I've been trying to identify the vehicle in the photo without success. Anyone know?

From what's been said, I would guess something along the lines of a Crossley-Kegresse half track. The Kegresse track might have led to the slightly strange 16 MPH maximum sign as having been translated roughly from 25 kph.

But was it really twin front axle? I can't find reference to any such conformation. Or are the second wheels in the photo actually spare wheels mounted slightly higher, on rotating hubs which were often fitted as aids to trench crossing?

Suggestions or please publish the photo which shows the whole vehicle!:ok:

I also think the vehicle is a Crossley with Kegresse gear fitted to the rear but have so far been unable to locate any comparison. The closest that I have come is the header photo on this link which shows a very similar vehicle, also at Seletar, around the same time.

2006 June « Seletar Airbase project

Can't really tell from that photo if there is a double front wheel arrangement.

The front wheels of the vehicle in the original photo that I posted seem to be a more permanent fixture than just added axles for crossing rough terrain. That is a possibility though.

I have just found a site that deals with the historic aspects of Crossley vehicles and am about contact them for advice.

I attach the second photo that I have been sent below. It was taken further away from the subject and shows a little more of the scene. I have cropped in a little to try and show more detail.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8061/8...e82e2c03_c.jpg Vildebeeste down-12 by Janner88, on Flickr

For anyone who might not be familiar with Crossley/Kegresse vehicles:

Crossley Kegresse data

Thanks very much Lauriebe. I'm still mystified. It may be an optical illusion but I get the feeling that the mudguard for the trailing front wheel is mounted higher than for the leading front wheel. Hence the thought of a low mounted "unditching" spare.

As the vehicle manufacturer would probably have supplied a bare chassis to a separate coachbuilder for the body to be fitted, I guess that any permutation would be possible!

Astir 8,

A very interesting observation re the front mudguard. I don't think it is an optical illusion.

I have used the larger .tif file that I was originally sent to try and check rather than the .jpg that I posted. Assuming that the stencilling on the side of the vehicle is straight, extending a line from that towards the mudguards does indicate that the front is lower than the rear.

I have now emailed the Crossley site and await a reply. As you mention, it is prossible that they supplied just a chassis so might not be able to help.

Lauriebe

Found on the Wikipedia description of the Russian BA-I or BAI armoured car from the 1930's


"An interesting idea that was borrowed from the earlier D-13 armoured car was mounting of spare wheels just next to the front wheels and only slightly higher. These helped when crossing trenches and rugged terrain".


BA-I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BA-3/6 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - shows a photo

BA-3, BA-6, and BA-9 Armored Cars - ENGLISH.BATTLEFIELD.RU - ENGLISH.BATTLEFIELD.RU refers to the spare wheels as "freely rotating"

Astir 8, thanks for those references.

I have now had a reply from the Crossley group. It seems that it is likely the vehicle in the photos could be a Crossley. However, the front wheel arrangement is just as confusing for the chap that answered as it is for us. He has never seen, or heard, of such an arrangement before.

Have now emailed a copy of the first photo which shows a little more detail of the front of the tender and am hoping he might be able to supply more information after seeing that.