No Signals

Best one I've seen is the 'Gloucester' Battery at Blyth, still has the generator house, etc etc. I'm told the battery was there as the Germans didn't follow the Tyne up to bomb Newcastle but generally went in up the coast and followed the river out. Hence the battery where it was needed - before the bombs were dropped. Dont know if this is just a local folktale though.

Found another one of these, courtesy of Google Earth. Not so close to home though, this time near to what is now Leeds Bradford airport. Again probably well know to those in the locality; but I am surprised to see it doesn't appear on the DoB database, unless i am looking in the wrong section. This one looks much 'cleaner' than my local one, shall have to take a nosey round when I am in the area next.

Yes, I too have to give a big thumbs up to Leger Holidays. No hesitation in recommending them. Can't compare them with anyone else as no experience of other companies. Very professional and on the trip I went on the guide/leader was very clued up and told a host of stuff to do with localities you would not know unless you were extremely well read. By the nature of an organised tour it always is a compromise but I didnt come back feeling in any way let down

Fair enough, given the training ground context I reckon you are probably spot on then in your interpretation. With reference to the second site do you think it is likely they were linked in any way from a training operational point of view? Are they that close? Do you know if the site has the same 'recognised' status as Hankley or are there any plans to try and gain it in order to protect it? Good of you to post the info - always interesting to pick up on these things in other areas.

Without checking the database records and I have to confess as to not knowing the area so will accept I could be wrong: but looking at the info on the linked posting it does seem to suggest it may be part of a 'stop line'. I do know there are other anti-tank ditches listed in Surrey but dont know their location in relation to these. They are in good nick though!

Happy to stand corrected on this. My suggestion was based on pics I'd seen and info received from the archives at Hendon. Nothing to beat some original source material though! Thanks for this.

Good stuff from Ted. A couple of points to add to his. The move away from the pre-war blue /grey came about from the Battle of Britain. It was recognised that whilst the aircraft on the ground were reasonably well camouflged, any attending vehicles tended to stand out and so drew fire. From '44 all RAF vehicles came off the production line in olive drab, as per the army, and did not have Mickey Mouse. 2nd Tactical Airforce went in to Europe with all over o/d. Photos from the time also show the most striking large roundels applied to them. Afraid of 'friendly fire' from the US maybe? AMO's also stated that vehicles were not to be painted the 'new' colours for the sake of it, just when routine repainting was required. This explains the range of schemes which can be seen on any one base at any one time. So, vehicles in the BoB film (and others) shown in blue /grey technically could be correct, unless of course they are later pattern vehicles but that is a different point eh!?

Found this in a nearby yard on the last afternoon of my recent hol. in france. Didnt have time to follow up on owner etc. Had been altered, Fiat steering column and seat being the most obvious!

What is the origin of the term 'tilt'? As very often it doesn't

Pretty sure everything original on my MW is BSWhitworth. I will measure up the clamping plates set-up and take a pic or two sometime this weekend. From memory in mine there is some kind of plate arrangement on the inside of the bed, not bolt heads, holding the lot down. Of course these may not be the original arrangement as I know the woodwork was replaced sometime in the none too distant past. I reckon if Richard finds this thread he will put you right with all the answers.

I've recently used frank Burberry's paint and had pretty good results with it. I probably chose too hot a day as the stuff was drying as I put it on. I found it did work more controllably with some white spirit in it to thin it down. The 'satin' finish I ordered turned out to be more glossy than I expected, but with the addition of w/s I got much more like the finish I required. Put it on by brush and roller as I dont have spraying facilities, but I would think with enough w/s in it it should go on fine. Colour seems pretty spot on for the late war olive drab I was after, but there are always plenty of folk to argue the accuracy of this! I met a guy who had painted Mickey Mouse black on his canvas and it looked pretty good and had soaked in rather than stopping on top, if you get what I mean, and so didnt appear to be cracking. He got his paint from a paint place in Manchester but I cant remember the name other than it was a series of initials 'D** paints'. might be worth a web or yellow pages search.

South Yorks Rick. Did a bit of online research tonight and it was known by the designation Station H17. Most likely associated with the defence of Sheffield, possibly coupled with the coalfield areas. Four heavy AA gun pits with command post. There was a sizable (for the area) army camp very close by whose main purpose I have yet to identify. It is in reasonable nick but seems to have suffered from a lot of fairly recent rubbish dumping. Not quite as spectacularly complete as the battery at Blyth but nontheless quite impressive being as I previously didnt know it was still there! God bless Google Earth! Abn D. The site will now the be property of the landowner as is the case with a lot of WW2 sites. Once hostilities finished the previous landowners got the space back, complete with contents which sometimes they had to buy!

Found this local AAA site by chance not many miles from home. Probably well known to others but its survival is new to me, although I had come across a reference to it as being destroyed 20(?) years ago. Looks pretty intact to me

I think I have finally exposed as much of the white paintwork that remains. It does appear to be a freehand painted, as opposed to stenciled, M4 or M41. It may be that what appears to be a 1 is in fact part of the remains of a larger 4, as traces of this can be seen, even if they are not clear in the pic. What is interesting is the amount of black paint that appears to be underneath this white lettering on green. which could possibly indicate the presence of a different badge underneath. That will be the next stage in scraping off. Which incidentally in case anyone else is going to try the same sometime, I found to be much more controlable using a very sharp craft knife to scrape specific layers/particles rather than wet or dry paper which did prove a bit lacking in precision for me.

