Unusual ERM

[10FM68]

OK, here we go again.  I came across this image (ack to Getty Images) of a Cromwell.  It is post war, probably somewhere sandy and it has an --SA-- ERM.  According to what I have read, SA didn't exist as an ERM but may have been used by the South Africans (though I can't see why the South Africans might wish to use British military registration numbers after 1950, but still).  What do others think and does anyone have a solution?

On the subject of ERMs, --KM-- is interesting.  Again, according to what I have read, it was used for British Army vehicles in Kenya and possibly also vehicles entered manually into Merlin - though what that means I don't know.  But,  they seem to me to appear on lease-hire vehicles - the RE 'C vehicle' fleet, saloon cars and the like.  Again, does anyone know for sure?

Edited November 23, 2023 by 10FM68

[wally dugan]

from what l know on military registration ERM history cards SA  numbers were not used on british military vehicles   as to S l have only come across ERM's SP

Edited November 23, 2023 by wally dugan

[10FM68]

I agree, I have never seen a photo of another one, certainly.  I agree on the --R?-- point as well.  I have hundreds, probably over 1000 actually, of photos of British military vehicles and I major on the 50s, but the highest I can go is --RH--.  I understood that the R series was reserved for rebuilds of soft-skinned vehicles.  If they weren't rebuilt, then they were ore likely to be in the Y series, while armoured vehicles majored on Z.

But the Cromwell certainly looks to be British, or at least, Commonwealth - perhaps it is South African.

[fv1609]

Libya 1952 Dragoon Guards

https://www.gettyimages.in/detail/news-photo/the-4-7th-dragoon-guards-make-friends-with-some-locals-in-news-photo/3363183

 

[10FM68]

Well, thank you Clive.  That was quick and yours is a much clearer picture - the cap badges are certainly apparent and those of the 4th/7th.  So... why --SA-- I wonder.  We'll have to look for more photos.  I wonder whether it is a local mistake and they applied SA instead of ZA, which would make much more sense!  And £375 will buy me a large picture of it!  Not cheap, eh?

[Noel7]

The Minature Armoured Fighting Vehicle Association used to have lists of VRNs on their old website, which are no longer on the current one, at least when I last looked some time ago. They seem to have been fairly accurate, although I have found more than a few errors. Their 'Pre-1950' vehicle listing included 00SA01 to 00SA99 as Cromwell 6pdr Mk 6,7,8. This was the only entry in S, apart from the previously mentioned SP [Special Projects]. I assume this range would have become extinct in the early 1950s, but have no information as my interest is B and C vehicles only.

[fv1609]

As the DG were stationed at Sabratha was the ERM change to SA a joke or compliment to the locality or changed to anonymise the vehicle identity as this was a staged publicity picture?

[10FM68]

Thank you Noel - that is indeed interesting and the first I have heard of --SA-- being used.  But, as they attach the SA series to Cromwells and the photo is of a Cromwell... they may be right!  Unless, of course, they took their reasoning from the picture in the first place.  

And thank you Clive, a couple of interesting theories there, not stong in likelihood, I think, but, you never know!

Further trawling on the internet found this photo which I hadn't previously come across:

There were no credits attched to it as far as I could see.  But it also shows a 1 Inf Div formation sign and the fact that the driver appears to have fashioned himself a glass window to see through without getting sand in his eyes!  One suspects that the tank had to be specially manoeuvred into that spot to ensure there was a palm tree in the photo!  Any suggestions for what it is lurking to the left of the photo showing only its trackguard?

[BlueBelle]

Possibly another; from a very small poor quality image in the June 1951 RDG journal.... 00SA23 or is it 00ZR23? Of the many photos I have of Cromwells, Comets and Centurions (other armoured and B vehicles too) in 4/7 RDG Libya markings/liveries, none show an SA ERM. It is not unreasonable to suggest the SA is for Sabratha and the staged photo taken in winter around the time the regiment's ERMs and livery changed to the new system/Lt Stone livery (from an olive drab-type livery).

Forgot to add: The other vehicle creeping in view in your photo is the drivers end of one of the regiment's Archer SPGs.

