I thought Lord Sutch was dead Dennis, he’s the only one I can think of that comes close.
Sent from my SM-T805W using Tapatalk
I’ve come late to this debate (sorry argument) because of internet and other issues during the last 6 weeks. However, taking note of our esteemed moderator’s yellow card, I have caught up and looked at the photos of the machine in question.
Sorry Ramone, but I do actually think that it is a Mandator as built. My reasons, well rigid Mandators were not uncommon and Shell had a history of buying rigid Mandators for airport refuelling work around the UK, there were two at Jersey airport for many years, also of 1975/76 vintage with identical front grilles, and also a couple at Cork airport to name but two airports. It would be reasonable to assume that Shell would also specify the Mandator for other specialised applications. Also, the front axle hub cover on view is not for a Mercury, but was used on a Mandator with power assisted steering, an optional extra even as late as 1975. It is most definitely not V8 powered, the last V8 Mandators were fitted with the high datum cab, and the front mounted exhaust silencer would be impossible to fit like that with a V8 engine. The chassis designation and number would tell us what model it is. Ignore the engine size stated on the DVLA site, an AEC AV505 is 8.3 litres, okay close to the 8 litres recorded, but whoever owns it now probably is simply a fire appliance enthusiast more interested in the “machine” rather than the vehicle.
Carryfast:
ramone:
Its making me smile Dipster too :smiley: , another correction for CF is that they didnt fit the L12 in the Mandator , just the Leylandsmiddx.net/aec/units/engines1.htm
To be fair I said ‘760’/L12.Although it says here the L12 formed part of ‘AEC’s’ engine range fitted to ‘AEC’ chassis from 1973 to 1979 ?.In which case exactly what is meant by ‘AEC’ chassis in that listing ?.Unless I’ve missed something regarding the difference between 760 v L12.
While an explanation would be good.As to how a wagon clearly badged as a Mandator from new and before it was registered suddenly supposedly became a Mercury at it’s date of first reg ?.Which obviously also blows apart the idea of the supposed ‘replacement’ cab with a Mandator badge left on it.
The L12 was fitted to the Marathon I think Texaco ordered some but not many , the Marathon would be regarded as an AEC chassis , the rest were mainly Octopus ,Buffalo and I think Bison but not 100% sure on that . I hope this doesnt get deleted because its a genuine response to a comment just like the last one was that did get deleted 
Correct, the L12 Marathons were ordered by Texaco, forty of them in total. These were the only L12 Marathons built.The major oil companies had plenty of buying clout so even British Leyland would agree to supply what they asked for. Expanding on my earlier post, the memory cells have re-awakened and I did get permission to go airside at Jersey airport in the mid-1980s to photograph the Mandator refuellers there. I was told by the Shell terminal manager that they were part of a special order and I did verify their chassis build records at the BCVM archive at Leyland. IIRC they were part of an order for 10 rigid Mandators for Shell. At that time BL was reluctant to build anything AEC and was pushing its fixed head engine models and Marathons, but re-iterating my earlier comment a customer such as Shell got what they wanted.
I`ve just done a bit of fishing and found the following link firetruck-photos.net/picture … r-JJC-867P , if you read the comments one asks if this is the only AEC Fire tender ever built on a Mandator chassis , so CF was right and I was wrong and apparently there was another built too
Without going into the realms of fast response times for an incident I can well understand the need for rapid response capability from powerful airport fire tenders, but with a fuel terminal or refinery major incident then response times are probably immaterial. (Thinking of Buncefield a few years ago). In the early years of the AEC Society (mid-1980s) there was considerable excitement caused by a member who reported that Esso at Fawley Refinery was selling a couple of AEC Mammoth Major Mk.111 fire tenders. These were by then 30 years old, so hardly the quickest fire tenders when they were new.
gingerfold:
Without going into the realms of fast response times for an incident I can well understand the need for rapid response capability from powerful airport fire tenders, but with a fuel terminal or refinery major incident then response times are probably immaterial. (Thinking of Buncefield a few years ago). In the early years of the AEC Society (mid-1980s) there was considerable excitement caused by a member who reported that Esso at Fawley Refinery was selling a couple of AEC Mammoth Major Mk.111 fire tenders. These were by then 30 years old, so hardly the quickest fire tenders when they were new.
I can understand the excitement though Graham , a thirty year old MM with virtually no mileage on would be a great asset I also see your point that if speed was the essence they would surely have disposed of them much sooner, ps hasn`t anyone persuaded you to do the Marathon book yet it would complete the set ?
Hello Paul, I could let you have a copy of the Marathon text and appendices if you are interested. There won’t be any photos as I disposed of my collection of AEC etc photos to Robert Harris, who edits and produces the AEC Gazette.
gingerfold:
Hello Paul, I could let you have a copy of the Marathon text and appendices if you are interested. There won’t be any photos as I disposed of my collection of AEC etc photos to Robert Harris, who edits and produces the AEC Gazette.
I would be very interested Graham ,I am going away for a few days tomorrow and when I get back I will contact you , thanks , made my day 
gingerfold:
I’ve come late to this debate (sorry argument) because of internet and other issues during the last 6 weeks. However, taking note of our esteemed moderator’s yellow card, I have caught up and looked at the photos of the machine in question.Sorry Ramone, but I do actually think that it is a Mandator as built. My reasons, well rigid Mandators were not uncommon and Shell had a history of buying rigid Mandators for airport refuelling work around the UK, there were two at Jersey airport for many years, also of 1975/76 vintage with identical front grilles, and also a couple at Cork airport to name but two airports. It would be reasonable to assume that Shell would also specify the Mandator for other specialised applications. Also, the front axle hub cover on view is not for a Mercury, but was used on a Mandator with power assisted steering, an optional extra even as late as 1975. It is most definitely not V8 powered, the last V8 Mandators were fitted with the high datum cab, and the front mounted exhaust silencer would be impossible to fit like that with a V8 engine. The chassis designation and number would tell us what model it is. Ignore the engine size stated on the DVLA site, an AEC AV505 is 8.3 litres, okay close to the 8 litres recorded, but whoever owns it now probably is simply a fire appliance enthusiast more interested in the “machine” rather than the vehicle.
Wednesday,17th May,2017
AEC Mandator TG4/Chubb Fire,Limousine Foam Tender Fire Engine,JJC 867P,of Shell Anglesey Marine Terminal.
My above title says it all:I am in agreement with Gingerfold and Carryfast that the above fire engine is an AEC Mandator TG4,powered by an AEC
AV760 12.47-Litre Diesel Engine.
According to the comments on this website : fire-engine-photos.com/picture/number20439 at least two of these AEC Mandator TG4 fire engines were built:JJC 867P and another one for Shellhaven.
The DVLA Vehicle Check Database Website is actually not all that accurate in regard to a considerable number of motor vehicles at least!
Some six and eight-wheeler lorries are documented as being two axle vehicles!
The cubic capacity-engine size is not listed for many vehicles.
Many vehicles are listed with the wrong cubic capacity anyway! Usually it’s a smaller capacity than the actual - larger - real cubic capacity!
Here are some examples of what I mean:-
AEC Mandator TG4 Ergomatic,4x2-4,Tanker-Bodied,Articulated Lorry,GBH 93G,December 1968,preserved Leathers Chemicals lorry.
i731.photobucket.com/albums/ww31 … ICALS2.jpg
According to the DVLA the marque name is ‘AECMANDATOR’,this AEC’s colour is red and it’s powered by a 740 cc diesel engine.
GBH 93G
Vehicle make:
AECMANDATOR
Date of first registration:
December 1968
Year of manufacture:
1968
Cylinder capacity (cc):
740 cc
CO₂Emissions:
Not available
Fuel type:
DIESEL
Export marker:
No
Vehicle status:
SORN in place
Vehicle colour:
RED
Vehicle type approval:
Not available
Wheelplan:
2 AXLE RIGID BODY
Revenue weight:
Not available
AEC Mandator MkV G4RA,Park Royal MkV-Cabbed,4x2-4,Flat-Bodied,Articulated Lorry,YHS 437,December 1963,W.H.Malcolm,Brookfield,Scotland.
trucksplanet.com/photo/aec/ … 4_9498.jpg
According to the DVLA this AEC Mandator MkV is powered by a 4000 cc diesel engine.
YHS 437
Vehicle make:
AEC MANDATOR
Date of first registration:
December 1963
Year of manufacture:
1963
Cylinder capacity (cc):
4000 cc
CO₂Emissions:
Not available
Fuel type:
DIESEL
Export marker:
No
Vehicle status:
Taxed and due
Vehicle colour:
BLUE
Vehicle type approval:
Not available
Wheelplan:
ARTICULATED
Revenue weight:
Not available
Foden S21 Spaceship Sputnik FG6LX/24 Rigid Eight Wheeler Lorry,XAN 291,1963,new to Rank Hovis McDougall,then fairground lorry of my late showman friend Terance Dowse,Doncaster,who sold it for preservation in 2010:-
flickr.com/photos/foden_djp/7065196283
According to the DVLA this Foden S21 Spaceship Sputnik rigid eight lorry is a two-axle 4-wheeler lorry 
XAN 291
►Incorrect tax status?
