steveo578

No doubt -but Czech infantry were no longer line infantry or part of a mobile mechanised force by the time they invested Dunkirk. The Czech forces battle duty from the fall of 1944 was to replace Canadian forces as a static division holding the German garrison in the Dunkirk area -to induce a surrender without an unnecessary large scale battle. To this end the Czechs Independant Brigade including the Czech Armoured Brigade its infantry and artillery elements were used as a static garrision division until the surrender of the Dunkirk on 8th May 1945. The Czechs left Dunkirk on the 12th May marched across France and Germany and hooked up with the U.S 3rd Army and entered Pilsen on the afternoon of the 18th May, the U.S. forces giving an indigenous force (as they had done in Paris) the nominal right of liberators to the area of Czechoslovakia under U.S. control . The Czech Brigade was used for static garrison duties in an attempt to conserve the integrety of Czech assets in the West- which although re-enforced in 1943 with elements from the middle east were not in a position to find replacement troops unlike Polish Brigades who were able to scour camps in western europe for replacements.

Only if your not in the infantry:-( The 100rd drum was specific to vehicles for A/A use -ie one use against an aircraft -without a barrel change-in the hope that before there was a need for reload the aircraft would have "gone away". As an afterthought it was fitted to the PLM mount on AFVs which also served as an additional secondary weapon against infantry, but required a higher capacity as no-one was going to volunteer:nut: to climb out and reload the thing.- The PLM was so bad very few were actually used in action. The standard 28-30rd box mag. for the Bren was thought to be the ideal at the time of its development - being more flexible for infantry use -probably from experience with the earlier Lewis squad weapon which had a 47rd drum and was viewed as inflexible requiring a 3 or 4 man gun team with the extras being magazine carriers- the Lewis 47rd mags. were too heavy/clumsy to be carried by riflemen in an infantry squad, whereas the Bren box mags could be carried in 2 pairs by each infantryman. The weight of the 28rd box loaded Bren was more manageable as opposed to a Bren fitted to a 100rd drum or a 47rd drum Lewis (which was also fitted with a 97rd drum for fixed mountings). A Bren box was considered adequate as a squad support weapon in burst mode and the mags. are easily and quickly changed- importantly they allow the No.2 to count for barrel change- prolonged fire by 100rd mags. would be difficult to gauge. ZB 26-30 (czech original) were fitted with experimental double boxes to increase the perceived firepower but it wasn't developed (pre-war czech army having a different squad concept). Other weapons such as the US/Swedish/Polish BAR was used as a similar capacity squad weapon whereas the Soviet DP 47rd pan mag. weapon was more of a platoon weapon -which may have been due to a shortage of machine guns, The whole style of the DP and its use was different- for example although it has a quick release barrel -the Soviets never really understood the concept.

All depends where it was "in Hampshire" U/Cs and other Vickers derivatives, Brens,Scouts, Loyd, commerical and War dept. lt. tanks were heavily used in training, not to mention some post war use in agriculture and forestry, However as a downer> an odd track link probably is a left behind when a track was shed and required shortening- fairly common with carriers, but you never know- one of the prototype carriers was buried for 60 odd years in a military reservation in Hampshire.

Are you inferring that the Nats. were of short stature?:nut:

perhaps if you dig deep enough you might find the rest:D

That's the Grizzly wreck shown in Post#99 viewed from the left front quarter, wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't under guns from the same firing point as that in post#128. Looks like Haybel Gill and the long fell in the background. steve

Thanks for that information I know the position of the eastern target- this probably means that either there were more than two grizzlies on Warcop or that my assumption that Grizzly 91 went to Warcop is wrong. If anyone visits Dresden military museum this summer I would be grateful if they could see if they can identify the Grizzly at that museum (assuming it is still there!) the ID (shop) number is stamped beneath the G mark on the glacis. Steve

Nice repilca -certainly it needs a closer look by some-one in NZ.

In that state only scrap value -even Eddy8men would turn his nose up at that one. Considering when purchased by the MOD they were unsaleable at £5k- about 18months ago one was offered for sale at £250k. So probably up to a factor of 10 over the value of the best property over a similar time! Incidently is this a different grizzly than that shown in your photo in post#99 or is it the same one at a later date - more iron worm? Steve

A word of caution make sure the "hockey tape" is compatable with the insulation material used in the wiring loom for example PVC to PVC or alternatively use a compatable heat shrink or insulating tape between the loom and the Hockey tape- otherwise an imcompatable tape could cause plasticiser to migrate from the wiring loom causing the cable to become brittle and fail.

