Another (suspected) F22 found

[Keith Webb]

Got your attention, Hanno?

http://www.oldcmp.net/Images/f22/Copley/front.jpg

I had at first thought this was an normal FGT, but on looking at it again recently observed the following things:

Retrofitted winch
1945 manufacture
400 steering and 6" steering ends.

Our Ford tractors had light steering and were mostly made during 1942-3.

No data plate, unfortunately.

What do you think, Hanno?

More pics here

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally posted by Keith Webb
Got your attention, Hanno?

I had at first thought this was an normal FGT

You certainly do! You sent me a b&w pic of this a while ago, but these pictures seem to endorse the assumption this must be an "F22" with all its typical late build features like "Ford Canada" pressings under the headlights, lift slings, round gauges, heavy steering gear and steering ends, full cab without hatch and no winch originally. Nice find!

Attached goes a pic (taken at Beltring 2003) of one of two known restored examples, s/n CK-236140 built NOV-12-45.

[Keith Webb]

http://www.oldcmp.net/images/fgt/fgt9darnum/darn1.jpg

This is the only FGT I've seen with late production hubs, although the front shell is the 1943 pattern with just FORD stamped on it, so possibly the axles were a retrofit.

Not sure which steering box it had. This picture was taken around 1974 and the truck is, as far as I know long gone.

[Keith Webb]

Don Smith sent me a batch of his photographs from South Australia.
Among them is this interesting shot of what looks to me like it may be another of the elusive 1945 F22 models:

http://www.oldcmp.net/Images/people/Don_Smith/F22_1.jpg

Also of interest in this batch is a cut down CGT.

http://www.oldcmp.net/Images/people/Don_Smith/cgt_3.jpg

http://www.oldcmp.net/Images/people/Don_Smith/cgt_1.jpg

More of Don's pics here.

Has anyone else seen these particular trucks? Any other photos, please?

Thanks for the shots, Don!

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Not an F22, just a F15A on 20" wheels, but seeing pictures always makes me look twice to make sure it isn't one of those elusive beasts!

"GSV 556, Portsmouth Harbour, June 3rd 2014"
http://www.flickr.com/photos/40172673@N03/15565016831/

[Alex van de Wetering]

F15A

Attached is another pic of this C15A, taken in Asnelles june 8th.......and a C15 with big boots. Both trucks travelled together.

Alex

[Keith Webb]

Here's the missing pic of the suspected F22

[lynx42]

Hi Keith,

Why don't the photos from your "OldCMP" site come up any more.

I just clicked on both pages as suggested and there is only the box but no photos. I had a look at Oldcmp and most of the photos are missing as well.

Regards Rick.

[Keith Webb]

Unfortunately I have been unable to access the site for many years to make changes or fix broken links.

Originally Posted by lynx42

Hi Keith,

Why don't the photos from your "OldCMP" site come up any more.

I just clicked on both pages as suggested and there is only the box but no photos. I had a look at Oldcmp and most of the photos are missing as well.

Regards Rick.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Keith Webb

Here's the missing pic of the suspected F22

Interesting photo Keith, I hadn't seen that one before. It's another Fewings Indian production FAT conversion, possibly GS configured originally, like the one below.




Just to update this old thread - the vehicle pictured in Hanno's old post at Beltring 2003 was also an Indian production FAT originally, presumably identical to the one above except for the winch.




Another likely F22 candidate yet to be fully investigated is the vehicle below - do we have any more photos/info on this vehicle?

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Tony Wheeler

Just to update this old thread - the vehicle pictured in Hanno's old post at Beltring 2003 was also an Indian Pattern FAT originally, presumably identical to the one above except for the winch.
Attachment 68728

Another likely F22 candidate yet to be fully investigated is the vehicle below - do we have any more photos/info on this vehicle?
Attachment 68729

Tony,

I know you have given the Indian Pattern FATs and F22 a lot of thought. But, the above two CMPs are what is commonly referred to as an "F22". More specifically, these are C291Q.L-W. chassis with full cabs, i.e. winch-less Ford FGT FAT chassis with No. 13 Cabs and GS bodies.

