6 X 6

Success At Last !

It occurred to me that as this leaking relay valve relates to the rear trailer brake couplings it must be controlled by the trailer brake lever mounted on the steering column. Also, the fact that the windscreen wipers weren't operating correctly (see post five on this thread) and they sourced their air pressure supply from a pipe connected directly to trailer brake valve the cause of the leaking rear valve may very well be here.

Having built up the air pressure to about 100psi I worked the trailer brake lever on, and off, for around a dozen times after which built up the air again and NO MORE LEAKING REAR RELAY VALVE. It was as simple as that. The system now quickly builds to 120psi and holds this pressure for a considerable length of time.....certainly long enough to satisfy both me and VOSA.

Maybe, if not ready doing so, Militant and owners of vehicles with a similar system might like to give both the trailer brake valve, and it's related rear relay valve, a quick work out by applying the trailer brake lever on and off as part of routine maintenance.

Public Service Warning:apply the hand brake before attempting this procedure. All work should be undertaken by a qualified mechanic.:-D

Thanks for all the advice and suggestions.....very much appreciated !

I just came back from the noggin, nosh and nattter, I guess you didn't make it?

Phil

Hi Phil, I was there with a Series 2a ambulance parked next to those Champs. I had been hoping to take the Militant but there was no way it would be on the Public Highway with any air leaks or other mechanical issues. I'm always amazed that any Matador has survived intact when so many were to converted to recovery or timber work. I look forward meeting you at some future event and hearing the story behind your magnificent AEC. Cheers, Tom:-)

Thank you for taking the time to post so many helpful suggestions. This is the HMVF at it's very best :-D I'll reply in detail in a few days time as I'm presently preoccupied preparing a vehicle for an important local midweek show .......might see you there.

https://www.steamheritage.co.uk/steam_rallies_and_events/listing/noggin_nosh_natter

If it's any use, this seems to be the same problem "ArtistsRifles" (Neil) is having. Two heads better than one?

Yes, I certainly agree that two, or more, heads are better than one especially if the one head is mine. Coincidentally, on the very same day last week that "AristsRifles" was removing the foot control valve on his Mk 1 I was doing the same job on my Militant:shocked:.

Just an observation - you said it did not leak when you blew into it.

 

I can imagine all manner of diaphragm / housing leaks which might not show up at 6x6 lung pressure, but would at something approaching working pressure. Have you tried feeding it from a compressed air source?

 

What is the function of the valve - and does the valve accept full system pressure under normal conditions or just when brakes applied?

 

T

Thank you, NOS.

The user handbook describes this component as a relay valve.

I blew into the diaphragm while it was separated from the main housing (please see 'photo) to check for any obvious leaks or tears and to see if the very small air way (at the bottom of 'photo) was clear. I doubt if this diaphragm could with stand 120psi when not supported in it's housing.

I'm not sure what part this relay valve plays in the system and would be wary of connecting it to any source of air pressure other than that provided by the vehicle it is intended for. I'm hoping to find time this weekend to fit another valve of the same type to see what, if anything, this might reveal.

I would only check other vehicle to see If valve has an standing air supply. If not your problem is with another valve on this vehicle do a pipeline chase to see where it is getting air from. It is many years since I chased air problems when I took parts off other vehicles I often then had a problem with that one as well usually a pipe fitting that did not want to reconnect.

Ok. Thanks for that.

Is it possible to remove the supply line to the valve and fit a blanking plug of some kind to the pipe to check there is no other issue?

Yes, that might be worth trying. Thank you for the suggestion. I do have the same type of valve on another vehicle that has no air pressure faults so I've decided to fit this other valve to see if it also leaks. I'll report back on my findings.

Regarding other issues on the problem vehicle, one that I'm recommissioning after it has been standing for a number of years, there is a very interesting symptom in that there is only an air pressure supply to the windscreen wipers when the brake pedal is used. Something seriously amiss with the air system on this vehicle in it's present state !