MOT
No details held by DVLA
►Incorrect MOT status?
Warning
If you’ve just bought this vehicle the tax or SORN doesn’t come with it. You’ll need to tax it before driving it.
Vehicle make:
FODEN
Date of first registration:
July 1963
Cylinder capacity (cc):
0 cc
CO₂Emissions:
Not available
Fuel type:
DIESEL
Export marker:
No
Vehicle status:
Not taxed
Vehicle colour:
RED
Vehicle type approval:
Not available
Wheelplan:
2 AXLE RIGID BODY
Revenue weight:
Not available
Tax rates:
These are just three examples of incorrect motor vehicle information on the DVLA website,BUT there are many more cases of the DVLA having
the wrong information on many other motor vehicles!
So for at least some motor vehicles,at some least some of the information for these held by the DVLA should not be taken as gospel 
Furthermore,the DVLA cannot even get the marque-names right for certain makes of motor vehicle!
“Leyland AEC” (just what the hell is an “Leyland AEC” ?! 
). The real marque-make name is A E C !
“Seddon/Atkinson”. There are actually three marque names:Atkinson. Seddon. Seddon Atkinson.
There are several other incorrect motor vehicle marque names on the DVLA website.
So keeping all of the above in mind,there is no wonder why the DVLA have got the cubic capacity of the following motor vehicle in question wrong! :-
AEC Mandator TG4/Chubb Fire,Limousine Foam Tender Fire Engine,JJC 867P,of Shell Anglesey Marine Terminal.
The Classic Commercial Motor Vehicles - CCMV - commercial vehicle photographs website is run by Neil Fraser,a knowledgeable AEC and commercial vehicle enthusiast,has placed a photograph of this AEC Mandator TG4 fire engine in preservation in the website’s AEC Mandator TG4 VTG4,1965-1978,Gallery :-
ccmv.aecsouthall.co.uk/p43944322 … e#h68b311e
Shell Anglesey Marine Terminal obviously wanted the more powerful and robust AEC Mandator TG4 than the lighter and less powerful AEC Mercury
TGM4R…by the way,Gingerfold mentioned the front axle hub covers being different to those fitted on the Mercury? What were the differences?
But this AEC Mandator or Mercury saga just goes to show that AEC did build and offer special vehicles,and that we should always try to be open-minded,take nothing for granted and be receptive to the unusual - but at the same time be reasonable and discerning!
VALKYRIE
Ramone, I must apologise for deleting your posts, it looked as if you were having technical issues as the posts showed up twice on my screen, however it was me that had the technical issues as the posts disappeared completely when I deleted what appeared to be two double posts. I meant to send you a PM explaining my stupidity, but got distracted by a shiny object and forgot. If it’s any consolation, I also forgot my wedding anniversary and the lady of the house was not impressed, I haven’t had the courage to sleep yet for fear of a nocturnal knife attack.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
VALKYRIE:
gingerfold:
I’ve come late to this debate (sorry argument) because of internet and other issues during the last 6 weeks. However, taking note of our esteemed moderator’s yellow card, I have caught up and looked at the photos of the machine in question.Sorry Ramone, but I do actually think that it is a Mandator as built. My reasons, well rigid Mandators were not uncommon and Shell had a history of buying rigid Mandators for airport refuelling work around the UK, there were two at Jersey airport for many years, also of 1975/76 vintage with identical front grilles, and also a couple at Cork airport to name but two airports. It would be reasonable to assume that Shell would also specify the Mandator for other specialised applications. Also, the front axle hub cover on view is not for a Mercury, but was used on a Mandator with power assisted steering, an optional extra even as late as 1975. It is most definitely not V8 powered, the last V8 Mandators were fitted with the high datum cab, and the front mounted exhaust silencer would be impossible to fit like that with a V8 engine. The chassis designation and number would tell us what model it is. Ignore the engine size stated on the DVLA site, an AEC AV505 is 8.3 litres, okay close to the 8 litres recorded, but whoever owns it now probably is simply a fire appliance enthusiast more interested in the “machine” rather than the vehicle.
Wednesday,17th May,2017
AEC Mandator TG4/Chubb Fire,Limousine Foam Tender Fire Engine,JJC 867P,of Shell Anglesey Marine Terminal.
My above title says it all:I am in agreement with Gingerfold and Carryfast that the above fire engine is an AEC Mandator TG4,powered by an AEC
AV760 12.47-Litre Diesel Engine.According to the comments on this website : fire-engine-photos.com/picture/number20439 at least two of these AEC Mandator TG4 fire engines were built:JJC 867P and another one for Shellhaven.
