Too incredible to be true?

kevin powles · #1 14-02-12, 02:26

Hi, I have just come across this petrol can on Ebay, Could this be from this very carrier?.

Caption on bren picture is : Australian light horse troops in Northern Africa, on January 7, 1941

chris vickery · #2 14-02-12, 02:54

Is the first digit on the can a 7 or a T?
If it were a T, I would say you have a match.

Little Jo · #3 14-02-12, 06:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin powles

Hi, I have just come across this petrol can on Ebay, Could this be from this very carrier?.

Caption on bren picture is : Australian light horse troops in Northern Africa, on January 7, 1941

Hi Kevin

I had a look with the magnifying glass and I am pretty sure it is a "7". But the you may get a better look having the actual tin.

Cheers

Tony

Bob Moseley (RIP) · #4 14-02-12, 11:46

Hi all - firstly, as far as I am aware, there is no provision on a Carrier for this type of can. The Carriers that carried the Vickers MMG had a condensor can but that was a different style. The Carrier depicted carries a Bren Gun and therefore has no need for a condensor can.

Bob

Ben · #5 14-02-12, 11:50

Bob

2 gallon petrol can found in the bin at the rear of a Bren carrier there is space for a 1 gallon oil can too.

Nice can....

Ben

tankbarrell · #6 14-02-12, 15:27

In the second picture taken from above, it looks a lot more like a T.

RichardT10829 · #7 14-02-12, 21:51

does look like a T... however where is the can now ? seems unlikely that a flimsy can would make it back from Aussie service in North Africa to say the UK after all this time.

EDIT: also i had not realised that they would even number the tin for a carrier.... i always thought that they would have a pile of fuel cans which you would grab at a fuel cache leaving your empties as you went ?

motto · #8 14-02-12, 22:43

The name 'flimsy' was used to describe the four gallon petrol/kerosine tins that these products were supplied in back in the days before bulk handling. They were often pierced to drain the contents and discarded. They were a failure when it came to rough handling in the field.

The two gallon can was far more robust and made as a re-useable, long lived container for on board vehicle use so no surprise that they are still around today.

The word BREN is stencilled on the can above the number which seems to further identify the can as belonging to this vehicle.

Who among us would not carry extra fuel when in the field and there was no better container at the time except for those in the hands of the enemy.

David

rob love · #9 14-02-12, 22:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardT10829

does look like a T... however where is the can now ? seems unlikely that a flimsy can would make it back from Aussie service in North Africa to say the UK after all this time.

EDIT: also i had not realised that they would even number the tin for a carrier.... i always thought that they would have a pile of fuel cans which you would grab at a fuel cache leaving your empties as you went ?

I'm pretty sure back then it would have been somewhat like it is today. A driver who looked after his vehicle and EIS would stencil everything, right up to the different pieces of the canvas enclosure, to try and disuade inter vehicle theft. I can assure you, there was nothing like needing your can of fuel, then finding that someone had swapped cans with you and it was now empty.

When I ran the stores section for the maint section at my last unit, I even branded the mechanics creepers,brooms, squegees and drain pans, otherwise by Monday morning they were all gone; either to the other batteries, or else homes. It got so bad one of the sections would have to remove the bulbs from their trouble lamps on Fridays and put them back in on Mondays....there were guys too thrifty to buy their own 50¢ lightbulbs.

As to the travel of artifacts between continents, in the last 50 years the world has got awful small. And with Ebay, nothing is too far out of reach.....in fact it's as close as your keyboard.

RichardT10829 · #10 14-02-12, 22:53

still seems weird... decanting fuel into the can that you stencilled up rather than just pick up another can

shaun · #11 14-02-12, 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardT10829

still seems weird... decanting fuel into the can that you stencilled up rather than just pick up another can

Richie, not an uncommon practise in the army is to put your vehicle number on CES Kit issued to that vehicle. i have many items with different vehicle numbers on, If you did not want to lose it put you name and number on it !!!. I find it quite reasonable to assume that the can is from that carrier - the ammount of carrrier stuff Kevin buys he was bound find something that relates to a carrier in a photo !!!

kevin powles · #12 15-02-12, 01:17

Hi, Its definitely a 'T' because its been painted with the name 'bren' and number both sides, the downward shot is the other side. It will be on its way in the post to me soon, so will check when I receive it. It also has the remains of desert paint on it, it is either from the vehicle or someone has seen that carrier pic many years ago and painted the can to match that carrier say back in the 60's or 70's, it has 64 on it is that a division number?, could be another clue to its authenticity?.

kev.

horsa · #13 15-02-12, 01:49

64 could be the vehicle designation in the division. That was the number used by the support battalion / machine gun battalion which was carrier based.

