Richard Farrant

1 hour ago, wally dugan said:

IT's just a thought between 1958 and 1961 27 GW RA regiment were based in CROOKHAM with there M386 honest john missile launchers

Sounds like the International M series launcher truck was mistook as an Antar!

1 hour ago, gas 44 said:

I agree with you but that is NOT how it seems to read from Nick JOHNS post.

 

It is on the online booking form that you can bring other military vehicles for free, just pay for the first one, so if you load a transporter up or you shuttle your MV's to Beltring you can bring as many as you like, it is any extra drivers who would have to pay.

See this quote from the website:

Additional Military Vehicles
We only charge for the first military vehicle you enter, you can bring the rest of your collection for FREE .

Maybe it is the vehicle in this link;

http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.net/main.asp?SectionID=31&SubSectionID=135&ArticleID=67692

Mike,

Disregard my comment on the securing nuts and  Thackeray washers, I was thinking of Austin lorries which had slotted back plates. The Bedford cylinders are tightened up as normal as they are not slotted.

regards Richard

1 hour ago, mark4974 said:

Thanks for all your suggestions.

Richard - The studs only have a standard spring washer so I'll look to get the Thackeray type you suggest and not tighten them fully so they can centre themselves properly. 

What confuses me though is the fact that everything moves okay when you pull it (or push it) manually, yet when it's conected to the hydraulics it locks on. The handbrake rod has been disconnected to rule out problems with that, for the time being?

Mike,

On the hydraulic piston are two seals, between them should be a short spacer sleeve. Just wondering if this is missing and a seal is blocking off the hole to the brake pipe, not allowing the fluid to return towards the master cylinder. I would normally suspect a faulty hose acting like a one way valve, but as there is only one hose feeding both rear brakes and the other brake is working well, then the fault has to be somewhere from the tee piece on the diff to the wheel cylinder.

Regarding the nuts and double coil washers, you nip them up then back off about half a turn. This allows the cylinder and expander to slide in the backplate to centre themselves.

Richard

4 hours ago, mark4974 said:

Afternoon folks,

I am having trouble with a rear brake seizing on and despite stripping it down (numerous times!) and rebuilding it I can't seem to find or fix the fault. The other side works fine!

It doesn't appear to be rubbing or sticking as I can move the mechanism by hand by either pulling the operating rod or by pushing the bisector mechanism from the front (having removed the cover plate) and the brakes apply and retract as normal. The problem seems to be when I connect the hydraulics. When I press the brake pedal the brakes apply (bisector retracts pushing the two plungers outwards) but then fails to return leaving the brakes on.

I have taken the rubber flexible hose and brake pipe off and blown them through with high pressure air so satisfied they are clear and the master cylinder isn't overfilled. I'm now at a loss what to do, other than by a new cylinder. Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

Cheers, Mark

Mark,

I see you have had this brake apart, when you refitted the cylinder on the two studs, did you tighten these up? They should be fitted with double coil spring washers (Thackery type) and not fully tightened so that the expander  and the shoes can centre themselves.

regards, Richard

48 minutes ago, Tony B said:

A while since I worked on a QL, but have you tried relasing the snail cam adjuster, sucking eggs I know but sometimes it's the stupid thigs.  The other thing I'm almost certain there is a second release spring on the rod to the rear brakes. May just need an extra bit of pull.

Tony,

Your memory must be failing you, there are no snail cam adjusters on QL rear brakes. The adjuster is a 'wheel' inside the backplate that you flick around with a screwdriver or similar, through a hole in the plate.

A TCV was the term used for a Bedford QLT troop carrying vehicle or ‘Trooper’.. photos of the time show these lorries with the tanks.

9 hours ago, mike30841 said:

Have never succeeded in finding the answer to this one, as you say, there is nothing in the manuals!

If it's any help, my QLD has run with the tyres at 50 psi for years. The QLR is heavier so I would probably go for a little bit more - unless anyone can come up with the definitive answer. (Over to you Mr Farrant - your knowledge and expertise seem to be limitless!).

Mike.

I have a booklet produced by the Army School of Transport, Bordon, specifically on the QLD and pressures are 36 front and 56 rear. I actually run my front tyres at 40 psi as it is not so heavy on the steering then. Hope this is of help.

regards, Richard

6 hours ago, mammoth said:

 

I can't locate the chassis list on the Surrey County archives so if any one could help I would be grateful.

Steven

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Steven,

A few years back I contacted Surrey Archives on behalf of a friend in NSW who had a 1929 Dennis fire engine, ex-NSW Brigade. They were able to send me a photocopy of the build sheet for that actual chassis number. I don't think they were available off the website at that time, you had to get them to locate and copy it.

regards, Richard

2 minutes ago, Old Bill said:

I had heard of the weathering of castings by leaving them out in the foundry yard for six months to settle down ('That's not weathering, that's rusting!') I must admit that I hadn't thought of doing so on ours as I thought the effect would be negligible. Apparently not! Our pistons are about a thou elliptical with them being narrower across the gudgeon pin holes. At least I don't have to machine them that way. I just need more clearance in the bores!

Many thanks for the reminder. I shall know for next time now.

Steve     

No problem Steve. It was just that I remembered coming across problems with cylinder blocks that had not been allowed the time to settle and thought the same could occur to a piston and it would not need to alter only a few thou to cause a problem.

Hope you can resolve the problem.

regards, Richard

50 minutes ago, johnwardle said:

It flew over heading east at 16:30 then about 15 minutes later a bright yellow biplane that I couldn't identify flew over also heading east, maybe that had been at the same show.

John,

Your lucky day. The Blenheim was a late change as the Vampire pair had mechanical issues and could not display.

