Project PHOENIX

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi all
Well despite all the intercepts, we made it home and completed another successfull border raid. However it was a close call when King Cop Keefy caught up with us at Leongatha but after I promised to deliver it to his place he allowed us to continue. HOWEVER WE LIED and after also duping Plushy we raced across the border and got her home.

We actually bought the Chev about three months ago after a lot of searching. Keefy knew about this truck and it features on his site but he must have forgotten about it. I must thank Colin Morley who gave me the heads up. The recovery was a two thousand kilometer round trip and this was the second time around as we did the recce three months ago and bought it. Since that time we had to buy and restore the Hino so we had a truck truck.

Anyway we now have all the componants for Phoenix apart from the diff, axle and plate assembly that Rob is holding for us (??). Hi Rob.

Next job is measuring and interpreting the wartime photographs to figure out and build the track sub-frames. This is where the expertise of Colin Jones comes into play with CAD programs and steel fabrication.

I'll keep you posted.

Bob

[cliff]

looks good Bob and here's me with hands and fingers to bad to start the model

[Alex van de Wetering]

Cliff,

Can you let me know which Tamiya carrier parts you need? Are you going to use the Tamiya tracks? I might be able to get you the parts needed from my spares box.

Alex

[cliff]

Originally posted by Alex van de Wetering
Cliff,

Can you let me know which Tamiya carrier parts you need? Are you going to use the Tamiya tracks? I might be able to get you the parts needed from my spares box.

Alex

Alex I need a complete set of bogies and tracks if possible. I would like to use AM tracks but cannot afford to purchase them myself just now so will cut and join the rubber band tracks to suit.

I have all the CMP cab and running gear parts needed and will build a chassis to suit.

This built may well be the last one I do due to ongoing health problems and not being able to handle small parts for any amount of time

[Alex van de Wetering]

Cliff,

I have just had a look and I have a complete set of bogies , wheels, sprockets, axle and two sets of rubber tracks (4 runs) for you. I hope you don't need the lower hull, because I have only got one side for you....
If you send me your postal address I will send them to you this week.

That doesn't sound good, Cliff. One more reason for me to send you the parts for Phoenix.

Alex

[Keith Webb]

Originally posted by Bob Moseley
Well despite all the intercepts, we made it home and completed another successfull border raid. However it was a close call when King Cop Keefy caught up with us at Leongatha but after I promised to deliver it to his place he allowed us to continue. HOWEVER WE LIED and after also duping Plushy we raced across the border and got her home.

I knew you were going to be a slippery customer and should have confiscated the keys to the Hino on the spot!

It's a really straight truck (and used to be a kitchen) so it should be a fairly straightforward exercise to rebuild.

Well done Bob, and I look forward to the story as it continues to unfold.

Here's the raider unmasked.

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

Originally posted by Bob Moseley
Well despite all the intercepts, we made it home and completed another successfull border raid. However it was a close call when King Cop Keefy caught up with us at Leongatha but after I promised to deliver it to his place he allowed us to continue. HOWEVER WE LIED and after also duping Plushy we raced across the border and got her home.

Methinks Highwayman Bob is going to be buying a few people a LOT of beer at Corowa next year...

[Ian Pullen]

Bob, I am still searching through the archives when time permits. I am still hopeful that we can come up with some more original pictures to help get "Project Burnt Budgie" off the ground.

[Keith Webb]

Love it!

What other names can we call it?

Toasted Parrot?

Cremated Crow?

'Dead Carrier' Pigeon?

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

Originally posted by Keith Webb
Love it!

What other names can we call it?

Toasted Parrot?

Cremated Crow?

'Dead Carrier' Pigeon?

What, the Operation, the truck or that ugly MiB smirking up a storm?

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

How can one soar like an eagle when one is surrounded by turkeys.
Bob

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi all

Well everything is now in one spot ready for construction. The photomerge image below depicts;

a) the finished product,
b) the donor truck at Colin Jones for a measure and quote,
c) the Carrier running gear.

All I need now are the two collars that hold the double bogies onto the cross-shaft and the Phoenix rear axle assembly from Rob.

Bob

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi all this is my research to date based purely on the few images I have.

1. ARN - 74150.

2. Truck - 1942 Chevrolet C60S.

3. Front tyres - 10.50x20 directionals.

4. Carrier track reduced to 157 track links.

5. Track tensioning through the Carrier front idler track adjustment system.

6. Carrier running gear fitted to purpose built sub-frames riveted to the truck chassis rails.

7. Rear axle/diff appear to be standard Chevrolet with the addition of a plate to hold the track sprockets on the hubs. One theory says that a second transfer case was introduced but reversed and down angled. This was to align the front and rear diff ratios.

8. Drive sprockets have 43 teeth whereas the Carrier sprocket only has 35 teeth ergo larger diameter drive sprockets. This may be the compensation measure for the diff ratios.