The DVLA Vehicle Check Database Website is actually not all that accurate in regard to a considerable number of motor vehicles at least!
Some six and eight-wheeler lorries are documented as being two axle vehicles!
The cubic capacity-engine size is not listed for many vehicles.
Many vehicles are listed with the wrong cubic capacity anyway! Usually it’s a smaller capacity than the actual - larger - real cubic capacity!
Here are some examples of what I mean:-
AEC Mandator TG4 Ergomatic,4x2-4,Tanker-Bodied,Articulated Lorry,GBH 93G,December 1968,preserved Leathers Chemicals lorry.
i731.photobucket.com/albums/ww31 … ICALS2.jpg
According to the DVLA the marque name is ‘AECMANDATOR’,this AEC’s colour is red and it’s powered by a 740 cc diesel engine.
GBH 93G
Vehicle make:
AECMANDATOR
Date of first registration:
December 1968
Year of manufacture:
1968
Cylinder capacity (cc):
740 cc
CO₂Emissions:
Not available
Fuel type:
DIESEL
Export marker:
No
Vehicle status:
SORN in place
Vehicle colour:
RED
Vehicle type approval:
Not available
Wheelplan:
2 AXLE RIGID BODY
Revenue weight:
Not availableAEC Mandator MkV G4RA,Park Royal MkV-Cabbed,4x2-4,Flat-Bodied,Articulated Lorry,YHS 437,December 1963,W.H.Malcolm,Brookfield,Scotland.
trucksplanet.com/photo/aec/ … 4_9498.jpg
According to the DVLA this AEC Mandator MkV is powered by a 4000 cc diesel engine.
YHS 437
Vehicle make:
AEC MANDATOR
Date of first registration:
December 1963
Year of manufacture:
1963
Cylinder capacity (cc):
4000 cc
CO₂Emissions:
Not available
Fuel type:
DIESEL
Export marker:
No
Vehicle status:
Taxed and due
Vehicle colour:
BLUE
Vehicle type approval:
Not available
Wheelplan:
ARTICULATED
Revenue weight:
Not availableFoden S21 Spaceship Sputnik FG6LX/24 Rigid Eight Wheeler Lorry,XAN 291,1963,new to Rank Hovis McDougall,then fairground lorry of my late showman friend Terance Dowse,Doncaster,who sold it for preservation in 2010:-
flickr.com/photos/foden_djp/7065196283
According to the DVLA this Foden S21 Spaceship Sputnik rigid eight lorry is a two-axle 4-wheeler lorry
XAN 291
►Incorrect tax status?
MOT
No details held by DVLA
►Incorrect MOT status?
Warning
If you’ve just bought this vehicle the tax or SORN doesn’t come with it. You’ll need to tax it before driving it.
Vehicle make:
FODEN
Date of first registration:
July 1963
Cylinder capacity (cc):
0 cc
CO₂Emissions:
Not available
Fuel type:
DIESEL
Export marker:
No
Vehicle status:
Not taxed
Vehicle colour:
RED
Vehicle type approval:
Not available
Wheelplan:
2 AXLE RIGID BODY
Revenue weight:
Not available
Tax rates:These are just three examples of incorrect motor vehicle information on the DVLA website,BUT there are many more cases of the DVLA having
the wrong information on many other motor vehicles!So for at least some motor vehicles,at some least some of the information for these held by the DVLA should not be taken as gospel
Furthermore,the DVLA cannot even get the marque-names right for certain makes of motor vehicle!
“Leyland AEC” (just what the hell is an “Leyland AEC” ?!
“Seddon/Atkinson”. There are actually three marque names:Atkinson. Seddon. Seddon Atkinson.
There are several other incorrect motor vehicle marque names on the DVLA website.
So keeping all of the above in mind,there is no wonder why the DVLA have got the cubic capacity of the following motor vehicle in question wrong!
AEC Mandator TG4/Chubb Fire,Limousine Foam Tender Fire Engine,JJC 867P,of Shell Anglesey Marine Terminal.
The Classic Commercial Motor Vehicles - CCMV - commercial vehicle photographs website is run by Neil Fraser,a knowledgeable AEC and commercial vehicle enthusiast,has placed a photograph of this AEC Mandator TG4 fire engine in preservation in the website’s AEC Mandator TG4 VTG4,1965-1978,Gallery
ccmv.aecsouthall.co.uk/p43944322 … e#h68b311eShell Anglesey Marine Terminal obviously wanted the more powerful and robust AEC Mandator TG4 than the lighter and less powerful AEC Mercury
TGM4R…by the way,Gingerfold mentioned the front axle hub covers being different to those fitted on the Mercury? What were the differences?But this AEC Mandator or Mercury saga just goes to show that AEC did build and offer special vehicles,and that we should always try to be open-minded,take nothing for granted and be receptive to the unusual - but at the same time be reasonable and discerning!
VALKYRIE
Great post VALKYRIE.For anyone who’s interested the photo’s comments section there has now been updated to confirm that the vehicle in question was the real thing.Just not the V8 version that,for the attention of Dave,apologies I’d definitely wrongly assumed since the day. 
( Now awaits a similar apology from anorak ) I won’t hold my breath ).
I’ve also attempted to steer this whole discussion across to the Fire Engines topic so far with no success with the relevant posts seeming to be stopped under pre mod ?.Shame because I’ve made a couple of informative observations for gingerfold’s attention to show the very different working expectations of the type v domestic appliances.Which mean that the type by necessity isn’t actually that much different from aircraft crash tenders in having to deal with a very similar,if not worse,potential scenario.In which response times and especially pumping requirements are at least as demanding.With the example he was referring to seeming to be foam tankers not response vehicles.
As for this topic I stand by the idea that the stroke limitations of AEC’s engine designs seriously damaged Leyland’s in house engine business model.To the point where it really logically needed to outsource its engine supplies to Rolls and ■■■■■■■ to meet the demands of the max weight sector.Which was really my orginal point and I’d guess is the ‘agenda’ referred to my nmm.Sorry if that upsets anyone but isn’t constructive comment and discussion what forums are for.
Now that you mention it CF I do think that the Esso Fawley refinery AEC Mammoth Major Mk.III’s were foam tankers, my apologies, but trying to remember snippets of information from 30 odd years ago.
Valkyrie, the Mandator rigids had a heavier front axle which was rated at 6 tons capacity. An artic Mandator’s front axle was lighter, rated at 5 tons capacity. The hub cover protrudes more than that on a Mercury. Incidentally the aircraft re-fuel Mandators weighed 19 tons fully loaded, which was 3 tons more than the legal road going limit in the 1970s / '80s. The Jersey Airport Mandators were transferred to Esso when it took over the Shell re-fueling contract and I photographed them again in Esso livery in 1989, when they were 13 years old.
British Leyland as a group failed, not just the commercial vehicle side and with hindsight there were several reasons.
Too many unappealing products, particularly in export markets.
Bad industrial relations - trade unions and disputes
Bad internal relations between the managements of the subsidiaries
Failure to rationalise the product ranges.
Deteriorating quality control
gingerfold:
Now that you mention it CF I do think that the Esso Fawley refinery AEC Mammoth Major Mk.III’s were foam tankers, my apologies, but trying to remember snippets of information from 30 odd years ago.
I guess this was an example of one ?.
ccmv.aecsouthall.co.uk/p11917675 … #h5ae34ead
While this is an impressive modern day example of a refinery tender.A lot more impressive than domestic types.
Yes, spot on, that’s one of the Fawley tankers. And compared with the Volvo how times have changed.
The second won’t be as reliable as the first though, most of our Volvo appliances and specials (Ariel Ladder Platforms) have been back to the dealers, and Angloco who fit the platforms, many times, barely a week passes without a fault occurring, not good when you get called out to them at three in the morning! Franky.
gingerfold:
And compared with the Volvo how times have changed.
I’d guess that the leap to the potential contained in the Bedford TM range,in a matter of just a few years within the late 1970’s,was probably the bridging point.Although I don’t get the idea of just the day cab with no extra crew/kit accomodation on the modern day versions. 
newmercman:
Ramone, I must apologise for deleting your posts, it looked as if you were having technical issues as the posts showed up twice on my screen, however it was me that had the technical issues as the posts disappeared completely when I deleted what appeared to be two double posts. I meant to send you a PM explaining my stupidity, but got distracted by a shiny object and forgot. If it’s any consolation, I also forgot my wedding anniversary and the lady of the house was not impressed, I haven’t had the courage to sleep yet for fear of a nocturnal knife attack.Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
No problem sir and if its any consolation i am on a trip to Majorca at the moment lads only and her who must be obeyed isn’t amused
gingerfold:
Yes, spot on, that’s one of the Fawley tankers. And compared with the Volvo how times have changed.
Here’s an AEC I took out of Fawley in 1999, for delivery to the BCVM in Leyland.
The AEC had covered something like 5000 miles from new, although I was told that its route into preservation hadn’t been straightforward, and it had lost its original tank along the way.
I didn’t take this photo, and I don’t know who did! I was the driver, though, and the photo was given to me some time later.
ABV 317M Atkinson Borderer T3446C by Chris Gardner, on Flickr