► Photothread: Czechoslovakian soft skin transport vehicles 1930-1945

[kerryboo]

Hi VRIL7,
For someone who does not want to offend you do a good job. "Disgusting quality"? I have a modest colllection of perhaps 15,000 photos, I do not use my finest photos to prove a point and I never use photos from books, the internet, or other sources. The watermark is to show my ownership, as is common amongst those who prefer that their property is not used by an unauthorised third party. Further, the watermarks are always placed so that they do not interfere with areas relevant to the discussion.
I am happy to accept your apology, no matter how qualified, I am not mortally offended, just somewhat surprised by the apparent tone of your response. You have explained, and I agree, translation programs are not perfect.
I am also happy to use my real name rather than a pseudonym.
Kerry.

[VRIL7]

Hi Kerry.
I am glad that we have reached mutual understanding. I will continue to write in a more polite tone.
Yes, this is not a small collection of photos. But I think that a photo of poor quality is unlikely to be used by anyone.
Let me ask: in your collection there are photos of good or normal quality of little-known military vehicles, prototypes with all-wheel drive of the period 1930-1945.

[kerryboo]

Hi VRIL7,
You would be surprised what people will take for their own use, regardless of quality. All of my photos are amateur taken, no studio or professional photos, so very often the original quality was not good. I also tend to smudge faces and registration plates, these are hard to restore, and I use low resolution scans for forum inclusion, so some decent pictures will look very rough. My primary interest is in captured types, especially the rarer marques and variants. I am, sadly, not sure that I have anything that may suit your interest, but I will review my files for you.
Cheers,
Kerry.

[VRIL7]

Hi VRIL7,
I am, sadly, not sure that I have anything that may suit your interest, but I will review my files for you.
Cheers,
Kerry.

Hi Kerry.
Many thanks. I will wait.
I am interested in this for personal use. This is my hobby.

[ilfil]

In the book "Historic Military Vehicles Directory" by Bart Vanderven, I discovered a lot of errors.

Can you point some?

[VRIL7]

In the book "Historic Military Vehicles Directory" by Bart Vanderven, I discovered a lot of errors.

Can you point some?

Hi ilfil.
Ok, here are some of them: in that part of the book, which deals with military equipment until 1940, on page 51 the light truck of Czechoslovakia is incorrectly named as Skoda L, but should be - Skoda 6LT6; Skoda 6L - but there should be a Skoda L; on page 249 - the Italian light truck SPA CL39 has a 4x4 wheel formula, but in reality 4x2; on page 234, the multi-wheeled 8x8 B10E2, stands out as a prototype of ARMSTRONG-SIDDELEY, but in fact it is a prototype of the Italian company Pavesi in 1932, here is the link: http://www.italie1935-45.com/regio-eser ... -pavesi-p4
In the book about the vehicles of the period of the Second World War: on page 278, the German multi-purpose truck “Einheitsdiesel” has a 6x4 chassis, but in reality it was 6x6; on page 317, under the photo of the Italian heavy truck Fiat 665 NM, the 4x2 wheel formula is written, but in reality it was a 4x4 all-wheel drive.
That is all I remember. There are still errors in engine power. But it takes time to find them.

[SIS 5]

Hi,

here a pic of a captured Praga RV with a captured bust of Stalin.

Regards

Bert

[ilfil]

the light truck of Czechoslovakia is incorrectly named as Skoda L, but should be - Skoda 6LT6; Skoda 6L - but there should be a Skoda L;

When you'll post the pictures in concern here we'll talk again. I have a feeling you confuse the things a bit. There isn't Skoda 6x4 truck which index starts with number 6 because according to Skoda period designation system this number is reserved for 6x6 trucks. And vice versa: 6x6 truck cannot be simply "L"'.

