Iain Crosbie

Hi Ian.

 

I you have the drums off and they are not ridged and look pretty even. then it might be worth using

some of these to rough the drums up.

 

ebay. item no 380349188451

 

 

I use these on new drums, on brand new axles to get the required braking efficiency for customer.

 

Hope this is of some help

 

Clive

Thanks Clive, looks like I'll need all the help I can get!

Yep it starts at the compressor and making sure you have full pressure all the way down to each brake chamber - good advice.

 

Iain I'll give you a call over the weekend

When I bought the beast it was only showing 85psi on the two gauges that worked.

After dismantling and rebuilding a relay valve and the unloader valve (more than once!) and having rebuilt the third gauge and checked the gauge calibration, I now have 120psi on all three, however I haven't actually checked the pressures at the chambers, so will make up some means of doing that and try again.

I suspect that there is now not really very much wrong with the thing apart from old age and a borderline original design. One leading shoe per axle, even in the 1970s, does seem rather inadequate. I might improve things by skimming the drums, but that would be a major operation, and from what has been said might not be very productive; anyway, it's now in the warm and dry (well dryish anyway) for the winter, so I will have some months of fun ahead!

Generally speaking yes. If that is how it was when it left the factory, then that is good enough for today.

Are there historical records somewhere which would list the original brake performance?

35% on a Militant ain't bad, and in any event the examiner can use a fair amount of personal discretion as to whether to pass or fail a given vehicle.

That's interesting to know. I assumed the pass was 50% and anything less was an automatic fail. That was why I had asked about the Mk 1 brakes. As far as I know the braking arrangements are similarly unsophisticated, but a Mk 1 could pass because of different conditions applying due to its age, whereas the Mk 3 would have to comply with more recent regs.

Do the regs allow a vehicle to pass if it is as good now as it would have been when new, or is that not part of the thinking?

I beg to differ as long as every thing is working as it should you will acheive a pass. I know a few companies who had them on police contracts and they had to go for certificates of roadworthiness (MOT under another name) Like i said they cant test it at its full loaded weight so you have an edge to start with

Sorry to be thick about this as I am no expert in this field, but could you clarify the weight issue? If I understand things correctly, the braking force as measured by the rollers or other device should amount to 50% of the vehicle weight, which I take to be 21 tons. If you are suggesting that the fully loaded weight could be more than 21 tons, then surely you would be looking for an even greater braking force to achieve the 50%? What figure would you think to be possible for the full loaded weight, and how does that come about for a vehicle not designed to be load carrying (other than the 4.5 ton suspended load)?

I would intend taking it to a friendly local commercial vehicle company who do MOTs and have a set of rollers.

Thanks for your input guys. Not quite sure where I go from here, but will obviously start by trying to rejuvenate the drums and shoes. From what you have all said it seems unlikely that any Milly out there would achieve a pass- or does anyone know different?

35% is about right for a Mk 3 recovery, you will struggle to get any where near 50% without a lot of work. It can be put on the rollers but you may have grip problems with the 1600 x 20 tyres.

So if 50% is the pass mark, does that mean I would have an automatic fail, or is there a discrepancy between the meter and the rollers which might mean 35% on the meter is 50% on the rollers?

If I'm understanding things properly, different standards would apply to a Mk 1 Militant because of age, even though the brakes are similar, i.e. only one leading shoe per wheel. Is that right?

I have an MOT exempt Militant Mk 3 Recovery truck on which I wish to do a voluntary brake test.

I have access to a Tapley Meter, but having looked at some posts about these meters on here I wonder what reading I should be looking for in order to expect a pass on a brake testing roller at the MOT station.

As far as I can find out, the test requires a braking efficiency of 50% on the rollers, so the question is: does that equate to 50% on a meter? I have adjusted up the brakes and tried the meter this afternoon, but could not get a reading above 35%, although it did seem to stop OK, and of course at 21 tons it does require some stopping!

One thing the meter instructions did not make clear is whether or not you need to let the vehicle settle down to a constant speed before applying the brakes (as I did). I noticed that on initial acceleration the meter dial naturally moves in the opposite direction, so presumably if you applied the brake before it had settled back to the zero/level position you would get a wrong reading? Also, I cannot quite see why it is unimportant that the road being used is not completely flat as you are required to accurately set the meter up to a level position before the test, so surely the reading would again be inaccurate if you ended the test on a hill, either up or down?

Are there any mechanics out there who can clarify things for me, and does anyone else with a Milly remember what their brakes read on a test?

Thanks for posting these Andy, it seems I may have the technology but not the talent!

Scammell Explorer going for scrap = £2,000 (as advertised in recent "Scammell Register" magazine). The same chap also has a Pioneer gearbox. Cab needs rebuilt, also radiator leaks, Meadows petrol engine, but Leyland diesel engine available for conversion. Located near Londonderry. I have been sent some pics of the Explorer so if anyone wants to see them, PM me and I'll e-mail them to you. It would be a shame to see it being converted to razor blades!

Every first attempt to log in results in the following message:

Could not find phrase 'invalid_redirect_url_x'.

However if I immediately re-try, then I can log in OK.

What is going on, and is there a fix, other than always having to log in twice? I am using Firefox browser on a Macintosh.

I'm sure the submarine museum in Gosport has one.

Mine has all the plumbing for the load reactor and the anchor for the tail end of the wire rope, but the actual ram is missing, and the pulley wheel that must have been fitted to take the chain to the towed vehicle.

