NZ LP2 project

David Ellery · #1 28-07-05, 12:24

She's a bit sad, but she's all mine ! after being sold of by the military this carrier was gas axed and altered for a new job cutting hedges and shelter belts around the rural areas. Lots of bits welded on top to house the engine, drive chain and swing arm for the cutters. The track gears reasonable, needs a few replacement links,springs and bits, half a day doing an archeological dig on the floor (100mm of soil and rust) revealed all the original steering linkages etc, only good for patterns though. So the work begins, I'll keep you posted... cheers David...

David Ellery · #2 28-07-05, 12:27

Pic

Lynn Eades · #3 29-07-05, 00:09

David is an LP2 or an LP2a? More pictures please.
Looking at your photos made me think of a question that I've often wondered about. On Aussie pattern carriers there are two different rubber profiles, one with a flat side, and one with the hollow side as per second wheel in Davids photo. Why the difference? Are they supposed to be fitted in any particular place? Is the hollow one a modification for some reason? .........Any body got the answers?

Tony Smith · #4 31-07-05, 14:21

Lynn, I thought this Hollow-side or Hourglass rubber was a NZ production identifier as I have never seen it on Aussie carriers.

Next question, what is the story behind 5 spoked Carrier wheels?

Lynn Eades · #5 31-07-05, 22:57

Tony, I didn't realize the "hourglass rubber, was "us" only. Maybe it's a rubber shortage initiative?. I have no clue.
On the five spoke wheel thing, I know even less. I take it, your talking ground wheels.
While we're here can you post the pictures off the changes in axles/axle mounts, with regards the diffrence between LP2 and LP2a for davids benefit (and mine)
Thanks, Lynn.

Bob Moseley (RIP) · #6 03-08-05, 23:13

Hi guys
I obtained this information from an SA Carrier contact who conducted quite a bit of research purely on SA Carriers.

Quote:

- Another noticable difference of SAR built Carriers compared to the others is the construction of the front track wheel. This type may only have been fitted to the early design. Firstly it is only five spoked, the others being six. Instead of the spokes being cast in the shape of an "H" or "I" as the other sic track wheelsare, these are cast in the shape of a "C" or "U". Also cast into one spoke is 1941 and the letters B & D, probably the maker's ID. Another spoke has 703-1 which may be the part number -

Bob

Tony Smith · #7 04-08-05, 01:22

The description of the 5 spoke wheel matches others I've seen, except I've also seen them with only "703-". The question really revolves around who D&B (note D&B, not B&D) were and where they were. In 1941, Aust Carrier production had just commenced by SAR Islington, so the cast date fits. I challenge the statement about them being fitted to a particular position on the carrier as the wheel can be fitted in all locations, with a change of bearings for certain locations. The wheel below is fitted to the forward roadwheel position.

Tony Smith · #8 04-08-05, 01:41

Now, as to the question regarding the 5 spoke wheels only appearing on SAR carriers, they have also appeared on NZ carriers, prompting me to ask Lynn if he knew more. The Australian carriers were initially given to the railway workshops in Vic and SA because of their ability to produce their own castings of components in house in large quantities. The NZ LP2 carrier programme got underway from March 1941 with calls to local contractors to supply components to Australian blueprints. GM NZ did not have the ability to cast components in house, relying instead on NZ Rlwys and subcontractors. Track links were produced by the Auckland foundry of Mason and Porter, but they couldn't produce them in sufficient numbers and were supplemented by Aust supplies. No doubt other companies produced other castings, too. I'm thinking that bogie wheels could also have been produced locally, but not in large enough quantities to satisfy demand. Could D&B be an NZ company, explaining the limited numbers of this type of wheel?
The picture below is of a freshly produced LP2 carrier standing outside the GM NZ factory at Petone. Note the rearmost roadwheel is a 5 spoke! Who were D&B?

Lynn Eades · #9 04-08-05, 06:14

Tony and Bob. Now that you have provided detail, I can now say that yes I have seen them over here. I did not recall them as five spoke, but yes I have seen the "u" section wheels. (not that I can remember where) Dont know who D&B were.
Are you watching? Jeff Plowman. Note. the only wheel bearing thats different is the front inner, which has a bigger bore (o.d. is same for all)

Tony Smith · #10 04-08-05, 11:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Lynn Eades
Now that you have provided detail, I can now say that yes I have seen them over here.

