Richard Farrant

The original design had its merits, but due to the short distance between front axle and tracks it could have been perfected by having individual brakes on the bogie drive axle, which were linked to the steering linkage. This way it would have had better steering control. I followed the build on MLU and agree with Gordon, a good effort to replicate an experimental vehicle. Similar was done in Britain with a Bedford QL.

They have had several suppliers over the years, and the one that matched and made my SCC2 is a major manufacturer and I cannot fault their paint. and no, I do not work for them

All this rambling on what SCC2 looks like, I had it mixed from a large example found in a 1942 armoured vehicle, the plate holding the control box was painted this colour, with a fabric between, so well protected. Warpaint had it matched for me by a large paint manufacturer.

Mikita ?? Is that the fake version of Makita, and generally sold by people touring the country in plain white vans?

This truck was built a few years ago to replicate a halftrack "blitz" that the Australian army had on trials during the war.

A pity it is in Norway, will not be cheap to get it to UK. Looks like an early chassis number.

Not really a thing to discuss on here, but the origin of the shell could be of importance, especially if it had been reloaded. There is a procedure for misfires on any weapon and you never open the breach immediately. I have experienced them with small arms.

If you look at the first link I sent, there are 5 sizes, I know this second link is slightly different in size, but gives a bit more background on it.

I have no idea, but apparently rare, see this; http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/wwii-military-invasion-special-172490347

To protect signals equipment in amphibious landings apparently, check this website, the stock number is listed; http://med-dept.com/articles/miscellaneous-medical-bags-packs/

I would say yes, and pretty sure where they came from.

Rick, As the ground guide is directing him to make the turn, you can hear gears grating as it starts to run away, so sounds like he was moving and trying to get it into a gear, hence the speed it went as it was in Angel gear.

The way I have always understood it is the synchromesh units work on friction to slow the gears, so using an extreme pressure gear oil is defeating the object. Hence why using a Straight 90 in the jeep gearbox, makes for better gear changes than if using EP90.

The Mk4 and Mk5 had a much more reliable epicyclic hub reduction gear. The Mk1 and Mk2 set up was cause for concern in service as the planet carrier secured the wheel bearings and it was apt to shear the securing bolts and dowels, resulting in a hub loss. Checks had to be made at 500 mile intervals. There would be a difference in the gear ratio, but it was probably seen as a way of redesigning the hub. No way was it "bits from the parts box". When the CVR(W) Fox was introduced this had a similar hub to the Mk4 and 5, but parts were not interchangeable.

I remember back in my younger days changing many an engine in Mk1 Militants, through the front, with a jib slid over the forks on the forklift, The lifting eye is between the heads and the jib had to be close to top of engine to give enough clearance on cab front panel. We had a heavy old Conveyancer forklift in Workshops at the time, I would think an Eager Beaver might be light on the back end by the time you have the jib or beam stuck on the forks, with about 18cwt of AEC 760 stuck on it. Good luck!

Ross, I have spent too much time on Dingos of late and was thinking of how the bevel gear is moved either side of the pinion. Now it comes back to me re. the Ferret, but, I well remember when working on these for the army that the boxes are two specific pairs, Front LH and Rear RH is one pair, and Front RH and Rear LH the other pair. Just checked the parts book and the casings are different part numbers depending on which location they are fitted. Cannot recollect if the difference is the size of the plug holes, top to bottom.

Hi Tim, A possibility I suppose, not sure where the info came from regarding past history. As to how it got to Australia is another mystery. regards Richard

This Liberty truck was apparently converted to pneumatic tyres and spider wheels in 1920's and served with the US Marines up until 1933. How it came to be found in New South Wales, Australia is not known, but the current owner bought it with the crane on and with a Perkins R6 diesel fitted. It is in full working order including crane and recently repainted for a show. You can see the ballast weights across the front! I had walked mast this once with out realising what its heritages was.

I will get a bit of background info on this in a day or two.

I think it is a truck version of Trigger's broom ............ if you know what I mean

In a book written in 1983, there were two listed in preservation, one was AMP80, a personnel carrier, owned by Miles of Shaftesbury and the other, no number, was a gun tractor owned by Lambe of Fenstanton.

How about this? A WW1 Liberty truck still going ........ maybe not quite original Tried zooming in on the info board, but not sharp enough to read, I can find out more though.

njjeeper, Sorry I do not know your name, my apologies for leading you astray, I have been working on Daimler Dingo and Armoured Car transfer boxes recently and as they turned the same direction, my immediate thought was that Ferrets do, but now you have pointed this out I remember that there is a bevel drive in the transfer box output that means the transfer box flanges turn in opposite directions. That still does not explain fully if your bevel boxes are in wrong locations. I see now that I missed your last but one post about transfer box, my excuse, late at night and doing too many things at once!! best regards, Richard

If you turn the output flange on one side of the transfer box, the other flange adjacent will turn same way, has to, its on the same shaft. I have been trying to get this over to you. This is why I am saying, imagine the bevel box flanges were joined together, then wheels turn same way. You said at the beginning that you thought two boxes had been transposed by previous owner, it does not take much thinking about to verify this. If wheels do not turn same way, then the bevel box which is suspect will be that one with plugs in wrong place I would think. If you have not got it, I suggest you read the EMER Technical Description for the Ferret and you will see it all explained.

I did not think it could have been explained any easier in my post earlier (#14). When the transfer box is fitted and props bolted to flanges, the shafts are turning in the same direction, this is why I said, imagine the two props are bolted together. You are confusing your self by looking at the face of each bevel box as they turn. Sit in there and get someone to turn both wheels on one side, look in one direction only and see that they both turn together, as I say, imagine them joined.