MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > MILITARY VEHICLES > The Gun Park

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 30-09-18, 00:06
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,365
Default

Lang,

To be fair, the AWM were not the originator of the furphy about the shape being for gas decontamination, but made the error of quoting an otherwise reputable source without checking or thinking about it. The origin, as far as I can make out, was as indicated by this post in another MLU thread:

"Reference to the design shape is contained in a Mechanisation Board minute featured in Ventham and Fletcher’s Moving the Guns : the Mechanisation of the Royal Artillery, 1854-1939, p81...."

And I agree with you: just because an individual is in the employ of the AWM (or any other military oriented museum) does not mean he or she has a sound knowledge of military matters or history.

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 30-09-18, 13:04
Hanno Spoelstra's Avatar
Hanno Spoelstra Hanno Spoelstra is offline
MLU Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 14,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Cecil View Post
The origin, as far as I can make out, was as indicated by this post in another MLU thread:

"Reference to the design shape is contained in a Mechanisation Board minute featured in Ventham and Fletcher’s Moving the Guns : the Mechanisation of the Royal Artillery, 1854-1939, p81...."
Here is a cross link to the relevant posting in the thread AWM acquisition?.

Thanks for bringing that source up again, Mike.

HTH,
Hanno
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 30-09-18, 13:53
rob love rob love is offline
carrier mech
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
Posts: 7,517
Default

Reading that link, I would say it is a mis-interpretation by the author. Here I have copied the relevant part:

Quote:
A clue to the origin of the curious "beetle shape of the guy ant, and other quads, is contained in the Mechanization Board report for 1939 which states:
"To permit decontamination, an all metal body to the Chief Superintendent of Design's was fitted, involving an increase of weight of 17cwts"

Thus, the characteristic shape of these vehicles was born of the need to be able to wash down the vehicles to rid them of chemical contamination......
Now if you take away the author's interpretation of that, here is the actual line from the Mechanization board report:

"To permit decontamination, an all metal body to the Chief Superintendent of Design's was fitted, involving an increase of weight of 17cwts"

My un-learned view of that line was that they previously had wood in the Chief Superintendent's design of the body, or that the Chief Superintendent of Design has changed the design to get rid of the wood. Note that in the photo of an early Guy Ant on the previous page, the body was made of wood. Wood, being porous, does not lend itself well to decontamination, so they instead changed the design to all metal, which made the bodies heavier.

The author of that book, I believe, has made a mistake in his interpretation, and that interpretation has been blindly repeated and accepted for fact. Using the word "thus" in his leap does not make it fact.

Last edited by rob love; 30-09-18 at 14:16.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 30-09-18, 15:00
Hanno Spoelstra's Avatar
Hanno Spoelstra Hanno Spoelstra is offline
MLU Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 14,400
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob love View Post
Reading that link, I would say it is a mis-interpretation by the author. Here I have copied the relevant part:

Now if you take away the author's interpretation of that, here is the actual line from the Mechanization board report:
Quote:
A clue to the origin of the curious "beetle shape of the guy ant, and other quads, is contained in the Mechanization Board report for 1939 which states:
"To permit decontamination, an all metal body to the Chief Superintendent of Design's was fitted, involving an increase of weight of 17cwts"

Thus, the characteristic shape of these vehicles was born of the need to be able to wash down the vehicles to rid them of chemical contamination......
"To permit decontamination, an all metal body to the Chief Superintendent of Design's was fitted, involving an increase of weight of 17cwts"

My un-learned view of that line was that they previously had wood in the Chief Superintendent's design of the body, or that the Chief Superintendent of Design has changed the design to get rid of the wood. Note that in the photo of an early Guy Ant on the previous page, the body was made of wood. Wood, being porous, does not lend itself well to decontamination, so they instead changed the design to all metal, which made the bodies heavier.

The author of that book, I believe, has made a mistake in his interpretation, and that interpretation has been blindly repeated and accepted for fact. Using the word "thus" in his leap does not make it fact.
Rob, I fully agree with your line of reasoning!

H.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 30-09-18, 15:45
rob love rob love is offline
carrier mech
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
Posts: 7,517
Default

Further to my last, note the excerpt mentions an increase of weight of 17cwt (roughly 1904 pounds in today's measurement). Sloping the back of a box would reduce weight, not increase it. Changing a wooden box to steel , however, could well increase the weight. Thus , ( ) this supports my reading of the sentence as to mean it was referring to the conversion of the previous wood design over to an all-metal design.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 30-09-18, 16:46
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob love View Post
Further to my last, note the excerpt mentions an increase of weight of 17cwt (roughly 1904 pounds in today's measurement). Sloping the back of a box would reduce weight, not increase it. Changing a wooden box to steel , however, could well increase the weight. Thus , ( ) this supports my reading of the sentence as to mean it was referring to the conversion of the previous wood design over to an all-metal design.
Rob, I think you've just added forensic linguist to you resume.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 30-09-18, 17:40
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,365
Default Well done that man!

Well done Rob, I think your interpretation is spot on: a mis-reading of the original intent of the quote.

I cannot say every fact in my books is 100% correct, either (or any technical history book, for that matter): blunders like that by authors are bound to occur, but we all do our best to bring other enthusiasts the fruits of our original research. I did a book review for SMH recently about the Aust WW1 Centennial History, and felt I had to point out a significant error by a well-respected historian, so it can happen to the best researchers/authors as well.

Thanks Hanno - my ability with cross linking etc is non-existent!