Also, I may respectfully advise any Militant Mk 1 owners to check the condition of the 3/16" pipe that supplies air pressure to the gauge on the instrument panel in the cab. This pipe travels down beside the steering column, through the cab floor, and then along the outside of the chassis under the O/S front wheel arch in company with the armoured conduit carrying electrical cables to the rear..

I've seen a few of these steel pipes on Militants very badly corroded and brittle on the side of the pipe between it and the chassis. The side of the pipe on the outside looks ok but not so good on the back of the pipe that's not so easy to see. If this pipe is found to have deteriorated it's not difficult to replace the entire length of pipe from the gauge to it's source using 3/16" copper/nickel hydraulic brake pipe and fittings.

I would check to make sure no air is getting through the foot treadle valve at rest with full air pressure.

Thank you. It's difficult to maintain full air pressure due to the leaking rear valve but the foot valve appears to be working normally over 110psi.

The air brake valve located on the N/S inside rear of the chassis was leaking through the exhaust port. I stripped the valve and cleaned the components with warm soapy water. The diaphragm appeared to be working correctly and not leaking when I blew into it through the threaded hole. I didn't replace the 0 rings as they seemed ok and, apart from some accumulated dust, the interior wasn't too grotty. I've now refitted this valve only to find that it's still leaking as before :cry:

I'm now wondering if there is still some problem with this valve or is it working correctly and reacting to a fault somewhere else within the system ? Any advice, thoughts and suggestions gratefully received. Cheers.

i seem to recall a possable thats possable loophole if the load is permanatly fixed to the trailer ie by welding not just say warrick strainers it becomes part of the trailer not a load imposed upon it anyone able to comment on that ?

VOSA do seem to recognise fixed loads but whether it could apply to us lot I don't know. The following is from a VOSA question and answer website and this section refers to Goods Vehicle Licensing exemptions. A Coles crane on AEC chassis is one example of a HMV that could be classified as fixed equipement. Unfortunately, my attention span was too short to find any other information more relevant to us on this VOSA site. I suppose the answer is to contact VOSA or the possibly the DVLA and ask them.

http://www.vosa.gov.uk/vosa/repository/10 253a.pdf

Vehicles with "fixed equipment"

Schedule 3 to the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Regulations 1995, lists the categories of goods vehicle that are exempt from operator licensing. Schedule 3 (15) (a) prescribes that the following type of vehicle is exempt:

A vehicle fitted with a machine, appliance, apparatus or other contrivance which is a permanent or essentially permanent fixture, provided that the only goods carried on the vehicle are *

(a) required for use in connection with the machine, appliance, apparatus or contrivance or the running of the vehicle;

This exemption usually applies in cases where a machine, appliance or apparatus (e.g a crane, compressor or generator) has been fixed or bolted on to the vehicle. Any goods carried on such a vehicle must be strictly in connection with the use of such equipment, (i.e. the vehicle should effectively form a moving platform for these permanent or essentially permanent fixtures, and absolutely no goods that are not essential for the equipment to function (e.g. loose tools or other articles) should be carried on the vehicle.

Therefore, (in light of the above) where you do not consider that you use of the vehicle would be exempt your best course of action would be to contact the national number (0300 1239000) and request a starter pack so that you may apply for a licence. A restricted licence should be sufficient, provided that you only carry your own goods.

I should point out that this is in VOSA s view and does not constitute legal opinion. As this is the case, we are unable to issue communications conferring exemption from goods vehicle operator licensing.

However I would suggest that even if there is no legal requirement to test and plate then there is a moral requirement to make sure that a thing the size of a Rogers trailer is fully safe for the road

Not just a moral requirement but a legal one as well. Brakes, tyres, lights etc all need to be good working order and safe condition at all times while on the highway even if not subject to testing or plating. Any motor vehicle, or trailer, can be stopped and examined by the police/VOSA at anytime, anywhere and no more friendly warnings these days. If it's found to be unsafe the vehicle will be impounded and the driver will get fines plus points. Quite right too !

