Jump to content

Antar Gallery


Recommended Posts

i have allways been led to belive that a heavy locomotive dous not need a class 1 licance . i have been driving heavy locomotivs on a class 2 since i passed at age 19 (without a trailer ). i was told that a ballest tractor dous not carry eny load so it can not be a HGV . but in the eyes of the law it is best to have a class one

 

Just before I took my HGV 1 I talked over with DVLA towing a living van, behind my Douglas, which I explained to them was a locomotive. (Light Loco at 8.25 Tonnes, first use 1952) and was told categorically that I needed an HGV 1 to drive the combo.

 

That is why I took my test.

 

I have never regretted this decision, because even if that info from DVLA was wrong, you can hold no higher lcence and there can never arise a situation when you are prosecuted for not having the correct licence. (buses tracked vehicles etc excluded from my comment)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well maybe I was wrong. That is the Big Al's site photo of Chris Millers Antar. I believe that it is with the Lawtons in Derbyshire now, For some reason I thought it was an Ex Army mark 3 not a civvy (basically oilfield) version.

 

Does anyone know what engine is in it. I reckon it is probably Rolls C6Turbo... can anyone confirm?

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well spotted Mike ! It is different to the Chris Miller Antar in Heavy Haulage and Abnormal Loads by David Lee ! It is described in this book as an Ex-military MK3A which he purchased in 1979 ! Built in 1964 and powered by a straight eight Rolls Royce of 313bhp ! Photographed by Mr D Tomlin in 1988

crane.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ex.Chris Miller Mighty Antar.

 

8a859e60.jpg

 

From Big Al's Truck Stop website - copyright James Sleight.

 

This is the ex Boscombe Down long wheelbase Big Ben/Antar? seen in another photo on the back of a yellow low-loader trailer.

Whilst at Boscombe Down it was re-engined with an AEC AV760 engine.

It's never been owned by Chris Miller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Very good 6 X 6, thanks for that, something for everyone there!:coffee:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well spotted Mike ! It is different to the Chris Miller Antar in Heavy Haulage and Abnormal Loads by David Lee ! It is described in this book as an Ex-military MK3A which he purchased in 1979 ! Built in 1964 and powered by a straight eight Rolls Royce of 313bhp ! Photographed by Mr D Tomlin in 1988

 

Yes that's the one I believe is with the Lawtons...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vdn150h.jpg

another Civvy operator was Elliotts of York. They blew this ones engine up when using it as a pusher. It got dragged by the lead tractor too fast, and over-revved the Rolls engine, that threw a conrod.

 

TheAntar rear bogey was put under their Pacific, after this , to replace the chain drive.

Edited by antarmike
technical error corredcted
Link to comment
Share on other sites

982ful.jpg

This is claimed to be 982FUL, an ex RAF petrol Antar that went onto runway testing with MPBW, alonside my Antar 983FUL. (I have my doubts)

 

Seen here at L.W.Vass she was sold for further work in New Zealand.

I say claimed to be, because I would have thought that the front winch rollers would show in a shot from this angle and they do not appear to be there.

 

The RAF mark 1 Antars differed from the Army Mk1 by being able to self recover using the winch fed out under the front bumper.

Rear view of an RAF Petrol Antar shows a third winch pulley. (two pulleys are placed paired centrally further forward in the chassis, ahead of the horizontal guide rollers)

0081.jpg

Thornycroft Society Ltd.

The Army version did not have the third left hand pulley. The winch could not feed to the front.

75zb98.jpg

The RAF Antars that transferred to the Army gained ZB registrations. Here 75ZB98 shows that the winching forward capability was retained on transfer. Note the winch rollers hanging under the front bumper.

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BD also has very noticable rusting to gutter over windscreen, FUL does not. FUL has writing on bridgeplate BD does not, FUL has cab mounted mirror missing, BD's is still there. FUL could be in RAF blue grey?? Certainly it is a different colour to the Maggy parked to its offside. FUL seems to be a gloss finish, BD seems to be Matt / Semi-Matt. (compare with Gloss Bedford M type)

 

But front tow pin rests in same place, Wipers are parked in same place. Both seem to have a near identical mark, lower left drivers windscreen., Same front tyre tread Pattern.

 

Is this FUL????

 

The Photo of FUL, has a spare wheel, that matches those originally supplied on the RAF batch.

Edited by antarmike
Link to comment
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.

Guest
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...