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 30-09-18, 22:39
Phil Waterman Phil Waterman is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Temple, New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 3,927
Default Tail fins or Iconic Design

Hi All


Personally, I think the sloped rear of the Gun Tractor was one of the following reason:

  • The original designer was the father of the designer who thought tail fins would look good on cars.
  • The original designer was look for a design which would have an Iconic shape to form the desires of a generation of young boys, so they would love CMPs
  • The reason is now lost in the mists of time, we should have thought to ask this at the CMP Conference back in 1984.
Cheers Phil
__________________
Phil Waterman
`41 C60L Pattern 12
`42 C60S Radio Pattern 13
`45 HUP
http://canadianmilitarypattern.com/
New e-mail Philip@canadianmilitarypattern.com
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 30-09-18, 22:56
Mike Cecil Mike Cecil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Cody, Wyoming, USA
Posts: 2,365
Default

Phil,

You didn't add: the designer just wanted to keep generations of vehicle enthusiasts puzzling over/debating the matter!!

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 30-09-18, 23:43
Bruce Parker (RIP) Bruce Parker (RIP) is offline
GM Fox I
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,606
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Cecil View Post
Phil,

You didn't add: the designer just wanted to keep generations of vehicle enthusiasts puzzling over/debating the matter!!

Mike
You're all missing the obvious answer. "Shortest on the left, tallest on the right...size". After that the tallest gun crew members sit up front and shortest sit in the back.

It's funny how you read things. The description for Chev HUW's is that they had steel panels in the rear windows. For years I thought this meant steel panels in the rear door windows which puzzled me as I'd only ever seen glass. Then I figured out what they were talking about. It refers to having steel panels replace the upper rear body plastic windows on HUPs which is 100% correct.

Last edited by Bruce Parker (RIP); 30-09-18 at 23:50.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 15-10-18, 00:17
Tom Millward Tom Millward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 209
Default

Hello guys,

Just a thought from a tank designer’s perspective, the sloping back would have given the gun No1 (the commander who stands out of the top hatch) a good view over the back of the gun tractor and allowed him to see the top of the limber, which may have helped the driver in maneuvering the awkward combination, particularly reversing. In the later Morris gun tractors the roof is squared off. Much better for stowing kit, but the rear view is obscured.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 17-05-21, 18:18
Niels V's Avatar
Niels V Niels V is offline
Niels Vegger
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 471
Default

I stumbled across this statement today will discussing Morris FAT designs:” while early Quads had the distinctive "beetle-back" shape, from 1944, the final model, the Mark 5, moved away from this characteristic shape as it was realised that it was too readily recognisable from the air, and therefore instantly indicated the position of an artillery unit. The Mark 5 was therefore given a more square body with a canvas-covered cargo space at the rear which made the vehicle resemble an ordinary cargo truck.”
From https://m.ww2db.com/vehicle_spec.php?q=O515 ,
Has anyone heard of this before
__________________
1941 Chevrolet, Cab 12 CGT, 7A2 body
1944 Ariel W/NG
1944 Scammell Pioneer SV/2S x 2
1955 Austin Champ, 04BF45
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 17-05-21, 19:01
m606paz m606paz is offline
Mariano Paz
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Buenos Aires,Argentina
Posts: 815
Default

Hi Niels
I have not heard that before, but it can be an answer as simple as it is effective. Sometimes we tend to complicate the answers.
__________________
Mariano Paz
Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA

1944 Ariel W/NG
1945 FGT FAT
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 17-05-21, 19:08
m606paz m606paz is offline
Mariano Paz
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Buenos Aires,Argentina
Posts: 815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob love View Post
They did. From the AEDB Design Records:"Reports from the field, however, indicated that the 7b2 -FAT did not full-fill all the requirements that had been anticipated, in that the payload was restricted, due to the design of the body. It was decided, therefore, to pilot a new FAT using the same chassis as heretofore, but considerably modifying the body. The sloping after deck was eliminated, and an all steel, open roof body, with superstructure and tarpaulin, was pilotted, the spare tire being housed in a compartment at the rear of the body. Considerably more stowage space was provided, particularly for ammunition which was for either the 17pdr or 25 pdr, role, and more room was available inside the body for the personal and their kits. This was the 7b3 body, and proved to be quite satisfactory."
A pity that the 7B3 body was never used during the war.
Attached Thumbnails
5-88a.jpg   5-88b.jpg   5-88d.jpg   5-88c.jpg  
__________________
Mariano Paz
Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA

1944 Ariel W/NG
1945 FGT FAT
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 17-05-21, 19:22
rob love rob love is offline
carrier mech
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
Posts: 7,517
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by m606paz View Post
A pity that the 7B3 body was never used during the war.
The real pity is that they all seem to have been exported and few to none remain in Canada.

Also odd that being this late in the war, they used POW cans in the racks instead of the 5 gallon jerry-can.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 17-05-21, 19:32
m606paz m606paz is offline
Mariano Paz
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Buenos Aires,Argentina
Posts: 815
Default

Hi Rob
It is true, that in Canada there is none.
Here in Argentina 2 survive in very good running condition and another 10 with many missing, according to my records.

Those racks are prepared to mount 3 pow or one Jerrycan. Very well designed.
__________________
Mariano Paz
Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA

1944 Ariel W/NG
1945 FGT FAT
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted: Re: BSA Parabike manual link and T shape bracket Danny Burt For Sale Or Wanted 7 20-12-15 20:19
Could it be a Gun Tractor Rusty The Softskin Forum 13 13-01-08 22:49
17 pdr tractor DaveCox The Softskin Forum 3 18-06-04 14:18
LAA tractor DaveCox The Softskin Forum 8 16-06-04 18:44
F.A. Gun Tractor James E. Roy The Softskin Forum 23 27-04-03 21:17


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 20:34.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016