AWM acquisition?

[Lynn Eades]

Thank you Richard, I never knew about the Commer Beetle.
The thread is very interesting and my jest is probably out of place.

When Tim asked "are these bodies made of wood" It brings me back to reality.
I assume people know what I know and forget there are younger people who have no knowledge on this sort of thing (no slight meant or implied,Tim)
It is important that people do ask these sort of questions otherwise much will be lost. Good question Tim.
Back to topic.....

[Mike Cecil]

Tony,

"Of course, if this analysis of MECH 314 is correct, it would mean all Cab 12 FAT arrivals during this period, including those on Sistership (sic) convoys, would receive 50201 - 51000 numbers."

I disagree with that analysis:

(1) vehicle with WO numbers arriving via Operation Stepsister from the Middle East retained their WO numbers no matter what type.

(2) vehicles arriving on refugee ships were alloted AMF numbers in the 50210 to 51000 block. The AWM Quad arrived on a refugee ship. The AWM Quad is in this group.

Seems straightforward to me, so I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree on the interpretation of MECH 314.

Mike

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

(1) vehicle with WO numbers arriving via Operation Stepsister from the Middle East retained their WO numbers no matter what type.

(2) vehicles arriving on refugee ships were alloted AMF numbers in the 50210 to 51000 block.

How then do we explain this one Mike:


P03113.002 Cairns, Qld. Probably 10th Australian Light Anti Aircraft Battery.jpg

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

Seems straightforward to me, so I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree on the interpretation of MECH 314.

Again, what matters here is not how we ourselves might interpret MECH 314, but how staff applied it at the time. Until we know that, we can't know the meaning of 50201-51000 block records. I would point out however that if the purpose were to identify vehicles from refugee ships, the instruction would simply read:

A number of vehicles have arrived from overseas on refugee ships. These vehicles will be allotted numbers from a special block which has been reserved for the purpose, viz.: 50201 - 51000 for wheeled vehicles

[Mike Cecil]

Image: Quad from a refugee ship: the register labels it as such, ie 'refugee', and it has been allotted an AMF number within the block allotted to refugee cargo, as per the instruction. But instead of using his initiative and common sense, the staff in the OVP didn't obliterate the Brit number because the instruction didn't specifically instruct him to do so. So now it has two: one useful, one useless within the Australian system.

Since neither of us really know just how the staff at the time interpreted the instruction, it will remain a mystery!

Mike

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

But instead of using his initiative and common sense, the staff in the OVP didn't obliterate the Brit number because the instruction didn't specifically instruct him to do so.

Like I said Mike - that's way above his pay grade! Mind you, in fairness to staff they did face a conundrum under MECH 314. That is, Cab 12 FATs bearing WO numbers technically fell under BOTH headings, and were subject to BOTH instructions, because they were "types which have not previously operated by AIF Units". It's possible therefore that Cab 12 FATs arriving in Stepsister movement were allocated 50201-51000 numbers, bringing "refugee" entry into the ledger, and in the case above, someone had a bob each way!

Of course, we're assuming OVP had access to full shipping information, which may not have been the case during this chaotic period.

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

Since neither of us really know just how the staff at the time interpreted the instruction, it will remain a mystery!

Exactly - we're trying to second guess staff who themselves were trying to second guess instructions in the middle of a war almost 75 years ago!

I notice Australian Armour and Artillery Museum have ARN 46425, which suggests another "Refugee" block was opened. Do we have any record of this one Mike?

Ford Cab 12 FAT ARN 46425 Australian Armour and Artillery Museum formerly Sid Beck Mareeba.jpg

[Mike Cecil]

Actually, Tony, I don't believe you can 'mix and match' the individual requirements as listed under each heading - I think each stands alone - which leads me to conclude that therein is the basis of the difference between how we each see MECH314, but that's just me.

46425 is an easy one: the front shell is off a 3 ton 4x4 GS cab 12, chassis/engine number 2G44509F, part of UK Order 889. It is ex-The Beck collection (where I think the image was taken), now residing at the Cairns A&A Museum. Syd was always keen to add the missing bits when he could.

Mike

[Keith Webb]

Not only was it a cab 12 front from a F60L, the whole lot was sitting on a cab 13 F15A chassis. You can see the centre mount for the cab 13 front shell.

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

46425 is an easy one: the front shell is off a 3 ton 4x4 GS cab 12, chassis/engine number 2G44509F, part of UK Order 889. It is ex-The Beck collection (where I think the image was taken), now residing at the Cairns A&A Museum. Syd was always keen to add the missing bits when he could.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

Actually, Tony, I don't believe you can 'mix and match' the individual requirements as listed under each heading - I think each stands alone

Certainly that's the literal interpretation Mike, which I believe would apply in 99% of cases. However, in the case of Cab 12 FAT, it would lead to some vehicles getting around with WO numbers (Stepsister ship arrivals) and others with 50210-51000 numbers (refugee ship arrivals). Rightly or wrongly I don't believe that was the intention at the time, so I've deliberately circumvented MECH 314 ("mix and match" interpretation) to achieve the required outcome.

What I'm suggesting here is that MECH 314 was policy on the run which did not cover all possibilities, and hence needs to be applied judiciously in certain cases. This requires an understanding of policy intentions at the time, in which OVP staff would have been instructed, but which we ourselves can only deduce from surviving evidence.

Originally Posted by Mike Cecil

which leads me to conclude that therein is the basis of the difference between how we each see MECH314

Yes, but the difference exists only in relation to Cab 12 FAT, because I see it as an anomaly which was not anticipated when MECH 314 was drafted. That is, a vehicle type brought back by AIF which had never actually been operated by AIF.

Ultimately it all comes back to our understanding of 50210-51000 block and "Refugee" entry in the ledger. I think we need to challenge our assumptions here. It's my strong suspicion that the word "Refugee" in this context may not mean what we think it means, but is more of a beaureacratic label. I believe it's worth exploring because it may open the possibility of AWM FAT being ex-Stepsister movement, which is far more significant provenance than mere "refugee cargo".

Of course, it's also possible I'm barking up the wrong tree completely!