ruxy

Later version known as - Cobra

http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Military-Vehicles-and-Logistics/Cobra-Light-Strike-Vehicle-LSV-United-Kingdom.html

Just remembered , it was known as "The Longline" LSV (Light strike vehicle) , goooogle around the word Longline (manufacturer) , ISTR they were tied up with KAM , or was it "the longline" was a military version with a stretched space frame to strap more kit on / improve handling & weapon platform ?

http://www.warwheels.net/LSVINDEX.html

It seems the Longline was in fact manufactred by Ricardo - that makes sence , however I still think earlier types were something to do with KAM

FAV

http://www.scribd.com/doc/44422295/War-Vol-4-No-47-From-www-jgokey-com

I would have to thumb through a few books where IIRC they are mentioned, ISTR the British Army FAV's were similar with a few differences to the Chenowth (I think the civilian sales used the name Chenowth and it rubbed off on to the military version) . I forget exactly - IIRC they were in fact manufactured by a Australian firms UK outlet - KAM differentials. Also ISTR the SAS used them in the first Gulf War (Op. Granby)

101 Sky Blue

Very convoluted history.

Known as just SKY or IIRC the trade name (patented) Camontint , as seen used by Sidney Cotton on a aircraft belonging to Maharaja of Jodhpur , USED on Spitfires (underside) because it had the ability to blend with the blue sky shortly after take-off. This was in the days before PRU (Heston Flight) was "nationalized" by the RAF , then as the RAF owned Camontint IIRC they called it Sky Blue and gave it a RAF colour that became the BS 101.

So - reason - not to easy see leaks / spillage , so you can see your truck when it takes-off - but not the underside of the engine..

Alternatively - call out the REME

FFR'ers need quick diagnostics at the road-side that the AA can't provide , obviously you pulled off the air inlet hose to confirm carb is fuelling , then :-

4 qty.

If not sparking like Blackpool , change condenser quick , after that - AVO / test lamp out time.

Carry a cheapo , 12 volt condenser - adapted earlier to mount (pukka 24 volt are far to expensive & same capacitance)..

Soon to fly again , apparently the only one !

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7440401/War-Mosquitos-maiden-flight

I find it highly amusing if not warped that your government allows you to buy that considering all the B/S that exists under the ITAR controls that all of us up here are enjoying.

 

Cudos to you for being able to buy it and own it and presumably operate it on the road.

 

Is there an add on hydraulic crane for the rear?

 

R

I just don't get it - there seems no good reason for sale controls ?? , obviously very nice to have BUT it is basically a "crane carrier".

When the Russians had to scrap (chop up) ballistic missile carriers under one of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks , then a loop-hole was to use them as crane carriers. ISTR the Dutch & Belgians used a few ,,

http://www.lrsoc.com/forum/index.php?topic=10910.msg80564#msg80564

Speed read , head-up - early trailers here

Generally with a X pressed in the body-sides - the trailer is 1/2 ton rated (and earlier manuf. than the common later being 3/4 ton). Brockhouse would still be manuf. 1/2 ton for specialist applications when the 3/4 ton cargo trailer went into production. Probably made by Brockhouse but could be Sankey. Very rivet-counterish subject. Could also be a early Sankey , IIRC a good clue is the mudguard boxes on the inside having a larger radius pressed in , brass 1/2 ton load plate on body above wheel-arch.

Both manufacturers , overun braking - the draw-bar differs from later A frame, the draw-bar is reversible to adjust to height of truck Champ or Rover etc.

ISTR the chassis were all in fact made by Rubery Owen & Sankey or Brockhouse would fit their own body & finish off details

If the rear "Jump hose" is closed up then the brakes would not be retracting easy at both near & offside - is this happening ?? If just one side is sticky - then probably one or both slave cylinder plungers are part siezed . Could be a bit of rust starting esp. if brake fluid not changed regular ,,

Info by way of pdf. but worth waiting a few seconds for download :-

http://www.twgpp.org/downloads/news/TWGPP_Newsletter_Summer_2012.pdf

So little corrosion , the rain water must be very pure in that part of Siberia.

In the case of a UK bona-fide press photographer taking a photograph , that his newspaper sells on as a scoop to another newspaper in the USA. 70 + years pass , both newspapers as such are defunct (or absorbed into larger groups). This photograph was one of several taken at the time but AFAIK it was not used as others were considered more suitable BUT after 70 years it is now known they were far less important. This photograph is the only one remaining (that is known of) , I purchase the photograph with provenance for a $ sum that I suppose is realistic but not conservative - if I make this photograph available to others (as part of research that I have been involved with) do I own the "copyright" , is there any way that I can discourage use by others without my permission ?

 

OPINIONS..

===========

Photographs taken between 1 July 1912 and 31 May 1957 - the day before the 1956 Copyright Act became law

Copyright will expire fifty years from the end of the year in which the photograph was taken or seventy years after the death of the photographer, whichever is the longer.

This may not be so simple, a Limited Liability company is in fact a entity as if a person, this is why in theory a Ltd. Co. can survive for ever.

QUOTE. 1

We vigorously protect our copyright. We can't stop you owning prints bought in good faith as a consequence of library clear outs - they have been happening for decades.

QUOTE. 2

In actual fact, pooling of images during WW2 has presented an enormous grey area allowing people to make money off each other in all kinds of ways. But at some point it will have to end.

The circumstances are probably exactly as you describe. The vendor has reputation , the provenance can not be bettered.

The fact is that I recognised the great historical significance that has only become significant in recent years (that was a puzzle even at the time).

Obviously - I know the origins , reporters name (but not the photographer he took to site) , their employer , the US newspaper the photograph(s) were wired to.

Probably I will need to do more research on the Newspapers concerned to establish if they retain the copyright , although - it would seem they no longer have actual legal ownership of the only photograph(s) . The pics I have , I suspect did not go into print as more dramatic ones were known used. At least until I became aware - nobody bothered , obviously well filed away but with captions as if prepared for print.

In the case of a UK bona-fide press photographer taking a photograph , that his newspaper sells on as a scoop to another newspaper in the USA. 70 + years pass , both newspapers as such are defunct (or absorbed into larger groups). This photograph was one of several taken at the time but AFAIK it was not used as others were considered more suitable BUT after 70 years it is now known they were far less important. This photograph is the only one remaining (that is known of) , I purchase the photograph with provenance for a $ sum that I suppose is realistic but not conservative - if I make this photograph available to others (as part of research that I have been involved with) do I own the "copyright" , is there any way that I can discourage use by others without my permission ?

OPINIONS..

The IR switch is a PITA and probably best shorted out , info. here :-

http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/Infrared.html

Loads of associated info. + wiring diagrams - here :-

http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/Index.html

Looking at your photograph , I would date your truck after 1976 but before 1978 , and probably nearer '78 than '76 LoL , DBG would be Solihul factory finish (forget the exact change point).

No,, this was a first class example of how to look at info. with 360. You think you have used lateral and yet failed to do so.

The zinc gauze , how stupid of me. Quite simple , the purpose is to stop bids using the box for nesting - a external problem that I had not considered. I fell into the trap that the gauze design in precision & or material held the clue to solving the question, why did they not use brass or copper gauze ?

I went down a single avenue, that the secret revolved around the gauze BUT - I was the bird brain.

Relay box - as explained in detail here :-

http://www.britishtelephones.com/magneto.htm

It is a "token" to allow operation on a military munitions railway line , wires from connection probably connected to the rails are means of communication to signal box.

Intrinsically safe morse-key ,,