Roy Larkin

Fuel tank shape and the body suggest US Army not British. Not the standardised B Type body though.

As far as I am aware the British FWD's were sent over without the body and were fitted with a locally made one.

 

I have some Militor pics to trade. See you at break (or PM or Email me if more convenient).

I'm with you Tim, does not look 'British' and all the references I have seen have American vehicles shipped without bodies to save space.

We wish you could have been there too. We are all becoming very popular at the moment! The Crossley looked splendid with the wreaths on your wonderful trailer.

 

Cambridgeshire is pretty flat, Doug, so we could happily cruise at 12-15mph. Probably achieving 5mpg or so.

 

Steve

5mpg sounds about right. Most companies during the war are recording 4.5/5mpg on average with a few up to 6mpg on very light work. Interestingly, one company I looked at which provided more detail than most showed that there was a gradual decline to 3.5mpg as the lorry got more and more worn out. Once overhauled it returned to 4.5mpg and over the following few months gradually slipped back to 3.5 before being overhauled again and returning to 4.5mpg.

Wonderful stuff.

Thanks Andy, luckily they were not that much worn out.

 

I acquired a postcard that arrived in the mail today. Bought it for the photo but I was amazed with the writing on the back. One of the three men in the photo writes to his parents to say that everything goes well and that he is posing with two friends on their 'ambulance car'.

 

Marcel

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]94902[/ATTACH]

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]94903[/ATTACH]

Breakdown lorries were also referred to as 'First Aid' lorries and 'Ambulances', although the term ambulance seems to have been dropped quite early on, by the British at least. A crew of 3 would be rare on a cargo lorry but not unusual on a breakdown lorry.

And This:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]94792[/ATTACH]

 

Moving floor body for?

Almost certainly roadstone. 10,000 tons of roadstone was used daily just to keep up with the wear and tear on the roads. As Northern France & Flanders isn't suitable for roadstone, all of it had to be imported from UK, Guernsey and southern & mid France. Royal Engineers were responsible for the upkeep of the roads with Labour Corps Coys and ASC Coys attached to them.

Any ideas on colours for ww1 motorbikes?

Motorcycles would have been painted the same as the lorries, so 'service colour', 'standard colour', 'service green' are about the best descriptions found so far. Paint was mixed, sometimes by the manufacturers, sometimes by HRSs, sometimes by companies locally, and batches of paint would have varied slightly in the mix depending on availablility and quality of that available, so no two batches were the same.

Do you know if the original grey colour was the same tone as used for navy ships? A common supply?

 

Doug

Doug, it might well be. More likely it was just grey. I suspect that whoever the supplier, every batch was slightly different.

Nothing new on the actual colour but 319 Coy ASC (1 Heavy repair Shop) first started repainting lorries after repairs on 29 October 1914. Prior to that date lorries were coming out of workshops in original livery so it looks like the repainting can be positively identified as starting on 29th.

It isn't just the bus restoration that the money is being spent on. Incidentally, having seen the bus during its restoration and heard of some of the plans and events being planned over a 4/5 year period, it strikes me as an excellent project. It certainly isn't just a static museum exhibit that comes out for the odd road run. Here's what the LT Museum have had to say;

"The funding that the Museum has received from the Heritage Lottery Fund covers a five year heritage, learning and participation programme marking the centenaries of the First World War between 2014 and 2018 which includes the restoration of B-type bus B2737. The sum that we have received takes into account this five year programme.

The restoration of the bus is costing around £250,000 – more than half of which was spent on purchasing original parts such as the bus body, engine and chassis. The remainder of the grant that we have secured from the Heritage Lottery Fund covers a whole range of activities including an apprenticeship programme and collections support. It is also funding a programme of learning and participation which will ensure communities across London will have the chance to see and learn about B2737, B-type buses and their role in the First World War through community exhibitions and a touring programme.

Staying true to its story, the Museum plans to recreate the journey that the B-type bus would have taken from London to transport troops to the Western Front. The funding that the Museum has received from the HLF does not cover this activity. To deliver this aim we have launched a crowdfunding campaign to raise £25,000 to cover the costs associated with recreating this historic journey, the largest of which is the cost associated with transportation and the use of a low loader over an extended period. Members of the general public are invited to support the campaign and help the Museum to reach its £25,000 target and in return for their support will receive B-type related rewards. For more information visit www.buzzbnk.org/ltm-battlebus"

Not quite. The rebuild is of B2737 (LH 8186) - a genuine B type chassis that, so I understand, went to the War Department.

 

More photos here:

 

Yes, confirmed as going to the War Office and also proved it went to France.

