Dennis Javelin:
5thwheel:
ERF-NGC-European:
Looks like a Borderer with a Gardner 8LXB and Fuller 9sp 'box to me; oh, and twin-steer to boot!
0
The caption is incorrect,it’s definitely a Big J
David
Wrong type batteries for it to be a Big J
Don’t worry Dennis, he’s pulling our leg (re the legendary 8-pot Guy). That chassis is a Borderer all right: it’s got an Akti steering wheel, Atki bumber assembly, Atki hub cabs - the lot!
David
[/quote]
Wrong type batteries for it to be a Big J
[/quote]
Don’t worry Dennis, he’s pulling our leg (re the legendary 8-pot Guy). That chassis is a Borderer all right: it’s got an Akti steering wheel, Atki bumber assembly, Atki hub cabs - the lot!
[/quote]
I knew that, I was just joining in the fun. My first thought was to post that it was a minibus chassis 
I should know a twin steer Atkinson when I see one,I drove a Eagle powered twin steer for Humber McVeigh’s
on containers to and from Felixstowe for a few months,even the number plate reads ATK 1971!
David
ERF-NGC-European:
Don’t worry Dennis, he’s pulling our leg
You share a leg?? 
Now that’s mateship for you.
Spardo:
ERF-NGC-European:
Don’t worry Dennis, he’s pulling our legYou share a leg??
Now that’s mateship for you.
Royal ‘we’. The answer to vernacular ‘Pass us the salt’ when there’s only one of you. Not grammatical I agree!
ERF-NGC-European:
Spardo:
ERF-NGC-European:
Don’t worry Dennis, he’s pulling our legYou share a leg??
Now that’s mateship for you.
Spardo:
ERF-NGC-European:
Spardo:
ERF-NGC-European:
Don’t worry Dennis, he’s pulling our legYou share a leg??
Now that’s mateship for you.
As the original post was aimed at the whole forum I would respectively suggest that the adjective “our” is the correct grammar in this case.
Just for the record for you Lads that are not clued up on all things Atkinson That beautiful chassis is an Atkinson LEADER being a rear steer 6x2 the four wheelers were the Borderers of which I ran about 15 in the day at Bewick Transport. Cheers Dennis Bewick !
Dennis Javelin:
You share a leg??
Now that’s mateship for you.
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
As the original post was aimed at the whole forum I would respectively suggest that the adjective “our” is the correct grammar in this case.
[/quote]Good point!
This Twin Steer unit is being discussed on another site where it came from although the photo is widely available on the net. This was the 8LXB powered Twin Rear Steer ‘Leader’ as Dennis mentioned, introduced at the 1970 Earls Court Show when Atkinson brought out the named models, Borderer (only a 4x2 Tractor), Raider (Four Wheel Rigid), Venturer (6x4 Tractor), Searcher (6x4 Rigid), Defender (8 Wheel Rigid) The same layout existed previously in the Silver Knight MkII cabbed range but at 32Ton GCW and also in the MkI range along with a Chinese Six unit. This layout wasn’t built by Atkinson for the named series only the Rear Steer, although I believe one or two companies did some mods to Borderers. Correct designation of the Twin Steer was TRS 3868XB and confirmed by Chris Gardner as Tractor Rear Steer 38 Ton 6 Wheel 8 Cylinder Gardner 8LXB. Franky.
ERF-NGC-European:
Dennis Javelin:
You share a leg??
Now that’s mateship for you.
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
As the original post was aimed at the whole forum I would respectively suggest that the adjective “our” is the correct grammar in this case.
[/quote]Good point!
A good point indeed. and I would respectfully suggest that, although it is a possessive pronoun, in this case being used as an adjective, then it is perfectly reasonable in that role.
If only you had just stuck one little ‘s’ on the end of your sentence, Robert.
Spardo:
ERF-NGC-European:
Dennis Javelin:
You share a leg??
