for anyone who has no memory of almost removing their ears pulling these things on and off in a German winter!  If anyone has any suggestions of where I might try, please let me know.

All the very best.

A

I have abstracted the following that may or may not help!

A

Afternoon Colin - the attached page may help.

Good luck!

A

Morning Colin.  Are you still on the hunt for Mk7 Wheelbarrow bumf?  I used the Mk7 and Mk8 (and, indeed, REDFIRE) operationally.  This was during the 1980s and I have some of the notes (genuine MoD quality, straight off the RONEO machine - or similar...).  There are only a few pages but they may be of some use.

All the best.

A

Just now, Adrian Dwyer said:

Again, thanks Ron.  A rich picture is emerging.

On a point of detail, none of the posts in the saddle thread mention a wasps nest - see image attached!

A

Springs and bungee!  No wasps.

Again, thanks Ron.  A rich picture is emerging.

On a point of detail, none of the posts in the saddle thread mention a wasps nest - see image attached!

A

17 minutes ago, Ron said:

I can't tell right now if yours is Terry's or Lycettes. Some had 12 slots for 6 bungees and some had 14 slots for 7 bungees. 

But Jan has written everything you might want to know about WD saddles in this thread.  Ron

 

Ron - brilliant read.  Now, without deliberately setting two schools of thought against each other, did bungees replace springs, or did they run in parallel?  This is all new to me as the last Triumph I rode before the 3HW was a over 40-years ago (a 1973 Trident) and the saddle was foam!  I can see my saddle frame would have had bungees but I can see why someone would have fitted springs over bungees.  However, I'm not certain as to its origins: i.e., is it the original £HW saddle modified to make it slimmer or is it an Italian saddle modified to fit the modified frame? As a matter of interest, did 3HWs have bungees as standard?  (I will reread Jan's thread!)

Having said/asked all that, was the move to bungees a cost saving measure?  I am not certain I see a mechanical advantage - but stand ready to be educated!

Many thanks once again.

A

Ron - great picture, thank you.  Looking at the saddle frame, I see the weld but the nose seems very different to the WD in your image.  I was thinking mine may be Italian, given the manufacturer's plate (GM of Turin) on the cover?  There seems to be ancient evidence of springs and bungees.  As a matter of interest, are bungees specific to saddles readily available?

Thank you again.

Yours,

A

17 minutes ago, Ron said:

It looks like it's been cut in the middle and at least one slot is missing. The slots are for bungee hooks, not mattress springs. Ron

Ah!

I am indebted to Richard, at Lacey's motorcycles in Suffolk, for his care and attention with this!

So, what are we thinking now?

More evidence of a misspent youth in 1940/50s Italy.  If you squint, the florid script discovered under the saddle (along with an ancient nest made by wasps) almost, almost certainly reads 'Giacomo Agostini' and not a mundane note to the saddle maker...

Question: Is the maker known to anyone? (just about to consult google)

10 minutes ago, rewdco said:

Mama mia! ❤️

Indeed!

1 hour ago, Ron said:

This is the normal British version. The fixing nuts do have a metric thread though.  Ron

Morning Ron and thank you for the image.  No trip on mine (see earlier post).  Have you ever seen a red version in Km/h?  Matches the tank quite nicely but a bit too crispy to put back.  As I mentioned, it was wrapped in the truly ancient tool-roll.

Image of back and front.  The difference in colour is due to my poor photographic technique and, I am guessing,  age and sun bleaching.

1 hour ago, rewdco said:

I have seen French versions ("kilomètres", Jaeger was a French company...), but I've never seen an Italian one before ("chilometri ora"). It must have been black, before someone overpainted it with a translucent "rosso corsa" paint. Why...? Dunno...

Morning rewdco.  It's red through and through - but getting a bit crispy with age.  The Jaeger logo and other markings were originally in white (judging by what's left) and were printed on.  I think it may have been 'liberated' from an Italian bike and cut to fit the Smith's clock 140 seems a bit optimistic for the 3HW.  I'll take a picture of the back face.

Finally located the JAEGER marked km face from the clock.  Has anyone seen one of these before or has one fitted? (and does anyone know why it's red?)  I rather like the idea of the Elastico hitting solid '140'!

All the best.

A

Please see below images of the anti-dimming cloth and tin in which it was supplied.  It was an integral part of the goggle box (goggles, tinted windows, cleaning cloth).  Post-war cloths were packed in a clear plastic container.  Tins I have seen on ebay are often exceptionally clean, suggesting to me they may not have been issued (or were issued but never used).  I have not conducted an extensive survey but most of the anti-dimming cloths I have seen have a wartime date - often '43 or '44.

