Richard Farrant Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 Wally, It makes you wonder if the worm and wheel was not set up correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted November 11, 2022 Author Share Posted November 11, 2022 (edited) RICHARD the middle and rear axles both suffered the same wear this happened at 7,000 miles the gear box failed at 2,000 the list is quite a long one Edited November 11, 2022 by wally dugan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attleej Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 That sounds like a stich up to me! The drive axles on a Rotinoff are the same Kirkstall axles as on the Antar! Why should they fail like that and not on an Antar? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Farrant Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 I recall the Swiss army bought Rotinoff tank transporter tractors, wonder if they had the same problems? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted November 11, 2022 Author Share Posted November 11, 2022 (edited) As said both used KIRKSTALL axles but the ROTINOFF used a different ratio to that fitted on the ANTAR Edited November 11, 2022 by wally dugan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attleej Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 So what were the ratios then?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted November 12, 2022 Author Share Posted November 12, 2022 all l know what l have read on the subject also l suggest that you ask in a more polite manner 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted November 12, 2022 Author Share Posted November 12, 2022 strange as it seems some one else mentions the difference in ratios on the subject of ROTINOFFS on this forum in 2008 august in transporters and wreckers ANTARMIKE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attleej Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Dear Wally, I apologise if I have caused any offence. My question was very much tongue in cheek and I drafted it quickly before going out. Mike is always good on research. Some of the Rotinoffs had very large tyres which would justify a lower axle ratio than the 14.4 : 1 used on both MkII and MkIII Antars. There were some Antar type vehicles with very large tyres and they would not have been effective without lower ratio axles. I just wonder whether Kirkstalls would have designed and made lower ratio axles for very low population vehicles such as the Rotinoff UNLESS they already had them available. In my opinion, the 14.4 : 1 axles ratio is perfect for an Antar on 1400 X 24 tyres. It gives a top speed of 30 MPH with a sensible overdrive ration and a gradeability of about 1:6 at 100 tons gross train weight. My thoughts of a stich up arise from the situation at the time. Remember that MOS would be still smarting from the FV1000 project when it turned out that the commercial Antar could do everything that was needed apart from carrying a tank cross country. The last thing that they would want would be another commercial vehicle that might be even better than an Antar. For instance, one dirty trick that I can think off would be to fit well-worn tyres to one wheel station only. This would create a huge wind-up load that would go through the worm reduction. Just my suspicious mind, that is all. I am sure that the FVRDE report would be fascinating reading! Once, again, apologies for any offence. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 (edited) In the new box there is a folder of british tank stowage diagrams as l said a number of key card no2 some of which are on the lists of the ones held by beverley and the RLC some of which were not on the lists compiled while at beverley Edited December 2, 2022 by wally dugan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attleej Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 Wally, I don't suppose that you have a loading diagram for a Conqueror ARV? John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 When you say loading do you mean on to a trailer there may be one in the FVRDE FILES if my question seems daft l was once asked about shipping weight which l thought for loading on vessels but it turned that the person in question meant some thing different Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 I believe that there are loading diagrams for all current military vehicles for use when transporting them on trailers. I used to know one of the people responsible for producing them but he retired several years ago. Andy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fv1609 Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 Yes JSP71 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
attleej Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 Wally, Sorry, I meant stowage diagram or sketch like the ones you have just posted but for Conq ARV. As it happens, I think I might have a JSP 371 or something similar. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted November 14, 2022 Author Share Posted November 14, 2022 JOHN l have some drawings of 120 conqueror in1/72 scale but cannot say l have seen any for the ARV but l will have a look over the next day or two for any ones of stowage drawings wally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fv1609 Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 43 minutes ago, attleej said: As it happens, I think I might have a JSP 371 or something similar. John John JSP 371 is the the Joint Service Manual on Pest Control. JSP 71 is in two volumes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted December 12, 2022 Author Share Posted December 12, 2022 (edited) CHRISTMAS came a bit early this afternoon a parcel arrived totally unexpected from a friend of over forty years who was in the military first a file of letters this is a copy l have deleted the the name who it was sent to but it also had a number of references to wartime motor cycles mainly contracts and manufacturers. There also was a Chilwell list of which l had a few pages before this covers the period 1945 to 1949 and continues from the well known 1944 it is a large document and from a quick glance answer some of the things that the 1944 CHILWELL does not explain or cover in depth Edited December 16, 2022 by wally dugan correction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
79x100 Posted December 12, 2022 Share Posted December 12, 2022 Will you be expanding on the information ? Despite years of scouring archives, there are still gaps in the Norton and BSA production sequences and no surviving factory records for the later-war period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted December 12, 2022 Author Share Posted December 12, 2022 At this moment in time the answer is no l have reasons which l am not going into but have been touched on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted December 16, 2022 Author Share Posted December 16, 2022 in the file on allocation of numbers 1945 -1949 is addressed to ministry of supply contracts dept CAXTON HOUSE { WEST } TOTHILL STREET SW1 it has thrown up a interesting number of things which will need referencing with the 1944 CHILWELL LIST the KEY CARD LIST and the new Chilwell list 1945 /1949 all l now have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally dugan Posted January 8, 2023 Author Share Posted January 8, 2023 having to search for a drawing l came across a few of these they have never been used the only thing is one staple is in a corner to hold the nine or ten sheets in a series they are large been 110 x74 CM they are training charts for scorpion j60 engined and others Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john1950 Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 (edited) All I can find on the Rotinoff Viscount heavy haulage tractor is it was powered by a Rolls Royce C6SFL rated at 250 bhp, mated to a 6 speed o/d gearbox into a 3 speed reduction box possibly from a Sherman. Rear bogie by Kirkstall With Hypoid diff's and hub reductions. Giving an axle reduction ratio of 10.18:1 running on 1100x20 tyres. I think the Antar's were worm drive axles. Edited January 22, 2023 by john1950 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radiomike7 Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 3 hours ago, john1950 said: All I can find on the Rotinoff Viscount heavy haulage tractor is it was powered by a Rolls Royce C6SFL rated at 250 bhp, mated to a 6 speed o/d gearbox into a 3 speed reduction box possibly from a Sherman. Rear bogie by Kirkstall With Hypoid diff's and hub reductions. Giving an axle reduction ratio of 10.18:1 running on 1100x20 tyres. I think the Antar's were worm drive axles. It was the C6 powered Rotinoff Atlantic and C8 Super Atlantic that had worm drives similar to the Antar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john1950 Posted January 22, 2023 Share Posted January 22, 2023 I would imagine all of the Rotinoff records are held with the Atkinson ones at Leyland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.