We have had Spitfires passing over to and fro all weekend. Have to stop and look up every time I hear them.

Richard

14 minutes ago, johnwardle said:

Yesterday afternoon we heard a twin engined  plane approaching and we were very surprised to see a Bristol Blenheim fly right over our house heading west towards Warminster. I checked the Blenheim website and the only event it was attending this weekend was Old Warden, so the big question is, where was it going?

John,

The Blenheim is flying at the Torbay Airshow this weekend.

1 hour ago, john_g_kearney said:

The Ford ute does indeed look very like the Alamein vehicle. How likely was it that an Australian vehicle was in the Western Desert - how much MT, if any, did the Australians bring with them when they arrived in theatre?

John.

 

Hi John,

it is very likely to see these Australian vehicles, and staff cars in photos of the war in North Africa.

Regards Richard 

Looks like an Australian army Ford 'ute', see this one, owned by John Hedges in NSW, rear mudguards slightly different but cab and bonnet the same.

:

Have you tried B&Q plumbing section?

8 hours ago, john1950 said:

Does that say Ambulance of top of the cab on the Humber. I will say for starters, R to Left. Albion, Fordson, Dodge, Chev, and Clark tractor, with a fuel tank on the trailer.

I think the lorry on the right is a Thornycroft Nubian (not an Albion) and tractor on extreme left is a Fordson.

A fungus can occur in the system, never seen or heard of mushrooms in a diesel tank. The fungus is a black slime and can occur on the clean side of the filter and contaminate the injection pump.

7 minutes ago, dgrev said:

Steve - I like your welding jig, simple, practical and logical.

Richard, Flanders and Andy - were you talking timber I would have expected such replies. But cast iron??? No wonder it has taken the Goslings unaware being that they are metal workers. As it would have 99.5% of the rest of those who read this adventure.

However, it does suggest that as the pistons have not been "left outside" and that being closed up in the engine, then the scenario may exist that they have yet to warp to their final dimensions? (Which could also account for the ring seizures?)

If they had not finished their aging process, then the Goslings may very well find that they are now distorted and will complicate any corrective machining? Does this mean that the pistons need to be left to their own devices for a few months before any attempt to correct them is made?

Regards

Doug

(Aussie one)

Doug,

I am aware of iron castings having to be weathered and it was a common practise with a lot of manufacturers. I recollect in my younger days having new diesel engines that were burning oil. On removing the pistons the bores were seen to show high spots. We re-linered the engines and bored them with problem solved. It was only when I noticed the casting dates on the block being close to build dates of the machine that it figured they had not been weathered. This may have happened due to strikes, shortages of casting or whatever.

I know of another engine type that had misalignment of main bearings and the only way to get over it was to use the last oversize of shells and line bore the block. All due to not leaving the castings long enough.

3 minutes ago, flandersflyer said:

Weathering Mr Pugh... ☺️

Left outside to "weather"...

Basically to settle down and normalize over a period of time...before jigging up on a lathe/miller/borer for 1st & 2nd op machining process.... 

Weathering, that was it. I recall that Norton Motorcycles left the cylinder barrel castings outside to 'weather' for several months before machining.

8 minutes ago, Old Bill said:

 

Many thanks for your thoughts. From my measurement of the original piston I think that Thornycrofts probably went for a clearance above the top ring of 0.017", between the rings, 0.012" and for the remainder of the piston, 0.005". If I hone the bores another 2 -3 thou then that would give me a general clearance of 0.008". If I take another 9 thou from the top land and 4 thou between the rings then that would give me something comparable with 'new'. I will take a good look at the rings and replace any that are obviously damaged. I am curious as to why they should have stuck in the bottom of their grooves on 2 and 3 pistons as all were quite free when I put them in. I will have to ease the grooves as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Steve,

A thought has just come to me regarding your pistons. I am not sure how long it was between them being cast and when you machined them, but it was well known years ago that iron castings had to lay for a period before machining. I recollect this with motorcycle cylinder barrels. Also cylinder blocks for engines, I have had experience of several types where they were machined pretty soon after casting and then the blocks became out of line when the casting 'relaxed' (probably a technical term for this which I cannot remember).

regards, Richard

The trailer has canvas sides and there are indications that it could be a generator    ........ but of course it just might be a mobile stage for the ENSA group.

1 hour ago, john_g_kearney said:

Many thanks, John and Richard.

I have found another view of it - a tiny part of a group photograph, here much enlarged. Is it looking more like a Chevrolet from this angle?

Any thoughts on the tank please - water or petrol?

John.

 

 

John,

Definitely Chevrolet, and right hand drive, so guess it came in from Canada.  Tank looks to be a local adaption, probably water.

1 hour ago, john_g_kearney said:

This photograph is of members of 40 Air Stores Park, serving in the Western Desert circa 1943. Any thoughts about the tanker lorry in the background please? The chassis looks military with its single instead of twin rear wheels, but the tank does not (to me at least...)

John.

 

 

 

With the glimpse of the front wing and wheel, and rake of the windscreen I would say Dodge or Chev.

2 hours ago, rampant rivet said:

Yes Frank allows an extra % to allow for shrinkage as per the original factory drawings, the problem is that the front and rear hoops are not exactly upright so allow for the sagging, will have to remedy this by possibly fitting hooks to tubes over the top of the side boards, but can only do that after I finalise the height of the bow hoops after the canvas has shrunk, or fit horizontal tubes to hold the tubes upright and rigid. 

Hi Jeremy,

REME Inspection Standards stated that, and I quote: 'shrinking allowance on new canvas is approx. 1.5" inches per yard along the warp of the material; whenever possible canvas should be shrunk before being made up.'

Hope this is of use.

regards, Richard