Sounds like the usual MOD cock-up to me, where they identified the problem on the prototype, ordered the vehicles nevertheless, then designed and retrofitted this expensive and complicated mod which only added about 3/4 ton to the capacity and was so difficult to rig no-one used it!

I've never seen any reference to a back-acter, and would assume it is just another name for the load reactor. If you'd like to see how the load reactor worked you are very welcome to lie underneath my Milly some time!

P.S. If anyone knows of a pair of front mudguards with more metal in than rust, I be happy to hear from them!!!:rotfl:

There is a nearside door advertised here:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/AEC-MILITANT-MK3-NEARSIDE-DOOR-COMPLETE-GLASS-ETC-/310158958701?pt=UK_Cars_Parts_Vehicles_Other_Commercial_Vehicles_ET&hash=item4836ea206d

Might be worth contacting the seller in case he has the mudguards

I don't think my attempts are too bad.... considering I'm restricted to an angle grinder and a big hammer!!! :nut:

 

Nice work, but glad I'm not having to do that (yet)! Is the sheet you are using galvanised, and how are you bending the flanges, or do you weld them on after bending the main part?

Does anyone else have intermittent difficulty in logging on?

I tried 4 times today, each time after entering my name and password I got the usual page that says "Thank you for logging on..." and it then reverted to the opening page again.

I then looked at "who's on line" and was surprised to see that I was, and sure enough when I went back to the home page I was!

There must be a glitch in the system somewhere, as I am convinced I haven't lost the plot (yet!).

Some pics of my Milly from a different Iain!

I recently asked Caerbont if they could repair an old Smiths instrument, and they recommended this company:

Speedy Cables Ltd

Abercrave

Swansea

SA9 1SQ

Tel: 01639 732213

Fax: 01639 732238

As they took a little while to reply to me, I got impatient and managed to fix the gauge myself, so I have not yet tried Speedy and can't therefore comment on their service.

Thanks Chris.

Thanks for your reply Mike, and I'm sorry to see that you have given up contributing to the "consultation", but completely understand why.

It would seem that I might be better off having the vehicle classed as a recovery vehicle as I would then at least be able to tow something, the MOT situation effectively being the same for either recovery vehicle or mobile crane.

Yes, it is I!

I keep expecting you and Ian I to turn up on your bikes.

Managed to get the old girl back to Orkney last year, but not been anywhere this year due to poor weather and high fuel prices. Major engine room refurb last year, so now short of enthusiasm for a repeat performance- what I am doing buying this truck!!??

I have just spent around 2 hours reading this thread, but am still rather confused as to the situation regarding my own vehicle, Militant Mk 3 Recovery. I suspect (hope!) I will not be the only confused person.

This vehicle is described as a mobile crane (rather than as a recovery vehicle) on the V5C. I know not why, but suspect the red diesel in the tank may have something to do with it!

I see from one of Mike's excellent previous postings that the vehicle would be exempt from an MOT requirement if used either as a recovery vehicle or as a mobile crane, however it could only be called a recovery vehicle if it was being used for that purpose. It seems to me that the same thing applies to a mobile crane classification, i.e. it would only qualify as a crane if it was being used as such and could only be driven on the road if it was on its way to a site where it was to be used as a crane. That leads me to believe that while I may be able to tax it without an MOT, I would not be able to drive it without having one. Can anyone confirm whether I am right or not? I should add that it will be some time before it sees the road and that the red diesel will be removed long before then!

I would also like to join in the list of people thanking Mike for his time and sterling efforts on our behalf over this saga- let's hope it will not be in vain, although it does seem that at his last meeting there was no real willingness on the part of the DfT to accept anything other than their original proposals.

Finally, and at the risk of introducing politics to this serious thread, which I have no wish to do, I can only observe that this whole situation reminds me of a parallel situation in the marine field, where HM Coastguard are trying to lobby for legislation that would cover being drunk in charge of a pleasure craft, needless to say on safety grounds. It transpires that more people are killed in the UK each year through testing 9 volt batteries on their tongues than through boating accidents where alcohol is a factor- but try arguing against it!

Let's hope the new government meant what they said about trying to reduce the amount of red tape we all face, and stop trying to legislate to fix problems that aren't there; in the meantime keep up the good work Mike, and thanks again for all you have done so far.

I don't know why I didn't think of that Robin!

I have been 'encouraged' to introduce myself, so here goes.

I have always been a Land-Rover enthusiast, and used to trial them when I was young and fit.

I always had a hankering for something outrageous like a Scammell Explorer and can't believe that I have missed the only two I know about in Scotland, so now that I am retired and in my dotage I have done the next best thing (I hope) and bought a Militant Mk3 Recovery Truck to have some fun before the remaining bits of my old body stop working.

So far I am spending lots of time underneath it wondering what all the bits do! Over the years it has been modified and so many of the controls do not work as they should, so let's hope I can get everything sussed and working without breaking anything.

In my 'spare time' I am also restoring an ex-RNLI lifeboat. I suppose I only need an aircraft now to complete the set, but fortunately I don't like heights, the Militant cab being quite high enough!

I have a service manual for the Militant Mk 3 Recovery, however it appears to be missing some sections. I don't know if that is because the manual applied to all AECs and the missing bits are not relevant to this particular model, or if I am actually missing some important bits.

The sections which are not there are:

A; L; M; N; P; Q.

The last sections I have are Folios O1/1, Electrical Equipment; O2/22, Alternator; O3/8, Starter Motor and O4/30 CAV Control units.

Does anyone have a complete manual from which I could copy the missing bits?