Some Sth Vietnam snippets from documents.

[Phoenix]

Your spreadsheet actually makes it pretty easy, i've done all of the 108 vehicles as of now (not the 92 - 94 ones)  I downloaded a copy of the excell sheet to make it easier.  so you can take the 108's off the master now.

[Carzee]

Very good. I'll empty the 108 refs out.

I found the first ref to Dave's 112951. [Monty Burns voice ] exxxxcellentttt ..

and I also found refs in '66 to the fact the RAE have no further 88in in their holdings due to the extra utility of the 109in.

More Interestesting:
At the end of the same month we have a Message from RAE 17 Const Sqn to RAASC about the 88in vs 109in Land-Rovers...

[Phoenix]

What a fascinating insight into vehicle evaluation.  I wonder what the date was?

[Carzee]

The reply message seen above was 15nov66.

Later that month.. 23nov66... 1RAASC Coy convoy lists Lcpl Zulu Delta



Par Oneri

[Carzee]

Regarding those Tac plates... (17 Const Sqn RAE Nui Dat 21mar68)

[Diana Alan]

The reply message seen above was 15nov66.

Later that month.. 23nov66... 1RAASC Coy convoy lists Lcpl Zulu Delta

Par Oneri

Does that mean that Glen has been mentioned in dispatches!    

[Carzee]

yeah, i reckon its worth a shout perhaps.
Coming up on 50 years ago, same as Battle of Long Tan itself.

ps, ring the Bells. The Petrol OC was Capt Bell. The 1RAASC snip shows there's another Bell, a Cpl, in 1RAASC. Must've been a lot more common back then.

[Phoenix]

Ok, I have done all 110, and 111 up to 111-450.

I have a couple of queries though.

110804   awm95-10-1-17.pdf apr67 'Gun Jeep', convoy escort duty   6005B      listed RAASC convoy commander 15apr67

This is listed as a gunbuggy, but 110-804 is a workshop LWB.  Any ideas?  was it unclear, or perhaps a typo ??

111209   awm95-13-3-2.pdf, awm95-13-3-1.pdf 8jan68 BER, awm95-13-3-2.pdf 22feb68 BER   6006
This one is noted as 6006, but it is 6005, there is a few inches difference between the 2, but wonder if it was just a mistake of nomenclature, or perhaps a shorty with radio.

[Diana Alan]

Is this one of the 109's that had later chassis swaps during rebuild?  I know that later in the conflict they used 109 GS with m60s on pintle mounts as convoy escorts, perhaps they were still calling them gun Land Rovers.  We know that 112 166 had a chassis swap, likely after SVN, perhaps this was the one.

[Carzee]

Ok, I have done all 110, and 111 up to 111-450.

I have a couple of queries though.

110804   awm95-10-1-17.pdf apr67 'Gun Jeep', convoy escort duty   6005B      listed RAASC convoy commander 15apr67

This is listed as a gunbuggy, but 110-804 is a workshop LWB.  Any ideas?  was it unclear, or perhaps a typo ??

In that convoy 110804 is designated as the gun jeep. Thats it - there is no census on that reference for that arn. Could a wshop be a gun jeep? Since its the only ref we have, until we find other refs of that ARN... we''l just note it was a gun jeep or maybe its their typo? The printing is quiet clear, two occurances.

[Carzee]

Ok, I have done all 110, and 111 up to 111-450.

I have a couple of queries though.

111209   awm95-13-3-2.pdf, awm95-13-3-1.pdf 8jan68 BER, awm95-13-3-2.pdf 22feb68 BER   6006
This one is noted as 6006, but it is 6005, there is a few inches difference between the 2, but wonder if it was just a mistake of nomenclature, or perhaps a shorty with radio.

agian, this one is clearly printed, and must be their typo, The arn and the 6006 census are both clear in awm95-13-3-2.pdf

how do we cope with those problems? I think we can only note the problem and leave it for some robot researching in 2413AD...

[Carzee]

Ok, I have done all 110, and 111 up to 111-450.

wow! I was working on those docs up to about 4pm. For instance, there was some additionals this afternoon that included 107, 108. I wiped out the file recs that you said you transferred. When you say, I'll wipe the 110 111 refs.
Anyway, I think I'll leave it alone for a couple of days. Those 17 Constr docs number about 70, I've done 30 so far. My eyes need a break, my ears are ok ...so I'll do a couple days of guitar until my ears need a break LOL.

[zulu delta 534]

110804 is a typo and should read 110807 (1 Platoon's vehicle).  Typos such as this are reasonably common in these reports and are quite obvious if you go through the truck numbers as I have done in the past.
An army typist is a bit like an old copper typist of the past, learnt the "Hunt" system of typing using one finger of each hand - hit one key and hunt for the next!
Carbon paper was in use so the keys were hit fairly hard and once you made a mistake there was no "edit" key like there is today.
Regards
Glen

[Carzee]

  thx Glen, there have been numerous typos noticed.
Actually, its a wonder there's not a lot more considering they worked in that heat. Hot people are usually sleepy people.

[Phoenix]

Carzee, with reference to suspected mistakes, all we can do is note it all and hoe that other documents, or first hand experience, clear up the mystery.

ZD, thanks for helping clear up that mystery!  I will add both notations later today.

Carzee, working over each other can be a problem, but as long as I say when I am doing which set of numbers (I take a copy of the file each time so I have an original to refer back to). I'll endeavour to post in here and say what I am doing to avoid confusion, but I should get through a few more today if it is a quiet day.