Pete Ashby

Next job was to fabricate the frame work that the carrier pivots in and attaches the whole assembly to the truck this is an angle iron and steel plate construction. First thing to do was to bend up the two side arms the angle is 50mm x 50mm x 5mm thick this was very close to the Imperial original size Next the hinge locking plate was bent up and drilled and filed out to take the bow pivot pins (that’s the bar in the lower front of the photo that joins the two angle irons) The side irons were mounted on the truck and the flat bar cross braces cut, drilled and added….. it was beginning to look a bit more like it, all be it still very wobbly. The wobbly problem is cured by the addition of the steel plate cheek pieces these bolt onto the fuel tank support angle irons and are cut from 5mm plate. They are a distinctive shape so a cardboard template was made up and adjusted until it fitted properly. The rails were then taken off and drilled to take the rivets that hold the cheek pieces on. Once the cheek pieces were cut out the edges were draw filed flat and square (no plasma cutter here just sweat, 1mm slitting disks in the angle grinder and a jig saw for the curvy bits ) The cheek pieces were then hot riveted onto the rails, the originals have a distinctive head shape on the outside and appeared to be machine closed on the inside face (no snap used apparently) after searching various catalogues the nearest to the shape and size I could find was on a long shank black iron coach bolt. So out with my machinists digest to work out the correct rivet length required cut the threaded portion off along with some of the unwanted shank then repeat 30 times. The cheek pieces were then hot riveted on using the anvil to hold the head, the Oxy torch with fine nozzle to heat only the rivet shank to just short of melting then thickening up the shank and dressing down with a medium weight ball pane hammer. The whole assembly ends up looking like this when fitted back on the truck Pete

A significant piece of kit that was missing from the truck was the spare wheel carrier so it was now time to turn my attention to this. Studying in service and factory photos showed that two types of carrier were fitted to the Retriever. From the start of production to mid1940 a bow type structure was used to support the wheel then from mid1940 to the end of production in November 1941 a simple angle iron ladder and rack was fitted. My truck should have the bow carrier fortunately the truck that was in the defunct Beverly RCT museum and Monty’s caravan at IWM Duxford both had the early bow system so these were used to produce drawings and scaled photos. The problem of bending some fairly heavy gauge pipe was solved when a post war carrier turned up it may possibly have come from an AEC Militant but I’m not sure. The problem was it was too tall had extra inertia brake fittings, the tubes were joined with a solid web and the hub was a four arm carrier as opposed to the original two arm……apart from that it was perfect….. hmm that’s a good buy then :???. The result was several days with my petrol cutter and an angle grinder. That did the trick, I did ponder changing the hub to a two arm configuration but decided I’d live with it the way it was. After cleaning and de-rusting it ended up like this Pete

It must be time for another update on progress. Work on and around the cab area is nearly complete with the instrument housing is repaired and waiting for a top coat. It’s taken some time but I managed to track down a full set of suitable instruments (trial fitted for the photo) the ignition / light switch is a NoS unit, it’s post war but I’ve fitted an early brass turn key, I still have to fit a brass bezel for the warning light fortunately I have a couple that can be cleaned up the only difference then will be the number of rivets in the face and possibly the part number but I can live with that. Before: After: Pete

Hmm, no I don't think so, the party didn't leave Rushmore until three days after the failed raid. I rather have the feeling that they went to do a job of work or perhaps attend a relevant course but why only 20 odd men out of 230 in the unit? The men who went were all MT fitters and what ever they were doing warranted the CO driving there and back to Rushmore on the first day to oversee something???? I rather hoped that there would be a RAOC field Depot on the redundant airfield but so far I haven't found any reference to anything of that nature there. Pete

Fair point David, however at that stage of the war I'm not sure we had too many PoW's, in fact they had rather more of ours than we had of theirs I fear :undecided:. The only thing of note at the time was that the abortive Dieppe raid had taken place three days before, but I can't see how there could be any connection with three sections (about 20 men and two junior officers ) of RAOC, having said that there must have been some driving force to initiate travelling over 100 miles east when there must have been other units closer. Small personal mystery for which there never be an answer I fear. Pete

Indeed, that was the conclusion I came to, as there appeared to be much more covered accommodation than would be required for the Lysander squadron that was based there in the summer of 1940. The RAF ceased operations from the field soon after the withdrawal from France so it must have been used for something else. My interest was raised by an entry for 22 of August 1942 in the war diary for my Fathers unit 10th Army Workshop RAOC currently in the process of forming up at Rushmore Arena prior to taking part in the Torch operations. Three sections (one of which included my Father) and an 'F' lorry (this is a house type electrical or instrument repair workshop) were sent on detachment to Bekesbourne Canterbury; some time before the 1st of September however the detachment had returned to Rushmore. Nothing particularly remarkable about any of this except it struck me as interesting that a detachment should be sent all the way from Aldershot to Canterbury to carry out less than 8 days work, it begs the question why couldn't a closer unit carry out the work and what were they doing at an an abandoned grass airfield. What ever it was it obviously did not make an impression on my Father as he never mentioned it at any time in any of his recollections. Pete

