chrisgrove

But I notice they did not measure the noise in front of the barrel of those tanks - just the sort of position the PBI might be in with the tanks firing over them. From experience at BATUS I would not like to be there! Chris

No! That is a No 1 burner, brought into service in 1939. But interesting to see American troops around it. My guess is that there were some Brits around as the No 1 burner was tricky to light (and full of petrol). Mind you, the ones I saw in use were probably 20 or 30 years old which may have had some affect on their performance. Does anyone have the dimensions of the outer insulating container for the dixies shown on the burner rack. One of those is shown behind the left hand end of the burner rack, with a bucket on the top. Chris

That interesting book 'The Vickers Tanks' contains two photographs of Centurion tanks that could float. The first (page 169) is similar in concept to the wartime DD tanks, with - it would appear - inflatable tubes supporting a collapsible screen. The second (page 170) is said to be the one with rigid panel flotation equipment and, from the photo, would appear to be the one now mouldering on the ranges. It certainly has the V shaped prow obvious on the pic above. Chris

Hi K6 Do you read German? I have a users handbook, in German, that I have no further use for. PM me with address if you want it. Chris

Britain did make Dodges; they are known as Dodge Kew (where they were made) to differentiate them from the ones from across the pond. Seldom seen in military colours though. Chris (only a modeller)

Panhard M3 Armoured Personnel Carrier - but IMHO one of the ugliest armoured vehicles ever built! Chris

Remember that the Kings Troop do not have 18 pounders. They have the lighter one - 13 pounder I seem to remember. Chris

Broken down and carried by pack mule in Indian Mountain Batteries. However, there are pictures of them being towed, with limber (no 23), by, I think, Light Dragons. I imagine that the sole British Mountain battery to utilise these in NW Europe (see the other post about the gun being broken down and moved upstairs in a house) would have towed them with jeeps or maybe 15 cwts. Chris

Hi LBdr If you visit Firepower at Woolwich their library has quite a lot of pictures and stuff on the No 29 limber. Basically it was the old horsedrawn limber converted to pneumatic tyres in the same way as the old horsedrawn 18 pounder Mk 1 was converted with the Martin-Parry conversion (same size wheels). Arrange a visit in advance to avoid disappointment. Chris

Thanks Mogmaner. Obviously the restoration community reckon that some carried the Lichtkreuz. Doesn't do much for the departure angle! My model will not have one. Chris

Thanks Ivor and Brucie I do have Mike Conniford's drawing, and also the 1/76 replacement page that was sent out later to the correct scale. Unfortunately it does not show any detail of the rear end of the chassis frame. John Church's (RIP, recently deceased) plan shows more detail, but not of that particular bit! Chris

Many thanks, Tom. There is no great hurry, but I shall await the results eagerly! Chris

Hi guys I am, I hope, about to make a model of a Ford WOT-6 Cargo. Being a little dissatisfied with the kits I have acquired, I need to build it at least partly from scratch. I have searched all my references and have resolved all the areas about which I was unsure, except one. Can anyone tell me, or preferably provide a photo or drawing, of the rear end of the chassis of the WOT-6 Cargo. There appears to be some sort of extension, roughly triangular when viewed from the top (I have a plan view of the chassis) at each side of the end of the frame, over the top of the ends of the spring mount for the tow hitch, but I cannot work out what it will look like from the rear or side, or where the frame actually ends. Very grateful for any assistance from all you experts. Chris

No! Plenty pics of early Mungas without the Lichtkreuz. In point of fact, I cannot find a pic with one! Not much space for one on the back of a Munga! Chris

Of course I do not know which version of the pamphlet you have, but training pamphlets were reprinted quite regularly, so the date of a particular pamphlet does not necessarily tell you anything about the date of introduction of the weapon to service. Chris