The first one is chassis serial no. CK-236140, first restored by Brian Nunn and now owned by forum member Lauren Child. The second one is owned by forum member Maurice Donckers. Both can be seen on my webpage with F22 survivors: http://www.mapleleafup.nl/cmpvehicles/f22_reg.html

Indian Pattern FATs are based on Ford FGT and Chevrolet CGT chassis/cowls, and were fitted with wooden bodies built locally in India, and had open cabs fitted with a canvas roof rather than a full No. 13 Cab. I think we should keep the full cab winchless FGT apart from the Indian Pattern CGT and FGT.

I apologize for muddling the water by posting pictures of short wheelbase CMPs (Chevrolets even!) on 20" rims in this thread - my bad

Hanno

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Hanno Spoelstra

I think we should keep the full cab winchless FGT apart from the Indian Pattern CGT and FGT.

Apologies Hanno, I was a bit lax with my wording in the previous post. I've amended "Indian Pattern" to "Indian production". It's a bit cumbersome but it's an important distinction as you say. However I'd expand your description of Indian Pattern FAT to include "integral body". That's the key differentiator here, and would exclude a hypothetical open cab GS bodied FAT. It's conceivable these existed in Indian late production, if only due to CMP cab panel shortage!

Of course, it gets even more confusing with Indian Pattern vehicles built outside India! For example, Australian local pattern F30 ambulance - should we refer to this as "Indian Pattern" or "Australian Pattern"...? Nomenclature plate reads: "Truck Ambulance Indian Army Type Aust." Looks to me like an each way bet!

Getting back to FATs, I'd suggest we also need to abandon the term "winchless FAT", particularly in light of recent evidence. It appears to be an assumption based on Brian Nunn's vehicle, which until recently was naturally assumed to be Canadian built. It's now abundantly clear this vehicle was Indian built originally, and that a winch equipped version existed as well. Thanks to Lauren we even have contract card info concerning these two versions, namely C291Q.L-W and C291Q.L-I. Evidently BOTH chassis types were built with full cabs, albeit in small numbers it would seem. Therefore in relation to full cab FATs we need to consider the winch as optional, certainly in Indian production at least.

In relation to the term "F22" - as a latecomer to the discussion I'm not fully conversant with the origins of the term, and my understanding is based mainly on your own extensive work on the subject. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my impression the term "F22" does not appear in any official documentation, and is based solely on chassis stamping in the form F.22 reported on Brian Nunn's vehicle:

Chassis rail:
C291Q
CK-236140
S16389 - F.22

Data plate:
CHASSIS: C291Q.L-W. CAB: FULL
CHASSIS SERIAL: CK-236140
ENGINE SERIAL: 5G-420-F
SM-6389 BUILT NOV-12-45

I gather this led to various theories, the most enduring of which is the existence of a presumed F22 within CMP nomenclature, describing what is essentially an upgraded F15A for use in the FAT role. As such it's a useful working hypothesis and a convenient designation for such a beast. It's also highly probable in my view, given the demonstrated requirement for such a vehicle, as evidenced by extensive use of F15A in the FAT role, certainly in Australian use anyway, where specialist bodied FAT production was abandoned in 1943. As we know of course the FAT evolved in post war years towards GS configuration, ultimately expressed in the 1 ton Landrover, which retained forward control and 101" wheelbase. Furthermore, as discussed in MLU thread "Is the FAT a 60cwt or 15cwt truck", a nominal WD load class rating of 22cwt can indeed be calculated for the CMP FAT, which would indicate the chassis stamping F.22 is no mere coincidence of letters and digits.

Therefore I fully agree with our adoption of F22 nomenclature, recognizing of course that it's a provisional designation only. However we can't automatically assume "winchless FAT" - the winch was optional on other GS configured CMPs, so why not the F22? The more definitive descriptor would be "full cab FAT", and indeed this appears on both F22 data plates found to date, one of which is the winch equipped C291Q.L-I example recorded in Australia by Keith, which is also Indian contract. More recently we've identified a further dozen late production FAT chassis in Australia, mostly in old photographs, but including at least four known survivors, one of which I've been able to inspect. These too appear to be Indian late production FATs, with evidence of integral body in some cases, but evidence also of full cab examples. Of these dozen vehicles at least 7 can be identified as winch equipped ex-factory. In due course I'll write these vehicles up in detail here.

