utt61

I wonder if Andy also knows the location of the fabled "strategic reserve" of perfectly preserved steam locos which legend has it were squirreled away, supposedly in Box tunnel, just in case of need (despite of course the fate of every British steam loco being documented). Perhaps they were added in a third massive excavation.

This thread is reminiscent of a group of reasonable people trying to have a rational discussion with a religious fanatic. Such a situation is doomed to failure because the latter is incapable of entertaining the possibility of being wrong. It is however mildly amusing.

The front axle of a S1 88" is 2" further forward than on an 86", but all other major dimensions are the same. The rear body, doors etc are interchangeable. The overall length is the same too. The no 2 crossmember (under the radiator) is closer to the bumper on an 86" than an 88". The change was to allow the 2L ohv diesel engine to fit in place of the 2L ioe petrol.

I attempted to watch the first episode yesterday but found it unbearable after a couple of minutes. I did however notice that they had the decency to warn viewers beforehand that the programme contained scenes that might upset some viewers, so at least they acknowledged the bizarre and controversial vehicle choices!

I haven't tried them but I know that it is possible to buy giant absorbent devices for reducing condensation in shipping containers. They are designed to hang from the top lashing points. I imagine that they may help inside an MV.

You are of course right, my only excuse is a tiny phone screen at the end of a long day. Still, if you're going to make a fool of yourself you might as well do it publicly! 😊

As someone whose profession is educating today's service personnel, I have to admire the extraordinary standard of handwriting displayed in that letter, a proper work of art by today's standards.

I'm not sure what it is but I don't think the proportions are right for any Land-Rover vehicle. It certainly looks like a similar vehicle of some kind though.

As long as they are accurately painted as they would have been originally, are white letters on black, and match there is no doubt about the legality on a vehicle of that age as far as I know.

I'm not sure when your photo was taken, but there is a couple of photos taken in 2017 on the International Steam website and it looks much better in them. So I hope your photo is earlier! See https://www.internationalsteam.co.uk/cranes/craneswesteurope.htm (about 3/4 of the way down the page).

Actually not, it's British, Cowans Sheldon works number 3823 of 1916 or 1917, 20 ton capacity. Supplied to the War Office, later to SNCB, now at Simpelveld ZLSM South Limburg.

Built in 1948 and spent its working life at Eastleigh PAD (Pre-assembly Depot), now preserved at the Mid-Hants Railway. Max capacity 10 tons.

My pleasure Mick, and I salute your great uncle and his compatriots for their courage and selflessness. RIP.

Railway steam cranes are very much my "thing" and I have been involved with them, their operation and preservation, and history, for more decades that I care to admit. I even own one, a crane of great historic significance, which I hope one day will be restored to working order. In the course of pursuing this particular interest, I, along with a friend with similar interests and involvements, founded an informal organisation dedicated not just to the preservation and safe operation of heritage steam cranes, but also the preservation of related artefacts, drawings, documents, etc. and the study of their development and history, and the capture of the memories and skills of the men who worked them (such men are still with us but in declining numbers of course). The organisation became the Breakdown Crane Association (BDCA) and the public face is our website and forum at www.bdca.org.uk. I think I can safely say that this is the world's leading on-line resource dedicated to steam breakdown cranes since as far as I know it is the only such resource! We have many former steam crane men who contribute, we have contacts with most of the organisations which operate such cranes today, and perhaps more significantly we have links to the most eminent railway crane historians in the UK and the RoW, one of whom in particular is an authority on British-built cranes sent overseas. On this occasion I asked his opinion and his identification was immediate and correct. Verification is easy since this particular crane is well-illustrated in David Ronald's and Mike Christensen's "Longmoor Military Railway" Vol.3 (Lightmoor Press, 2014), but beware of many erroneous captions as far as the crane photos in this book are concerned. There is also a photo of it rigged in its face shovel configuration in John Brownlie's seminal "Railway Steam Cranes" (privately published, 1973). Peter Tatlow's "Railway Breakdown Cranes" Vol 1 (Noodle Books, 2012) includes several photos and a good description of the five similar cranes mentioned in my post above but makes no mention of this particular crane, since in general one-off military cranes were out of scope for Peter's book. It does however provide a useful reference to assess the similarities and differences. I hope that that answers your questions, and in general I would suggest that if you want information on steam railway cranes, the BDCA is the best place to ask.

