ruxy

Before plastic tanks ,  the procedure was always to remove from car and proper steam-clean for a period.  To be honest - I just use a wall-paper stripper steam cleaner for abt. 1/2 hour.

btw ,  I have the odd tank (late type) that does seem gas seam welded , some roughness present.  This morning I had a quick look at some tate tanks and the seams could be friction/resistance welded = difficult to tell under the paint.

AFAIK  , Solihull did not apply the underseal - must have been done at Ordnance Storage  ?  The underseal would have been asbestos reinforced bitumen type - so not fuel resistant.

Later Lightweights were not undersealed (probably from abt. 1980).

I would just paint with a fuel resistant machinery enamel (when through dry) , I normally apply a few coats of such as Tractol.  If you must apply black-clag - just do it at the sill where the tank is seen - any of the newer wax. based (black) underseals .

It will not be fuel migration from actual leak under underseal , there is a 'cradle' - this is where the leak tracks.

------

There are  early and late LWT tanks  (in fact Optional Cat. Aux. tanks)

Early tanks are made from  "terne steel"  similar to Rolls-Royce, quality but with a weak point , seams are all lap-construction with the top seam (near filler neck) abt. 10mm wide solder seam - a weak point that cracks (I became quite skilled on re-solder).   IIRC the bare tank is secured to the cradle with solder plugs.  I once abt. 1978 did a repair to a pin-prick leak from base of a tank in Snowdonia - 19FM65 and the tank is still fuel tight. Empty tank - I eyeballed the leak , stuck a 2p coin using Araldite and thetank still holds fuel. I should have asked the wife , I stuck my BIG hand through the filler hole , the wife just applied Fairey liquid and helped pull LoL

btw  - we are talking 'genuine' tanks here because , the later tank is more or less a copy of a Copy-tank that was on sale from 1970's that I know of.  The later gen. tank is identical other than the "X" side panel pressings are a mirror-image, or I should say the copy tank was a mirror of the original gen. tank.

So the Mk.2 tank is gas welded seams + gas welded top seam.  I would have to check to confirm but 95% certain the cradle is solder plug secured also. I think the material is just electro zinc plated , not terne that is superior anti-corrosive as it is a lead/tin mix with quite a few microns of thickness too.

The leak may be from where the threaded boss is secured. May be worth a try with a new copper washer - just in case, a copper crush type or Dowty may be better.     

If the tank were mine - I would remove , clean out and dry - then soak aerosol dye-pen (crack testing stuff) into edge of cradle (both sides + cradle hole for filler boss) - you should see the leak hole after a while  - use your intrinsically safe torch !

The top $ cost of buying  COOL         LoL

On 10/10/2018 at 1:04 PM, Richard Farrant said:

The engine is a Bedford 214 3.5 litre.

Now  - I can see  BEDFORD  pressed in the top (rear) of the rocker cover  ,  I am so thick - part illegible but was convinced it was  FORD  !

21 hours ago, Delboy said:

Don't use compression fittings with olives, not suitable for brakes will fail an MOT.

Obviously - a double-lap flare is best on a pressure pipe,  seems he is fitting a remote intensifier / servo , possibly with a remote reservoir where the feed pipe would be just static head.  ?

You can soon find the minimum bursting pressure for Bundy and Kunifer + any quality branded pipe or fitting , not so easy to find the vehicle max. braking operating pressure.

I am uncertain what the MOT situation actually is ,  abt. 5 years ago a MOT examiner actually suggested and gave the OK for me to use a straight connector with a new length of pipe from front offise slave cylinder on a S2A Land Rover. This was to save a load of work and hassle as it is a long complex shaped pipe going by way of IIRC cross member near bellhousing.   I decided to take the best option of a full new length of  Cupro Nickel pipe.

Years ago I would have said Tecalemit  ,  now it seems Lumatic

Catalogue

http://www.lumatic.co.uk/

2 hours ago, wally dugan said:

I recall this lightweight very well its history card turned up in amongst a batch of army  history cards there was a  nine year gap in its history if i remember right l contacted the branch at CHETWYN BARRACKS  and was given a reason for the missing years since then l did look in to these occrrence's that appeared on other vehicles some of which have a very simple answer others not as straight forward

Wally  ,  just checked  - your Beverly Museum letter is in here :-

https://forum.emlra.org//viewtopic.php?f=25&t=6577

--

I do have the odd similar LWT letter(s) ,  may have been obtained direct via.  CWG (deceased) latterly of Nothallerton.

btw,    you don't state the pipe material ,   there are cutting olive rings for steel.

https://www.indanc.com/catalogue/results.aspx?search=olive+rings+steel+pipe

If you are in that class for brakes , then I would do a search on what  ERMETO have available

You may find that imperial microbore is difficult to get & in any case you would not wish to use cheapo Italian brass.

