steveo578

Yes Hanno a really great link, I noticed the photos 23 and 24 on the http://jtrowbridge5.smugmug.com/Alli...80183744_SWRTQ pages show ammunition sledges being towed behind bulldozers maybe an early form of porpoise -possibly the same type of sledges used on the Dieppe Raid. The troops training on the beach seem to have Canadian shoulder patches in some photos and of course the old MkVIII international tanks are relavent to Canadian forces. Steve

Is that the picture No73 -if it is I think those pictures are North Africa -there even seems to be a Gendarme c/w a French Adrian helmet on the road side.

some nice pics of what are probably GAD churchills in the fighting on the way to Munster on page 7.

I thought "4 men in a tank" was a Polish T.V. programme:nut: joke honestly:D Steve

Excellent pics:laugh:

Found a couple of photos tucked away in a file the first one is a yarder probably the same as in the link This in an ex M4A2 HVSS chassis components made into a drill carrier -can't find the plough. But unlike the Oregon tank chassis VVSS Yarder both these are new build apart from the suspension comonents Steve

Hi Hanno, There are/were VVSS equiped yarders as in the UK Channel 5 series on the Oregon lumber industry from around 2008- I'm surprised none were shown in the 20 odd pages of the link- there must have been some around- the HVSS yarders were I think from a Canadian company that also built large dozer using the Sherman HVSS suspension components on a new build chassis which would probably make the armoured nose of a sherman unnecessary. Steve

I had a look at the Cuthbertson site the Buffalo doesn't look like anything tank like neither does the Tracked Land Rover but the tracked hopper does have the look of an A12 Matilda 2 about it certainly nothing like any other British AFV apart for a few rarer types like the A11 Matilda and Vickers 6tonners but like anything else the rarer stuff sometimes ended up in bazaar circumstance -for example the A20 (pre churchill prototype) end up as a make weight for the 70ton Coles tank transporter trailer. Come to think of it the A20 and several other types had what became known as the japanese style suspension.

Doesn't ring any bells with me although there were extensive trials with Churchills in the area around Hawick may have led to some dead vehicles. So who are Cuthbertsons?

I heard the same -shortly after Dunkirk the British set up cardboard and wood tanks and trucks on SPTA only to be targeted by German bombers using cardboard bombs. Jasper Maskelyne put forward a plan to make the Suez canal disappear -I think by dazzle using search lights, I think he had some connection with the Sunshade =disguising tanks as trucks. Steve

Israeli girl soldiers who packed parachutes used to pencil there name on a scrap of paper and place it into a little pocket on the harness- not that anyone could complain if it failed:wow: Don't know if it still happens. Steve

Considering the suspension arm and part of the spring case are visible on the surface tends to toward a completely wasted target tank as the twin wall hull would have broken up on one side at least- if Woolacombe their targeting was almost industrial with targets reworked-resurfaced during training for example the book Spearheading D.Day shows wall targets used for Bazookas being divided into 3 -cut down -refaced/hardened and in use, so possibly a one sided tank would be turned to get the most out of it. Probably wouldn't hurt to have a look around but a long way from anywhere The wheel looks beyond saving. Steve

I look forward to seeing the photos

There is the remains of a related type probably a P63 Kingcobra in the Russian far east,Probably a Soviet era range target at http://a-meridian.ru/archives/2753 from a link within a link posted by Pzkfw-e in the thread T54 Turret bunker as the nose is missing without the prop it is difficult to id, but the shape of the underwing airscoops seem to point to a standard P63 rather than a P63A or a P39 -most of which served in Europe. Steve

Adrian Thanks for the correction, I was under the mis-impression they (Cavaliers and Crusaders) were interchangeable you live and learn, the fact that the covered one were actually the alluminium ones is a true revalation:red: Steve

Could be a Covenanter (A13 Mk3). Wheels on the early cruisers were not unique to a single type although the Covenanter should have had unique alluminum wheels but that never happened as it would have interfered with aircraft production. Covenanter Mk1 and Crusader Mk1 inherited the covered road wheels fitted to A13 Mk1 & 2 the A24 Cavalier also used later model Crusader wheels and axles, as probably did early Cromwell pilots. As for location perhaps the old Assault Training Centre at Woolacombe bay near Instow springs to mind- further east near Minehead-Somerset (about a mile west of the Butlins holiday camp) there is supposed to be at least one Festung style pillbox with a Covenanter turret on it along with a pillbox that was relieved of its turret- possibly that which ended up on a Valentine 3 hull some years ago -the Valentine now has a Mk2 turret and is at Samaur. Steve

There was a Channel 4 (i think) documentary about Lockheed Ventura bombers flown by US forces form the Alutians and at least one had crashed on the Kiruls it would be very interesting to see anything regarding this comparatively rarely reported type in US service.

:thumbsup:Good pics- first time I've seen what looks like model 1949 as a bunker, model 1949 turrets which had a bustle and the normal style D10t gun mount (the model 1946 had a mantlet and a bustle) it would be interesting to if any model 1946 were used in these bunker systems. Steve

They all look like Panzerfaust 60 by the aiming device trigger cover. PF30 used both the original small head Faustpatrone 1 and a later one Faustpatrone 2 was similar to that on the Panzerfaust 60. but the mechanism for aiming was lighter thinner and did not act as a trigger guard, safety catch device?.