Of course, in light of the Indian evidence, the question now becomes - was the F22 ever produced in Canada? If surviving examples exist, we're yet to present conclusive evidence. Hence my request for photos/info on Maurice Donckers' vehicle, so we can determine Indian or Canadian production if possible, assuming of course it's an F22 as we believe. I note also the reference to another unrestored example in Belgium, which if still in existence would be worth investigating if possible, given the extreme rarity of these vehicles. I must confess I've become quite obsessed with the F22 - I'm even planning to build a replica!

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Tony,

I am in a hurry right now, will get back on this subject in detail later.

For now I will leave you with the remark that it seems we will have to go back to the drawing board (literally), because there are some aspects totally confused /mingled up: there was no such thing as "Indian production", for example. Assembly: yes, production: no. The "F22" was manufactured in Canada, period. More about that later.

Regards,
Hanno

[Tony Wheeler]

Thanks Hanno, that would be greatly appreciated. As you say there's a lot of confusion surrounding the F22, and not just in my own mind! It's fair to say the F22 remains a mystery to most CMP enthusiasts. It would be great if we rectify that, as it's an important part of CMP history.

Cheers,
Tony

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Moderator's note: the next five postings were split off from F30 Illustrated Parts List:

Originally Posted by Lauren Child

I've also been told that some of the F22 parts are F30, hence it would be useful for my truck.

I'd be interested to hear which parts that would be? The F30 is basically a long wheelbase F15A, your F22 is basically an FGT without winch.

H.

[Lauren Child]

Originally Posted by Hanno Spoelstra

I'd be interested to hear which parts that would be? The F30 is basically a long wheelbase F15A, your F22 is basically an FGT without winch.

If I remember right it's some suspension components. I'll have to look out the big book of her history.

[Tony Wheeler]

Lauren, the only suspension component which varies throughout the CMP 4x4 range is auxiliary springs. They're present on 60S/L and absent on 15A, 30, FAT. Everything else is standardized across the range.

Your vehicle has auxiliary springs but they may be retrofit. Are the spring bumpers riveted or bolted to the chassis rail?

[Lauren Child]

I'll take a look, though I'm hesitant to assume anything is retrofit unless I find evidence on the F22 to indicate it. It's a weird enough beast that anything could have been standard.

[Tony Wheeler]

You're dead right Lauren, it's dangerous to make assumptions about this vehicle! It was poor wording on my part, I've amended it accordingly. In my mind there are actually two possibilities for this vehicle, which could potentially relate to the auxiliary springs. Here's my thinking FWIW:

If we work on the basis that it was supplied to India as per contract, ie. standard FAT chassis less winch, that would mean the auxiliary springs are retrofit. I think that's the logical starting point for this vehicle, as a working hypothesis, until we can establish its provenance more definitely. It's well documented in civvy hands but that doesn't explain the non-standard features, notably the simplified transfer case shift pattern. That is, did it emerge from the factory that way in 1945, or was it a British Army mod performed subsequently?

Personally I find the latter far more likely, particularly in light of the stirrup step evidence, which appears to confirm Indian build. In other words, the chassis was built up by Ford India, with full cab and wooden GS body (just like the winch equipped example photographed during the Indo-Pakistan war), and subsequently brought back to the UK with its returning RA unit. Presumably quite a few CMPs arrived in the UK by that route, either immediately after WWII, or after Indian Independence in 1947, or conceivably some time later, if the unit served elsewhere post war, eg. Burma, Malaya, Singapore, Hong Kong. We're even finding what appear to be Indian assembled FATs in Australia lately, apparently GS configured originally, one of them with an original battery box located exactly like yours Lauren. Funnily enough this vehicle used to be Keith's daily drive!

Anyway to my mind that's the most likely scenario for your vehicle Lauren, given the evidence to date. I can find no other way to explain those stirrup steps. Logically therefore, the simplified transfer case shift must have been a British Army mod, perhaps for trialling in post war years, with a view to introduction on future vehicle types, eg. Landrovers. The alternative theory is that it was a 1945 Ford factory development, but that only makes sense on a pilot vehicle, not on a single chassis delivered to India.