I don't know what source you use but in my Vanderveen books everything is in order.

the Italian light truck SPA CL39 has a 4x4 wheel formula, but in reality 4x2;

the multi-wheeled 8x8 B10E2, stands out as a prototype of ARMSTRONG-SIDDELEY, but in fact it is a prototype of the Italian company Pavesi in 1932,

Then why in all sources this prototype is mentioned as "Armstrong-Siddeley Pavesi"?

the German multi-purpose truck “Einheitsdiesel” has a 6x4 chassis, but in reality it was 6x6;

under the photo of the Italian heavy truck Fiat 665 NM, the 4x2 wheel formula is written, but in reality it was a 4x4 all-wheel drive.

That is all I remember. There are still errors in engine power. But it takes time to find them.

Go ahead, I'm not in a hurry.

[VRIL7]

When you'll post the pictures in concern here we'll talk again. I have a feeling you confuse the things a bit. There isn't Skoda 6x4 truck which index starts with number 6 because according to Skoda period designation system this number is reserved for 6x6 trucks. And vice versa: 6x6 truck cannot be simply "L"'.

Hi ilfil.
First you need to say hello before you write something.
On the first question: I did not write a Skoda 6x4, I wrote a Skoda 6LT6 (6x4), as well as a Skoda L (6x4) and a Skoda 6L (6x6). Look carefully at my post # 190 viewtopic.php?p=2274917#p2274917. I’ve taken apart everything in detail there. Or maybe your translator is buggy?

I don't know what source you use but in my Vanderveen books everything is in order.

It looks like everything is okay in your book, but mine is full of mistakes. What publishing house do you have?
It’s a pity I don’t have a scanner to scan pages from a book. But I took screenshots of my orders on the eBay website.
Here is the first book: "The Observer's Army Vehicles Directory to 1940" by Bart H.Vanderveen (The Olyslager) ISBN 0723215405, 1974.

The Observer's Army Vehicles Directory to 1940

And this is the second - "The Observer's Fighting Vehicles Directory World War II" by Bart H. Vanderveen, SBN 723210349. 1969.

The Observer's Fighting Vehicles Directory World War II

Then why in all sources this prototype is mentioned as "Armstrong-Siddeley Pavesi"?

Does the last word in the name "Armstrong-Siddeley Pavesi" say nothing to you?
Yes, because Armstrong-Siddeley bought a license for the Italian prototype and built its own on its basis.

0_f314_20fbd41d_L2.jpg (90.3 KiB) Viewed 1569 times

[Jose85]

Tatra 26 or 26/30 (and a Praga RV?)
Photo from eBay.de

[kerryboo]

Hi Jose,
I suspect that it may be a French Lorraine 72, a licence-built Tatra design, although the lack of anti-ditching wheels at the front is a worry.
Kerry.

[kerryboo]

Hello again Jose,
I am now officially confused. I just noticed the spare-wheel stowage. This is a feature I have only seen on a Tatra 72 of the Czechosovakian forces. The French built cars do not have sufficient room between the driver's door and the rear wheel arch. There does not seem to be much information available for either type, so, given the lack of anti-ditching wheels and the spare stowage perhaps I will defer to your identification of a Tatra, but model 72.
Here is a confirmed Lorraine 72, still with the French military registration, note the short distance between the door and wheel arch, plus the squared-off, one piece, windscreen. Also the front-hung door.
Cheers,
Kerry.

[SIS 5]

Hi José, hi Kerry,

excuse me, please, that I interfere in Your discussion. Here pics of a Tatra T 26/30 and of a Tatra T 72 (Lorraine license). I hope these pics can help to settle the question about the vehicle on that pic.

Best regards

Bert

[kerryboo]

Hi Bert,
No interference for me, a pleasure to have you join the discussion, as always.
Thank you for the scans, it does help, but I am still not 100%, although leaning towards the Tatra.
Thanks again,
Kerry.

[VRIL7]

Hello to all.
Although I am not a fan of vehicles without all-wheel drive, I will add - there was also a long-wheelbase version of the Tatra T-72. This model already has space for a spare wheel. Here is a photo: