correct measurements of rear mk1 armour plate

[RichardT10829]

i could be wrong but the air ducting seems to be incorrect to be a scout carrier ?

[shaun]

Hi Lynn, it was of the old hulls i sold Martyn a couple of years back. you could see where all the fixings had been when it was a scout. there had been some major upgrades done to the vehicle to bring it up to Universal spec. i have the "T" number written down some where. i hope that helps. TTFN

[Lynn Eades]

In the photos, I see the blanking of the battery box wiring holes, and the rear panel, and side panel bren mount holes, which are factory blanked by riveting. This was a standard production method. This is why I say she was a mortar carrier. I would doubt that any Scouts were factory converted to MkII Universals. Scout production finished about 1938, and the first MkII Universals were produced in 1942. By this time the Scouts were lost at Dunkirk, or had gone to North Africa. Aside from that I can only think of one difinative Scout feature that MIGHT have survived in a factory rebuild. That would be the bolt holes for the air ducts, which on the Scout are curved, and on a Universal, are straight.
I believe that all other Scout features would have disapeared.
I cannot see a factory halting its systemised. production to pull one old Scout to bits to rebuild it as a Universal MkII. ( I Imagine also that had this been done, then it would have been renumbered)
Would they have stripped the carrier to the point of removing and replacing the gunners front plate, the hull division plate, The rear plate (that started this thread) Which in the photo looks like a standard factoy Universal installation. the side armour on the left side. etc. etc. etc.
One would have to consider the order in which parts were riveted together, and then the difficulty of doing some of those operations in a different order.
I am not trying to poke you in the eye Shaun. I am saying (from my limited knowledge) that it is highly unlikely, and that because you were un aware of what the differences between a standard Universal carrier, and a Mortar carrier are, that this was the conclusion that you arrived at.
Pictures are Philip Hastings Scout hull, and one of the Air ducts common only to Brens, and Scouts. the last picture shows a Universal carrier air duct arrangement. Note in the Scout there is no armour plate at the outer upper corners, that is in the universals.

[martyn]

I can tell you all that that carrier was a mk1 all the running gear was marked 1941 and had canadian part numbers on them.
from that iam guessing its not a scout and i have found a couple more pickys of the bulkhead and air boxes if that helps anyone work out what she was?

[Lynn Eades]

As you said. A MkI Universal. I can't see clearly enough, the back plate. Is it the same as this picture? This is a Mortar carrier hull. Note the rivets closing the holes where the battery box bolts on, The rivets filling the gun mounts holes, as well as the smoke discharger bkt, and the holes for the rubber rest angle iron along the side, and back.

I think this picture is the Overloon carrier. there is a thread on MLU about it.

[kevin powles]

Hi, One clue to the carriers original stowage design could be this : on the rear plate there are two holes drilled on a Mk1 carrier for mounting the bracket for the boys anti tank gun stock.

On a standard stowage carrier with bracket missing, there will be two holes.

On a mortar carrier one hole will be factory rivetted shut.

On a tank hunter carrier both will be factory rivetted shut.

On a scout carrier i cannot comment.

hope this helps.

[RichardT10829]

I know that the rivet spacing along the side armour on the bren and the scout is different to the universals and they are positioned slightly different. plus there is the different front idlers. but mainly as i initially stated and Lynn kindly posted a photo of, the ducting is different too.