This is a bit of a left field question but perhaps some one can help. I'm interested to know if any army units (Canadian or British) were stationed on or around the air field around the time or immediately post the date of the Dieppe raid 19 August 1942. I know the RAF were not using the airfield by this stage of the war but the infra structure such as it was was still in place thanks Pete

Hello Ian, David did mention he'd met you there, yes the Chev is rather early and rather rare regards Pete

Look forward to following this one Pete

Interesting.... so a universal fitment on most common usage Canadian trailers Pete

You might give these guys a try not used them myself but know others who have sourced some fairly rare kit from them http://www.gosnays.co.uk/acatalog/Veteran___Vintage_Parts.html Pete

Thanks for confirming that Maurice I guessed that it might be the case , it seems all Canadian trailers up to 3 ton were fitted with the Ford master cylinder activated on the over run. Pete

Your right Jeremy is so much as it is a Canadian side/rear light however it is the later type that was brought in with the 13 cab series of trucks when rubber was getting in sort supply. Pete

Found it this is taken from the Design Records Canadian Developed Military Vehicles World War 11. So these are factory photos and specs Pete

Pleased you like the photos Ian and Jeremy, somewhere I have the data sheet for the 180 gal Canadian tank I'll have a root around in the morning and see if I can find it and put a scan up on here I may also have some more factory photos on disc I'll have a look. One small point worthy of note on the photo of the rear of the tank is the Canadian 'rubber light' rear lights these would not be fitted to British trailers. These lights are the same as fitted to 11 and 12 cab Ford and Chevrolet CMP's. I wonder if the over run brake is hydraulic on the tanker? the 10cwt trailer is and it's activated by a Ford CMP master cylinder Pete

Indeed it is Sean with standard controls and back up in place and a contingency plan filed (all in another life and another place now) Pete

Just so Tony.... 'the reasonable act of the reasonable Man/Women' :readpaper: I have sadly wasted many hours of my life trying to define and justify just that. Pete

No I'm not sure either Sean, my limited experience is confined to health & safety and contract law :yawn:, however I do wonder if Persuasive Precedent may have a part to play that's why I included the link to the definitions so that people could make their own informed judgment. The finer points of the legal system are well outside my scope but as NoS pointed out further back in this thread... that's what Briefs are paid to do..... for both sides. Nothing to get hung up about but worth bearing in mind. Pete

Nice find here's a couple of photos that may be of interest taken from the manual for the Canadian 180 gal tank Pete

One thing I forgot to add.......when lapping make sure you use plenty of light oil for lubrication...... I didn't on one occasion and had to junk the whole tap assembly the very fine paste dried and welded the whole assembly up solid :-( Pete

As Richard has said lapping will do the trick provided there is not excessive ware or damage of the spindle or bore I've never done a drain cock but have had some success on fuel taps using jewelers rouge which I guess will be very close to Richards suggestion for injector lapping paste. If all else fails you might find something suitable here https://www.vintagecarparts.co.uk/categories/vintage-car-parts-taps-pipe-and-fittings-taps-drain Pete

Not sure there is a suggestion of paranoia or victimization in the threads so far cosrec :-), it's more about a timely reminder for all of us to be aware, the point of interest regarding the actual speed at which the fine the was imposed is that it is close to the speed that a number of our larger vehicles travel at around the average 25mph to 35mph mark. Pete

Hmmm, just re-read the article and I can see no suggestion that he was classed as a 'professional driver' there is however an interesting comment used in the defense that there was deemed nowhere safe to pull over. Perhaps there is little merit in discussing the actual case only in so much as it relates to our activities and relative speeds on the highway, rather it acts as a reminder for all of us that Rule 169 is on the statue and is applied in a subjective manner by the courts using fines and points as defined by CD30. Pete

No I'm not worried Sean it doesn't really impact on me. For many years (40 years this year) I have driven many thousands of miles here in the UK and on the continent in a range of preserved vehicles getting by using common sense and common road courtesy and on the rare occasion these days I move my stuff around I either trailer it or take small relatively fast vehicles. My reason for flagging this up was for the good of us all here on HMVF who own large slow vehicles so that we all sing from the same song sheet and are aware of the requirement under CD30. I'm not fully clear about the range and scope of the Magistrates court however I wonder if Persuasive Precedent may not play a part if the plaintive offered the charge which was then rejected by the counsel acting for the accused and the case was taken to a higher court. Either way it's not the intention of this thread to argue the finer points of case law, it's purely to bring the issue to the attention of members on the basis that ignorance of the law is no defense. Pete

Agreed NoS and this is what we should all be doing and keeping a wary eye out for the plod. for reference purposes and with no further comment I have included a link here that gives the three main legal definitions of precedent http://www.inbrief.co.uk/legal-system/precedents/ Pete (busy fitting a supercharger to my Retriever)