9. Chalk scripting on the driver’s door appears to be “Not to go to Eng or Steelweld”. Apparently Steelweld was a fabricator for GMH and “Eng” could be short for Engineering.

It now appears that Rob’s rear axle assembly did not originate from this truck as his drive sprockets are the standard 35 tooth Carrier ones. I wonder what this rear end was from?

The other thing I need to track down, pardon the pun, is that allegedly there is film footage of the testing of this vehicle. My sources have named Keefy as the originator of this information, so my friend help me out. I contacted Mike at the AWM but he has no direct knowledge of this. I have also researched many of the AWM databases, but to date no luck.

Colin is well into producing CAD drawings but we still need further information, especially re. the rear end of which we have no imagery.

Over to you gurus.

Bob

[Keith Webb]

Your engine number should be PR3874314

I have a feeling I saw the footage at Tony Smith's...

I hope the truck will be well prepped for it's operation - make sure you have the anaethesist ready - 65 year old ladies can respond badly to major operations!

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi all
Well at this stage the sad news is that there are no holdings at Bandiana, thanks Ian, and Tony's film footage is about the Tracked Truck. I've trawled the AWM with no luck and will now trawl The State Library of Victoria on Tony's suggestion. This is an elusive little bugger.
Bob

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally posted by Bob Moseley
The other thing I need to track down, pardon the pun, is that allegedly there is film footage of the testing of this vehicle. My sources have named Keefy as the originator of this information, so my friend help me out. I contacted Mike at the AWM but he has no direct knowledge of this. I have also researched many of the AWM databases, but to date no luck.

Bob,

I recall it was Mike Kelly. At least it was him who posted an AWM reference number in CMP Half Track. But I now see Keefy later came up with the fact that this footage shows the tracked truck. An elusive bugger indeed. . . .

Good luck, sounds like an exciting project!

Hanno

NOTE: I have merged these two threads since Hanno dug up the old one, so don't bother with the link! -- Jif

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi Hanno
Thanks for reminding me about that thread. I read it many years ago and that whetted my appetite for this project. It was good to read it again and re-visit the theories.
Bob

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

Originally posted by Richard Notton
As you well know, my other function is to act as Aunt Sally.
( That'll send them off around Google. )

R.

Found it....

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

What the hell, we have addressed both now that Hanno dug up the old one!

[Tony Smith]

Originally posted by Bob Moseley
Hi all this is my research to date based purely on the few images I have.

3. Front tyres - 10.50x20 directionals.

4. Carrier track reduced to 157 track links.
...

6. Carrier running gear fitted to purpose built sub-frames riveted to the truck chassis rails.

7. Rear axle/diff appear to be standard Chevrolet with the addition of a plate to hold the track sprockets on the hubs. One theory says that a second transfer case was introduced but reversed and down angled. This was to align the front and rear diff ratios.

8. Drive sprockets have 43 teeth whereas the Carrier sprocket only has 35 teeth ergo larger diameter drive sprockets. This may be the compensation measure for the diff ratios.

Over to you gurus.

Bob

Bob, I was throwing some numbers about with Laurie Winney tonight, and we have come to the conclusion the following concept is a workable proposition:

If the rear axle was driven straight from the 1:1 ratio PTO output of the Transfer case (ie: NO second transfer case in the back) and the front axle was driven from the Transfer case which was permanently in Low range (1.87 : 1 ratio), then the carrier track would turn 75.25 inches per the front wheels turning 70.55inches, or approximately a 6% difference. As the vehicle speed would be limited by the capability of the carrier track, having the vehicle perpetually in low range would not present a problem as this vehicle would never have been intended for highway use, but cross country work. It is possible to re-work the transfer case linkage to keep Low Range selected, but engage or disengage the front axle as required. Cross country work would also provide some slippage necessary to overcome the 6% difference when the front axle is engaged.

Having the rear drive through the dog clutch of the PTO output may present a mechanical weak point, however, being a GM project, I would expect that an output shaft from a C60X would have been substituted, being a solid shaft without the dog clutch.

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi Tony
Thanks for putting all that in writing. Lawrie and I have been on the phone for hours over the last couple of weeks trying to nut out this problem and tonight he relayed this latest information to me. My measurements were the track travelled 77" per revolution of the 43 toothed sprocket whilst the 10.50x20 directional tyre travelled 129" per revolution, ergo the sprocket rotated 1.7 times to one rotation of the tyre. So both our figures are pretty close. I'm just going to hook the driveline up to the standard componantry and see what happens.
Bob

[charlie fitton]

But if I may add two points:

The front wheels should overdrive the rear by a small percentage, to allow for the turning of curves and such, otherwise, the driveline will be perpetually "wound up", and

If memory serves , the Opel Blitz halftrack/carrier-type truck drove with the diff at the front of the tracks, as opposed to the rear. What may have been their reasoning for this?

[Lynn Eades]

10.5 + 10.5 + 20 = 41" dia.
I know you need to start somewhere, but from make to make, and through the life of the tyres, there will be a fair variation in the circumference. Maybe the front "overdrive" Charlie is talking about allows for tyre wear.

[Lynn Eades]

Surely they would have stuck to standard componentry, as much as possible.
The only non std. thing in the drive line, is the sprocket.(?) My guess is that they made the sprockets with 43 teeth because thats what works.

[Bob Carriere]

... which is worth more now!!!!!

1. Typically the front axle ratio of half tracks always overdrive the rear assembly by at least a little bit..... remember the initial thread.... they are hard enough to steer without having the superior traction of the rear pushing faster than the front axle.

2. Charlie is right all other half track I have seen have the diff, mounted up front even White and Internationals..... maybe it was to give some movement to the track rather than a stiff suspension associated with a quick transplant of a UC track.

3. from my experience with the 2 speed T case I beleive that it is impossible to run the front axle at 1.87 while the rear runs at 1 to 1....... the two speed gear can only be engaged in one position at the time as they are at opposite end of the PTO shaft. At least NOT unless you did some re-engineering of the T case guts.

4. they may have used a secong T case to do exactly what is impossible above.....

Think of it as using the second T case to input 1.87 to one and output back to the rear axle 1.1.....sketch it out.... and that would account for the second T case.....yes the T case would have to be flipped..... take 1:87 out of the first T case at the usual rear axle output.... feed it into the second T case flipped backwards so it goes in to the usual rear axle output....convert it back to 1:1 and drive the rear axle from the normally front part of the T case that wouold accept the engine input....yeck draw a picture and you'll see..... or maybe it's time I went to bed.....

5. the slight difference in ratio front to back maybe cancelled out by using a different 10.50 casing tires.... somewhat taller. I base this on the fact that I have compared original 9 x16 V thread 1940 tires with modern 9x16 bar thread and 9x16 michelin and they all have significant rolling diameter.....The originalal 10:50 tires on Rob's HUP are HUGE compared to regular 1940 threads...... so is it possible they found and inflated hard a larger 10:50 tyre( brand unknown) to reduce the ratio differences.....???? notice the tire in the original picture is not flexing much....... even with all the concrete blocks at the rear.

Noneless fascinated with your project Bob.

Boob

[Tony Smith]

Originally posted by Lynn Eades
10.5 + 10.5 + 20 = 41" dia.
I know you need to start somewhere, ...

I said the same thing to Laurie, but apparently Bob has measured these tyres to be 42in. Correct, Bob?

Bob, so 43 track links laid out on the ground are 77in long? You might have some pin wear there!

[Tony Smith]

Originally posted by charlie fitton
But if I may add two points:

The front wheels should overdrive the rear by a small percentage, to allow for the turning of curves and such, otherwise, the driveline will be perpetually "wound up", and

Although the trans case is permanently in low range, the front axle is only engaged when the driver selects it, so "Wind up" should'nt be a problem on solid surfaces.

Next problem to nut out is if there was any link between the steering and L/R braking on the carrier track?

[Bob Carriere]

.... what is the diameter of a modern US bar thread 11 x 20..?

I have some at the barn and they are much taller than the usual 9x16........

with the proper large tire you can surmount the ratio differences.

Bob

[Lynn Eades]

I would think that the steer axle would do all the steering (is that the case with other half tracks?) and that there would be no need for any steering control at the rear. KISS applies.

Charlie, There would be a lot of reasons to have the drive axle at the front of the track. The drive axle is solid mounted in the chassis, making the hookup of diff to t/fer case relatively simple.

[Bob Moseley (RIP)]

Hi all
Thanks for all your comments so far, they are extreemly helpful. As this is a faithful reproduction I am using the standard 10.50x20 directional tyre. My measurement is off my one worn example with a tape measure around the highest point on the tread. So the 129" circumference would be the minimum. The 77" track distance was measured with the track coiled and counting 43 sprocket holes. Again this is only an approximate measurement. However as both measurements would be within cooee of the original measurements I don't think the discrepancy would matter.

Boob, your theory relating to the second transfer case flipped is exactly the same as Tony's and my other guru, Lawrie Winney.

The quandry now is, one transfer case or two with the second one reversed, bearing in mind that this would only apply if 4wd was utilised.

Re. the steering, I am happy to rely on the steer axle at this stage. However if that doesn't work I may introduce steering rods that connect between the tie rod ends and the brake actuation levers in the brake drums. However to do this I would need to obtain the backing plates off the Ford C81T (1938 Ford Commercial, the barrel nosed one) as they operated on cable brakes and were utilised in the Australian Carriers. However my limited stock of images doesn't show this adaptation.

OK that's it for now. Time for a red, some choccies and watch the beautiful rain, although the hay makers don't want it at the moment as they are in the middle of the hay season.

Actually Jif, we need a smilie with a glass of red. Just have a look in the 25th hour of your day.

Bob