RichardT10829 · #14 15-02-12, 02:50

if it is pucker then i would say it was worth a pretty penny to a collector thats for sure

Bruce Parker (RIP) · #15 15-02-12, 03:14

Just to muddy the waters, I'm almost certain that is a Canadian can. The 'Highly Enflamable' stamping usually dates from 1940 on the similar cans I've seen. The paint is just such that I can't make out the date or absolutely confirm the C broad arrow.

Pic added for comparison.

Philliphastings · #16 15-02-12, 04:04

Hello Kevin - this could well be one of those rare coincidences which colour our hobby.

Of course all of the early carriers came from the factory with standard stowage for one of these cans as well as one of the narrower oil cans.

I have a collection of ex Australian issued cans and there are a variety of styles and manufacturers.

If I were you I would bid on it and keep it as a conversation piece. Maybe the carrier itself will turn up next

Cheers

Phill

jack neville · #17 15-02-12, 12:35

I go with the repro theory from someone seeing a photo. How many Te Anau LRDG trucks have been made now? If you came across a beaten up piece of kit with Te Anau written on it how excited would you really get these days?

Gunner · #18 15-02-12, 23:08

When we pulled into a laeger or "DP" we would not use the can on our veh unless it had already been emptied earlier. It stayed, full, on the vehicle and we gassed up using what the echelon or the service battalion delivered.

To back up Rob Love's points we, the users and abusers of the mechanised artillery, (Rob will get the reference being a RCEME type

) hardly ever hung all our clag and gear on the outside of the vehicle because it would disappear. Our rucksacks were generally stowed outside 'cause, frankly, who wants my smelly, skid marked clothes? The veh stores (tools, etc were carefully marked and carefully locked in the carrier or SP gun to prevent the five fingered discount!

On rail moves everything went inside, even the sopping wet cam nets, to prevent pilfering at every little whistle stop along the way. We even had to gun tape the periscope glass as vandals would chip away at them with sharp rocks!

Congrats on finding a possible historical link between a wartime photo and and an actual artefact.

Cheers, Mike

Mike Cecil · #19 15-02-12, 23:54

The 2 gallon can was part of the Vehicle Outfit List (VOL), these days called the Complete Equipment Schedule (CES). If the can was issued as part of the VOL, then it was expected to stay with that vehicle, and good crews would ensure that it did by labelling with some form of identification, often the vehicle registration number. As was said earlier, it helped defeat the '5 finger discount' mob!

The English/Canadian 2 gallon cans I have seen appear to be standardised in dimensions, so will fit any vehicle stowage position designated for a 'can, 2 gallon'. The Australian manufactured 2 gallon cans varied with (1) date made and, more particularly (2) manufacturer, and were often larger than their overseas counterparts. Made stowage problematic, to say the least. I wrote an article that was published in Army Motors several years ago about the subject that provided several sets of dimensions and descriptions as a comparative table. It also discussed the Australian 4 gallon drum that was an issue item from POL points, rather than part of the VOL of the vehicle. Of course, as Dave has said, why persist with such things when the best form of petrol carrier on the battlefield had to be 'liberated' from the enemy, and there were orders to do just that in North Africa, and send them to POL units for refilling and distribution. But that's another story...

Is it genuine? Don't know, but it sure looks good!

Mike C

Bob Moseley (RIP) · #20 16-02-12, 04:51

Hi all - if all fails, read the manual. Lo and behold after reading my 1943 Spare Parts Manual, I discovered that a two gallon water can was part of the kit. It was situated at the right-hand rear corner between Hull upper rear plate and lifting jack.

Embarresed Bob

RichardT10829 · #21 16-02-12, 06:31

well here's hoping its the real deal... would be a great score Kevin... and perhaps a nice story to print along with your carrier restorations for say CMV mag