And how common are they? I have never seen a carrier here fitted with more than one, lending creedence to the theory that they may have been a spare part replacement (in Aus). NZ went beserk with it's orders for components for carriers, but only proceeded with numbers of carriers about 10% of that originally envisaged. Some suppliers contracts were cancelled, but many had to be honoured leading to an oversupply of certain parts. As Australia was still actively producing carriers, it would seem reasonable to imagine that some of these surplus items may have been offered to the Aust manufacturers. If these D&B 5 spoke wheels were indeed NZ made, that may explain how SA Rlwys came to have some. If they are NZ made, I think that they would perhaps be more numerous in NZ?
As to finding the possible identity of D&B, it's possible they have changed their name, merged or even gone out of business. Mason and Porter are of course still in business, trading as Masport and making pot belly stoves and such.

Bob Moseley (RIP) · #11 04-08-05, 13:24

Hi guys
Tony, you are right, it is D&B. I just copied the information, but obviously because of the wheel orientation, my contact read it wrong. I have inverted the image so it can be properly read. Now all we have to do is identify this company.
Bob

Lynn Eades · #12 04-08-05, 23:22

Bob and Tony, I note the wheel in Bob's photo is fitted to the front of the carrier, and that it is secured with a "nyloc" nut. I would guess a 1960s or later photo.
The following is based on foggy memory and supposition.
As far as I recall we (NZ) built about 680 LP2/2a's. We had an order from India for about 800, which was cancelled after many parts had been manufactured.
Being dated 1941 these wheels,if made here would have to be early production.(I don't know what dates production started and finished)
What is the likelyhood of these wheels coming from one of the English tanks? Was the wide wheel on the Aussie LP1 a local initiative? or was it taken from something in the Vickers/Carden/Loyd stable?
The wheel I saw was in a very bad state, and on carrier suspension, but not part of a carrier
I imagine the numbers of these wheels in N.Z. would be very low as they are in Aust.
I recall seeing an odd looking carrier front suspension unit (it may have been off a Loyd carrier) It had cast into it "for light tanks only" and I think thats where I saw the wheel. (Loyds have narrow wheels, but the ones we are talking about here are the wide ones)

Hanno Spoelstra · #13 04-08-05, 23:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Lynn Eades
or was it taken from something in the Vickers/Carden/Loyd stable?
The wheel I saw was in a very bad state, and on carrier suspension, but not part of a carrier
I imagine the numbers of these wheels in N.Z. would be very low as they are in Aust.
I recall seeing an odd looking carrier front suspension unit (it may have been off a Loyd carrier) It had cast into it "for light tanks only" and I think thats where I saw the wheel. (Loyds have narrow wheels, but the ones we are talking about here are the wide ones)

Good thought!
But in the pics I can find all the Vickers Light Tanks have six spoke wheels.

Source: http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/

Lynn Eades · #14 05-08-05, 07:39

Thanks for that Hanno. Do you know if any of them used the track profile that the LP2,s used, or was that an Aussie initiative?
That 703-1 number does fit with Aust carrier part numbers.Who has a parts book?

Lynn Eades · #15 05-08-05, 08:07

In the "steering wheel versus levers" thread Tony mentioned that the Aust LP1 used 9.5 inch track from the English light tank. Tony all the track is the same width. The difference is that the guide horns (and consequently the wheels/tyres) are wide on the Aussie carriers, and stupid....sorry...I mean narrow on the Eng/Can. carriers. So Tony can you clarify what you were saying about the Aust. LP1 track and where it came from. Thanks.

Tony Smith · #16 05-08-05, 12:59

Well, Lynn, you've got me stumped. I was under the impression that the early english carriers had 2 1/2in wide wheels and 8 1/2 or 9in wide track links, whereas the Light Tanks and the Aussie carriers had 3in wide wheels and 9 1/2in wide track links. The Aussie carriers specifically had different track from the British carriers, the track being the same as that in use on the Vickers Light Tanks. You probably have the heavy metal to back up your argument, but are you saying the only difference is the width of the wheel and the track is 9 1/2in wide in both cases?

Lynn Eades · #17 06-08-05, 07:11

Tony, Yes thats it. Obviously the way the pins are located is different, but effectively the footprint on the ground is the same.
If someone had a set of Aussie track and Aussie wheels (top roller incl.) then he could fit them up to an eng/Can. carrier and have a carrier that wont throw its track so easily,and apart from the look of the wheels, no one would notice the difference.

Bob Moseley (RIP) · #18 06-08-05, 15:11

Hi guys
I only have a 1943 Parts Manual where the bogie numbers are 590-1 & 590-2. The 703 number is omitted with 702 & 704 referring to other Carrier parts, well away from the bogies.
Bob

Lynn Eades · #19 07-08-05, 06:05

Tony, with regards the pic. you posted on the 4th aug of the "u" section wheel, What is that fitted to? I have not seen track like that on a carrier.
With regard the part numbers. The part number although not featuring in Bobs 1943 book is the same style as the Aust. carrier parts, and quite different than Eng/Can. part numbers. Which side of the ditch they were made on, I wouldn't like to guess.
Do you know about the "Schofield " tank?

