Old Git

Did this Murex ever get restored? I'd love to see strip down and rebuild pics for it!

Just stumbled upon this thread and I just had to comment, this trailer is a thing of beauty. Maybe it's the bloke in me but I do have a deep seated fondness for the old Engineering setups. And this one is just beautiful!! Cracking job mate...I am deeply envious!

Here's a photocopy of ACI 1278 from September 1944 approving the Tank Suit, Denim for production. The real question though is what is the difference between the 'Tank Suit, Denim' and 'Overalls, Denim' which it was intended to replace?

Does anyone have any dated photos showing these worn before the autumn of 44?

Other than the Major Currie one above (which may indeed be mis-attributed) none that I know off so far. However, there's a fairly large document at the National Archives on the development of the Oversuit and I'm hoping to get up there sometime soon to study it. I requested an estimate for copy from TNA but they quoted me (cough) £650 (cough). I'd rather pop un for the day and take my digital camera! More of a curiousity item for me for as you say who'd wear one in summer, that said though they could we unzipped and re-zipped together to make a sort of sleeping bag and I know one veteran of the Italian campaign who said once unzipped they made fantastic replacements for groundsheets.

You are scaring me as to the size of the whole thing, as I have also bought but not yet received a scale bridge set, the M4 Treadway type.

Yes Robin, it tis I! I wouldn't get too scared mate the bridge you've bought is closer to 1/12th scale. Which is about half the size of this one. Still pretty big though!

I used to have one of the 'boat-shaped' parts, many years back, when I was still a lad playing with Action Man, (now I'm 43, and playing with real Saracens and Ferrets!. I always wondered what it was, (-the boat thing), I thought it was some half-finished homemade Action Man boat, that my dad had made, or got from someone. It may still be in my Mum's loft, I'll have a look....

Those are false bows and they were used on the pontoons to make it easier to move them around on the water when getting them into place! If you do find it and you're happy to pass it on please do shoot me a PM and we'll work something out!

Re the use of the Pixie suit in Normandy. In British Army Uniforms and Insignia of WWII, Brian L Davis confidently asserts...

Commonly known as the ‘Tank Suit’ and sometimes referred to as a ‘Pixie Suit’, the Oversuit for tank crews was introduced in July 1943. The design of this new form of protective clothing had evolved from numerous attempts the Army had made in its effort to produce a functional garment that was easy to wear within the close confines of an armoured fighting vehicle and at the same time was warm, waterproof and comfortable. It was intended, along with the ‘Tank Suits, Jungle’ and the denim tank suits, which were at a later date, to replace all earlier forms of protective clothing such as oilskin clothing (pg 209)

Later, on pg 210, on the subject of the Denim Tank suit he further asserts...

‘The Tank Suit, Denim’ was introduced into the Army from 23 September 1944 (ACI 1278 of 1944). It replaced the former pattern of denim overalls and was designed to be worn over the drawers and shirt in summer and over Battle-Dress in winter or during cold weather conditions.

Of-course the problem with both these statements is that the denim tank suit is very visible in Normandy era photo record whilst the Pixie is never seen. This has led some to speculate that Davis somehow, and inadvertently, transposed the dates for these two garments.

There's a few things that bug me about this though. The following picture shows Major Currie of the South Albertas and everytime I' ve seen this picture published it most always says it was taken in Normandy in 1944. I've not been able to find the copyright owner for this picture so have not been able to verify how took the picture and when.

Secondly, Bill Bellamy’s WWII memoir, “Troop Leader: A Tank Commanders Story”. This book details Bellamy’s experiences with 8th Kings Royal Irish Hussars who, in 1944, were the Armoured Recce unit for 7th Armoured Division. Bellamy’s wartime account is based on the daily diary he kept, in spite of regulations to the contrary, and so can be trusted to be fairly accurate in terms of recall, having been written as, or immediately after, the events in question occured. On pg 98 – 101, Bellamy describes the death of his friend and fellow Troop Leader, Mike Young on August 18th, 1944. On pg 100-101 Bellamy has this to say...

As I drew near to the two knocked out Cromwells, I saw Mike’s body lying by the side of the road, together with the body of one of his crew. It was a lesson to me, as he was wearing one of the new tank suits with which we had been issued, They were made out of a semi-waterproof material, but were a yellowish creamy colour and there was no way that the wearer could have taken cover without being easily visible. It was something which I had not thought of before, and I resolved not to wear mine in the future

Is this the Pixie suit Bellamy's talking about? I think it might be as I can think of no other waterproof garment that would have been 'new' in 1944 or even that colour. As most of you will know the colours of various wartime era Pixie's can range from creamy to tan to khaki, (I've got a Pixie hood which is a dark green ala the Denim tank suit...I think it might be post-war though).

However, in the ‘Faces of War’ collection in the Canadian National Archive I found several other pictures of Major Currie, one dated November 12th 1944 and the other dated November 25th 1944. In both pictures he is quite clearly wearing the Pixie suit and it may be that these, with the one above, are all part of the same series of pictures. But if Davis did transpose the dates for the two suits then the gap between the suit being approved for production and one making its way to a front line commander is a mere 50 days!

Finally, in the Osprey book on 'Canadian Forces in WWII'. Plate E1 shows a Ron Volstad drawing of a Captain in Major Currie's old mob, the South Alberta's, wearing a Pixie suit. The notes to accompany this drawing are quite illuminating so I've quoted it in it's entirety here...