I doubt it's a US dump, I've not seen anything about the USA repatriating wrecks. Difficult to see but my money would be on Kempton Park.

Confirmation received this morning that the Dennis has been accepted for the HCVS London to Brighton Run on Sunday 4th May. All very pleasing and we will look forward to joining up with other WW1 vehicles on the day!

 

 

Tony

The Brighton programme lists 17 vehicles in the 'Special Class Vehicles from WW1 Era up to 1920'. Looks like an excellent display. Look forward to seeing you on the Front at Brighton.

Having recently read a book on Marsons Road Services and some of the men involved it seems that on the Scammell 100 tonner they had problems with the wheel revolving within the tyre when working hard. They solved it by pressing the wheels on with rubber fire hose between the two.

 

 

 

 

Indeed they did. They bought worn out fire hoses from Liverpool Fire Brigade for the purpose. Cut them into narrow strips and put them between wheel rim and tyre as the new tyre was pressed on.

There are reports of lorries being unusable for weeks at a time in France while waiting for the correct size tyres to become available and then within a matter of hours of new tyres being fitted were unusable again as they tyres were falling off, so the problem isn't anything new.

Just how many tyre sizes were there? How universal are/were they? I'd assumed a relatively small number of tyre sizes that would fit the wheels on any make of lorry but it seems that's not the case as there were times when tyres for Halleys were impossible to obtain and when they were obtainable, another make such as Daimler or Thornycroft were devoid of tyres as they became unobtainable. I appreciate that Halley wheels wouldn't fit a Daimler, or vice versa, but would have thought that tyres for Daimler wheels would fit Halley wheels etc.

We will have to begin to think about body style for the Thornycroft soon.

What do you make of this one? Sliding windows would be quite useful.

 

I prefer this one - just need a slice from an old railway carriage and the jobs done. Might even get a nicely upholstered seat as well.

This should help to sort the confusion over colour and colour change in WW1.

421 Coy ASC (4 MAC) started to repaint ambulances on 2 January 1915. This was under orders of CO MACs who considered that green was too conspicuous and that ambulances should be repainted grey.

So, we have lorries going from grey to green and ambulances from green to grey, both for the same reason and both about the same time.

Nothing like a bit of clarity to solve a mystery, is there?

The American Expeditionary Force acquired a number of Austin twin shafts in 1917. I wonder if these were left over from the Russian order?

I'm not sure how many of the 'Russian Order' were actually built by Austin, Tim. I suspect very few. However the AEF would have arranged their lorries through the War Office/Ministry of Munitions, not Austin directly. As with the Russian order, Austin had the capacity, so it would make sense that the War Office would have used that capacity for the Americans. Much would depend on dates, as to whether the Americans got their lorries before or after the Russian order was placed and subsequently cancelled.

The Austin 'twin shaft' only appeared as a 2 ton lorry, not the chassis used for armoured cars. The 'twin shaft' was a financial disaster for Austin, a cancelled order for Russia being the basic cause, two variations were built although in late 1913 a larger 4/5 version was built experimentally as was a forward radiator version in 1917. Other than a brief excursion into lorry building in 1919 Austin left the commercial vehicle market until the late 1930s. One 'twin shaft' of original specification survives in an Essex collection.

Richard Peskett.

The order from Russia and was addressed to the British government and was for about 1200 lorries. The Russians didn't specify what make and it was the War Office/Ministry of Munitions that determined they would be Austins as they could be supplied without interrupting the supply of lorries to the War Office from other makers. After months of debate as to whether the Russians could afford to pay for them, the order was finally placed but then the Russian Revolution intervened and the order was cancelled by the British government. Austin did rather well out of the War office compensation for the cancelled order. It's a measure of what the War Office thought of the twin shaft Austin that even after paying for them, they didn't want them. So, while it is true that Austin didn't make enough Austin twin shafts to be financially a success, they did get paid for around 1,000 which they didn't have to build, so wasn't entirely a disaster.

The hooks were indeed part of the War Office specification with the War Office even determining the design. Probably the intention was to have a means of recovery, or a place to attach a rope that was easy to get at and minimised the risk of additional damage when recovering from a ditch, or when being towed on a rope. They would also have provided a lashing point for the cross-channel journey. Lorries at the time were far from reliable and with the War office keeping an eye on the performance and development of the motor lorry in civilian life, these hooks would have been regarded as a vital part of the equipment. I think that it would have been more likely that the horse would have helped the lorry, rather than the lorry helping the horse. If the horse was struggling, and they did, then they had already left the lorry far behind.

The 'Decoy' name plate looks to me like a fleet name.

