|
|
|
|
#1
17-12-06, 13:06
|
||||
|
||||
Re: photograph
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Regards, Hanno -------------------------- 
|
|
#2
17-12-06, 13:45
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Copyrights
Quote:
H.
__________________
Regards, Hanno --------------------------
|
|
#3
18-12-06, 11:01
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thread!
Dear Colleagues,
May I respectfully draw your attention to my thread: http://www.mapleleafup.org/forums/sh...&threadid=7614 which informs you of Demand Supply-Mechanical S/M 2005 for 4 x 2 Chevrolets for Egypt? Also, the agreement by the ERC to allow the use of dollars to pay for Chevrolets supplied through GM Near East Ltd in Alexandria?
|
|
#4
18-12-06, 20:39
|
||||
|
||||
|
Already said!
1940 Models. If the sidelight is correct namely on the fender/wing! Also if that date is correct then there was not enough time to assemble 1941 Models!
You can therefore take your pick from: a) Contract V.3352 515 units, 30-cwt Chevrolet WA, 266 G/S, 94 Water Tankers, the rest probably for local bodying, in Egypt. My understanding is that 19? were used by the LRDG together with 14 from the Egyptian Army. b) 360 lorries destined I believe for GM International, Denmark, were seized by the RN and then sold of as prize cargo, and I suggest that these were acquited under V.4028 which covered Duple? cabs and bodies as they were lhd and chassis cowl: L 241482 to 241837. These probably had 133" wheelbases, as Model WA, and we know that a number were released onto the domestic market. c) We know also that 158" w.b. 1940 Model 1543 Canadian amd US WB chassis were issued to the civilian essential users by summer.autumn 1940 so there may have been some assembled and then shipped out. My suggestion is that these were 1940 Models, and either comprised in the V.3352 contract or late 1940 Model 1543 Canadian lorries covered under S/M 2005. The 1941 Models did not go into production until October, and Chevrolet commercial production for the British had started early September. In fact '41 production did not start until the very end of October. I hope that this helps! Last edited by David_Hayward (RIP); 18-12-06 at 21:11.
|
|
#5
18-12-06, 21:25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Clarification
The big order was for 1940 Models, and I have just looked up printed photos of military trucks in Egypt in the 1944 book by GM Overseas Operations. The grille looks to me to be 1940. I should add that studying photos of those plus Egyptian Government order trucks in GENERAL MOTORS WORLD February 1940 shows that neither the '39 or '40 Models assembled in Alexandria had sidelights! Perhaps they were going to get smashed? So the sidelights may be a red herring. I have also found a photo of a '39 or '40 without sidelights that was on this forum..the top of the grille is not clear to differentiate...deep top grille is '39, narrow is '40.
In addition to 1939 and 1940 Models there were also 1938 Models used by the WD in Egypt and Trans-Jordan, etc. So I entirely agree with you but my impression is that these are 1940 Models. As these have sidelights, I suggest that they are to S/M 2005..but there is a qualification here...they were officially "160-inch" wheelbase [158 actually] and these trucks seem to be 158? The 1939 Models that I have seen in photos were the shorter wheelbase. The WA order mentioned previously was the shorter wheelbase so I have just realised that these vehicles seem to be from a different batch! I therefore suggest that these are Canadian '40 Model 1543 CC60L unless I am wrong on wheelbases again!
|
|
#6
19-12-06, 00:05
|
||||
|
||||
|
US v Canadian
Cliff, thank you for your input, as always. I believe that the presence of the side lamps points to Canadian origin, and not Tarrytown, NY. These were British orders, but what happened to the cabs? Were they removed on assembly, or modified locally? Cliff, any ideas please? The 1941-2 LRDG 1543X1 trucks pictured were delivered it seems as built in Oshawa. Earlier 1939-40 lorries assembled in Alexandria had an open cab with canvas roof.
|
|
#7
19-12-06, 09:21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Rad!
a) I have been looking up my books and it does seem that the side lights were not always fitted. The Master Parts List says that they are "parking lamps" and "(special equip.)", the same parts being used 1937-9. Photos of '39 trucks show that they were not always fitted, and so I suggest that parking lamps on fenders were optional? The 1940 Models had them as standard I gather, with different lamps for passenger cars and commercials.
