modern heavyweights - Page 2

Les Freathy · #31 18-11-06, 19:17

And the largest prototype tractor for the British army the massive FV 1201 30 ton 6x6 ,if i am correct the trailer is a further prototype for the carrage of the 32pdr gun. Two ended there days at Hardwicks scrap yard in Surrey one with a complete wheel change for some reason but were eventually scapped, well what in the hell would you do with a thing like that, its a shame as one at least should have been preserved

T. Metsovitis · #32 20-11-06, 23:19

Steyr tank transporter of the Greek army.

Fyll

Les Freathy · #33 23-11-06, 20:23

Thats some tyres on those Steyrs Fyll, i reckon the Greek army hold there excercises on all those nice beaches you have .

Heres a shot of the current British army bridge carrier the 8x8 Unipower, quite why we never progressed with the tank transporter ill never know its getting to the stage in the UK when very soon we will not have the capacity to build any military vehicles ourselves and that comes hard to someone living through the 1950s 60s and 70s when we were able to provide good equipment and make good head way abroad. Ah well heres to the modern world ever forwards and downwards

Les Freathy · #34 23-11-06, 20:27

The current Leyland drops which again will probably be replaced by Man trucks in the not to distant future, i do like these trucks when they pass our house in convoy its a heart warming sound

Les Freathy · #35 23-11-06, 20:28

and the rear end

Les Freathy · #36 23-11-06, 20:30

well prehaps not the rear end, for interest this is one of the 6x6 prototypes that were not accepted fpr production

Les Freathy · #37 15-01-07, 13:14

I covered the AEC Militant in the knockers thread but as most will know the Britsh army used a number of different makes of 6x4 and 6x6 heavies in the 1950/60s but rather than start another thread on a similer vane i will put the photos here

Two Albion 10 ton trucks the FV11102 6x4 machinery model WD/HD/23N and theFV11105 3 way tipper 6x4 model WD/HD/23S
Les

Les Freathy · #38 15-01-07, 13:15

Tipper

Alex Blair (RIP) · #39 15-01-07, 14:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Les Freathy
Scammell constructor semi, these were issued to the Royal Engineers

I notice that the way that the tires are installed on this Scammel, the point of the chevron hits the ground first in the forward motion....
I also noticed it in the previously posted Foden..
I was under the impression that the point of the chevron should hit the ground last for proper traction in mud or snow...as pictured in the FV 1201...
Any comments on the proper installation of chevron style tires..????

Richard Farrant · #40 15-01-07, 19:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Alex Blair
I notice that the way that the tires are installed on this Scammel, the point of the chevron hits the ground first in the forward motion....
I also noticed it in the previously posted Foden..
I was under the impression that the point of the chevron should hit the ground last for proper traction in mud or snow...as pictured in the FV 1201...
Any comments on the proper installation of chevron style tires..????

Alex,

Rather a strange one this, because on a tractor or earthmover, the point of the chevron has to hit the ground first, but if towing a trailer implement with similar treaded tyres, they should be fitted the opposite way. Now I have heard it said, that all wheel drive trucks should have the rear tyres chevron point first, but fronts with chevron point trailing. the FV1201 does have the rear tyres with point first if you look closely.

I reckon this subject could run and run

Alex Blair (RIP) · #41 15-01-07, 20:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Richard Farrant
Alex,

Rather a strange one this, because on a tractor or earthmover, the point of the chevron has to hit the ground first, but if towing a trailer implement with similar treaded tyres, they should be fitted the opposite way. Now I have heard it said, that all wheel drive trucks should have the rear tyres chevron point first, but fronts with chevron point trailing. the FV1201 does have the rear tyres with point first if you look closely.

I reckon this subject could run and run

Richard ..
You are absolutely right on the rear tire direction...
Strange debate and does anyone know for sure..This debate has been around for as long as I can remember,and why should the fronts and backs be different on an all wheel drive..???

Grant Bowker · #42 15-01-07, 20:33

The logic I have heard is that one direction is better for stability on a steering axle and the other is better for traction. I'm not sure if this is based on fact or people trying to justify a "that's how I always do it". If there's any truth to it, I'd guess that trailers should have the stability setting.

I think this is one of those discussions that the right answer depends on where you were born, whether you are right handed, red headed and other imponderables.

Richard Farrant · #43 15-01-07, 21:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Alex Blair

Strange debate and does anyone know for sure..This debate has been around for as long as I can remember,and why should the fronts and backs be different on an all wheel drive..???