Now now, I know the Loyd had a volume capacity problem but you might give Hanno a weight complex:-D. Good to hear the project is moving along if you are rebuilding them as a pair then it probably be as well to complete them as a T/T and a limber which is possibly the use that befell TPCs. Good luck with them and have fun. Steve

Yes looks like a Mack probably a heavily modified NM series (NM3 favourite) or using NR cab components but could be any similar pressed steel cab. Steve

Yes it was very moving -but also very sad that on the same day it was reported that a pair of brass memorial plaques were stolen in Manchester! Steve

Hi Robin I think this question was answered in dated 26-02-10 to 4-03-10 and no-one 'fessed up to doing it so that tends to re-enforce the general view that it's not such a good idea. Steve

An explaination would be nice - maybe it shows Carla Bruni's great aunty in drag in the second rank 2nd from the left?

So did you get incare treatment or just have to keep taking the tablets?:nut: Steve

Didn't stop him exploiting the inferior technology of those Czech untermensch though:-D

Most likely it's a Grant 2 -an M3A3 medium tank with the british turret the hull is welded rather than riveted. It looks like it still has its T number

Spotted these three drawings after posting, they show comparative of original simple leaf spring suspension-probably totally overloaded 2nd design with interleaved suspension and final design with the Tiger 1 style 8.8cm L/56 gun- which suggests that the other weapon was a 7.5cm taper bore based on the taper bore Pak 41 7.5cm reducing to 5.5cm rather than a conventional 7.5cm KWK cannon. Gen. Guderian -head of Waffenant suggested that it would be better to just reverse engineer the T34 which would certainly be valid for the armour layout but as far as the 76mm F34 weapon was concerned it was no better as an A/T weapon than the long 5cm L/60 fitted to later J series Panzer 3, probably better as a HE firing gun. The original turret and 137cm ring dimension of the T34/76 would have precluded any significant re-armament. As for shooting at your own kit -it happened all the time, generally identification relied on the tank approaching from the "right direction" and during the East front and Desert wars loads of stuff was used after capture.

Unfortunately a real tank, the Caterpiller G9 was built by the Holt tractor company and based on the 10ton 75HP tractor. Orignally fitted with 2 turrets it was demonstrated and photographed at various times with one or other removed obviously to reduce C of G. G9 was tested by the Army Ordnance Dept in 1917 -it was sensibly rejected. No doubt it was hired to a movie company. Another fantasy tank that built by the C.L. Best Tractor Company on one of its crawlers again with a revolling turret with two guns! simulating what looks like a pair of Naval 6pdrs. The remarkeable thing is that a revoling turret is already regarded as the norm. Steve

Yes the internet and electronic communication has been a benefit but to put the converse point of view- the internet is rightly accessable to everyone world wide and has probably been the a major cause of price inflation in historic vehicles, as one major importer/dealer put it back in 2000 when trying to recover some central American wrecks - "suddenly the sellers were aware of the value of their vehicles -willfully oblivious that the price they had seen on the internet refers to a restored runner in a western country as opposed to the often trackless engineless rotting hulk stuck in a jungle miles from adequate transport facilities. So suddenly the price of the hulk is the same as a restored vehicle, added to which transport costs quadruple because the transport guys are also aware of how valubable it will be to the to the rich gringo - end result the vehicle stays in the jungle."

Yes a great route, did you go to the Eden Valey Railway? -it looked very lack lustre last time I was up that way. That's another thing this map site is good for -pre Beeching railways, if your so inclinded. Steve

Good link I seen something similar before but the link has changed -perhaps there was previously a problem with copyrights. The old 1930-40s maps were those that the 1958 definative maps were based on, these were quite heavily used by organisations such as the Ramblers and Rural England to re-establish rights of way which were being lost due to temporary changes during WW2 and during the changes to argriculture in the 1950s. These maps are really good for seeing the way the land was when defences were built to defend britain in WW2 as many roads particulary in the South East have little resemblence to 1940. Whether the sample overview of Kirkby Steven that popped up when I used it is a good example as nothing much changed in that area in 70 years -you'll still get chased off the Rights of Way on Warcop if you try using them.:shocked::-D Steve

Some stock photos of DB VK3002 first photo of a design model showing features T34 style hull hull escape hatches small turret with what is probably an 7.5cm L/60 cannon. Photo heavily airbrushed (probably from a movie) shows the DB VK3002 hull in a scrap pile outside the Daimler factory at the end of the war. Another photo of the same scene showing the DB prototype waiting the scrapman with an 8cm PAW 600 cannon in foreground.

The HE111 in Battle of Britiain movie were CASA 2.111B or 2.111D which were post war spanish built versions of HE111 which were fitted with Merlin 500s from about 1953 and used as general bomber and costal command aircraft- last went out of service in 1975 but few in service beyond 1968, when they were purchased for use in B of B. So what would you call a CASA 2.111B/D a Hienkcaster or a Lanckel:-D