LarryH57

It would be interesting to run another poll and ask if how the vehicles are split in to WW1 / pre-war, WW2, post-war and 'modern' / built from 2000 onwards. The reason I ask is that most members own British but those from WW2 are becoming rarer at shows, and pre-war almost hard to find.

Great looking Lwt! When you get time, change the tyres to those with MOD like tread pattern of the period

This is a short Pathe film from 1965 showing the activities of Military Engineering Establishment in Christchurch, Hampshire, since closed and now a retail park? Did the trench digger ever enter service? http://www.britishpathe.com/video/army-innovations/query/Christchurch

Cigarette smoke; (I gave up years ago) but the smell reminds me of those breaks in convoys or being beside the road in Germany, out of our vehicles waiting for someone or something to happen, so out come the fags!

Has anyone got any images of say French, Dutch or Belgian V5 equivalents, as that's where I'm most likely to source a vehicle in the UK?

Whenever I pass a local café and smell bacon and eggs I'm transported back in my mind to my time in the Army heading from my billet to the cookhouse for breakfast (usually around dawn), complete with knife, fork and spoon and mug in left hand behind my back and marching in step with one or more persons, never on my own (which may have been discouraged) and taking a route round the parade ground, as god forbid that I should crossed it and be spotted by an SSM as in his words I'd wish I'd never been born!

I be to differ about Fury. I thought with all the help on the Tank Museum Tiger and some members of the hobby that the film would be quite realistic! Sadly it wasn't! People elsewhere have commented that the age of the crew members was about double the age they would have been in WW2. As for the plot, a baby faced typist in the Army becomes a tank machine gunner might just be believable but making him shoot a German prisoner in front of so many other people is a bit far fetched. Its a bit far fetched to think that the Tiger tank missed with every shot, when experience in NW Europe and elsewhere shows these were formidable opponents. Did anyone notice how the Shermans were bunched up in convoy and also the US infantry with them ran along in bunches too. And why is it that the Germans, so expert in defence dig their trenches in front of a hedgerow in a ploughed field rather than in the bushes. As for driving off in to the distance in one Sherman with no support and defending a cross roads after the track was blown off by a mine, complete rubbish against a German Company so well equipped! It annoys me when I see German soldiers running this way and that way across the screen and then getting shot, yet none of their shots against the Sherman or the crew seems to count, when in fact a few Panzerfausts up the rear of the Sherman and in to the piles of ammo on the back would soon have it ablaze and the crew cooked. A wasted opportunity in my opinion!

If Carden Loyd type Tankettes such as the Soviet T27, Polish TKS and French UE (to name a few) were considered obsolete by 1939, how is it that the Universal Carrier was considered a success? After all the Bren Gun and Universal Carriers had similar running gear, armour thickness and armament and no over head protection so why don't historians have a negative opinion of these?

Wattie, Thanks for your reply!

I have been involved with consultation on the ULEZ , that is to be introduced in London in 2020 and run 24/7 365 days a year. I proposed that that there should be exemption to any charge for this scheme for MVs, classic cars and buses as this would prevent such vehicles being involved in parades or charity runs in London. I'm pleased to say that their response was 'For the purposes of the ULEZ standards we have aligned our definition of an historic vehicle with the Government’s so that all vehicles with a ‘historic’ vehicle tax class will be exempt. Prior to that it seems 'history stopped at 1973' but at least things are moving in the right direction. So I'm told the Government is also looking to allow a rolling exception to VED / Car Tax so that by 2020 my MV will be 40 years old and also exempt.

Well then, I suggest some of you Canadian re-enactors dress in battledress and US helmets and get told by the know alls that you are all wrong - then get out a copy of this photo!

Any more interested parties; the RAF are looking for ex-RAF MVs for their 100th Anniversary Open Day / Air Show?

Well Niels thanks for that info regarding Norway; now I need members to confirm how they trust V5 equivalents from EU Countries.

Roughly how much do you need to raise each month to run the Forum?

