Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The DROPS version of the Hannibal mask. Thanks for posting.


The army are now using transformers and this helps them blend in :cool2:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 1 month later...

The vehicle bearing the LF10 registration plate looks awfully familiar in that very shiny paint job.


Back in 1997 or maybe 2000 the was a group of vehicles and this or very similar was one of them. They had all the toys and even had some kind of modular tentage or maybe it was hardsided modular accomodation.


They were a "different" crowd and were somewhat elusive as to who they were or where they were from. They had all kinds of kit that was only just released or we thought not even released.


Interesting to see that picture which has jogged my dim memory





Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 year later...

does anyone know anything about this ex military scammell s26 6x6?


it turned up in are yard the other day for storage as a friend has bought it but we don't know anything about the specific vehicle other than it's serial number indicates it is number 5.


is it one of the demo 6x6 drops built for the military or was it built for something else?


myself and the owner would be very grateful for any information and history of this particular vehicle.


scammell s26.jpg


sorry for the poor image as it is from the web vert but i shall take some fresh pics tomorrow, also is there any numbers located on the vehicle that may help with finding it's history?


regards sam

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to say that it has not been altered but my recollection was that the prototype Scammell IMMLC did not have "S26" on the front. I was also under the impression that the prototypes went back to the manufacturers (who owned them - they did not belong to the MOD) and were re-worked as MMLC. I could be wrong there though. I also recall that the wheels were much much bigger even than the ones in the picture (it certainly did not meet construction and use regulations!) Again, I could be wrong.


The Scammells that did have the "S26" were the 6x6 dumpers.


One key indicator would be the gearbox. What gearbox does it have?


I will try and dig some pictures out of my trials ones.

Edited by paulbrook
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the roof of the blue one there is a clue..


From Clive at Protruck who was involved with the development of the DROPS on the Scammell side:


Here's a couple of the wide track 6x6 S26 Drops With 24R x 20 tyres.







Also the smaller wheeled Mountaineer:



Edited by radiomike7
Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your replies chaps the blue truck has a rolls - royse diesel engine mated to an auto box. i haven't got a clue what type of auto but if it helps i can take some picks looking down on top of the transmission and the chassis.


there is a pto box mounted on top of the left hand side of the auto box if that helps which looks like it has some kind of hydraulic clutch on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right it just shows how rubbish my memories are - the prototype IMMLC did have S26 on the front!


Anyway the prototypes had Allison auto boxes in whilst the production ones had ZFs. The picture here was taken at Crocker Barracks in Sennelager in about 1984/85





It was a very good truck indeed, but like its Foden rival exceeded Construction and Use on both width and axle loadings. But as a military vehicle it was decided that it could be Crown Exempt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course if you wanted to make it a really interesting machine then instead of the Multilift Mk4 loading system it could have a MK2 (Half the trials vehicles had Mk2 LHS - the main difference was that they were "low lift" - the bale bar was simply on the front of a totally flat flatrack rather than mounted on the A frame.)


This was because as well as deciding which vehicles were best suited to the task there was a need to decide on the LHS. The Mk2 offered distinct cost and storage advantages because flatracks (and they envisaged thousands of them) would be a lot cheaper to store and easier to handle in depots.


In practice the low lift was tricky to operate in comparison to the high lift, was seen to be less foolproof, was certainly less stable (always an issue with DROPS development) and as the depot end of the DROP system was never properly thought through anyway the high lift won the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...