MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Carrier Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-01-09, 13:36
JackM JackM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Perth Western Australia
Posts: 100
Default

Hi Ron & Justin,

I've looked through the photos (234 of them) I took of the vehicle record books that were of interest to me and although I've got a lot of the carriers, I guess I didn't get them all - I can't find any record of 2753.

I did however find 2300. It doesn't have any overseas markings on the page for this carrier and given its likely date of production, it may have been a little late in the War for this carrier to have gone overseas with any of the Middle East divisions, but who knows ?



Jack

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-01-09, 08:19
Justin Pollard Justin Pollard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 191
Default

Thanks for looking Jack,
much appreciated.
if you get a chance could you see if 1846 and 1902 are in there?,i,m trying to find the rego numbers of them.

Regards
Justin.
__________________
Go Kimi!

Met Gas LP2A carrier Hull no.2753-
Progressing slowly.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-01-09, 12:55
JackM JackM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Perth Western Australia
Posts: 100
Default

Justin,

My filing system could do with some refinement - while I found Hull # 1846, I can't yet find 1902. I'll let my brain recover from scrolling numbers and have another look later on. It is possible that 1902 is on one of the pages I didn't photograph.

Nonetheless, 1846 is attached below - doesn't provide much info apart from an ARN (which might possibly have doubled as a T number) and the original engine # .



Jack

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-01-09, 06:01
Justin Pollard Justin Pollard is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 191
Default

Top work Jack,
Thanks very much for looking.
I,m having a little bit of trouble making out the hull number list,i think 1846 is ARN 25669.is that right?.
sorry to be a pest!.

Thanks again for your efforts.


Regards
Justin.
__________________
Go Kimi!

Met Gas LP2A carrier Hull no.2753-
Progressing slowly.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-01-09, 23:47
JackM JackM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Perth Western Australia
Posts: 100
Default

Justin,

PM me your email address and I'll send you an enlarged copy that's easier to read.


Jack

P.S. I think that the stamped numbers on these record pages are what we now regard as the ARN, but it may well have been used as the identifying number (a "T" number) prior to standardising on the Hull #.

If you have a copy of Mike Cecil's book on the Carrier evolution, he explains it quite well.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-01-09, 04:30
Tony Smith's Avatar
Tony Smith Tony Smith is offline
No1, Mk 2** (I'm back!)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lithgow, NSW, Australia
Posts: 5,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackM View Post
P.S. I think that the stamped numbers on these record pages are what we now regard as the ARN, but it may well have been used as the identifying number (a "T" number) prior to standardising on the Hull #.
AWM books 126-01 through to 126-04 carry the reg no issued solely to the AIF, and these will show the "T" numbers. AMF Carriers didn't get "T" numbers and were issued "C" numbers, which evolved into the ARN. Not all Aust carriers will have been issued "T" numbers, and some never got "C"/ARNs, just hull numbers. The "C"/ARN records are in AWM 126-05 to 126-27, and where a carrier had previously been issued a AIF "T" no, there will be a cross reference and date. If a Carrier was a late production and only got a hull number (eg 4000-5000 hull numbers, Aust 2pdr Carriers, etc), it won't appear ANYWHERE in the AWM 126 series books.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_1122-1.jpg (36.5 KB, 34 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_1132-1.jpg (42.5 KB, 43 views)
__________________
You can help Keep Mapleleafup Up! See Here how you can help, and why you should!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-01-09, 01:00
JackM JackM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Perth Western Australia
Posts: 100
Default

Thanks Tony - I was wondering why I had so few pics of the higher hull #s. The hull #s of the carrier records I photographed, stop somewhere in the range 2000-3000.

I guess it also explains why the fabled mortar carriers are not there.



Jack
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:31.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016