b) The other easy way I always suggest to differentiate between the 1939 and 1940 Models is the number of grille bars, but I can never seem to decide which is which and I believe that the cabs vary in height so the grilles vary likewise. However the '40 has a deeper top grille strip with "Chevrolet" script, though I am certain that military models may have had painted, not chromed, strips and no script. The Parts List suggests that the strip is actually part of the hood and so the '40 hood must be deeper in the fron thant he '39. c) The WA 1940 Model was available in three versions: chassis with flat face cowl; chassis with cowl and chasis with cab. The same applied to the 1940 Canadian series, 15XX although the US trucks had a 1/5 ton rating and the Canadian 2 tons. The XX by the way was the Canadian cab style, and Oshawa produced all three versions in theory. The WA had the 133" wheelbase, the WB the 158 1/2" w.b. We know that some WB trucks made it to the UK as well as WA. I have always assumed that these were diverted French/Belgian orders and prize seizures. I may however be wrong! There were also '40 Model 1543 2-ton Canadian trucks imported, and I cannot see that these were diverted but without seeing a photo to see if it has lhd I have no idea. We know that the WA trucks used by the RAOC etc. were lhd, and chassis with flat-faced cowl so I am certain that these were in the "360" seized. d) I may well be wrong in assuming that the 3-tonners delivered to Egypt under S/M 2005 weer Chassis with cab 1543 Models. I assumed that they were the same as CC60L because of the civilian versions registered in the UK. I can now see the logic in delivering at least the 1940 Models as Model 1541 flat-faced cowl for local bodying and cabs. That said the LRDG 1941 Models included some 1311 1/2 ton 115" chassis with flat-face cowl [as per 1311X3 to India] plus "200" 1533 134 1/2" w.b. chassis with cabs, delivered minus cabs and modified grilles! e) The truck in the last photo looks to me as though it is a 1940 Model by the radiator grille, and the lights. The photos I have seen of 1939 Models assembled in Alexandria for the Egyptian Government "civilian" use have no parking lights and neither do the 1939 trucks assembled for the WD. I am only too willing to be proven wrong but that's my suggestion. Last edited by David_Hayward (RIP); 19-12-06 at 11:17.
|
|
#8
19-12-06, 21:51
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yank or Canuck?
The next question then Cliff is whether these were from Bloomfield, NJ Boxing Plant CKD; Tarrytown, NY PKD, or Oshawa, Ont. SKD. I cannot imagine at the moment that these were US-sourced, but rather were part of the massive S/M 2005 Demand which would have arrived I would suggest late December. In that event I would put them as 1541 Chassis with flat-faced cowl rather than the almost identical WB Chassis with flat-faced cowl. However we need proof either way to be certain.
I am going to hopefully do some voluntary work at Bovington on record cards next year. I would hope to have by then looked at the S/M 2002-6 records cards if they exist to see if there is any information on them about bodying locally. Last edited by David_Hayward (RIP); 19-12-06 at 21:57.
|
|
#9
19-12-06, 23:01
|
||||
|
||||
|
Canuck?
Cliff may well be right. I believe though that the 1938-9 WD trucks were all US-sourced, most likely CKD from Bloomfield Boxing Plant for asembly at the Rue de Ptolomees plant in Alexandria. That would have allowed the plant to add their own open cab design. I believe that the various Haj transports featured in GM World, Feb 1940 that had woodie station wagon bodies were built in that plant.
As you know the GM Near East plant was bombed, and then as it was clearly useless for anything else, was leased to the WD for essential work on military Chevrolets, etc.
|
|
#10
22-12-06, 12:32
|
||||
|
||||
|
New info
A 5th July 1942 memo relating to vehicles for the 9th Australian Division from GHQ, MEF, refers to releases, and mentions "To this total must be added some 50 lorries 3-ton portee issued with the AT guns". As at August 1942 there were "W.E." 118 AT 3-ton Portees, with 74 on strength, 44 deficient, and "3-ton with winch" were issued in lieu of the deificiencies. There were 144 FWD Artillery Tractrors "W.E." of which there were 123 on strength, 21 deficient, and again 3-ton with winch were issued in lieu. Do I take it that the 3-tonners were actually 2-pounder Portees which we know were "3-tonners"?
The following Chevrolet 2-pdr Portees were issued to the AIF: L 4623008, L 4623053, L 4623061, L 4623452, L 4623541 plus L4516072 L14418712 L4516466 L4514359 L4516492 L4413524 L4514782 L4514865 L4514809 L4514803 L4412964 L4412889 L4514860 L4412893 as @ 25/07/1941 L4516467 [thanks Shane!]
|
|
#11
22-12-06, 22:44
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thoughts
Cliff, I looked again at the papers and it does not state whether the "Lorries" i.e. ober 1-tonners, were 4x2 or 4x4/FWD or not. I think that the fact that as we can prove that 2-pdr Portees were issued to the AIF, the suggestion that the issues of these from stocks has grounding. I am no expert, so ask what other 3-ton CMPs had winches other than .... the 3-ton S/M 2613 C60L 6-pdrr Portees but in the absence of any known delivery dates I can only suggest that they were summer 1942-on assembly, with delivery months later. The only fly in the ointment is that the 2-pdr Portees were officially 30-cwt lorries, and yet we know from the Canadians rated the FAT chassis on which they were based as 3-tonners. I assume that the rebuilds to G/S lorries were also 3-tonners, and not 30-cwt.
|
|
#12
23-12-06, 06:19
|
||||
|
||||
|
AWD
The War Department used FWD to describe tractors such as the Quads..Guy/Morris/AEC/Chev/Ford etc. from at least 1938. Lorries were up from 1 ton capacity, Trucks were up to 1 ton, and it seems "Bantams" were Jeeps in this 1942 paper! The bodies were listed then under types, so Lorry 3-ton GS, or ....Water... or stores, etc.
|
|
#13
17-12-06, 18:22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Copyright
There is always a lot of confusion about who owns a photographic print and who owns the Intellectual Property (copyright).
Regardless of where a photo was obtained (Aust War Museum or your Auntie Belle) it can be bought, sold, trsded, etc... for free or for profit. Limitations come into effect if you wish to reproduce the photo. Even a Xerox copy would not be allowed except under some very strict rules (use in a classroom, personal use, etc...) but if the reproduction is for commercial use and profit then the rights of the creator come into play. Copyright laws vary by country but most have a number of years where only the creator can benefit. In Canada it is currently 50 years after the creator's death. However, in the case of photos taken by employees (newspaper photographers, military Film & Photo guys) the copyright belongs to the employer. For Canadian Army photos this 'Crown' copyright expires 50 years after the photo is created. The additional 'wrinkle' imposed by many museums is their ownership of the actual image. In other words, only the Aust War Museum has this picture so if you want a copy to use in a commercial endeavour you have to agree to pay a reproduction fee. Most museums charge this. BUT, if you find the same image from a 'free' provider or you buy a print from e-bay, a store or a flea market, then you can do whatever you wish with it provided you can show that the photographers or employers copyright has expired. An example of a free provider is the Cdn Library & Archives who only charge for the cost of the photographic print and do not charge reproduction fees. I have often gone trolling in the IWM on-line photo collection then go to the Cdn Archives to find the same photo. This way I avoid the IWM's insanely high reproduction costs.
__________________
Those who live by the sword will be shot by those of us who have progressed. - M38A1, 67-07800, ex LETE
|
|
#14
19-12-06, 22:43
|
|||
|
|||
|
Evening Mates:
Sadly, my faithful computer of the last four years died a few weeks ago and a lot of my document files are temporarily not available. One of, the major one, my Christmas presents is to have a home computer expert come to the house and retrieve and install on my new PC all of my old files. Having said that, the first vehicle is in my opinion a 1940 model with 158" wheelbase. I cannot yet prove it because of my document file problem but I am rather sure I am correct. Bill
__________________
Dog Robber Sends
|
|
#15
17-12-06, 07:23
|
||||
|
||||
|
MCP 2Lb Anti-Tank portees
I found this photo in the AWM data base. It is Australian Anti- Tank units at Tobruk in 1941 but the trucks look to me like 1940 Chevrolet 4X2 units with the open cab similar to the LRDG chev's (Egyptian assembled?) rather then the normal CMP portee.
I date them as 1940 rather then 1941 because of the seperate side light on the mudguard in the rear vehicle rather then the side light being on top of the headlight in the 1941 model. But then again not been able to see the grill for positive ID they may be 1939 models. Can anyone confirm this and if possible show more photos of them? Cheers Cliff 
|
|
#16
17-12-06, 20:47
|
||||
|
||||
|
Accually the photos are now out of copywrite here and it is more the fact that the AWM holds (one of) the originals that they can reproduce it. As Hanno said with the price of the one on e-bay original or not it is cheaper to get a copy of it from the AWM.