Cromwell 00SA23 or 00ZR23 4:7 RDG Sabratha -from Dec 1951 journal .pdf

Edited November 24, 2023 by BlueBelle
Omission of Archer

[10FM68]

Well, good morning Lizzie, how very nice to hear from you and what a coincidence as, only last night I was trawling through your whole thread on Tripoli: I have it all on my computer (luckily I saved the photos before they disappeared as there are some fascinating shots and I return to them often).  There was little on there which I would argue with now - except I think that there were light khaki coveralls and that they weren't faded green as you suggest.  Which is a pretty small matter to disagree on, I suspect!  Oh, and I'd spell 'jerrican' with an 'i' rather than a 'y' as the Army did (maybe still does, but I duobt that they are as finickety about such detail these days when they can't even manage drill properly (I saw a photo recently of an RSM with one hand correctly supporting his pace stick under his arm and the other cocked up behind his back as if he were a GI - I was shocked!)

As to this matter, thank you for your thoughts and the photo - yes, not brill, but it's all grist to the mill. I'm not really convinced by the Sabratha theory - that might be too subtle for its audience I think.  It might hold water better in a static exhibit of one of the regiment's tanks on an open day all bulled up, but not here, I think.  I would be surprised if the photo had been taken at the time of the livery change: it's in 'rag order' badly weathered and with a replacement (and yet to be painted?) front mudguard by the look of it.  Yes, it is a posed shot, but not one of which the regiment ought to have been too proud!  Certainly 3 RHA would have managed the photoshoot rather better, if their Scammell is anything to go by!  Best BD for the crew, in this case, is rather let down by the state of their chariot!

So, in the absence of a more convincing reason, I will stick with the dyslexic  answer - the backwards 'z'!  But, we'll probably never know.

How's the book going?  We're still waiting.  I had a wry smile about your comments about Pat Ware and his knowledge of Centurions, last night.  I have most of his books on 'Antars' 'Quarter Tons' 'Ferrets' and so on and have been pleased with them.  Just recently I bought 2 of the series of 4 bookzines by him for Kelsley Pubs on the subject of soft-skinned vehicles in British military use.  They're terrible!  Although most of the photos come from The Warehouse Collection, the captioning is dire and many are completely irrelevant or of preserved examples with all the problems of detail they bring.  As you and I, and most on this forum, probably, appreciate, there is so much to be gleaned from an original photo - buy why do those posing always stand in front of the markings!  The narrative is thin... I could go on, but, my goodness, not a series I'd have put my name to in his position.  But, I expect it helps pay the bills.  So... take your time and do a good job - but do make sure you have a good proof-reader who knows his stuff - that is where so many books fall down as the author is so immersed in the work they often can't see the wood for the trees by the end - it is the proof-reader's job to bring a critical eye from a new persepective.

 

Oh and thank you for the ID of the Archer - what a spot!

Edited November 24, 2023 by 10FM68

[Noel7]

 

54 minutes ago, 10FM68 said:

I had a wry smile about your comments about Pat Ware and his knowledge of Centurions, last night. I have most of his books on 'Antars' 'Quarter Tons' 'Ferrets' and so on and have been pleased with them.  Just recently I bought 2 of the series of 4 bookzines by him for Kelsley Pubs on the subject of soft-skinned vehicles in British military use.  They're terrible!  Although most of the photos come from The Warehouse Collection, the captioning is dire and many are completely irrelevant or of preserved examples with all the problems of detail they bring.

I don't know about the others, but there are issues with the ERMs given in "Quarter Ton" for both Jeeps and Land Rovers.

[10FM68]

1 hour ago, Noel7 said:

 

I don't know about the others, but there are issues with the ERMs given in "Quarter Ton" for both Jeeps and Land Rovers.

