Mk3iain

Sorry, not on Facebook so cant log in!

They remind me of the MRDs "mechanical runway de-icers" we used in the RAF. Twin Derwent (I think) and opperators cab in the middle, pushed along by a tanker. I used to get to play with them at my old unit (MRT)at Bruggen in the early eighties, our sooties would double as runway clearers and of course they had to be tested! Has any one got some pics of them or remember them, or am I going even more mad! oops!!.. just realised this is kind of off thread, sorry Croc.

Mike "ferretfixer" I fully agree, I was also affected by the firearms bill and when this issue was first raised I had that horrible sinking feeling in my gut "here we go again, another hobby gone!". But things are much calmer now we are getting the full picture and people are listening, and we are not the target! I have had a reply by letter from my MP Rt Hon Malcom Bruce, he has written to Paul Clark MP to put our case and asks for our concerns to be heard, he also asks why we are not represented in the consultation. If interested I will scan a copy. Regards Iain

Pics of a truck I looked at during the hunt for the right one! Needs a good polish.

There is concern about using vehicles "laden", untaxed, etc at shows because as the law stands road regulations apply in these areas as they are accessible to the public. You can see the reasoning, safety, insurance etc. If these were segregated areas, ie all arenas and "pit" areas in effect fenced off, so as not to be accessible to the public, could this be a way around the problem. I know we want the public to be able to see the vehicles up close, this would not effect this if vehicles were in the "pit" and arenas only when neccesary and returned to the public area after their turn. Moving in and out would be the only time of risk but under marshal control this could be done safely, possibly even legaly. The area under temp. marshal control in effect not accessible to the public! Just a thought.

Doh I suppose it would be a hanging offence to scan it and send it !

Got it, thanks all !

Check out the Feb issue of Mil. Mac. it has a feature on them!

I appreciate that the regulation as written would class the 432 as "special type". But it seems that there have been times when vehicles have been classed under a more expedient heading by the authority to more fully reflect its use, as the system has not been able to cater for all the variations. In effect sometimes jugment calls have been made to class vehicles that are maybe unusual. That is maybe one of the biggest problems now, to have classifications that cover all vehicle types. There may have to be some (or an) additional catagories for "constructed for military use, roadgoing" vehicles. More cups of tea required!!!

Maybe its a chicken and egg situation. The 432 is a roadgoing tracked vehicle, not really what "special types" was meant to cover. If the classification is simply accepted as "tracklaying vehicle" and accepted as such without looking for another catagory for it, all would be well. But we are having to look at detail ,and this is perhaps another grey area to be clarified. Trying to draw up a set of guidelines will be a headache, I am sure there are already some around! Iain

:tup::Well done Mike and thank you. I think I am clear where I stand. I have a 1984 M1008, no change it needs testing as normal. And a 1970 AEC Mk3 recovery, has been registered as a mobile crane but could just as easily be changed toRecovery Vehicle, I would expect this to need testing. No problem with that as long as, as expected it will be tested with regard to its age and hopefully at a local venue. As I suggested before maybe at an approved garage (as per safety checks on commercial vehicles). Things are starting to come toghether. Cheers Iain Robert when are you going green, and getting a sensible vehicle ie Ferret, M35 ..........

D**m it me too, except I just forgot.

Have just been browsing that well known online machinery mart and came accross military style workwear from the workplace fashion house "Dickies". I was totally unaware of the availability of cammo. cargo trousers AND shorts from my favourite designer. Whatever next, digi cammo dungerees!! ....too late for christmas:-(

Thats disturbing, pictures in my head I DONT want......ooow.ouch:shocked:

It might help if we each print of a copy of the proposal and have a good read and then read it again a couple of days later. I have read it at least twice completly and I still have to go over bits. But then I am half blind ( an age thing!) I know, its just me. I am starting to hope/feel that things might not be as bad as we feared. But then as they say; "Hope for the best but prepare for the worst":nut:

If you look at annex A of the consultation paper "caterpillar Tracked" vehicles are not earmarked for removal of exemtion, also steam driven vehicles etc. I take this to mean " no change"!

Many thanks all. Its more interestng now. I was perhaps stupidly thinking 1917 was date of manufacture, maybe it is? and what was it for?? hmmm :confused:

Fv432. Tracked vehicle, still exempt surely?

Are they the "postman Pat" armoured patrol vehicles used in NI. I think the bodies were removed because they are made from classified armour. I would like to know more about them, They are described as having GM 6,2 turbo hmm....sure that should be 6.5 t. Not very usefull for much except parts, unless you like a challenge. Iain

New from Deamon Tweaks for mega speed and efficiency! Rear spoiler for added traction next!!!

Hi there I just had a look at mine and the guage has written on it; "Shrader" and underneath it says "Licence Michelin made in France" So maybe they both make them or are Shrader part of Michelin... Thing is, I agree they are the one to have. Cheers

I dug this out fom behind other stuff that strangely seems to be pilling up over time. It is marked on one side. "Laird Irvine. (MoD symbol) . 1917.18." On the other side. "SP.8.40" ".13.15.0." "5.7.17." and some other strang marking! Is it of interest or just another bit of c**p?

Pics of the two types of issue tyre inflator that I have. On left the newer and I think better type for use, on right the older type, more in keeping for older vehicles.

I have used the standard push on tyre inflator as per CES and available from some dealers and then came accross an ex. mod Shrader inflator complete with guage and clip on valve fitting. This is by far the best inflator I have come accross including the normal garage type. It clips on and you have ablout 2m hose before the guage/control. Easy to use and I think safer as you can stand off to the side of the tyre and control with a guage in your hand. The more common type you have to hold on the valve and have a assistant operate the inflator valve! Regards

Well done, good idea. You definately have my support. (for what its worth) :goodidea: