[servicepub (RIP)]

My comments were made after plowing through six volumes of documents, dated betwen 1933 and 1940, dealing with the mechanization of the Canadian Army.

Syd Swallow was certainly involved but not at a senior level. His boss, Ellis, penned a number of letters and these, along with all of the DND correspondence are there.

When this started in 1937 there was a fear of war on the horizon (one of the reasons why industrial cooperation between Ford and GM was sought) but there was no preconception of ultimately developing the CMP. DND at the time was struggling to get 50-70 15cwt vehicles per year and only desired that WO specs be attained - as much as possible within the confines of DND's own instructions to use as many commercially used parts as possible. In hindsight, one could say that these early vehicles were part of a three year evolution - but in 1937 and 1938 that was not DND's concern.

Your statement "DND wrote a "Statement of Requirements" for the manufacturers to work from and then issued a "Request for Proposal". The manufacturers would take this away and develop and submit their proposal on how to meet that statement. From that, DND would issue a contract, within that contract there may be a deliverable such as a prototype vehicle. This vehicle is tested and rarely accepted "as is" and may be the first of several developmental vehicles built until a standardized vehicle is accepted for production." accurately describes what has happened since the 1950s but is not represenetative of the pre-war and wartime situation.

DND set specifications and then worked closely with both manufacturers concurrently in order to come up with a single design accepteable to DND. Indeed, the documents show that GM and Ford communicated with each other. While the pilots were being built DND modified the specs to adress the individual needs of the manufacturers, including slightly different body sizes.

A single pilot from each firm was tested at Petawawa and the contract was let on the basis of the pilots PLUS any suggested changes put forward by DND. In the case of the Ford it was sloppy steering and for the GM it was the leaf-springs. However, no additional vehicles were built to 'prove' these changes.

DND intended to split the contract for the 1938 purchase of 52 15cwt GS trucks into two equal purchases of 26 per vendor - even though the prices differed. In fact the price paid was the cost of parts and labour plus 10% as a fixed profit. Only Ford's surprising decision to not tender caused the entire contract to go to GM. To encourage Ford to get involved (read 'experienced') they directed the follow-on contract solely to Ford.

Insofar as the body is concerned, although the 1938 body is similar to the 2A1 it is only because they both come from the same British drawings. At the time the term 2A1 was unknown as the system of body identification was only developed with the establishment of the Steel Body Manufacturer's Assocation, a group established by DND to find efficiencies in body production and to relieve the auto manufacturers from this.

From David Hayward's research Sidney [S.E.] Swallow of Ford’s Service Department wrote to LaFleche in early April suggesting that the body for the pilot models from both sources should have a body made by the same source in view of the desired standardisation of bodies. Ford had been asked to withhold from ordering their body until they received the drawings from Ottawa and further instructions . This is a further example of the unique and unprecedented situation whereby two rival companies some distance apart, were requested to, and did, work in tandem. The standard G.S. [General Service] body design was approved on 9 April 1937, and Specification No. 352-C was allocated, whilst the Drawings were given the code D.D. (V) 352-C. Woodwork was to be of thoroughly seasoned ash and white oak, free from knots, saps, shakes, wavy edges and defects. Metal parts were to be of high quality forged steel, free from defects. All bolts and nuts were to be of steel. The body was to have side and tailboards, duly hinged. Carriage bolts were to be used when assembling wooden components, though screws could be used when it was wood-to-wood. Side and tailboards were to be of 1-in. planed white ash,-tongued and grooved where applicable and finished with a “V” joint outside. The floor was to be of 1¼ in. planed white oak with plain butt joints. The spacing of the longitudinal runners on the body was not specified but was to be in accordance with the width of the chassis frame for which the body was intended. The assembled body was to be painted throughout in Service Green No.22 “Dulux” including interior, under-surfaces and hardware. A plate with the name of the manufacturer, date of completion and reference number was to be engraved or stamped on it, and attached to the left lower corner of the body. After completion and inspection, the detailed drawings and specifications were to be sent to the D.N.D. in connection with any future production.

In fact, DND allowed a variation in that quality ash was unobtainable in Canada and they suggested that oak should be an acceptable substitute. DND agreed.

In any event, after studying thousands of pages, there is not one single hint that these contracts were part of an intentional "continuous development program".

Clive