I think that is true about every book you read - the 'difinitive work' on Military Land Rovers by James Taylor & Geoff Fletcher is superb, but there are lots of little anomalies here and there - hence my advice to Lizzie to get a good proof-reader who knows his stuff.  Interestingly, I sometimes wonder whether the author ever gets to choose the captions for the photos as it is often here that the biggest mistakes occur.  A lovely article about an SAS Jeep had a caption suggesting that the stowed Lewis gun magazines were anti-tank mines.  One has to try and pick one's way through the quagmire and, frankly, often it doesn't really matter as, certainly in my case, so much of what I read doesn't stay in my brain past the weekend.  I look on here and sometimes come across old posts of mine and read them and think, 'golly, did I really know that at that time - I don't now!'  But ERMs are a particular minefield because of the way they were put together and because so many records have been lost.  MERLIN is wonderful, but often useless on the units which used the vehicles because they match UINs with current nomenclature and, given all the changes in regiments and corps over the years, that makes it a matter of interpretation for the reader rather than being able to take it as fact.  And so it goes on.

[fv1609]

55 minutes ago, 10FM68 said:

I sometimes wonder whether the author ever gets to choose the captions for the photos as it is often here that the biggest mistakes occur. 

Indeed I have often had captions totally changed when I have written guest chapters in various books. This was particularly frustrating in an official unit history that makes me look half-witted, which I ain't.

[BlueBelle]

4 hours ago, 10FM68 said:

Well, good morning Lizzie, how very nice to hear from you and what a coincidence as, only last night I was trawling through your whole thread on Tripoli: I have it all on my computer (luckily I saved the photos before they disappeared as there are some fascinating shots and I return to them often).  There was little on there which I would argue with now - except I think that there were light khaki coveralls and that they weren't faded green as you suggest.  Which is a pretty small matter to disagree on, I suspect!  Oh, and I'd spell 'jerrican' with an 'i' rather than a 'y' as the Army did (maybe still does, but I duobt that they are as finickety about such detail these days when they can't even manage drill properly (I saw a photo recently of an RSM with one hand correctly supporting his pace stick under his arm and the other cocked up behind his back as if he were a GI - I was shocked!)

As to this matter, thank you for your thoughts and the photo - yes, not brill, but it's all grist to the mill. I'm not really convinced by the Sabratha theory - that might be too subtle for its audience I think.  It might hold water better in a static exhibit of one of the regiment's tanks on an open day all bulled up, but not here, I think.  I would be surprised if the photo had been taken at the time of the livery change: it's in 'rag order' badly weathered and with a replacement (and yet to be painted?) front mudguard by the look of it.  Yes, it is a posed shot, but not one of which the regiment ought to have been too proud!  Certainly 3 RHA would have managed the photoshoot rather better, if their Scammell is anything to go by!  Best BD for the crew, in this case, is rather let down by the state of their chariot!

So, in the absence of a more convincing reason, I will stick with the dyslexic  answer - the backwards 'z'!  But, we'll probably never know.

How's the book going?  We're still waiting.  I had a wry smile about your comments about Pat Ware and his knowledge of Centurions, last night.  I have most of his books on 'Antars' 'Quarter Tons' 'Ferrets' and so on and have been pleased with them.  Just recently I bought 2 of the series of 4 bookzines by him for Kelsley Pubs on the subject of soft-skinned vehicles in British military use.  They're terrible!  Although most of the photos come from The Warehouse Collection, the captioning is dire and many are completely irrelevant or of preserved examples with all the problems of detail they bring.  As you and I, and most on this forum, probably, appreciate, there is so much to be gleaned from an original photo - buy why do those posing always stand in front of the markings!  The narrative is thin... I could go on, but, my goodness, not a series I'd have put my name to in his position.  But, I expect it helps pay the bills.  So... take your time and do a good job - but do make sure you have a good proof-reader who knows his stuff - that is where so many books fall down as the author is so immersed in the work they often can't see the wood for the trees by the end - it is the proof-reader's job to bring a critical eye from a new perspective.

 

Oh and thank you for the ID of the Archer - what a spot!

A pleasure, as usual, to read your comments 10FM68 and to receive your very welcome advice. Thank you.

I have managed to spell jerrican both ways in my book draft! I will also need an editor who has more that just an 'idea' of what I've written about so that all materialises in a true, factually accurate and readable form..... I'd hate it if I were to be picked up or mocked for getting basics and facts wrong, even after using an editor!

