Landships II

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: General Sir Arthur Currie's Roll Royce Staff Car


Field Marshal

Status: Offline
Posts: 416
Date:
General Sir Arthur Currie's Roll Royce Staff Car
Permalink   


I'm hoping that someone on here may know the WD number of General Sir Arthur Currie's Roll Royce?

Over the years I've tracked down a few pictures of the car in question and there are tantalising glimpses of the WD number but in every photo there's always either a lot of glare on the engine cover of someone standing in the way!   

I've spent hours trawling the net looking for a clear picture or a log of the WD number assigned to it but to no avail so I'm hoping someone out there can help.

 

Thanks a lot

Bern



Attachments
__________________

Has anyone else noticed "new and improved" seems to mean it doesn't work as well as it used to?

 



Corporal

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:
Permalink   

Have you tried converting the photo to a negative? Sometimes that works. Or else play with the contrasts can sometimes yield a result.

cheers,

bj

__________________


Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 781
Date:
Permalink   

I tried looking for General Haig and looked in the background. Hope this helps.

Helen x

 



Attachments
__________________


Field Marshal

Status: Offline
Posts: 416
Date:
Permalink   

Helen you're an absolute star, thank you so much, that's much higher resolution than the image I had and I can finally see some of the numbers.


So after playing about with brightness and contrast as brad suggested and a lot of despeckling it looks like the number is M^19977 although the last digit could be a 1?
I'd be glad to hear anyone else's opinion especially if they have better software skills or sharper eyes than me smile



-- Edited by CrashandBern on Monday 15th of February 2016 10:40:04 PM



-- Edited by CrashandBern on Tuesday 16th of February 2016 08:13:33 AM

__________________

Has anyone else noticed "new and improved" seems to mean it doesn't work as well as it used to?

 



Corporal

Status: Offline
Posts: 19
Date:
Permalink   

I vote for the last digit being a 7 - the down stroke of the last digit appears to be at the same angle (ie parallel) to the digit before.

cheers,

bj

__________________


Corporal

Status: Offline
Posts: 23
Date:
Permalink   

I fully endorse Brad and his opinions on  "le parallel"

 



__________________


Field Marshal

Status: Offline
Posts: 416
Date:
Permalink   

brad wrote:

I vote for the last digit being a 7 - the down stroke of the last digit appears to be at the same angle (ie parallel) to the digit before.

cheers,

bj


 Thanks brad it does look more like a 7 than a 1 to me.



__________________

Has anyone else noticed "new and improved" seems to mean it doesn't work as well as it used to?

 



Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 781
Date:
Permalink   

Hiya, I was have a nose through the Scottish archives and came across another version of the photo. The Image has a zoomable version and it is clearly a number seven.

http://digital.nls.uk/first-world-war-official-photographs/pageturner.cfm?id=74549242&mode=zoom



__________________


Field Marshal

Status: Offline
Posts: 416
Date:
Permalink   

Brilliant, Thanks Helen that's conclusive then... guess I'll have start a master now!

__________________

Has anyone else noticed "new and improved" seems to mean it doesn't work as well as it used to?

 

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us