What you need is a  "Wade"  quality unequal pipe coupler.

https://www.indanc.com/Catalogue/Brass-Compression-Fittings/Wade-Imperial-Couplings/Reducing-Coupling-WADE-40431

Visiting aircraft - there would be standard procedures.  Not for a  SLG (esp. if used for storage)  many RAF pilots overflew them and were unaware of their existence.  Forgetting the two huge  ELG (intended for bombers).   A diversion to a operating or ELG ,  Darky (or is it Darkie)  or no Darky ,  any aircraft (inc. Luftwaffe or even Italian) obviously in distress.  The searchlight teams had their instructions , all  ALL  lower their lights and aim at the nearest operational or ELG.  The nearest light would using a few million candles make gooseneck or fido obsolete ,  all that mattered was to get down - what happend after - I don't know..

Well  ,  it is very wll known , owned by a internet forum person who goes under the handle of -  sickpup.

For any LWT enthusiast , who thinks he knows all  LoL  ,  this is  THE  one that defies known recorded history.  The owner has spent years on research , turned out a few surprises that defy all previously known - chassis numbers ,  VRM , service transfer(s)  and nomenclature plates specific to the RN.  I would have to do a few searches , the last info.  sickpup  reported on is most most interesting.  If ever  MJC does anorther re-print of his  1/2 Ton book then this LWT certainly deserves a couple of dedicated pages..  Certainly a  RARE  , rare  LWT.

-------------------------

Thread  ,  Navy Liveried Lightweight , on ExMLRA  Forum for starters.

If you read  BRITAIN'S MILITARY AIRFIELDS  1939-45 ,  by David J. Smith ,supplement book & all his /other similar books .  The stated book above is national and covers well the development of main field to hard strips + dispersals etc.  Then you will see there was just no requirement for  "Follow me",  the procedure was just never considered..

6 hours ago, attleej said:

Dear All,

You cannot make a better claim than "I designed it"!  However, I don't think that memory is serving David very well.  IMHO the last British heavy military vehicle not to fitted with Defence Eyes were the Leyland Martian and the AEC Militant Mk 1 and II.  In the case of the latter it had lifting eyes only.  If you tried to tow or winch on them they simply tore away because the fasteners taking the load were simply too few and to small.

In the case of the Foden 16 tonne 8 X 4 and 6 X 6 range, they would simply not pass the recovery assessment tests at FVRDE Chertsey if they were not fitted with Defence Eyes.  How would you recover a loaded 8 wheel tanker if you could not use holleybones connected to the Defence Eyes.

The design and tolerances of the range of Defence Eyes is carefully arranged so that it is easy to connect up a tow, esp with the Holleybone system.

An oddity is the Bedford TM 8 tonne.  The largest shackle that will fit in its eyes is a 6 ton bow shackle.  Thus the largest winch pull that can be applied is 12 tons.  However, it is easy get an estimated pull (EP) of much more than that.  The eyes should have been the next size up to take the 20 ton bow as in the case of the 14 tonne 6 X 6 Bedford TM.

I hope that someone can come up with the STANAG of Def Stan.  I do have a catalogue of recovery equipment for ref.

John

Regarding bow shackles & nom. sized.   I would expect a pick to me made from a Crosby bolt-type.  There is quite a range between 6T and 20T for Crosby and similar better makes used for registered lifting tackle.  There are some dodgy shackles out there ,  the worst I have come across were 'single-trip' shackles used for ship export lashings and branded with SWL - on proof test they crumpled before 1/4 of  WLL achieved.  Some high tensile shackles , even meeting BS are below such as a Crosby

Google on the two words  -  Holebones recovery , lots comes up , many previous details on past HMVF threads , named after the REME Officer who invented it in 1942.  Details of several attachments due to variations of attachment points on vehicles - so I doubt if any  'standard(s)'  ..

2 hours ago, Surveyor said:

My one is 92KF11, if reading this correctly would appear in that catalogue

Thanks for the pointers guys

Of course , if it is a Hobson Industries -  "Project Tithonus"  re-work for the MOD - then there would be additional modifications.  ISTR    'County'  trim=spec. seats , roll-over protection frame and a Wolf plastic hardtop + other mods. I forget .  O'h  - yes ,  that examined & found tip-top chassis , coated with preservative to last another 20 years !  LoL

This is a example.