Alex,

A thought I had since posting, was something I remember hearing once, that as the front axle is not being driven on hard surfaces for majority of time, these directional tyres tend to wear badly in the "point first" position, this could I suppose, affect steering and handling, hence why they are fitted opposite.

An idea of my own is that if you did get stuck, sometimes its better to come out the way you went in, ie a ditch, and the front tyres are best placed for max. grip.

Lynn Eades · #44 15-01-07, 23:02

On a front non driving axle on tarmac the tyres wear better/ last longer when the out side of the chevron hits the ground first.
For mud clearance/ better traction on driven axles the center tip of the chevron needs to hit first.
So its the perceived usage that dictates which way tyres are fitted.

Lynn Eades · #45 15-01-07, 23:17

If the outer tips hit the ground first (in mud ,on driven axle) the mud is "captured" in the tread of the tyre. If the centre of the chevron hits the ground first the mud is "cleared" out to the sides, allowing the tyre to bite into the hard under the mud.
Richard did the British army teach you how to retreat?
"By Skill and Arms" we were supposed to help the Infantry(Onward) to advance!...... Wern't we????

Richard Farrant · #46 16-01-07, 00:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Lynn Eades
Richard did the British army teach you how to retreat?
"By Skill and Arms" we were supposed to help the Infantry(Onward) to advance!...... Wern't we????

Lynne,

Quite true, but I was trying to come up with a plausible explanation for tyres on front and rear axles to be in different positions (already aware of the wearing problem), and it occured that you would be able to get tractive effort from your tyres in either forward or reverse.

Lynn Eades · #47 16-01-07, 00:31

I think it's more a compromise where economics has won out over maximum tractive effort. the reality being that it's still going to perfom pretty well in all wheel drive.
How many times in the life of the tyres is a truck of that weight going to be floundering in mud,spinning all of it's wheels? ,and if iit was, would turning the two front tyres,on the rims, have seen it get through?
I'd say it's too fine a point, easily offset by the sure longer life of the tyres, as fitted. (and thats why they do it.)

Les Freathy · #48 30-05-07, 22:58

TIme for a few more heavies , this another thread thats rather faded into the background and needs revitalising
first up a Scammell contractor with Dyson semi trailer. This one is Middle east bound could be Jordon not the air conditioning on the cab roof.

Les Freathy · #49 30-05-07, 23:01

German army Faun Elephant loaded with the Gepard A.A craft system

Les Freathy · #50 30-05-07, 23:04

Third another scammell contractor, this one from the 1950s and built to air ministry specs, the main changes from the army version are the larger three man cab,mudguards and steel body

Keith Webb · #51 05-06-07, 22:42

Quote:

I think this was the biggest truck used after the war in 1957-58. There were 5 of them made by MACK for the purpose of serving the DEWLINE (radar) in northern Canada. They were to go West to East across the top of Canada. By time they got to Yellowknife the terrian was too rough for them and they were brought South, where I saw them in Grimshaw Alberta. The front axles were over 11 feet wide, the trailers were 90 feet long. The frames of the trailers could hold thousands of gallons of fuel for the truck's 600 hp engine. They could haul 164 tons on each truck. The trailers were left here for scrap and the tractors were hauled to Oregon to do logging as they were too heavy for the roads

sapper740 · #52 26-07-07, 15:36

Here's some Soviet ballistic missile transporters which truly must be some of the largest wheeled vehicles on the planet. Would you believe a 400,000lb payload! Shades of Dr. Strangelove!

Model 7906:

sapper740 · #53 26-07-07, 15:37

another:

sapper740 · #54 26-07-07, 15:38

One more:

FearNaught · #55 10-08-07, 18:17

This picture was taken at the RAC Gunnery school, Lulworth in 1987 when the Royal Hussars came to collect a Challenger 1. They took 6 attempts to get the MBT on the transporter.....how we laughed!!!

The Mighty Antar - memories of 'swanning' up the autobahn the MBT driver in the cab with the 2 Polish MSO - MOJO's swigging vodka as they reached the storming speed of 25mph!!! Arrival normally meant the MOJO's and our drivers all being '15 sheets to the wind' and singing albeit in different languages with no-one understanding each other!!!!

This last one, I took at the Bovington Battle Day in 88. I think (but don't know) this was a White transporter - excuse my ignorance but, well, my speciality has always been tracked!!