simon king

I think 3 might be the mount for the charging board which switched power from the auxiliary generator or chorehorse generator to the banks of batteries. 4 could be the trunking protecting the cables running from the auxiliary generator under the floor to the big control box seen in earlier pictures.(That in turn feeds the charging board) 5 could be the mount for the CAV ammeter associated with the control box. 1 could be part of the cover for the charging board or control box. 10 could be part of the clamping system used to secure the radio table to the floor..

Pretty sure that no 9 are the four bars that hold the four wooden 100-125 Ah battery boxes into their frames. If the Morris mirrors MWR practice, there should be four frames with eight long threaded rods to which are welded large wing nuts. These screw down onto those bars to hold the batteries in place.

Thanks for these photos. It certainly gives credence to the theory as I don’t think the foot is a part for the antenna. Would it be possible to let us have some dimensions for those three canvas extension aprons. This might give us a clue to the original length of the tube extensions

David, is there a way of securing the tilt frame in a raised position on the truck as you suggest. The 3 planks attached to the tilt frame just rest on the top of the original body. There is no other attachment. Also the windows in the canvas only work if you think of it as a separate tent as they are behind the lockers otherwise. Similarly the canvas blinds are on the inside, suggesting easy access from the inside. Just not possible with the lockers in place. The radio installation, with the No23 carrier that just clips onto the table, is specifically designed to be removed from the back of the truck if required, and the attached diagram shows it being used away from the truck. That’s why the 300w Chorehorse genny is carried to allow the installation to be used without access to the vehicle auxiliary dynamo. The charging board is attached with wing nuts to allow it to be easily removed for remote use. Having said all this, I suspect the feeling was that it was a lot of faffing around for little benefit and the option was rarely used

Hi Sigve Do you have the original canvas tilt for the truck? Do those three canvas extension pieces attach to the bottom of it by any chance? If so you may have proved something that I have been wondering about for a while - that on the 15cwt FFW like the MWR and your museums Morris, it was possible to take the tilt frame off the truck to use as a separate radio tent. That is why the tilt frame is extended front and back. Once on the ground, the trucks canvas would not be long enough so the three additional sections were intended to be attached to the bottom of the trucks canvas to fully enclose the tent. Were there any extension pieces for the four legs as well? The two circles are intended to close off the speaking tubes when used as a tent. As with the MWR, the planks attached to the tilt frames are only intended to provide stability when the frame is being used away from the vehicle as a separate tent

If it was a purely domestic vehicle, used for delivering the post or running stores around the station, would they even bother to repaint to match the current regulations. The van is unlikely to be in a "combat" situation and all the regulations seem to state that vehicles should only be repainted into a new scheme when the vehicle needed to be repainted. As a station runabout it might not have had a lot of hammer and the paint never deteriorated to the point where it needed another coat. It is possible that it was requisitioned in early 1940 or was delivered to an post Dunkirk contract where anything with wheels was welcome so it might have been refinished or finished in blue-grey/black wings or KG3/black wings. Just a thought

The narrow gauge War Department Light Railway workshop trains are well illustrated in WDLR Album by Roy Link. They seem to be built onto the standard D Class bogie wagon chassis and are therefore longer than the IWM example. Could be the source of the idea that it was once a railway wagon, although it would have had to be cut down.

I have a similar original repair on my jeep block under the distributor boss to repair frost damage. There’s a lot more screws around the perimeter of the applied patch though.

The OYC was a Bedford OY 3 ton chassis and cab bodied by external suppliers. In the case of a tanker likely to have been Butterfields or Thompson’s. There seem to be quite a few in preservation if google images is to be believed

Don’t know why people just don’t google TK620 as I did. It pulls up a picture taken on the same occasion from a different angle, with the camouflaged B35 in exactly the same position. Why overcomplicate?

Possibly Mosquito B35, TK620 XD-A of 139 Squadron RAF Faid, Egypt in 1948/49

We think that wooden holder might be for the oil funnel. No 43 on Page 5 of drivers handbook

There seems to be a fold down footstep attached to the inside tailgate. I think I have seen this on another surviving MWR. Wonder if this was a standard MWR fitment or a post war addition. My MWR is also fitted with a standard towhook

i saved these pictures of the same brass OEC plate off the web a while ago. Probably came from the long HMVF thread on 10cwt trailers. Looks as if the census number is only 10 distant from yours, Your census number X 5439529 is listed on page 87 on the copy of the Chilwell list that I have from the batch X5438651 to 5439610 - Make is listed as Brockhouse - did they buy out Orme Evans during the war?

Tony you are probably right. My excuse is a long day at Goodwood yesterday

OEC is Owen Equipment Company I believe, one of 4 or 5 different manufacturers of these trailers, each firm having their own particular foibles

Peter, You are very welcome to come over and look at my 10cwt GS in North Notts if you need to check or measure anything. Has the earlier type of hitch though

30 seconds of Googling “Caunter Scheme” will pull up any number of photos showing the hard straight edges used in this scheme. The Austin is a superb recreation of this short lived camouflage, using the correct colours of Portland Stone, Silver grey and Service colour or slate Incidentally that photo of a CMP truck in Caunter thought to be an original contemporary colour photo is apparently a still from a recent Czech film

Everything but precise dates of entry into service unfortunately. Not much of interest to most people I guess.

Does anyone know when the WS19 came into widespread use as a replacement for the WS9? Is it likely that WS19 sets would have been retrofitted into the A10 cruiser tanks in North Africa and Greece? thanks

Nice work on the generator box Tom. Mine has just been repaired, blasted and primed, along with the battery box, locker and passenger seat. Comes back next weekend.

As an aside, on my MWR, which I think has a body that started out as a GS body before conversion to MWR standard as it still has tailgate bump stops on both sides, that gutter panel rearward facing lip has been bent up through 90 degrees so that it instead screws into the additional board added around the top of the body.

If you look closely at my picture, it is the holes in the wood that are slightly countersunk to take the bolts head, not the coach bolts themselves. The carriage bolts have standard domed heads. There are no holes in my original gutter panel, other than for attachment and for the two footmans loops for the cab canvas straps which may anyway be a post war/rebuild alteration as they appear to have been moved from the cab rear wood below the gutter panel. It’s a logical move as the lower edge of the panel could fray the strap if the loops remained in their original position

Aren’t those four carriage bolt holes countersunk so that the heads of the bolts don’t protrude? Definitely no holes within the gutter panel. The woodwork is all original on my MWR and you can see the countersinking on the picture below

The similarities between the Mickey Mouse patterning on the MWD and the MWR suggests that there was actually a set way of applying the disruptive patterning within the factory. Wally, according to some experts Mickey Mouse is actually a stylised combination of the dapple and foliage schemes