View Single Post
  #84  
Old 23-04-15, 00:49
David Dunlop David Dunlop is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada
Posts: 3,572
Default 2K1 Penthouses

Rob Love.

You mentioned these 15-cwt penthouses were not covered in the Design Branch records, but do your references covering the 30-cwt penthouses provide enough information to get a good idea of how the 2K1 penthouses would have looked?

I am thinking there must have been a large number of design/construction similarities and the 15-cwt items would essentially be shorter versions of the larger ones. Trying to figure out in my mind if they were one piece of canvas, 2 or more. They were probably interchangeable on either side of the 2K1 Body. A left and right version would be overkill.

I suspect they had two support poles for the outside corners at the very least, probably wooden, but would they be one piece or sectional?

The hem at the roofline for the 2K1 should probably have a line of grommets fitted tofasten to the hooks installed along the roofline and this hem may also have had some sort of weather strip to minimize the elements getting in. Don't know if the 30-cwt and other vehicles would have used the same hooks on the roof attachment method or something else.

Does it say if the penthouse came with it's own Storage Bag for all the pieces?

I am thinking the penthouse might not have been a standard issue for all WIRE 5 Trucks, but was more likely issued on an as needed basis. Not sure if that makes sense.

Can't help thinking of all the piles of canvas that used to be lying about at Tuelon and Westbourne many years ago that looked like bits and pieces of tent and wondering now if some of it was penthouse canvas. They would probably only ever have sold on the civvies market to anyone looking for bits to cut up and sew into something the customer needed. Can't imagine them ever flying off the shelves for what they were, although if they were stencilled with an ID and NOS today, they might attract a lot of attention.


David
Reply With Quote