Nearly there with the 6RTR in Libya book but new stuff keeps coming in and I'm loathe to keep it and the photos out of the narrative. It's a longer than anticipated process but really enjoyable building the regiment's history, especially through original photographs and the intelligence they provide. Some original colour photos here last week of a DT on the Garian Pass loaded with the DAK Sexton (from Ice Cold in Alex) making its way to be used as a 6RTR range hard target and, it's being followed by one of the K2 (painted windscreen) ambulances from the film. Five new glorious colour slides arrived of Cambridge Load Carrier vehicles on trial with 6RTR.... bogged at Leptis Magna in the exact same spot where Centurions habitually got stuck. The slides also depict the recovery by an Explorer, using another Cambridge as a winching anchor. Enough wetting the appetites of the curious.... more work to be done. 😊

[10FM68]

1 hour ago, fv1609 said:

Indeed I have often had captions totally changed when I have written guest chapters in various books. This was particularly frustrating in an official unit history that makes me look half-witted, which I ain't.

The best ones are those which the Daily Mail use for things like photos of all the guests at something like Ladies Day at the races.  The caption-writers don't appear to have English as their first language and are probably about 12 years old!  Hilarious (as the DM would say!)  But, yes, on a serious note, it can be very annoying to have one's contribution which you will have worked so hard on, altered after despatch.

[10FM68]

48 minutes ago, BlueBelle said:

 

Nearly there with the 6RTR in Libya book but new stuff keeps coming in and I'm loathe to keep it and the photos out of the narrative. It's a longer than anticipated process but really enjoyable building the regiment's history, especially through original photographs and the intelligence they provide. Some original colour photos here last week of a DT on the Garian Pass loaded with the DAK Sexton (from Ice Cold in Alex) making its way to be used as a 6RTR range hard target and, it's being followed by one of the K2 (painted windscreen) ambulances from the film. Enough whetting the appetites of the curious.... more work to be done. 😊

It all sounds great fun, you are fortunate to have the perseverence.  I like studying things in depth, but usually get distracted after a while.  I was piecing together the narrative of your thread last night and got sidetracked onto the differences between the various marks of halftrack.  So, all morning I have been trying to sort that riddle out!  Later I shall return to M32 ARVs in British military service - I had forgotten, until I re-read your thread, that the British Army had any. 

What are you going to do with all your photos when you have finished the book?  It does worry me that so much has been lost - there was that blinkin' online photo store (can't remember the name) which suddenly demanded large sums of money and then deleted all the photos of those who didn't pay - did so much damage to online study and the move from websites to FB was dreadful - recalling old posts from FB is impossible.  We have probably a max of 20-30 years left and then our collections will be gone - there is no guarantee that our next generation of relatives will be interested and they'll all get slung out as being of no interest - not least because the young today don't go in for hard copies of photos - if it isn't on their phone, it doesn't exist.  And I'm not that sure museums can be trusted either - look what happened to Beverley and even Bovington has a pretty hard nose when it comes to exhibits - they seem to have scrapped or sold off quite a lot over the years.  Enough, I'm rambling.

[BlueBelle]

31 minutes ago, 10FM68 said:

It all sounds great fun, you are fortunate to have the perseverence.  I like studying things in depth, but usually get distracted after a while.  I was piecing together the narrative of your thread last night and got sidetracked onto the differences between the various marks of halftrack.  So, all morning I have been trying to sort that riddle out!  Later I shall return to M32 ARVs in British military service - I had forgotten, until I re-read your thread, that the British Army had any. 

What are you going to do with all your photos when you have finished the book?  It does worry me that so much has been lost - there was that blinkin' online photo store (can't remember the name) which suddenly demanded large sums of money and then deleted all the photos of those who didn't pay - did so much damage to online study and the move from websites to FB was dreadful - recalling old posts from FB is impossible.  We have probably a max of 20-30 years left and then our collections will be gone - there is no guarantee that our next generation of relatives will be interested and they'll all get slung out as being of no interest - not least because the young today don't go in for hard copies of photos - if it isn't on their phone, it doesn't exist.  And I'm not that sure museums can be trusted either - look what happened to Beverley and even Bovington has a pretty hard nose when it comes to exhibits - they seem to have scrapped or sold off quite a lot over the years.  Enough, I'm rambling.