NB.    
Covers vehicles 79KE06 to 16KF66.Built 1985-1986 Fiscal year.

https://www.greenmachinesurplus.com/land-rover110supplementary-parts-catalogue-3467-p.asp

On 9/25/2018 at 6:11 PM, Surveyor said:

Does any one have any details of this contract, I believe it was for vehicles

thanks

Richard

If you find the Contract details , it is not going to tell you a great deal of info.  Just the nomenclature that appears on the plate , such as  GS , 12 volt, Cargo.  It could also possibly state Hardtop - that is all. What you need is to view the "Supplementary Parts List" covering the date of manufacture  (not so easy to find on the internet , as it used to be).  In the front pages is a 'MATRIX'  . this tells you all the 'bolt-on' to the BASIC  ,  you just cross-reference to the Contract No. and read the boxes that contain a  x  ,  this tells you the accessories / supplementaries as supplied by Solihull..

On 9/25/2018 at 2:33 PM, chris85 said:

Hi all, 

thanks for the add to this forum/group 

Sorry if this is in the wrong place. I have had a look around to see if there is an area for tracing numbers etc.

I have just purchased a series 3 with a contract number plate. I would love to know the history of the vehicle. I tried the freedom of info forum they don't have the info. 

Info I have is - contract no FVE 22A/44 registered 1999 and manufactured in 1980 

series 3 soft top that doesn't have the military bumpers 

would love to know its background of service 

Any help appreciated! 

I would say the info. you have is correct for build date 1999-80 , also the contract No. is correct , there is a slim possibility of a Item No. following the 44 , it could go like  44/?

You don't state the w.b  (wheelbase)  -  I guess 88"  ?

You need a history search , abt.  £30 + at Royal Logistics Museum , you will be better off consulting a Geof Fletcher of  FMW @ a similar  £  cost.

No 'bumperettes'  ,  correct for a  88" CL that it is  Commercial  ( C--------L )  ,  a  109"  CL  - could have been fitted bumperettes at factory.

Quote

 

 

Just to raise from the dead again, I wonder  -  Majorlift  ?

Better known for pit jacks/beams  -  but are longstanding contractors to the MOD

http://www.majorlift.co.uk/defence/

Totally barmpot when you have to dispose of  10% of what you have paid £ for , work involved.  Considering you have paid at least £2.50 per gal. duty and then the 20% VAT on top .  I don't fancy calculating what the unadulterated unleaded is going to cost £ per/gal.

So , is there a practical use for raw ethanol ??    ,  I suppose sell it on cheap to the  DERV avoidance Mazola boys !

WIDTH..    More probable that it was adapted from a time-line container for a  'flat'  - in use until the first Freightliner with what is now the standard ISO container(s) -  BR approx.  1967...  Probably not worth considering a rail/lorry demountable.

4 hours ago, David Herbert said:

It may well be that the MOD specified features on machine tools that were not usual on civilian production.

David

It would be back-geared with bull-wheel of indexing type so that it could be used as a dividing-head.  It would not have had a carriage thread dial-indicator, doubtful if power reverse .  The leadscrew handwheel could probably be used for quick reverse-back when screwcutting.  However judging by the size (as big as the carriage handwheel) - I am thinking more use when shaping/cutting keyways , broaching splines , cutting gears - man-power being cheap , probably one at the headstock doing the indexing and another on the leadscrew handwheel driving the tool , using the carriage handwheel is done for this but not best practice.   Designed as a full universal - no miller or shaper on board.

Not so rare ,  well on Hobyist class lathes .

http://www.small-lathes.co.uk/Leadscrew-Handwheel-[A4735_6]/www.small-lathes.co.uk/Leadscrew-Handwheel-[A4735_6]/852.htm

I served 6 years apprenticeship as a fitter & turner ,  huge 6ft faceplate  flat-belt drive Swift (as mate) , down to Colchester Student & Myford .  My fav. toolroom class would without doubt be Henry Milnes & yes - Colchester inc. (providing it has a quiet  Kopp variable) but collet machine would have to be Brown & Smart.  So , yes been with centre lathes been around the block , have 2  + a ancient flat-belt Atlas (USA) unused for over 40 + years.  I can't recall using a leadscrew handwheel - on any lathe other than a Myford.

The IWM-Duxford dispay with blacksmiths bellows hearth (too big for rivet-heating)  & type of machinery seems more of a general millwrights shop for anything , not including specialist armourer (who may have called at times for their services).    The workshop being queried is  RAF , so I am thinking more rotary aero engine fitting shop  ?  + anything not canvas / dope  timber construction.

The roof  'ridge'board'  seems far to heavy in section for roofing, also the end structure(s) seem reinforced .  Seems to possibly be for a general purpose "sky-hook" for hanging a small set of rope-blocks off -  SWL  1/4 ton  ?

Timber has not been considered sufficiently reliable for lifting off for many years , however I can recall quite frequently used - 3 steam powered Scotch derrick cranes (this was until abt. 1970 ) , the 'clog factory' supplied timber blanks from a estate to Holland.  Also a few manual  Scotch derricks in such as timber-yards.