By the same logic we could reasonably assume the auxiliary springs were also British Army installed, according their own particular needs at the time, rather than by Ford in 1945 on a single chassis delivered to India. However, of interest in this context is Brian Nunn's report: "The chassis is made up as the standard type for the F15 range but with a secondary chassis fitted to the inside of the standard one." That's an extraordinary mod, which if confirmed would appear to tie in with the auxiliary springs, indicating very heavy duty use, eg. water tanker perhaps. That seems to raise another possibility, in light of your contract card evidence Lauren: "The back of SM6337 notes that a small number of vehicles were used as either Truck 15cwt, 4x4 Water 200 gal, or Lorry 30cwt, 4x4, Water." (I believe you've got the cards mixed up Lauren, and it's actually SM6389). In other words, it's not inconceivable the vehicle started life as a Lorry 30cwt, 4x4, Water. That might explain the reinforced chassis (yet to be confirmed) and auxiliary springs, if indeed that's how these 30cwt SWB chassis were built, which seems not unlikely. Certainly you'd expect some such modification to warrant uprating from 15cwt to 30cwt.

Brian also reported: "I purchased the vehicle back in 1979/80 from a garage in Hampshire, where it had stood unwanted and unloved for about 15 years. The garage owner told me that he had bought two Ford V8 trucks at an auction, one was fitted with a GS steel body, and the other was a Water Bowser. Both bodies were removed by him, and the trucks were fitted out with a Harvey Frost crane and winch fitted to the back for use as a tow truck. One vehicle was disposed of during the late 60's whilst the other one continued to work till it was replaced with a Humber 1 ton GS truck in the mid 70's. The garage owner could not remember which vehicle was fitted with which body, but thought that it was fitted with the GS type body."

In other words Lauren, if the garage owner's recollection was astray, it's quite possible you own a former Lorry 30cwt, 4x4, Water! Of course, we'd then have to explain RA markings on a water tanker!

Whatever the case I agree we need to stick to the physical evidence, as found on the vehicle itself. If you can post a few pics of the chassis it may shed some light on these questions. I reckon it would be worth starting a new thread on this vehicle, to keep all the evidence and discussion in one place. If ever a CMP deserved a dedicated thread it's this one!

[Lauren Child]

I see your point, though I'm reasonably sure the flat back is correct as it ties in with the oddness - she's got an odd carrier underneath that's not a normal size for POL or jerry can, and the chances of the garage owner getting mixed up and having procured two odd vehicles seem pretty remote. I'm told that this was copied (and confirmed as being the right dimensions) from the wreck of the old back, and I suspect we'll have a cinderella "the shoe fits" moment when we find what goes into it.

It is true that the back of the card shows a subset of trucks were used for water though, and I'd imagine they'd be a good choice for it. Noting the 30cwt gives food for thought on the small chassis.

The stirrup steps I'm pretty certain are a UK thing, as she would never have got to India (she was made at the point where the orders were getting diverted, and the suspicion is that's where the names of the channel islands on the cards come from). She did go somewhere hot and dusty as she's got desert paint under the garage's yellow colour and on top of the SCC15. Maybe Palestine?

[Tony Wheeler]

Interesting about the odd carrier Lauren, maybe post some pics and someone may recognize it.

I don't quite follow you on a few points here:

1. "The stirrup steps I'm pretty certain are a UK thing"

The problem is we've only seen two RH stirrup steps on the entire planet. One of them is on a full cab FAT which was DEFINITELY built in India. The other is on a full cab FAT which was CONTRACTED for India, namely yours. There's just no getting around that kind of evidence - that RH stirrup step has "FORD INDIA" stamped all over it!

Likewise the battery box location - that's standard Indian Pattern FAT practice. They either moved the passenger seat forward, or dispensed with it completely on some versions. Once again, the only other CMP we've found with a battery box located like yours is a full cab FAT supplied to India.

2. "she would never have got to India (she was made at the point where the orders were getting diverted, and the suspicion is that's where the names of the channel islands on the cards come from)."