If you are indeed rambling then its fine by me as yours are enjoyable, relevant and of value to our fields of interest . Don't stop, except to get a cup of tea. As for today's museums, archives, archivists and the ethos within....don't get me started... again. In the process of moving back to the UK from a colony, the topic of what to do eventually with the original photographic  collection presents questions and frustrations as I don't want them to be lost forever, nor do I want the electronic images wherever I put them to 'not be there' tomorrow for whatever reason. I need a permanent gallery perhaps.... but how? Oh well, I'll worry about it later!

Yes, Halftracks and M32 ARVs...in Libya, fascinating topic. Keep on keeping on with them. Even the little Humber CT too, that I'd not thought 6RTR had in Libya has turned up in a colour slide but I can't make out the ERM.

[challengertwo]

Bovington circa 1952.

[fv1609]

For anyone who is into Cromwells I spotted this:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/126200907457

[wally dugan]

The story of SA numbers these were used to renumber ZR and ZV AND T cromwells

[10FM68]

Thank you for that photo Chally2.  Interesting - probably not quite as interesting as the jolt the driver probably felt when he landed - were that to happen today, I suspect he would be suing for compensation due to a crushed spine etc!  

3 hours ago, wally dugan said:

The story of SA numbers these were used to renumber ZR and ZV AND T cromwells

Thanks, Wally, but, forgive me, but I'm not quite sure what you mean.  Are you saying that, at some point after the introduction of the new ERM system in 49/50 that Cromwells - and only Cromwells had their ERMs changed from the Z series to SA?  Is this just a suggestion by you or do you know this to be the case?  If so, do you have any idea why that was done?

[wally dugan]

As most know my main interest is soft skins and on the subject l had only once come across the SP ones So as some  one who does not like puzzles l contacted johathan holt at the archive at bovington who said just that he did not give a date or a reason for the change so it must have been after 49/50

Edited November 27, 2023 by wally dugan

[Richard Farrant]

As I had never seen SA ERM's before until these recent photos on the forum I am going to hazard a guess. I beleive the SP numbers stood for Sales Prototype (or similar meaning). I am wondering if these particular tanks numbered in the SA series are something like Sales Armour and were in fact, vehicles put aside for sales to other countries and pictures of British crews in them were possibly demonstrating them to foreign powers or training their crews. Later on we would see MS numbers for armoured vehcles sold overseas.

[wally dugan]

RICHARD  the  thought also crossed my mind but if that was the case l think there would have been other examples of SA armoured  vehicles and most lists of vehicle abbreviation  would have had it included  SP is listed as special project and is found on prototypes

Edited November 27, 2023 by wally dugan

[Noel7]

32 minutes ago, wally dugan said:

SP is listed as special project and is found on prototypes

It seems to have been used for for trials and testing of 'production' prototypes as distinct from the manufacturers' development prototypes which usually seem to have had civilian registrations. "British Military Trucks of the Cold War" shows, for example, 00SP44, a Militant FV11047 with sides and tailgate removed to carry containers, 00SP62, one of four prototype  heavy recovery tractors 00SP60-00SP63 based on Militant 3 chassis and tested at FVRDE, and 01SP16, a Land Rover 1 ton forward control prototype.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Noel7

[10FM68]

Yes, I think that SP is more likely related to 'Special Project' than to anything directly to do with sales as so many SP series vehicles led directly to British Army vehicles with coincident overseas sales rather than more directly to them.  The trouble is, for a very logical organisation the military can sometimes be rather obtuse - after all, they completely disregarded whole blocks of perfectly usable bigrams for no obvious reason (not those which might be confused such as 'I' and 'O').  And if the SAs appear only on a few Cromwells and nowhere else, then that is even more odd, but that is, currerntly how it appears.  More digging needed, I suspect.  Thank you Wally for going that extra mile with the Tank Museum.