I changed computers a few days after the last time I uploaded photos and for some reason the new computer won't allow me to upload- so t's back to the old one (700mhz cpu for those with a computer bent) for one last hurrar. Ferret 1 at ATGW1 mobile target range Wilkwood AT range Redesdale Impact Area Ferret near Ridless CQB Most of the Ferrets are(were these photos were taken in 2000 and I have not been on OTA since late 2002) on the West side of the Ridesdale impact area in the vicinity of Thirl moor Woolbist Law to the south of Dearbush hill starting NT812085 and heading North. As Andy says it is an active range and therefore visits must be co-ordinated with the Range Officer OTA as I said I am really out of touch with OTA these days and I don't know who is current RO. I suppose I really should make an effort to go there and see what has changed-gone or stayed the same. ex IFOR 432 are stripped down before placement at ATGW2 hard standing. Another view of one of the M47 near hindberry Crags ATGW2 Can't remember if I posted this nice pic of Red Cavalier after recovery So that's it for the monent anyway depending on what I find when going through my negatives when I get a half decent negative reader -New computer quad cored 3.5Ghz awaits my attention so we'll see if behaves. Last pic a final drive off a Centurion Mk1-5 that was cleared from Roman Road HESH range Steve

Right matey 1. That was not a legal opinion did I say it was? if so where? 2. You continue to quote the 1989 act -an act that could not be used to give an opinion on LED lamps -as they were not a viable alternative at that time -high brightness LEDs did not exist commercially -so if the 1989 act is quoted it can only be done so on the basis that as it mentions only (filament) lamps with wattage between 15 and 36w for stop lights and indicators (necessary variation to allow twin or multiple lamps in paralel -do I have to explain Ohms Law to you or do you accept my expertise on that subject as previously you have infered that I don't know what I'm talking about with regard to electical instalation and design- the thread How many HMVF members does it take to change a light bulb - relates). 3. Your point that lamps on vehicles prior to 1971 need only be clear -by your interperation that would allow some-one to used a parafin light with a wick or a candle or more seriously a single 10mA white LED which can be visible at up to a 1000m. In all legislation there is a glossary of terms and definations and that defines things in this case a lamp- and what its parameters are -normally and even prior to 1989 1971 or whatever, this is normally as BS standard - BS means British Standard not what you normally pen. The sum up you like legislation ok advise the forum the legislation is that specifically makes LEDs legal on UK roads- if you can't it's time to shut up. I will go further you like playing lawyer you are not, you are some-one that has gotten hold of a legal book but lacks the necessary training-education to use it properly, everyone on HMVF may give an opinion even you, but you certainly do not have the right to behave the way you do in often sarcasiticly attempting to belittle others -while I been privilaged to be on the forum you have systematically annoyed numerous people you've even mananged to p*** **f the moderators on several occasions and to be honest the way you behave makes me wonder whether I should continue. As I've said before I don't want to comment on your posts in future and as you like legal related matters to quote from the 1970s U.S legal drama - The Paper Chase, "Mr **** here is a shroud as far as I am concerned you don't exist" Steve

Mike After reading your post no#23 my response will be very brief -I find your comment as the forums self appointed legal expert both offensive and vexatious -that's a legal term meaning some-one that uses mendacious, time wasting and unnecessarily convoluted arguments. As far as I am concerned if you disrespect people by using terms such as barrack room solicitor (the term is barrack room lawyer anyway) I think in future the best thing is that we ignore each others posts. Steve

Antarmike In response to your previous query- In 2003 the UK govt. (disprooving the right wing British press ranting that HMG cowtow to EU legislation) broke with the EU directive (EMC Directive 89/336/EEC) which allowed CE marked retro-fit lighting components to be fitted to vehicles in use in the UK- this however has no effect on vehicles built to Unified Type Approval hence many vehicles on UK roads have quite legally LED indicators, the replacement directive Automotive Directive 95/54/EC proscribes use of any retro-fit or aftermarket alterations to vehicles that are not (in this case of lamps) E marked -including LED lamps. As far as I am aware no current LED suppliers have represented to an appropriate EMC testing facility to obtain a E mark as required by Vehicle Certification Agency - if wrong I will be very pleased to know as I am an enthusiast of anything that makes driving safer which LEDs obviously do. A traffic police officer will be well aware of the vehicles likely to be legally fitted with LEDs -last years Renault probably - a 25 year old boy racer Golf probably not. IMO your contention that LEDs can be fiited to older vehicles is unlikely to stand up to scruitiny -additional retro-fits must conform to the requirement at the time they were fitted and any lamps can only be like for like so lamps fitted to vehicles of 1940-50-60 vintage can only use a similar filament lamp as originally fitted not withstanding Kite CE marks etc, LEDs cannot be fitted as they did not exist at the date of manufacture nor were part of an aftermarket device at the time they were fitted unless said aftermarket device is E marked.

Never mind slagging off Nigeria I've had my ID/bank account details hacked twice on both occasions the only site where the information could have been hacked was those run by government agencies. Can't proove it 100% or I would be very rich but if your bank information was hacked on 2 occasions starting within a week of using their sites -what would you think - if it waddles and quacks it's probably a duck:undecided:.

You are probably quite right about pre 1960s or whatever date vehicles not requiring a DOT stamp as such however I am fairly certain, although it is now 30years since I had anything to do with lighting regulations that the "law" requires all lamps originally fitted with a filament lamp to have a filament lamp- and I would think that pre-dates the regulations you quote,ie you cannot retro-fit a carbide or wick or an xeon lamp (why any would do this the law doesn't say -it only proscribes it) -as LEDs were first developed in 1960s and were first commercially available about 1970 (allbeit in very low power red applications) and although superficially a LED does have a wire -it is not a filament therefore cannot be retro fitted in place of a filament lamp. Whether the police would prosecute or fix penalty an older vehicle is debatable -it would have to await a legal case which I am sure there hasn't been one so it is again a case of none legal oppinion (and I am only pointing out a possible problem) -however even allowing for specialist insurance companies any opportunity for a company to void cover is almost always taken with alacricty -especially if the other parties insurer get wind of any "out of the ordinary modification" notifified or not. Steve