It seems to me we've placed rather too much emphasis on the late '45 diversion theory. This vehicle has been the subject of investigation for decades, but most discussion seems to revolve around the idea it was built in the UK, as suggested by the late Peter Ford: "Given what I now know, I'm strongly of the opinion that Brian's truck was a British Army assembly modified for their own purposes......One must assume that it was assembled in the UK, from parts, on Nov. 12th." In light of recent evidence however, including the contract cards, the photo above, and mounting evidence of Indian built vehicles in Australia, I believe we need to focus on the possibility it was built in India as contracted, and subsequently brought back with the British Army. I imagine they brought scores of vehicles back from India after WWII, invariably the newest ones. The question remains open, as Hanno wrote many years ago:

The following questions regarding the "F22" remain:

Where were these trucks built?

Fact is that Great Britain, Australia and India did receive a number of CKD (Complete Knock Down) kits. These were not complete vehicles built up in Canada and then disassembled to some extent to facilitate shipping, but kits of parts that were to be built in overseas factories with a high degree of local content. Thus, a number of local versions existed which might not all be listed in Canadian manuals.

Where and when were they used?


It's also worth noting that SM6389 is not a particularly late contract. A little earlier we have SM6337 with one recorded build date of 26 May 45, and somewhat later we have SM6537 with a build date of 4 Sep 45. Evidently this SM6389 chassis sat around for several months before being built on 12 Nov 45. That's not unusual, esp. for an export chassis. Here in Australia we see plenty of Nov 45 build dates, and we've seen build dates as late as 1947.

3. "She did go somewhere hot and dusty as she's got desert paint under the garage's yellow colour and on top of the SCC15. Maybe Palestine?"

I don't see why not Lauren - maybe direct from from Ford Bombay up the Suez with a British Army unit posted from India to Palestine? I imagine that would have made sense at the time, what with excess units in India and trouble brewing in Palestine. BTW what's SSC15?

4. "the chances of the garage owner getting mixed up and having procured two odd vehicles seem pretty remote."

I completely agree Lauren, but therein lies the problem! If both vehicles were SWB as we assume, and only one of them was an oddity, then the other one must have been F15A. The question then becomes - which body did the F15A have? By far the most likely answer is the GS body, which means your vehicle was the tanker.

I believe the chassis rails may hold the answer. If they're double skinned as Brian reported, and the auxiliary spring stops are riveted, it's hard to imagine it being anything but a Lorry 30cwt, 4x4, Water. However I don't think we should speculate before seeing the evidence. Can you post some pics of the chassis at some stage Lauren?

Cheers,
Tony

[Lauren Child]

Tony,

I'm not saying that it isn't a possibility, just that it doesn't tie in with what I'm being told on this side of the pond.

At the end of the war a number of contracts were used to supply the staging for the allied invasion of Japan and Japanese held territories. When the war ended unexpectedly the supply ships were diverted, and it took a while to halt production. The surplus of vehicles were then made available for other countries to rebuild, and the newer "oddball" models were at the front of the queue as the Commonwealth armies began to consolidate and re standardise their fleet (the mixed manufacture and model of vehicles being a logistics nightmare in peacetime).

Somehow my vehicle ended up in a British army surplus auction over here sometime later where the garage bought her, so she must have been missed from this process. That's not unusual given how complex the process was (and possibly because she was deployed somewhere when her compatriots were packaged up, that would tie in with just post-war use somewhere hot and sandy). Alternatively she was painted up post war but never used, possibly as part of the whole process (maybe a trials vehicle?).

SCC15 is the late war British (and some of the Commonwealth) camo colour. I understand from a different thread that Australian vehicles had different colour schemes. The desert colour on top is a post-war colour.

[RichCam]

I have been wondering about my Cab 13 Ford CMP. I thought it was an F15A - no data plates - in the 43 or 44 vintage but it has the 20" rims and some other components that are bigger than the standard F15A. Could it be a F22 based on the other pictures in this thread? What would I be looking for to identify it as an F22?
Thanks, Richard

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Tony Wheeler

It seems to me we've been led astray here by the flimsiest of flimsy evidence, namely the word "Jersey" pencilled on the contract card. This vehicle has been the subject of speculation for decades, including by experts like Hanno and the late Peter Ford, and yet in all that time it seems no one has been willing to consider the possibility it was delivered to India. Why is that so? The reality is it was CONTRACTED to India, and even if some of those 350 chassis WERE diverted, why would we assume this was one of them? The fact that it turned up in the UK around 1960 means nothing. I imagine RA units brought back scores of vehicles from India after WWII, invariably the newest ones.

