TOPIC: ex army trucks circa 1946 or earlier with canopy
ex army trucks circa 1946 or earlier with canopy
25 Jun 2020 21:29 #211865
Just wanting some general information and help without being able to provide much info.
Ex army trucks with canopies purchased in Western Australia 1946 or earlier in the Great Southern including Perth. I don't have a definite make/model or year. I have found newspaper articles re army trucks/vehicles that seem to have a habit of running off roads and overturning. Anyway, I'm wanting to know if the steering wheel ever had a habit or an issue with coming off or breaking in some way? Were there steering issues (as found in newspaper articles)?
I'm researching my family history and a family member was killed in 1947 from an accident in an ex army truck/utility that steered off the road, hitting a guide post, then telegraph pole, hitting 3 saplings and overturning. Passenger was thrown from the truck and the driver was found laying beside the truck.
Any help or information is great appreciated. Thanks Kerry
There were no problems with the steering or steering wheel on any Army trucks of the period. They were of the best technology of the time and equal or superior to their civil counterparts. 90% of Army trucks had steering wheels, columns and boxes from units already in general civil production.
Half of the military fleet were two wheel drive vehicles that were just civilian models painted green. The other half were cross country types of 4 and 6 wheel drive. Jeeps were dangerous because they were capable of high speeds, not particularly stable at those high speeds and driven by young blokes who thought they were a sports car.
The cross country types had a higher centre of gravity but this was solved by having a much wider track. A Chevrolet or Ford Blitz will still be on its feet on a side slope well after a Chevrolet or Ford 3 ton civilian type truck has rolled over.
Just like today, any unroadworthiness in a vehicle may contribute to the severity of an accident but is responsible for causing it in the first place in less than 10% of cases. The vast majority of these are caused by bad tyres and bad brakes both of which the driver was aware of and continued operation.
Another 15% are caused by animals or people stepping out, bike riders, oil or debris on the road and various other unavoidable situations. These are really the only incidents which can be called "accidents"
75% of crashes are caused by human error - inattention, fatigue, not driving to the conditions, bad judgement, poor skills.
To answer your question, no, when judged with their 1940's contemporaries , not modern ADR standards, there are no skeletons in the closet concerning the un-roadworthiness of military vehicle design of the 40's.
The following user(s) said Thank You: cobbadog, DieselFan
I think that was more to do with the height of the "load" and the fact they were driven and turned at high speed. If the truck was fitted with a normal tray it probably would be pretty normal. As it was a fixed construction tanker I suppose you are right in saying it it was not fit for purpose and corrected by getting the water lower on later models.
I bought an AS 180 to wreck once,steering had broken twice ,and the company blackbanned the truck.......when I got the Perk out ,I noticed the four cab mounts were all broken up ,and the cab had moved to one side by around 4".......they must have sprung the steering column to fit the mountings..
I think that after WW2 rationing wasstill enforced and there was waiting lists on everything including tyresand all manner of parts
I'm guessing as I dont know because I wasn't even thought of then that this lack of basic parts would of caused a lot of problems
Drink driving wouldn't of helped as it was Im lead to believe pretty normal back then
Also we need to remember many people up to the end of WW2 in Australia had never owned or operated a motor vehicle of any description which no doubt lead to lots of accidents
Also just the fact that percentage of ex military vehicles on would of been extremely high as thats all people could buy
These few factors alone I would think could distort any figures on their own let alone a combination of them
Just some thoughts
Your better to die trying than live on your knees begging
mammoth wrote: 'High speed Thornycroft' is an oxymoron.
The 6 x 6 Thornycroft Nubian Airport Crash tender with the Rolls Royce B81 straight eight petrol engine had a speed controller with one setting for driving and another faster setting for pumping. They have a plate near the throttle warning operators not to use the pumping revs. when driving. The manufacturer obviously knew that the vehicle was capable of over 100 miles per hour but may be uncontrollable at that speed. I would not like to have to make a panic stop from that speed in an emergency.
I have my shoulder to the wheel,
my nose to the grindstone,
I've put my best foot forward,
I've put my back into it,
I'm gritting my teeth,