I have read the posts on importing a vehicle and the matters relating to VAT etc, but one thing that I have not found is confirmation of what EU (and Norway) Vehicle Ownership Documents look like, so if I bought a vehicle from a private individual how would I know what I was being given (as a V5 equivalent) was genuine? Are there pictures of what they look like for these countries?

it seems the links in post 1 do not work now?

That £21m used on an unnecessary makeover of the IWM was a total waste, as are many other lottery backed schemes with museums across the UK. It's as if they see pound signs and lose all track of what a museum is about. They either build a fantastically expense and ugly structure shaped like a donut or use millions on a well loved museum for no logical reason. Following that they then fill the place with TV screens and interactive displays, in which case I could stay home and go on the web! Honestly I don't know where they get these museum directors from. It's happened in so many museums across the UK. They are guardians of our heritage and they have no right to put the archives in danger. As someone said its all about the architects not the artefacts! Perversely its because many museums are free to enter that we end up having to pay much more in the future to pick up the costs. Millions of tourists visit each year and I don't think £1 to enter would be too much to ask; except of course if the Accountants say each £1 will cost £1.10 to pay in to the Bank! Give up now you will never win against people like this, or against people who put speed bumps on main arterial roads, or who have you sitting at red traffic lights on deserted roads at 1 am- when the concept of flashing amber 'go if its clear' traffic signals have been used in Europe for decades!

What scum for stealing our heritage. Probably stolen to order as RJ Mitchells Cigarette case will hardly have any scrap value Everyone look out for it in case it comes out in the open in a year or two and its the only one with RJM on it!

John Jackson's Crossley Q was featured in Wheels & Tracks in 1990s but I have not seen it since. Has anyone got any recent photos of it. Does it get to any shows in East Anglia?

Photos out of the archives; The one above shows Canadian Troops on the West Coast of Canada training on the 40mm Bofors in 1943. But why are they wearing US Army style helmets, which they did not adopt in NW Europe in WW2? The second photo dates from 1938 and shows a parade in Vancouver, and although the troops shown are believed to be Canadian, the truck is from the US Army with US registration. On the bonnet it says USA W310372, on the door 148th FA Hv Btry, tac sign 5 on the rad and vehicle licence plate says Washington US 25.

Did anyone come to any conclusion as to why 126 or 127 AF (Air Field) was still used in Normandy rather than 126 or 127 Wing? Better things to do perhaps that correct your jeep markings under fire from long range artillery?!!!!

Crossley6 many thanks for your comments, which add to the debate. Lastly Ted, did you have any thoughts on the jeep markings that looked like a Bridge Plate with 1 on them?

Many thanks as ever Ted; it did cross my mind after posting that the circle next to the roundel was the bridge plate but I was confused by the 1. As for the explanation of 127 AF being Air Field that's very helpful but I'm interested as to how you knew it was Tangmere pre D-Day, as the photo of the Padre's jeep still shows this style of marking when evidently it was taken in France post D-Day?

Bryan, thanks for your reply, and yes I would really appreciate copies of the AMOs. I also understand now from what you have said that the Austin K6 photo gives an example of the Type Number for the body. And Ted, welcome back I hope you are getting better. Thanks for your input on the vehicle 'Type Number' being the load capacity. If its true that a QL was Type 1300 and a Jeep a Type 1900, was the type number meant to confuse the enemy as it has no correlation to lbs. or Kgs! Also the well known photo of Prestwick's Crash Tender shows Type 1301 on the side, so was another number added for its use? BTW - in passing did you see the Padre's Jeep above had a plate over the headlight saying 127 AF. I have seen several others with 126 AF (see below) on them but as this was the RAF Wing why do you think it wasn't 127W or 126W? I'd also be interested to know the meaning and colour of the 'white' circle and 'I' painted in it. Was it a Canadian marking?

Well Simon, that's a start. I guessed right that it was introduced in 1944, and although the book says it was for D-Day, it was also used on UK airfields too, which in turn suggests the Type Number was applied before delivery rather than being unit specific or just for 2 TAF. Now I just need to get a list together from the book and also check that Bedford OY really was given the same RAF Type Number as a QL. Photos of RAF Bedford OY's in 1944-45 anyone?