Help support TMP


"Land Rover in NATO Service Question...." Topic


14 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please avoid recent politics on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Cold War (1946-1989) Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

A Fistful of TOWs


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

20mm U.S. Army Specialists, Episode 2

Can you identify the specialist?


Featured Profile Article

Iraq 2005

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian plays Ambush Alley at Council of Five Nations.


Current Poll


Featured Book Review


933 hits since 31 May 2016
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Cold Warrior31 May 2016 5:13 a.m. PST

Confused as to the Land Rover designations, particularly in Belgian and Dutch service in the 1980's. I see that both 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton variants were used, is the 1/2 ton the 110 (Light Utility Vehicle) and 3/4 ton the classic 109?

Doing this in 1/600, the 109, 110 along with the 101FC variants are available, just don't know which fit the Belgian and Dutch armies. Any help appreciated.

Personal logo Doms Decals Sponsoring Member of TMP31 May 2016 5:22 a.m. PST

1/2 ton in the 1980s usually means the old "lightweight" variant – I'm not certain if the Belgians used this one, but the Dutch definitely did:

link

Personal logo Doms Decals Sponsoring Member of TMP31 May 2016 5:25 a.m. PST

Looking at the 1/600 stuff, I'd definitely use the "Land Rover 109" (which looks mislabelled – it seems like it is a short wheelbase, not a 109….) for the 1/2 ton.

nickinsomerset31 May 2016 5:26 a.m. PST

1/4 Ton was the air portable, 1/2 ton Short Wheel base and 3/4 ton the long wheel base – Series III. These were all used by the Dutch and Belgians. 90 and 110 appeared mid 80s, pretty sure they used them but still recall seeing the old series in use by the Dutch in the 90s,

Tally Ho!

Cold Warrior31 May 2016 5:28 a.m. PST

Thanks Dom! Any ideas what the 3/4ton variant might be?

Cold Warrior31 May 2016 5:30 a.m. PST

Thanks Nick!

So is the LWB the 110 Model?

Personal logo Doms Decals Sponsoring Member of TMP31 May 2016 5:30 a.m. PST

3/4 ton is the usual long wheelbase – almost certainly 109" Series III in the '80s.

Cold Warrior31 May 2016 5:37 a.m. PST

Dom,

Thanks, got it, so I should just use the Oddzial 109 for both variants?

shaun from s and s models31 May 2016 9:45 a.m. PST

in 20mm the 109 and 110 wheelbase models are almost the same except the front grill, bumpers and wheel arch extensions.
the 3/4 ton models are generaly the 109in ser 2 & 3, the 110 is also rated at 3/4 ton.
the 1/2 ton models are 88in, 90in and the light weight model, mainly used by the marines and para's
the 90 in is not much used by the army, but the navy and raf have a few.
the fc 101 is the flat fronted model used to tow art, rapier, ambulance, radio ect, long out of service

Cold Warrior01 Jun 2016 4:56 a.m. PST

Shaun,

Thanks for the break down.

shaun from s and s models01 Jun 2016 5:28 a.m. PST

no probs, got tons of info on land rovers if you need any more info just ask

Jemima Fawr01 Jun 2016 10:51 a.m. PST

We used a fair few 'airborne' lightweights in the RAF and always referred to them as 1/2-tonners. Everything else was a 3/4-tonner apart from the obviously-different 1-tonner.

We were undoubtedly wrong in our descriptions, but that's what we called 'em… :)

shaun from s and s models01 Jun 2016 11:02 a.m. PST

to be honest i doubt you cared what you called it, it is after all only a land rover! or a jeep!

Jemima Fawr01 Jun 2016 1:34 p.m. PST

The lightweights were brilliant fun… First military vehicle I ever drove (as a 17 year-old cadet).

picture

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.