How do you intend to use this trailer ? Will it be laden or unladen ? Private use only or for hire or reward ? It may well be it's use that decides the answers to your questions. :nut:

Some years ago I was looking around for a Crossley 'Q' type tractor and contacted the Crossley Register. They were, at that time, able to tell me of seven or eight unrestored 'Q' types still surviving in various parts of the country including three, or more, that were standing in the back garden of a well known Crossley collector. I'm assuming that some of the posters on this thread may be members of the Crossley Register so does anyone know what happened to these back garden Crossleys ? Are they still there ? Restored ? Scrapped ?

By the time I was offered a fairly complete and running example things had moved on so I told David Shopland about it and he bought and, as far as I know, still owns that one.

How fast would he have been going to do that then, it looks like a reasonable sweeping bend !

I don't think it's reasonable sweeping bend.......more like a sharp right turn. Looking at the road markings, what maybe an Austin A40 is travelling along the main road the transporter has just turned off. How fast ? Anything faster than walking speed would be too fast I'd been driving. The really scary incident is the one with the red hot brakes that diamond-t-steve posted. What happened there ? Did the driver miss a gear ? Whatever happened, it must lasted long enough to have been a full-on brown trouser experience for whatever poor sod was at the wheel.

Great 'photo ! There's only one way you can do that.

Eaurouge, this may sound like nit-picking but it's really just curiosity.............like Zero-Five-Two, I think the rear wheels on your magnificent Milly are the "wrong" way round. Militant hubs don't usually protrude that much and the shallow side of the wheel seems to be facing outwards. Having said that, I'm surprised that 14:00 or 15:00 wheels can be fitted "inside out" without the tyre fouling the spring pivot. Wot's going on ? We should be told !

Some pics of the baby now she has arrived... Christ how slow... how heavy steering!

Looking good ! Alright, it maybe a bit slow with heavy steering but at least they run very quietly with almost no engine noise in the cab.

Tom - I saw the truck at Dave's yard a few years ago (I could smell it from the A14 and diverted....:-)). He said it had been towed without disconnecting prop or pulling half shafts, so quite possibly also with gearbox in neutral between 1st and R....

 

In any event it had seized up and they were looking to put another box in. It appeared otherwise to be in very good condition. Something about being towed in Germany rings a bell??

 

Best,

Tony

Thank you for the info Tony. I've no experience in towing these vehicles and had always understood that it would be sufficient to isolate the main gearbox by having the transfer box in neutral. Certainly, detaching and safely suspending all three propshafts on a Constructor would be a formidable task at the roadside.

If this Scammell is being offered for sale for a "tidy sum" can we assume it is now driveable ? If it is, well done to David Crouch and the blokes in his workshops. CSV 668 is one of very few surviving Scammell Constructors with an original appearence and even still having it's fuel tank surrounds.

Does anyone know the earlier history of CSV 668 after it was released by the Ministry ? It's so unusual for any vehicle of this kind to survive unbutchered until it comes into the care of us preservationists.

It was in David Crouches yard about 6 months ago.

 

I was looking for a different vehicle and David offered it to me for a tidy sum.

 

It is a lovely vehicle though.

Has this Scammell been put back in running order while at David Crouch's workshops ?

Sometime ago I read some posts by the ex.owner of CSV 668 on the "Metal Solders" military vehicle forum that said this lorry had been towed with the transfer box in gear with the predictable consequence that the gearbox seized. I thought this was tough luck and none of us can say that we haven't done daft things from time to time. On the posts I'm referring to there were also a few sad 'photos of the stricken Constructor being towed away behind one of David Crouch's recovery trucks.

These posts seem to have now, for whatever reason, disappeared. The only reference to this Scammell and it's gearbox "mishap" I could find on "Metal Solders" today is post No 4 by the same poster that relates that "transmission caught fire and jammed the gearbox Xcase"

http://www.steelsoldiers.com/deuce/59649-memories-past.html

I've been driving lorries for quite while now and I have not, as yet, come across a case of

a transmission catching fire. Does anyone one on here know what actually caused the gearbox on CSV 668 to seize and, more importantly, if Mr. Crouch has sorted this problem out ?

Does anybody have any recollections of Joe Hunt's scrap yard at Molesworth, UK?

I think it was closed down in the mid 1990s, and I am looking for people who knew Mr. Hunt (he passed away in 1998) and/or have any recollections or even pictures of the military vehicles he had on his premises.

Hanno

There are recollections, and 'photos, of Joe's yard on this forum already but I can't remember which thread they are on. I'm sure someone on here with a better memory than me will be able to tell you. I only ever dealt with Joe's brother Jacob as Joe was, by then, very ill with cancer. Although the yard was in it's last days when I was buying bits from Jacob there was still tons of interesting stuff.

I'm tempted to ask you why there's a windmill mounted on the top of the radiator. That's a hell of an overhang to think about when cornering and manoeuvring. A terrific 'photo. Thanks for posting. (Got any more !!!)

I'm not absolutely sure this 'photo hasn't already been posted on the forum already so forgive me if it has. Scammell Constructor 20 ton Ballast Tractor while operated by Circus Hoffman shown here at Crayland Park, Wellingborough -August 1980. There's something about this picture that I find very evocative of long, hot, past summers.........wonderful. Lots of other ex MOD stuff in circus mode on the link to where this pix came from. (below the 'photo.)

http://showtrucks.fotopic.net/c1666830.html

Yes but in terms of vehicles there are only makes and models. The make for all types mentioned is Scammell so I suggest the genus is Scammell.

 

The models are Junior Constructor, Constructor, Super Constructor. These are all species within the genus Scammell, as are Handyman, Routeman, etc. A junior Constructor is no more closely related to a Super constructor than a handyman is to a routeman.

 

A Constructor is more closely related to a Mountaineer, than it is to a Super Constructor......

Mike, I think you're missing the point that Constructors are a polytypic species and not a monotypic species. A polytypic species has two or more subspecies, races or more generally speaking, populations that need a separate description. These are separate groups that are clearly distinct from one another and do not generally interbreed (although there may be a relatively narrow hybridization zone), but which would interbreed freely if given the chance to do so. Note that groups which would not interbreed freely, even if brought together such that they had the opportunity to do so, are not subspecies: they are separate species.

However, a monotypic species like the Routeman or the Handyman has no distinct population or races, or rather one race comprising the whole species. Monotypic species can occur in several ways:

All members of the species are very similar and cannot be sensibly divided into biologically significant.

subcategories. The individuals vary considerably but the variation is essentially random and largely meaningless so far as genetic transmission of these variations is concerned.

The variation among individuals is noticeable and follows a pattern, but there are no clear dividing lines among separate groups: they fade imperceptibly into one another. Such clinal variation always indicates substantial gene flow among the apparently separate groups that make up the population(s). Populations that have a steady, substantial gene flow among them are likely to represent a monotypic species even when a fair degree of genetic variation is obvious. In fairness, I've been trying to get my Scammells to breed for ages without much luck so far but I'm not giving up yet.

is the Current Mini the same genus as the sixties mini that bore the same name???

Surprisingly, yes. Both have enough general characteristics in common to place them in a group, or class, of vehicle. The three types of Constructor you describe also have more similarities than differences between them and that places them firmly within the Constructor genus. They are all Constructors. A bit like with African elephants and Indian elephants. They're both elephants but distinctly different models within the elephant genus. I hope this has cleared things up.

GENUS.

a class; kind; sort

BIOL. a major category in the classification of animals, plants, etc., ranking above a species and below a family: it can include one species or many similar species: the Latinized genus name is capitalized and italicized, and precedes the species name, which is italicized but not capitalized (Ex.: Homo sapiens, modern man)

LOGIC a class of things made up of subordinate classes or species

http://www.yourdictionary.com/genus

6X6

 

you are 100% CORRECT in saying that the super & junior are both Construtors Just different plated weights and the junior being 6X4.

 

 

Clive

Well, it's very unusual for me to be right about anything never mind being 100% right ! This must mean that Lord Field Marshal Fowler is also right......and.....err....... that ExAntarMike is 100% wrong. What a day it's been. I expect Mike will apologise to Andy.