A good point indeed. and I would respectfully suggest that, although it is a possessive pronoun, in this case being used as an adjective, then it is perfectly reasonable in that role.
If only you had just stuck one little ‘s’ on the end of your sentence, Robert.
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
This is one of the things I love about this forum. We can fly off at a tangent and discuss the proper use of English as a common language without the argument getting heated. I’m old school and hate when our language, both verbal and written, is trashed with poor punctuation, spelling (although I might be more tolerant in this respect) and incorrect use of verbs, adjectives etc. The way we deal with this is through humour, and more often than not humility.
I applaud you all for your input.
Dennis Javelin:
Spardo:
ERF-NGC-European:
Dennis Javelin:
You share a leg??
A good point indeed. and I would respectfully suggest that, although it is a possessive pronoun, in this case being used as an adjective, then it is perfectly reasonable in that role.
If only you had just stuck one little ‘s’ on the end of your sentence, Robert.
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
This is one of the things I love about this forum. We can fly off at a tangent and discuss the proper use of English as a common language without the argument getting heated. I’m old school and hate when our language, both verbal and written, is trashed with poor punctuation, spelling (although I might be more tolerant in this respect) and incorrect use of verbs, adjectives etc. The way we deal with this is through humour, and more often than not humility.
I applaud you all for your input.
[/quote]
I second all that. I note that you popped a comma after the word ‘humour’ - not incorrect, but often disputed. It reminds me of a delicious moment, entirely relevant to this forum, when I was sitting in my local recently. My friend, a writer was discussing English with another friend, a retired BT worker who surprised us all with the news that he’d once been asked to edit material to be sent out. The writer looked at him with new respect and asked, ‘So what do you think of the Oxford comma then Cliff?’ To which Cliff replied: ‘Oh, they weren’t bad for their day. Bit sluggish on the open road and those bloody sliding doors would slam on your arm if you pulled up a bit sharp…’ It would take a wily scriptwriter to think that one up!
Robert:
I second all that. I note that you popped a comma after the word ‘humour’ - not incorrect, but often disputed. It reminds me of a delicious moment, entirely relevant to this forum, when I was sitting in my local recently. My friend, a writer was discussing English with another friend, a retired BT worker who surprised us all with the news that he’d once been asked to edit material to be sent out. The writer looked at him with new respect and asked, ‘So what do you think of the Oxford comma then Cliff?’ To which Cliff replied: ‘Oh, they weren’t bad for their day. Bit sluggish on the open road and those bloody sliding doors would slam on your arm if you pulled up a bit sharp…’ It would take a wily scriptwriter to think that one up! :lol
Thirded. (eh? ) Also your very amusing tale, Robert, ably trumped my knee jerk reaction to show off my knowledge of the Oxford comma, something I do use quite deliberately from time to time. It, and we, all have our place in the great scheme of things.
Spardo:
Robert:
I second all that. I note that you popped a comma after the word ‘humour’ - not incorrect, but often disputed. It reminds me of a delicious moment, entirely relevant to this forum, when I was sitting in my local recently. My friend, a writer was discussing English with another friend, a retired BT worker who surprised us all with the news that he’d once been asked to edit material to be sent out. The writer looked at him with new respect and asked, ‘So what do you think of the Oxford comma then Cliff?’ To which Cliff replied: ‘Oh, they weren’t bad for their day. Bit sluggish on the open road and those bloody sliding doors would slam on your arm if you pulled up a bit sharp…’ It would take a wily scriptwriter to think that one up! :lol
Good stuff!
The Oxford comma I believe has a genuine usefulness.
A list of articles may contain some individual, and some paired items, and can be used to differentiate between them.
e.g.
A laundry basket may contain shirts, trousers, and jackets.
Or shirts, trousers and jackets.
In the latter case there will be the same number of trousers and jackets, whilst in the former case that may not be true.
Similarly,
Furniture loaded onto a lorry might be cases, settees, tables and chairs, and lampshades.