The crane is unique and readily identifiable as Cowans Sheldon Works No. 3828 built in 1917 for the Ministry of Munitions as a one-off pile-driver, excavator (face shovel) and crane for military use in the Near East. It was supplied with two jibs; one 34' for use with the digger bucket or the pile driver; the other a 51'3" lattice. Lifting capacity was 7 tons at 30', 13 tons at 15'. Whilst essentially similar to five 20-ton cranes built by CS between 1916 and 1920 (four of which were for the military and two of which still exist overseas) this particular crane had modifications to the carriage and general layout which make it uniquely identifiable. Of note is the provision of external operating controls visible in the photo above. Initially sent overseas it was returned to the UK from Anatolia, ca. 1923, initially to Woolmer, and was in use at Longmoor until early/mid 1950s.

Awesome work! I am really enjoying this thread, thank you for the updates.

They are easy to source, perfectly normal 1/4" UNF countersunk screws. I am not in a position to challenge whether officially they are considered safety-critical and thread-locked but over the years I have overhauled at least half-a-dozen of these pintles and have never come across one which has been thread-locked by anything other than rust and corrosion, which is commonplace. Equally I don't see how they could be considered SC since all they do is hold the two retaining plates in the right place when the pintle is not mounted to a vehicle, it is the four mounting bolts which provide the strength to tow. It is my experience that they seldom can be removed from a typical well-used pintle without the use of an impact driver, and quite often require drilling out. It is also my experience that since Bradley Dixon Bate was taken over by Al-Ko their aftermarket and technical support on all former Bradley and DB products has been virtually non-existent, to the point that they even denied that Bradley ever made the lunettes fitted to wide-track Sankey trailers, this despite the Bradley plate and NSN on the product I was asking about. Hopeless.

The only issue you may have with it being in the "historic vehicle" classification is that you cannot use it in connection with a trade or business. If it is a plaything all is well, and you can use it laden, but not for your own or anyone else's profit or reward. Isn't is strange how a dog can unerringly find the most valuable item of mail amongst a pile of junk and unimportant stuff, and then choose to chew that one alone?

Bargain!

Sadly LMS Lichfield has sold all it had, and cannot supply any more.

Sadly LMS Lichfield has sold all it had, and cannot supply any more.

I have a Bradley MH35 coupling from a Sankey Widetrack with a split rubber boot and a failed damper. Since it appears to be impossible to obtain replacement dampers (at least for less that the price of a complete trailer) the coupling is destined for the scrap bin unless someone here has a use for it. Currently stripped down but complete, it is available for collection free of charge from the Poole area if anyone wants it. Please message me as soon as possible if you are interested - the scrap bin is hungry and needs feeding and I am fed up tripping over the coupling!

I thought that as long as the chassis was a new replacement and effectively "like-for-like" - as similar as possible to the original - it didn't make any difference to the status of the vehicle. If the chassis was different (such as a different wheelbase, or coils instead of leaf springs, etc) the situation is not as straightforward. If you fit a new replacement chassis and it carries the same chassis number/identification markings as the old, and the old chassis is scrapped, I don't think you even need to tell anyone. It's just a replacement part.

100mm impact sockets are readily available in standard and deep lengths in 1"and 1.5" square drive from Impact Socket Supplies, albeit not cheap. (ISS are fairly generous with discounts if you ask nicely though).

Thanks. It's great just to know it still exists, I've wondered for years if it did.