Gwyn Evans

True enough of course. I was using 4643 as it is the clearest example, though I've found similar marks on the less pristine one in the USA.

Thank you for your efforts on my behalf.

Gwyn

Actually I think there might be something there. What I'm half-expecting to find is a HALLSIDE mark. I attach a photo showing one on 'Grit' (4643) and a marked-up photo showing an area where I think a mark might be. Would anyone in the area fancy taking another look for me, please? A torch can be helpful in finding these. Thanks.

Gwyn

Richard

I am most grateful to you for your time and trouble.

With Seasons Greetings

Gwyn

 

 

 

No ... I'm not on commission. Nic

I'll believe you Nic...

Actually this is a good solution for another reason - I won't have to bring the thing all the way from Wales.

Thanks very much everyone.

Gwyn

It will be pitch black in there and the door on the rear is not very large and who ever is holding the camera will block out any available daylight. Ideally you need a lamp on the camera.

 

regards, Richard

True, though I was hoping that I could use a flash which would solve the problem (fingers crossed). If just using a mirror on a stick the lack of a light source would be a problem though.

Gwyn

One of these would probably do the trick. I've no idea if they can be hired.

 

http://www.inline.com.au/snakeeye-pole-camera

 

Nic

They're certainly long enough Nic. Many thanks.

Gwyn

If you don't mind some simple fabrication and have a camera with a tripod screw thread it would be possible to make your own selfie stick: 1/4" Whitworth thread bolt (check size on your camera), 3 metres metal electrical conduit/pipe for the stick, tripod to clamp the pipe part way down for stability, long cable release, small flash, wide angle lens setting, small aperture for depth of field. Bit of messing about but cheaper than a drone if you don't already have one.

Putting a tripod inside to support a stick with a camera with wide angle lens is a good idea. This could be do-able. Thank you.

Gwyn

An endoscope is probably unsuitable anyway, unless you can get it really close to the bit you're interested in. I suspect the typical "in focus" distance is under an inch. An autofocusing camera on a suitable long pole (with ideally its own light source and remote control from a laptop so you can see what you're looking at before taking the shot) would be better.

 

What's the relative position of the target area from the rear door? If it's straight in and look sideways, I'd consider sticking a camera on a length of 2x2 (tripod bush is 1/4" Whitworth), rotate it to the angle you need, and then feed it in - use something to support the rod to reduce shake and see what you get. (My old Fuji S2Pro can be controlled from a Mac/PC over USB for studio work, and would probably work well in this situation. I'm sure more recent cameras offer the same features.)

 

Chris.

Hi Chris

Thanks for the advice. The relative position of the target and and rear door can be seen in the photo in post #4 on page 1 of this thread. The rear door is the oval-ish shape in the background. None of the interior machinery remains and the floor has been removed. The Acroprops mentioned earlier are further forward than the target so shouldn't pose a problem as they'd be out of reach of any stick, though they are a hazard to anyone entering due to the risk of a fall dislodging them.

Gwyn

Thank you for all the suggestions. A look at selfie sticks (and similar) on the market suggests they're extendable up to about 41". The distance between the rear door and the point I need to see is between about 50" and 58", so they're probably not long enough. Likely to be considerable wobble at that distance as well I'd have thought. Endoscopes have a much longer reach, obviously, but how to point one at what I need to see once it's inside (if from behind the plate) is another problem to which I'm presently lacking a solution.

Gwyn

Thank you both.

Gwyn

That would be good of you. I'm sure everyone will appreciate them.

Gwyn

Sorry for this tardy response to latest posts, for which I am grateful. I've been away for a few nights.

The idea of an endoscope is a good one, but there seems to be a lack of entry points. It looks as though the vision slits above the driver's and commander's visors have been welded shut so that rules them out, and as has been pointed out the sponsons are also blocked up - literally because as I have said before they're full of bricks.

The Council's ban on entry is not a case of the nanny state at all. The tank has no floor and at about crotch height are four or five pieces of angle iron joining one side of the hull with the other. Any stumble negotiating those will likely bring a clumsy clod in contact with at least one of the two Acroprops that are holding up the roof. I do have permission to use a drone but that will require some practice, and I'm concerned whether it's practicable in a iron room. That's why I'm trying all routes to locate people who might have interior photos first.

I do need some photos of specific external details. Would any of you who are in the area be willing to do this for me please? The pictures will be for my own personal study, and not for publication. If so, perhaps you could contact me by personal message? I'm reluctant to post my email on an open forum.

Thanks

Gwyn

... I should have added that not all Mark IVs have these plates, for example the Mark IV Male at Bovington doesn't. All the same there's good reason to believe that when built the tank that was eventually presented to Ashford did have them.

Interesting information about the Coventry chains, Richard - thank you. I don't think that there was a standard way of disabling presentation tanks, though removing at least one chain was certainly a common method. I'm sure that various methods were devised to disable tanks in a hurry and the officer in charge could have resorted to his own initiative.

Gwyn

Richard, Sean

Thank you for your replies. Yes, I fully accept the Council's refusal to allow access. It's completely understandable. Personally I wouldn't let anyone sit under the sponsons either as they're full of bricks and one day will just peel off.

I am in regular contact with David Fletcher. He is well aware of my research and has been very supportive over the years, but he doesn't know the Ashford tank's identity. I agree that it carried, and carries, the training number (aka home service number) 245, but this doesn't tell very much except that the tank is a Mark IV Female, which we know. I can actually narrow the tank's identity down to one of about 40, so bearing in mind 1220 Mark IVs were built that's a good start! However I need to pursue all avenues to see if the evidence of the actual manufacturer's number still survives.

To show what I'm looking for, I attach a photo of the starboard rear diaphragm on 4643, the Mark IV at the Australian War Memorial. At the top you can see the cast plate with the all important number nicely picked out in red. This plate should still be in the Ashford tank (with a second on the other side) as both diaphragms are intact. What I need are internal photographs that may have been taken during any surveys, or as a preliminary to work being carried out, or for any other reason, to see if these castings survive and if so, what they say.

Thanks for your help in this quest.

Gwyn

Hi

I research British tanks and tank production in WW1, and I'm in need of some help in placing the Ashford tank in the Mark IV production sequence. To do this ideally I need to know its four digit manufacturer's number (which is not 1234 as painted on it today). It should be visible internally on a metal casting at the top of the diaphragm towards the rear of the sponson openings. (Not all Mark IVs have them in this position; I'm acting on a strong hunch that I've already correctly identified the manufacturer).

Ashford Borough Council have been helpful in searching for any internal photos they might hold, but have only been able to provide ones taken from outside through the replica rear door. These don't show what I need because the castings face forward and would be obscured from this point. Entry to the tank is now prohibited due to health and safety concerns so I can't enter and take my own photos, and I'm not sure how a drone would work when surrounded by metal.

I'm wondering whether anyone on the Forum already has internal photos of the Ashford tank that show this aspect. If so, I'd be delighted to hear from you.

I'd also be interested in hearing from anyone who has ready access to the tank and would be willing to take some external photos of some very detailed points for me.

Many thanks

Gwyn Evans

Quite exceptional photos - many thanks for posting.

The tank isn't a Mark I Male but a Mark I Female, identifiable by the small hatch at the rear of the sponson.

Gwyn

Not such a new member I suppose, but I've not posted anything yet. Interests: British tracked armour from WW1 through to 1945, with particular interests in WW1 tank production, British WW2 amphibious tanks and British remotely controlled armour from this period (yes - there was lots of it!)

Found this ,Taken in Barrow in Furness , Looks like they have not seen a tank up close.

I am sure this is Ulverston, not Barrow in Furness.