Canadian amoured units were issued with the British 1943 Tank Oversuit, or 'Pixie Suit'. Made of heavy cotton fabric of a light khaki colour lined with khaki wool shirting material, with two neck-to-ankle zippers, it had no less than 13 pockets. 'They had a heck of a lot of pockets...but they were too heavy', and thus too warm for tank crews in th summer of 1944, so that 'not everyone had them [on]', recalled Capt. Barford of the South Alberta Regiment. However, 'the tank commander generally had one [on] because he sat in the turret with the draft down the back of his neck'. Captain Jack Summers, of the same regiment, liked the suit in cool weather, as, it seems, did most Canadian tank crews. (Graves, Donald E., 'South Albertas: A Canadian Regiment at War', Toronto: Robin Bass Studio, 1998; and in interview data kindly provided by Mr Graves).

If the Davis is correct and the Pixie suit was approved by ACI in 1943 is it possible that (like the MkIII Turtle shell) that some leading elements of the invasiion force got the Pixie long before anyone else had a need for it in winter? Anyone got any ideas, opinions, wild guesses?

Some years ago I determined to get myself one of the model Bailey Sets that the RE used for training purposes. These things were mostly made of wood, with some brass fittings. Little did I know just how difficult it would be to get a full set of these things, nor how much of an obsession it would become.

The bridge led me to also seek out a suitable sized RC tank and I managed to pick up a 1/6th scale RC Stuart from the US(which is waiting a new upper-hull, a paint job and a re-badge to 8th KRIH). The tank took me to a 1/6th scale tankie figure, (i.e. Actionman size), and I'm now in the process of building a 1/6th scale Cromwell (hence the question in research about the FD housing and cover plate).

BTW, if anyone comes across any of sets of 1/6th scale Bailey, or any components thereoff (even broken bits). Do let me know...cash waiting in my emergency Bailey fund (suitably salted away from prying wifely eyes).

That's fantastic Adrian, thankyou! I wasn't sure if they'd machined it down or cast it with a flat already in it. That picture answers quite a few questions for me but if anyone's got a picture of it in situ I'd still like to see it, just to get an view of the overall shape of the housing.

Once again Adrian, thanks a lot mate!!

Hello, I think you will find one of the members on here lives very close to you and also is in possession of a comet "awaiting restoration"!

Fantastic news...I wonder if he needs an extra pair of hands? I make a pretty good cup of tea!

Some years later I mentioned this collection to the old soldier's Regimental museum - they were really excited and replied that these letters are in fact a far more valuable resource, both as display items and as research material than for example medals, which they are given all the time.

For a long time social historians relied on the records of 'worthy' middle-class institutions, such as the temperance society and others of that ilk, for their impressions of working-class life in Britain. This was especially true for the period of heavy industrialisation coming out of the 19th Century and into the early 20th Century. By and large the picture painted of the average working-class male was one of a brutish, alcoholic, tyrannical patriarch who abused both wife and children. Indeed, I'm willing to bet that if you ask the average bod in the street that this is the general impression that they will also have...so ingrained has it now become. However, with the coming of the 60's there was a a vigorous re-examination of British social history. One thing that played a vital part in this re-examination, and continues to do so, was the body of literature that became available as the WWI generation began to pass-away, i.e. the letters they had written home from the trenches. The general tone of all these letters show a British male population that was not only engaged with their families but showed genuine concern for their well being and future development of their children. You find husband's chiding their wives for telling him all the local gossip when all he wants to hear about is how well little Johnny is doing and if he's keeping up with his studies. So, you see these records are hugely important in clariying the 'real' picture of what our forebears were like and what their real concerns were. Had we not had WWI and the huge amount of letter writing that occured then we would not have this corrective to a distorted historical view of the working class British male and his familylife.

Incidentally, analysis of the diaries of middle-class housewives from the same period show that in general it was the middle-class and upper-middle-class husbands who tend to alcoholic, abusive parenting with administering of the cane a much more frequent event in middle-class households than it ever was in the working class households.

These things are important for more reasons that we sometimes aware!

It was late so thing dont get explained fully, or a picture that should be attached isn't.

Here's the drawing I'm working from. As you can see the sprocket is mounted on some form of 'cone' gubbins, which in turn is mounted on a housing, sandwiched between the 'vehicle outer side plate' and the 'vehicle inner side plate', for the gear wheel and pinion. It is this 'cone' and housing that I'm interested in. Obviously the rear of the housing has two overlapping, holes machined in it to take the gear wheel and pinion whilst permitting them to mesh. But it is the front that of the housing and 'cone' that has me somewhat stumped. From this drawing it would appear that they have machined down one side of the 'cone' to provide clearance for external access to the pinion. But I'd really like to get a clearer picture of what it actually looks like, in the flesh as it were, so if anyone has any really, good clear pictures of this 'cone' and housing with the 'outer side plates' removed then I'd be most grateful for a looksee?

Alas no, I don't believe it was me you were talking with!

...without the sprocket. From what I can tell from the drawings I've been studying it appears to be some form of elliptical cone which attaches to a casing that holds the gear wheel and pinion. Has anyone got any pics that shows this gubbins, front and rear?

Thanks in Advance

Pete

Hi all,

been trawling around this site for what seems like ages now and thought it was high time I introduced myself. In mostly interested in WWII British Armour but I'm more of a voyeur than a collector. I'm rather short of space, money and an understanding wife to be the latter! The closest I'll most likely ever come is a couple of scale models!

Anyways, at the moment I'm searching for info on the Cromwell and the Comet and in particular I'm looking for a single Cromwell track link for my desk so if anyone knows where I might lay my hands on one please do say!