The pattern for RAF vehicles after Sept. '43 was more or less the same as for Army vehicles and used the 'Mickey Mouse' disruptive pattern. From September '44 onwards the RAF used the British Standard War Emergency Standard Camouflage Colour which is olive drab, considered by some to be more drab than olive! All vehicles coming off the production line initially had this colour on them, so I am led to believe. However existing vehicles only had this applied to them as and when repainting was deemed necessary. Vehicles supplied to the Western Desert had the standard desert sand finish, but this is obviously pre-'44. I've found no specific references to vehicles in Italy or Gib.. Pictures I've seen of those in Malta tended to have the distinctive blockwork applied, but I make no claims for this being universal. My vehicle does seem to have desert sand as the bottom coat on quite a few main areas of it. The main exception being the front radiator surround piece. This does seem to have olive drab around the marking and an absence of desert sand, but all the other subsequent yellow and blue/ grey layers. My thought is that maybe the vehicle had a front end shunt and this lump is from a donor, as the paint layer pattern is different. Unfortunately if this is the case then it does mean that the marking is not for the 'master' vehicle. On this point the pic below seems to show what may be a letter 'M' coming out from the gunge. I note what Rippo says about his MW having M44 on the wing. (Mine has no surviving marks on the wings) Interestingly a document I was sent from the archives at Hendon gives no listings for the letter M being issued to any unit. One suggestion for this I have had is that it could in bad light or dirt be confused with H, in the same way G was not issued to avoid confusion with C. I dont state these as facts, just possible suggestions as to explain things. So I am interested that another vehicle has an M unit designation. If anyone needs to know the unit letter designations I will list them somewhere suitable. I will post the final results of the scraping as and when!

This is all very interesting/useful background info guys, thanks a lot. It could well point to the vehicle transferring from Army to Raf sometime post war. A lot may well depend upon whether I am able to uncover any more of the front markings as posted in my other thread. Tody's hour and a half patient work with some 800 wet and dry revealed nothing yet!

Not had chance to rub any more down on the front yet, but came across this under the seat covering. It seems a strange place to have a vehicle i.d. but it does seem to fit in with the 'style' of wartime nubers. Does anyone know the range of what the WW2 serial numbers went up to? Or where i might refer to to find out this info? The paint scheme on the body went(latest first) blue/grey, blue/grey/ hi vis yellow. desert sand and then some parts (but no pattern to this) have olive green. Due to metal condition etc I'm of the opinion there is one main vehicle here and then odds and sods of panels etc from other donor trucks. Interesting if you like that kind of stuff. Boring as hell if you dont:)

Busy rubbing down bits of the MW and this seems to be the only marking anywhere on the front. I have gone further than when I took the pic and didnt have the camera later in the day, but the bottom item is definitely a number 4. I've added a few lines and bits of white to show what has appeared. The other 'digit' above it appears to be less distinct and not as easy to trace. Any guesses as to what it might be? I'm pretty sure the vehicle is RAF origin rather than Army, but this does link to the other post I've put up about possible Service branch changes. Other than the olive around the numeral 4, the earliest paint on most of the vehicle is desert sand! For a 1944 vehicle this surprises me.

Is there any record/knowledge of vehicles being transferred between different branches of the Services if some were considered surplus 'here' but of use 'there'? I'm guessing the answer is 'no' but maybe someone else knows different? It is all to do with tracing the history/usage of my MW as I strip the paint off.

So why has the Spit got different i.d. numbers on each side? To confuse eye witnesses?

I've been asked by a bloke I know, who doesnt do eBay, to list some Mutt manuals for him. Anyone any idea of what should be a reasonable price for them to go at? I.e. are they worth not a lot and therefore not worth puttting a reserve or suitable start price on? Or the opposite? They all seem to be variations on TM 9-2320-218-10.1960, 1971(2 sight different), 1974 (something in German) and 1978. All in very good nick. Any guidance appreciated as these are totally outside my experience. cheers.

Worst day in British military history for casualties, and sent so casually. First day of the Battle of The Somme.

Update. No longer hill or speed related regarding selecting of top. Pleases itself if it will go in at all and also refuses to go back to anything else without application of force and ignorance (of which I am blessed with plenty of both ) So I reckon Tony's suggestion of worn gate / pin / selector bearings has to be the starting point for inspection. Once more in to the box dear friends once more!

As Mark more or less gets the gist of, the issue refers to wearing the 'current' uniform of the UK armed forces. It does not have to be within the context of trying to commit some other crime though, the doing it is an offence in itself if you are not a serving member and you wear 'current' gear. I believe this also stretches to being an offence if you are a serving member and wear a 'current' uniform of another branch of the services. Anything which the law might interpret as 'current' within the context of passing oneself as a serving member will be enough to get a conviction if they are of that mind. Anything which is obviously 'antique' or obsolete is not an offence as there is an obvious case of not passing oneself off as ..etc. Within the context of Living History or re-enactment then it should not be a problem, but if you were to wear reasonably recent gear and walk past the gates at Colchester etc dont be surprised if you end up in the glasshouse .

Had a closer look and no obvious makers marks on it. The only thing being the remains of a tag stating' Deflate before dismantling tighten nuts before inflating do not over inflate'. Really useful stuff eh? If from a trailer it possibly might have an agricultural origin rather than military? So maybe not as easy to 'source'? Anyone got a unicycle with a heavy duty five stud hub, needing a new rim?