Hi Catch22 Your correspondents are looking in references rather too modern! Me, I'm only a modeller, but two of my valuable books are 'Heraldry in War' and 'Badges on Battledress' by Lt Col Howard N Cole. He has published at least one more book since those two which were in 1946 and 1953 respectively. Anyway, enough history. Badges on Battledress states: 72 British (no Indian units, see) Brigade Group was formed in 1946 when the 36th Division was disbanded. 72 Bde, which prior to its incorporation in the Division had as its sign a red circle on a square black background, did not, however, revert to this badge, but adopted the central part of the 36 Div sign (which was two interlocking circles, left one red, right one white, on a black rectangle) - the interlocking part of the two circles. This design in yellow was set on a blue shield with a narrow yellow border (just as, with a little allowance for artistic licence, you see above). The formation was stationed in Bangalore and was composed of Ist Battalion the Essex Regiment, 2nd Bn the Leicestershire Regt, 2nd Bn the Manchester Regiment and 6 Field Regt Royal Artillery. Until it was disbanded (presumably in 1947 on Indian Independence) the Brigade was occupied on internal security duties in Mysore. 1st Essex had a detachment in the fort at Madras and was the last British unit to be stationed in that ancient stronghold. Note that the words in brackets above have been added by myself to help your understanding. It would appear likely that your Quad was owned at one time by 6 Fd Regt RA, but please do not ask me how it has come to have some sort of an RASC Arm of Service square, let alone why that was painted on the bridging circle! Hope this helps Chris

Try the Drum next year; over the railway (on foot) and straight up. Much nearer than Sellindge! Chris

Gentlemen A rather old book from the Olyslager Organisation, edited by none other than Bart Vanderveen, shows this vehicle as the Farmobil; "a multi-purpose vehicle shaped like the Haflinger but of simpler design and without front wheel drive. The rear wheels were driven by an aircooled flat-twin 35 bhp BMW 700 engine mounted at the rear. Designed and developed in 1959/60 by Fahr of West Germany, the Farmobil was produced in France by Farco, a Greek company which in 1963 was taken over by Chrysler. In Germany it was reintroduced in 1965 as BMW Farmobil, BMW having acquired sole marketing rights in the Federal Republic." Chris

That's why, in UK at least, and also under British Army standing orders, armoured vehicles must have a commander sticking out of the top who is in contact (intercom) with the driver. Mind you, I reckon the driver can see over the top of the blade, even if there is a fair amount of dead ground that he cannot see. Chris

There are not many countries in the world that put military bridge classifications on all the bridges on their road network. Germany does. But I don't think that 1950s Malaya did! Chris

Correction; the crossed kukris indicate that the vehicle belongs to a Gurkha FORMATION, probably brigade. The RAC patch on the other side indicates that the vehicle belonged to an armoured unit (and AFAIK the Gurkhas had none of those). Nice Scammell Explorer behind. Chris

Hi guys Now I am only a modeller, but some years ago I went round to Mike Stallwood's place near Bethersden in Kent to photograph a Conqueror that he had there (He's moved since then, but only to the next road - and I hope I have the right names). Being a nice guy he invited me to inspect his sheds and in there was an armoured Crossley-Kegresse. Now that must be really rare. Does anyone have any news on that one? Chris

They call it the Ostsee, but the description on post 179 is clearly much longer than that! Chris

Hi guys Verstehen Sie deutsch? I have a couple of user handbooks (Betriebsanleitung) for the Munga in german. The first is dated February 1959 and only covers the Munga 4; the second is dated September 1967 and covers the 4, the 6 and the 8. They were given to me by a german officer when he learnt that I was interested in making a model of the Munga, but the information therein is not much use to me as a maker of rather small models. They may well be useful for the owner of a real one, but I emphasize that they are in german. However, things like circuit diagrams are fairly obvious. Anyone interested? Say a couple of quid (each) to cover postage and packing and first come first served. Chris

Those burners, those dixies, and also the hayboxes which are not shown, were still in use with the British Army into the 1960s! I used to bamboozle people by asking what the loops on the hayboxes were for; the answer was to attach them to a pack saddle on a mule! Chris