Could we now get back to discussing the original question rather then a too expensive photo on e-bay please? Cheers Cliff
|
|
#17
17-12-06, 23:13
|
||||
|
||||
|
To the left in the photo is a soldier wearing what appears to be a slouch hat but none of the crew members on or near the trucks are wearing one.
Never the less I am still interested in knowing more about the trucks whether they are Australian or not as I find it interesting that they are 4X2 MCP units rather then CMP's. Cheers Cliff
|
|
#18
17-12-06, 23:39
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: MCP Portees
Quote:
If I discover anything new on these I will let you know. Cheers & Thanks Cliff PS> I do not doubt you saying they are more likely to be British and in support of the Australians. 
|
|
#19
17-12-06, 23:47
|
||||
|
||||
|
I believe these vehicles to have been built in Egypt by the local GM company as I suspect they are flat cowl export models the same as the LRDG Chevrolet depicted in the Tamiya LRDG Chev kit. But having said that if they are 1939 models, like the AWM picture below, and not 1940/41 they would have a totally different grill so the Tamiya model could not be converted to one.
If I discover anything new on these I will let you know. Cheers Cliff
|
|
#21
18-12-06, 07:40
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Cliff
Quote:
I have a feeling though due to the small side light on the front mudguard that they are the later model as shown in the second photo. Cheers Cliff
|
|
#22
18-12-06, 20:34
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Thread!
Quote:
|
|
#23
18-12-06, 20:53
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Already said!
Quote:
A lot of the LRDG Chev trucks I have seen photos of also show this sidelight indentifying them as 1940 models (I can see the grill in most of these photos) so these would have been part of the order in your other thread as it is more likely that 1940 models would have been supplied initially to fill this order. The trouble is that there were also a lot of the 1939 Chevrolets used as well and I have seen LRDG Chevs of this type as well. They are not as well known as the 1940 models but they were used. Now having typed all this I realise that 1941 can be deleted as they did not have the seperate sidelight on the front guard! Cheers Cliff
|
|
#25
19-12-06, 00:40
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: US v Canadian
Quote:
is there a possibility that these portee versions were flat cowl models assembled locally? Or were they imported from Canada as flat cowl models fully assembled with bodies as per the LRDG type pictured and then converted to portees? This would explain the missing cabs. I doubt they would remove the cabs when they put portee bodies on them although in most cases of portees they did have a open topped cab. The point is though that the LRDG Chev's were 30cwt's and 134inch WB models mainly and not the 3 ton 158inch WB that I think the pictured portees are! We may have to hope that a better detailed photo or photos turn up to help us solve this little mistery. Cheers Cliff
Last edited by cliff; 19-12-06 at 00:48.
|
|
#26
19-12-06, 08:21
|
||||
|
||||
|
another find
while browsing the AWM again I found the photo below, neg # 010769, with the caption....
A BRITISH ANTI-TANK GUN IN POSITION IN THE WESTERN DESERT AND A KNOCKED OUT ITALIAN TANK IN THE FOREGROUND. This is the earlier 1939/40 model Chevrolet. Cheers Cliff
|
|
#27
19-12-06, 20:38
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Rad!
Quote:
This is the first that I have heard of what I refer to as the 'LRDG' body style (or local Egyptian type) been built in Ottawa or for that matter the US. I know the 'Indian pattern bodies' were similar with their open cabs. I would also take a stab now and say that my original photo is almost certainly 1940 WB 158 1/2 inch wheelbase trucks rather then the later YS 160 inch wheelbase model. Cheers Cliff
|
|
#28
19-12-06, 22:37
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yank or Canuck?
David I would say Canadian. I said USA in my last post as I am totally unsure whether this open cabbed type was fully made in any of the Canadian or US plants.
I will keep looking as well and if anything new turns up I will post it here. Cheers Cliff
|
|
#29
22-12-06, 21:07
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: New info
Quote:
Still wondering though if any of these Chevrolet portees were 'YS' 160in wheelbase models rather then the 'WB' 158in wheelbase. Cheers Cliff
|
|
#30
22-12-06, 23:53
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have a photo of 12 cab CMP portee's in convoy formation in the middle East so they could be these.
But why mark the artillery tractors as FWD (four wheel drive or 4X4) and not the lorries with winch? The marking of one as FWD and not the other is why I assume the lorries with winch are A/ 4X2 and B/ because they are 4X2 and have a winch they are more likely to be portees. In British english were CMP's generally know as 'lorries' either GS (General Service) or otherwise or Lorries FWD? Cheers Cliff
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