Thousands of civilian haulage lorries were requisitioned in the first few months of the war, although many of those were never shipped to France. It is more likely that it would have been fitted with a GS lorry body than converted to a bus. In 1914 buses were being converted to lorries on arrival in France, although we were using French buses as troop carriers with some success at the time.

I have received an email from Martin Oliver about the Great Dorset Steam Fair and probably the easiest way of explaining is to copy the press release he sent me here.

PRESS RELEASE

WORLD WAR ONE COMMEMORATION DISPLAY – GREAT DORSET STEAM FAIR 2014

News from Martin Oliver at the Great Dorset Steam Fair is that with 2014 marking 100 years since the outbreak of the First World War, the GDSF will be commemorating this centenary anniversary with its own tribute display at this year’s show. This thoughtfully assembled display will feature a selection of steam and historic vehicles and ancillary equipment which participated in the War years 1914-1918.

If you would like to be considered as an exhibitor in this special commemorative display please send full details in writing of your proposed exhibit (including a recent photograph) to Great Dorset Steam Fair (World War One Display), Show Office, Dairy House Farm, Child Okeford, Blandford, Dorset, DT11 8HT. Alternatively, please send Martin your details by email to martin.oliver@gdsf.co.uk Careful consideration will be given to all applications, particularly to those with rare and unusually interesting exhibits. All applications must be received by GDSF by 15th March 2014.

For further information on the display, please contact Martin Oliver (01258 860361/07833 514961).

Excellent Tim, best by far for a very long time. The quality and attention to detail matches that of the Dennis and Thornycroft and gives everybody the opportunity to share the Gosling family's excellent work with something easier to put on a shelf than a Dennis. Very well done indeed.

Of the initial 4 ASC companies, 90,91,92,93 Coys only 2 were kept as bus companies.

93 Coy arrived at Rouen on 2/11/1914 with 75 buses. There is then a gap in their records until they arrived in St Omer on 7/12/1914 by which time they had become 1 Mobile Repair Unit. There is no record of what happened to their buses, although it is known that French carpenters were cutting off the top decks within 4 hours of them arriving at Rouen. 57 Coy ASC received regularly LGOCs which they commented on as being 'converted buses' and by 6/12/1914 had 52 such lorries on their strength. These were initially rated as 40-cwt but very quickly 57 Coy had persuaded GHQ to downrate them to 30-cwt and they were always referred to as 30-cwt from then on.

92 Coy became 4 GHQ Ammunition Park and although their records prior to April 1916 appear to be missing (at least not where they should be, so who knows if they will ever turn up in some unexpected place), the movements of vehicles in and out of the company into workshops, other companies etc, seem to all be lorries of various makes, including Straker-Squire and Berna, despite it still being referred to as 3 Auxiliary Bus Coy. They were also operating, it seems various lorries fitted with seats, but no actual buses. What happened to the 75 buses they originally had on formation? Why were they kept as a bus company but worked as a lorry company, who knows?

On 28 January 1917 it was redesignated 50 Auxiliary Bus Coy but I've not looked at that company yet.

Tim,

That was my thought as well, that the Albions were intended for Home Front use. I am assuming that it was the civilian liveried lorries in France that were repainted first, although some military ones might have been if they were in for overhaul. At some point, the decision was made to switch from military grey to GS, or whatever they called it. Certainly by mid-January 1915 repainting was happening among a lot of ASC companies and ambulance companies. My gut feeling is that that decision was made sometime in October or November 1914.

Rick, that's the nearest I've seen that gives an idea when the colour changed. Fortunately it ties in with what appears to have happened in France.

 

As regards the shade of colour, I'm coming round to thinking that nobody actually knew what the shade was, so just gave it a name like 'Service Green', 'GS' or anything nondescript so that they couldn't be accused of getting it wrong. Every new batch mixed would have been different anyway.

Oops! just noticed that you've got 1915. I reckon that's a year late as I've got colour changes taking place in France in January 1915.

Here is the card for 368A laid down on 29th December 1915 showing that it was to be Service Green. 361A has body no. 5150 and 368A has body no. 5197, 47 bodies later.

 

These Chassis Cards are to be found in the Albion Archives at Biggar in Scotland and are on Microfisch.

Rick, that's the nearest I've seen that gives an idea when the colour changed. Fortunately it ties in with what appears to have happened in France.

As regards the shade of colour, I'm coming round to thinking that nobody actually knew what the shade was, so just gave it a name like 'Service Green', 'GS' or anything nondescript so that they couldn't be accused of getting it wrong. Every new batch mixed would have been different anyway.