Sections of canopy from C-407.

1 hour ago, LarryH57 said:

Guys, thanks for all the info on laying up a vehicle. To be honest it seems quite involved, and so I have made a concious effort to 'escape all other commitments' and use the Lwt more often. Amazingly it fired up first time and I drove it on the road again, since February.  Luckily it is classed as Historic, so is ULEZ exempt and has lasted longer than ALL the cars, I have ever owned.

Result!

Evening all,

I recently added to a post concerning WW2 driving goggles.  The question raised was: were the ancient (relic) 'almost' mk8s I'd acquired WW2 vintage or not?  The suggestion was that they had been used by RASC motorcyclists and drivers in Italy/N. Africa  The jury is out; although some people think they might be a commonwealth variant, I am not certain.

Given the profusion of goggles being offered on ebay in particular, many of which are very modern replicas of Mk8s being passed of as "my grandads goggles from the Battle of Britain" or something equally ludicrous (have a look, it's a hoot), I thought I'd share a few more images.

Blow are a pair of genuine WW2 provenance Mk8 goggles (I have the pilot's logbook and photo album.  Sadly, these are not Blag's goggles - see 'Spitfires in Italy' thread in aviation).  The things I look for in a genuine Mk8 (introduced in 1943) are:

• AM and crown, and RAF part number pressed into the leather over the bridge (i.e., underneath the adjuster).
• Scallop-edged frame
• Webbing linking the two leather eyepieces (always leather: never leatherette)
• Exceptionally fine stitching on the leather
• Twin-tab adjuster on the strap
• D rings where the strap fits to the frame (with a leather fitment on each end of the strap), The inner end of the bent wire D ring has a series of bends to keep it secure within the stitched end of the strap.
• Pressed ventilation 'scoops' above and below each window
• Goggles that have seen serious use have a very dark inner face - not a dark sand-yellow, not cream and certainly not a primary colour (mine are almost the same chestnut brown front and rear)

This list is not inclusive and it is worth noting that some genuine WW2 Mk8s do not have scalloped edges or AM, etc., pressed into the leather.  However, all seem to have the webbing between the leather eye pieces and exceptionally fine stitching. I have never seen genuine Mk8s with a screw adjuster across the bridge of the nose.  No WW2 google has a BS kitemark. (I must acknowledge here the generous guidance of David, from the Historic Flying Clothing Company.)

So below are images of: the  original WW2 Mk8s; the 'tea strainer' goggles (featured in the WW2 Driving goggles thread); and, by way of contrast, a pair of 1980s Stadium goggles.

If anyone takes a view on the tea strainer relic, I'm keen to hear it!  Similarly, if I have missed something vital, or veered off-track, do let me know.

All the very best.

A

Thanks for the link to the Halcyon site.  They are probably one of the best (though I'm not sure how they can keep a straight face claiming a Battle of Britain Mk8 goggle - given the Mk8 arrived some years after 1940 . . .).

All the Mk8'ish goggles shown have the pressed 'scoop' feature on the frame, not the tea strainer.  So, I'll keep looking!

Thank you again.

A

Morning!  Great pictures!  Thank you for posting.

A

Morning - I am hoping someone can point me in the right direction re: the images of ancient goggles, attached below.  I acquired these relatively recently.  My suspicion is that they are possibly WW2 but certainly NOT the standard Mk8 flying goggle.   There is a potential link to RASC, N. Africa and Italy

When I was looking for Blag's flying kit (see 'Spitfires in Italy' thread in aviation) I looked at a lot of goggles: all of which, it was claimed or otherwise suggested, were owned by a Spitfire/Lancaster pilot.  Many had the BS kitemark, faux leather, modern straps and fixings, etc., and were clearly 1960s/70s or newer.  The pair shown here are leather (now in very poor condition in places), have the webbing sewn in to join the two separate leather eye/face pieces (a good indicator of age), have exceptionally fine stitching, the WW2 type windows (seriously delaminated) and the right type of metal fixings for the long-gone strap.  They have, therefore, many features of wartime goggles.

What they don't have is the piece of leather that would, if they were issue, have carried the AM stamp and crown.  Neither do they have the pressed air 'scoops top and bottom of each window (window being the RAF term indicating a glass eyepiece that wasn't a lens).  Instead of the small pressed scoops, there is a tea strainer!  It is very distinctive and I am sure anyone who has seen this feature on other goggles - whatever the provenance - will recognise it.

What are we thinking: WW2 or not?

Many thanks in advance.

A