Lynn Eades · #20 07-08-05, 06:19

I just noticed that I've been promoted to geriatric!

Tony Smith · #21 07-08-05, 08:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Lynn Eades
Tony, with regards the pic. you posted on the 4th aug of the "u" section wheel, What is that fitted to? I have not seen track like that on a carrier.

It was one of the carriers at Corowa, the beast fitted with Stuart tank tracks.

Quote:

Originally posted by Lynn Eades
Do you know about the "Schofield " tank?

Only what Jeff Plowman has written about them. Do you have any details to share?

Lynn Eades · #22 07-08-05, 11:35

Only the same Tony. I was wondering what wheels it used, because all my books are in storage, I can't check anything for myself. My recollection is that they were on English track gear.
So who can check any other editions of the parts books for Aust carriers, with regard the 703-1 part no?

Hanno Spoelstra · #23 07-08-05, 12:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Lynn Eades
Thanks for that Hanno. Do you know if any of them used the track profile that the LP2,s used, or was that an Aussie initiative?

No idea, sorry!

Quote:

I was wondering what wheels it used, because all my books are in storage, I can't check anything for myself. My recollection is that they were on English track gear.

Here's a pic:

source

Lynn Eades · #24 07-08-05, 23:01

What a disaster! Front three are Aust. pattern, fourth looks english(fitted inside out) fifth is English (or Can.) Suspension units are a mix also.
No "u" section wheels here. Thanks Hanno.

Tony Smith · #25 16-08-05, 02:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Bob Moseley
Hi guys
I obtained this information from an SA Carrier contact who conducted quite a bit of research purely on SA Carriers.

- Another noticable difference of SAR built Carriers compared to the others is the construction of the front track wheel. This type may only have been fitted to the early design. Firstly it is only five spoked, the others being six. Instead of the spokes being cast in the shape of an "H" or "I" as the other sic track wheelsare, these are cast in the shape of a "C" or "U". Also cast into one spoke is 1941 and the letters B & D, probably the maker's ID.

Bob

The following pics are of LP2 Carrier 1091 configured as a 3in Mortar carrier. There are lots of lovely details to be seen in these, notably the middle roadwheel on the right side has thew rounded spokes of a 5 spoke. 1091 was built by Melbourne Metropolitan Gasworks. Interestingly, this carrier bears BOTH the registration plate C 15001 and the hull number, dating this pic from some time in 1942..

Tony Smith · #26 16-08-05, 02:50

... and the left side also has a 5 spoke wheel fitted as the centre roadwheel. Other interesting details are the Tare weight stencilled on the left rear and the mismatched taillights, a carrier "Teacup" style and a civvy truck "Beehive"

David Ellery · #27 04-12-05, 08:08

Well there's not that much to show in the pictures, but believe me there's been alot of time put in on this beastie. After stripping the carrier down which took quite a bit of work due to lots of rust, she's now starting to come together again. I cut the old floor out and welded in a new one as well as new engine / gearbox channel and had replacement inner and outer springs made for those which were broken or missing. The suspension has been the biggest job, getting the old springs of etc, has been a real pain, but putting it all back together again without the right equipment has been down right dangerous, anyway all the running gears back on and I am now working on the tracks replacing rotten links etc. next will be all the steering and brake gear. Hopefully in the new year I can fit a nice loud V8 and get the thing moving. cheers David...

David Ellery · #28 04-12-05, 08:27

I had alot of fun with exploding springs all over the workshop here!!! a altered sash cramp did the job, but I ended up welding the clamp rods to the spring retainer as with each bogie assembly the cramp started to let go with fun results. Hopefully I'll have no trouble with the springs in the future and want have to go through all that again ! David

JackM · #29 04-12-05, 13:33

David,

You are an inventive fellow.

I can remember coming across a few sets of springs which had the top/bottom sleeve (part #U20) rusted solid onto the central rod. I guess after 40 odd years sitting in a farmer's yard, the two items fuse.

No amount of penetrene or liberal use of the BFH would free the two and in the end I had to resort to sacrificing /cannibalising some to make up a working set.

It's interesting work though, eh.

Jack

Tony Smith · #30 04-12-05, 14:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Tony Smith
I have never seen a carrier here fitted with more than one, lending creedence to the theory that they may have been a spare part replacement (in Aus).

Apologies to David for again hi-jacking his thread.

In light of my comments above, I had a look at the pic posted by Keith in this thread. The nearest carrier has TWO 5 spoke wheels, and this pic is dated "Circa 1941". Does this eliminate the possibility of the wheel being a spare part, and might instead have been fitted during production?