ADF Scammell/Leyland Contractor ARNs and Photos

[Tommy]

ADF Scammell/Leyland Contractors during exercise K98. Note the 'Red Rooster over 21' on the doors of the Contractors and Mack tippers.

ARNs from left to right. 172-523, 172 516 and 172-526.



Although the front ARN plate is partially 'cropped', the numbers that can be seen are 172-51?. Bulldozer is an International TD15.





172-523. The front end loader is a Case W36 high lift wheeled loader. It is the same as in the photo below.





Although the ARN plate on this Contractor is difficult to read (on original image), it may be 101-969 or 569? Interestingly, the third Contractor is towing a fuel tanker trailer.

[Diana Alan]

Thanks Tommy

The trailers are mostly Steco, (apart from the last photo where only the first and fourth prime movers have Stecos).

The Stecos are interesting because they load from the front.  The gooseneck lowers off the fifth wheel and is pulled back up by the winch on the rear of the Scammell.  Once dropped off the truck, the gooseneck of the trailer hinges down flat.

The trials in SVN suggested that the trailers were difficult to load back onto the prime mover if the ground surface was not flat and level.

In the last image the second trailer looks like the old 1960/70s Haulmark bogie trailers same as used in SVN behind the Diamond Reo.


Image source REMLR.com - Noel Ps images.

Just one question someone may know about the Scammell Commander, does anyone know the location of the chassis number on the truck?

[Phoenix]

Great photos!!  I will have to add the entries in to the database!

[Diana Alan]

ADF Scammell/Leyland Contractors during exercise K98. Note the 'Red Rooster over 21' on the doors of the Contractors and Mack tippers.

Although the ARN plate on this Contractor is difficult to read (on original image), it may be 101-969 or 569? Interestingly, the third Contractor is towing a fuel tanker trailer.

Tommy

Just realised the significance of this last comment.
Could the number be 101-963, 101-964 or 101-965?

101-964 was used in SVN and one of two trials Scammell Contractors, one would assume that the other was either 101-963 or 101-965.  These two trials trucks were likely the only ones badged Scammell, the rest were badged Leyland.

Image location large: http://remlr.com/photos/pics10/Vietnam8.jpg
Image source REMLR.com Noel Ps SVN images.

Diana

[Tommy]

Not exactly sure of the ARN from this closeup.

It has the Leyland badge on the bonnet too.

[Diana Alan]

I see your issue with the plate and yes you're right it is a Leyland, so perhaps 101-964 was the only one branded Scammell.

I wonder if carzee or one of the others in Canberra would be able to pop over to the AWM and have a look at the ARN book.  It would at least give us an idea of what the ARN should be.

[Mike C]

Looks like 101969 to me...

Mike C

[Diana Alan]

Agree it does resemble 969, which is why it would be good to have a look at the ARN book to confirm.

[Mike C]

Confirm ... what?
That 101969 is a Contractor? 
OK: consider it confirmed.

As for Leyland v Scammell, 101964 and 101965 were purchased/supplied at the one time. All the others came later.

Mike C

[Diana Alan]

Hi Mike

The reason for wanting confirmation was that my mate Steve, who owns a Contractor, was under the impression that there were only two Contractors with the 101 prefix.  101-964 photographed in SVN and 101-965 that is depicted on the cover and inside one of the Army manuals on the vehicles.  (In my posts above, I couldn't remember if the vehicle on the manual was 963 or 965.)

If you suggest there is a third Contractor 101-969 that is new information to both of us and something that needs to be updated on the REMLR ARN lists.  (Neither 101-965 nor 101-969 are listed in the REMLR list and 101-964 has no chassis or other identifiers listed. See: http://remlr.com/ARN/ARN-leyland.php)

Always good practice to have at least two sources of information.

Diana

[Phoenix]

101-942 is as high as I have photos of the ARN Ledgers, so I don't quite get there in what we have archived.

[Diana Alan]

101-942 is as high as I have photos of the ARN Ledgers, so I don't quite get there in what we have archived.

Richard

Why haven't you driven up to the AWM today and sorted out our issue?  Just kidding, I will have it on my to-do list next time I visit, unless someone else gets the info first.

Diana 

[Tommy]

[Diana Alan]

  The more I look the less I know.

If you were a gambler you might even have a bet on 569 as you suggested in your first post Tommy.

My money's still on Mike, he's known for having a bit of inside knowledge!      (Good to have him around)

Diana

[Mike C]

No, not 'inside knowledge' (whatever that is), just been researching this stuff an awfully long time....

It is not 101569: that's a 1/2 ton trailer.

As Richard has said, his REMLR lists are a work in progress, and are incomplete.

But why do you doubt my post? Believe me: 101969 is a Contractor, and your mate Steve is incorrect in his assumption (dangerous things, assumptions....). 101964 to 101993 are all Contractors.

Mike C