Not so much speculation: I try to base my research on period sources or well-researched and documented sources.

Regarding shipments, diversions and assembly: do you have access to Wheels & Tracks magazine? I would recommend the following issues to anyone who wants to get a good understanding about vehicle shipments and assembly across the globe during WW2:

PS: in fact ALL W&T CMP articles are worthwhile reading material for anyone interested in CMP vehicles

ISSUE No. 37 (October 1991)
CMP Assembly Overseas - Re-assembly of knocked-down Canadian Military Pattern vehicles.

ISSUE No. 38 (January 1992)
Trucks for Albania and Yugoslavia - Transport provided by UNRRA for relief work in 1945/46.

ISSUE No. 41 (October 1992)
India's Ford Wheeled Carriers - Canadian Ford Quad 4×4 chassis with Indian armoured hulls.
Wheeled Carriers, NZ Pattern - New Zealand version of Indian armoured carrier, narrated by Jeff Plowman.

ISSUE No. 55 (April 1996)
Canadian Disposals and Returns - Canada-Europe; some vehicles did it twice.
The Dutch Inheritance (1) - Deelen Demob Vehicle Park.
The Dutch Inheritance (2) - The Enschede Dump.
Holland's Vehicle Parks - Soesterberg: 1 VP, Stroe: 2 VP.

ISSUE No. 56 (July 1996)
Surplus MVs for UNRRA - Part 1: Transport for Albania, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Germany.

H.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by RichCam

I have been wondering about my Cab 13 Ford CMP. I thought it was an F15A - no data plates - in the 43 or 44 vintage but it has the 20" rims and some other components that are bigger than the standard F15A. Could it be a F22 based on the other pictures in this thread? What would I be looking for to identify it as an F22?

Richard,

Don't forget many many CMPs were rebuilt after the war and components were re-used over and over again. This means that your F15A could have been fitted with other axles, wheels, engines etc. after the originals wore out or when the owner converted his truck for other uses.

That said, please refer to my web-page http://www.geocities.ws/cmpvehicles/f22.html for the most comprehensive description of an "F22" (it wasn't an original designation) to date.
It basically was an FGT chassis without winch and a regular Cab 13 plus cargo box.

Please post some detail pictures of the chassis and axles so we can have a proper look.

Thanks,
Hanno

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Hanno Spoelstra

Please post some detail pictures of the chassis and axles so we can have a proper look.

In particular we need to see the steering box and steering ends Richard. I recall this vehicle appearing on MLU some time ago, and I have a few saved images from that thread, but unfortunately none of them show these aspects.

[Tony Wheeler]

Originally Posted by Hanno Spoelstra

Not so much speculation: I try to base my research on period sources or well-researched and documented sources.

Apologies Hanno, poor choice of wording on my part. I've amended "speculation" to "investigation". Your research is indeed extremely rigorous and entirely evidence based, with an admirable avoidance of jumping to conclusions. I've also done you quite an injustice in suggesting that "in all that time it seems no one has been willing to consider the possibility it was delivered to India." That's simply not true in your case, so I've amended the entire paragraph accordingly.

At this stage I don't have access to Wheels & Track mags so my CMP education is sadly lacking in many areas. In due course I hope to start a collection so I'll look out for the editions you mention.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Tony Wheeler

At this stage I don't have access to Wheels & Track mags so my CMP education is sadly lacking in many areas. In due course I hope to start a collection so I'll look out for the editions you mention.

I will try to scan the most relevant articles, will need to take the magazines out of their binders first.
Or else check out ebay, often people are offering their unwanted issues. Not expensive and well worth having an properly printed copy.

H.

[lynx42]

Originally Posted by Hanno Spoelstra

Or else check out ebay, often people are offering their unwanted issues. Not expensive and well worth having an properly printed copy.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WHEELS-AND-T...item4d17fecace

Most copies available from this mob. Many other issues at varying prices from other vendors as well.

Regards Rick.

[Tony Wheeler]

Thanks very much Hanno and Rick. I've just emailed the seller requesting the issues you suggested Hanno. Don't worry about scanning the articles until I hear back from him.

Cheers,
Tony