We use two "and"s because the first “and” groups elements into one item.
Or
Cases, lampshades, settees, and tables and chairs.
But I expect some will disagree.
Franglais:
Spardo:
Robert:
I second all that. I note that you popped a comma after the word ‘humour’ - not incorrect, but often disputed. It reminds me of a delicious moment, entirely relevant to this forum, when I was sitting in my local recently. My friend, a writer was discussing English with another friend, a retired BT worker who surprised us all with the news that he’d once been asked to edit material to be sent out. The writer looked at him with new respect and asked, ‘So what do you think of the Oxford comma then Cliff?’ To which Cliff replied: ‘Oh, they weren’t bad for their day. Bit sluggish on the open road and those bloody sliding doors would slam on your arm if you pulled up a bit sharp…’ It would take a wily scriptwriter to think that one up! :lol
Good stuff!
The Oxford comma I believe has a genuine usefulness.
A list of articles may contain some individual, and some paired items, and can be used to differentiate between them.
e.g.
A laundry basket may contain shirts, trousers, and jackets.
Or shirts, trousers and jackets.
In the latter case there will be the same number of trousers and jackets, whilst in the former case that may not be true.Similarly,
Furniture loaded onto a lorry might be cases, settees, tables and chairs, and lampshades.
We use two "and"s because the first “and” groups elements into one item.
Or
Cases, lampshades, settees, and tables and chairs.But I expect some will disagree.
Much of it a matter of preference rather than correctness. In the end the choice ought to be about clarity of meaning. For instance, I often follow the word and with a semi-colon rather than a comma, as in: cases, settees, tables and chairs; and lampshades.
No disagreement from me Franglais, though Robert I must admit to not being a frequent user of the semi-colon, but not because I believe it to be incorrect, I don’t.
Who would have thought that a group of thicko lorry drivers would be discussing semantics?
But that is the upside, the downside is those like me who are pedants. Being effectively alone in the house most of the time I am a frequent shouter at the tv when some numpty commits the ultimate sin and confuses a double negative. The only relief is when the younger woman who comes in regularly to look after my wife’s needs (no, I don’t mean that 
) and we have some vigorous discussions of this nature.
Spardo:
No disagreement from me Franglais, though Robert I must admit to not being a frequent user of the semi-colon, but not because I believe it to be incorrect, I don’t.
Who would have thought that a group of thicko lorry drivers would be discussing semantics?But that is the upside, the downside is those like me who are pedants. Being effectively alone in the house most of the time I am a frequent shouter at the tv when some numpty commits the ultimate sin and confuses a double negative. The only relief is when the younger woman who comes in regularly to look after my wife’s needs (no, I don’t mean that
David it is becoming obvious to me that you should not have had all those truck driving positions and in fact should have been a teacher of English Grammar Buzzer
Spardo:
No disagreement from me Franglais, though Robert I must admit to not being a frequent user of the semi-colon, but not because I believe it to be incorrect, I don’t.
Who would have thought that a group of thicko lorry drivers would be discussing semantics?But that is the upside, the downside is those like me who are pedants. Being effectively alone in the house most of the time I am a frequent shouter at the tv when some numpty commits the ultimate sin and confuses a double negative. The only relief is when the younger woman who comes in regularly to look after my wife’s needs (no, I don’t mean that
We could start a whole new thread on what rattles our cages. Being ex Royal Navy I get really hacked off when action shots of ships are shown in tv programmes when these particular ships were never there or in some cases not even around at that time. It’s just lazy research/researchers. Unfortunately in these instances all I can do is get angry at a tv screen.
Bewick ,
Hello Dennis, your description of the Atki Leader is very similar to one i once read by Pat Kennet who incidentally came to John Raymond’s yard back in the seventies to road test a Silver Knight ( FTX 702K iirc)
fitted with a David Brown range change gearbox and 8lxb engine. While i worked there i drove a Leader for
while (ETX 990K), not a bad machine !
Regards, Allan