The AEC Marshall pic , seems to be a very odd combination of lorry /load/ trailer . I wonder if it was taking part in the clean up operation after the evacuation ? Craig
Ted Thanks - I will have a hunt through the RAFM site. You are absolutely right about that trailer at Cherbourg. It is a water trailer and it does have the T so they were present with the BEF. As an aside on the fire pictures - do you have information on the Crossley streamline-shaped fire engine and do you think it went to France? Andrew
Andrew, known in the RAF and RN as the Crossley Teardrop due to its streamline shape. The shape was to aid decon after a gas attack. Built on the 6x4 40/100 chassis. It carried 200gal water, 25 gal saponine foam compound and 4 x 60 lb CO2 cylinders coupled to discharge reels and applicators. 100 built for the RAF by Auto Fire Protection Ltd, it was the first RAF foam producing tender equiped with a pto driven pump - in fact the first with any engine driven pump. prior to that the standard RAF crash tender carried 3 x 30 gal Bromylene foam extinquishers each delivering through a pre coupled hose terminating in an applicator lance to delivery a foam/ gas mixture from above the seat of the fire. To date I have not seen a Teardrop in any 39/40 shots taken in France , but I will make a point in future to see what I can find. My one thought is- as the AASF and BEF air component were initially to operate on established fields its possible we were to rely on the host nation for crash cover ?? strange though- a large portion of the RAF was equipped during the expansion period to be totally self sufficent in the expeditionary role, even to the extent of many stations having purpose built storage sheds for their field force MT & equipment. TED
Ted That is a very full description thank you. Same principle as the beetle-backed Morris Quad then? Easier to wash down after a gas attack. I think the RAF took quite a lot of transport to France and it does pop up in pictures now and again. There is a classic picture, which I attach, with some intriguingly large trailers. http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=78232&stc=1&d=1333400239 Presumably these were designed for transporting aircraft parts unlike the rather strange combination posted earlier. Andrew
Good evening Sir, do you know what colour the background is on the Unit Code 19? Hope you can help as I have started a model kit of this particular vehicle. Thanks from Colonel Durnford. Hell again my dear friend. Do you reckon the number plate on that 8hp in the top photo has been removed as to the placement of the Unit Code sign?
These photos of 1st Armoured Div date from May / June 1940 and although I've never seen copies of the instruction, it is clear that the issue of civilian registrations was dispensed with for WD vehicles quite early on, probably September 1939. Although vehicles in service seem to have retained the plate a while longer, the second car looks to have a 1940 issue census number and would have been quite new at the time. It probably never had a civilian plate. There's a good chance that 1st Armoured who were equipping in the UK during 1940 received a large issue of new support vehicles.
An interesting image of an AEC Marshal. It's still on eBay but with a 49 euro start price and no visible formation or AoS markings it's a bit expensive. (AoS must be two figures and begins with a '2' or a '3' but that doesn't help much). Any ideas on what the trailer is ? ...and Andrew wants the aircraft parts ID'd too ! The buildings have a Belgian coastal town look to them. As mentioned the wing roots look a bit too substantial to be from a fighter and don't look substantial enough to be engine-bearing, therefore logic leads me to conclude they my well belong to a single-engine bomber, the prime and most fitting example of the time being a Fairey Battle.
Take a close look at that AEC Marshall, its a bridging truck you can see the frame under the pile of junk probably a sliding bay and trestle
Take a close look at that AEC Marshall, its a bridging truck you can see the frame under the pile of junk probably a sliding bay and trestle I think you are right Les - although the frame and junk are hard to distinguish. Do you know what this one is? The rear body looks unusual. http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=79094&stc=1&d=1334076914 Andrew
Can't help you out about the bodywork but the thing at the front is a sound locator so possibly a searchlight unit?
These photos of 1st Armoured Div date from May / June 1940 and although I've never seen copies of the instruction, it is clear that the issue of civilian registrations was dispensed with for WD vehicles quite early on, probably September 1939. Although vehicles in service seem to have retained the plate a while longer, the second car looks to have a 1940 issue census number and would have been quite new at the time. It probably never had a civilian plate. There's a good chance that 1st Armoured who were equipping in the UK during 1940 received a large issue of new support vehicles. Hello again my helpful chap. My kit of the Austin 8hp is coming along nicely. In the second photo shows as you have stated WD Numbers on the sides of its bonnet. I take it they start with the letter M? Do you know what numbers are too? Also do you know any other numbers used regarding the Austin Tourer in 1940 with the BEF? Thanks, Colonel Durnford.
Can't help you out about the bodywork but the thing at the front is a sound locator so possibly a searchlight unit? I agree it may be a searchlight unit but the body on that first truck does not have the right shape to be searchlight vehicle. Strange. Andrew
Hello again my helpful chap. My kit of the Austin 8hp is coming along nicely. In the second photo shows as you have stated WD Numbers on the sides of its bonnet. I take it they start with the letter M? Do you know what numbers are too? Also do you know any other numbers used regarding the Austin Tourer in 1940 with the BEF? Thanks, Colonel Durnford. Numbers on these Austins do not necessarily appear beginning with 'M'. This number looks like 4139929. There was apparently a batch of these made with numbers in the range 4139380 - 4140219. If it ever was painted on, the prefix would have been 'M'. Andrew
Hi Andrew, Thank you very much for all the information, you are very kind. Now I have something to aim for!
Thats a odd one Andrew both the GS and searchlight had higher side bodies The BEF had some unusual stuff more a case at times of anything goes so i wonder if the body has been taken from another type vehicle cheers. The bridging body i would say is the sliding bay and trestle Les
Thats a odd one Andrew both the GS and searchlight had higher side bodies The BEF had some unusual stuff more a case at times of anything goes so i wonder if the body has been taken from another type vehicle cheers. The bridging body i would say is the sliding bay and trestle Les Thanks Les I have just had a closer look - how about a Leyland Bull Terrier? They operated with the AA units in France. If so it will be the first I have seen in France. Andrew
Could well be, Andrew. My problem is that my only pic has the tilt up, but it certainly looks about right. The Bull Terriers were apparently used to tow the 3 inch 20 cwt AA gun. Chris Chris
Hi By coincidence I was doing some work on these very numbers last night. Sadly it has not given me the answer to your question. The serial numbers for 1st Armored Division changed a bit and, although we know the numbers for the armoured brigades, I have not been able to find a definitive list for the supporting units nor make any conclusions from photographs. If anyone has better prints of those two photographs it might be possible to see more information. In the meantime, if I was to make a guess I would say the car belongs to one of the RASC units and I would make the background green/red split diagonally from bottom left to top right with the green at top left, red bottom right. Andrew Hi Andrew, The information regarding colour of the Unit Code sign confuses me a little, as you stated before green top left ,red at bottom right. In your book it shows red top left and green bottom right, or reversed green bottom left and red top right. Oh my god I have completely lost it!! So did it matter which way the colours were presented? Also was the Divisional Sign and Unit Code painted on the back of the Austin 8hp?
