WWII - Universal "Bren" Carrier MK2 (1944) - Project - Market Garden

[@declan1278]

Wow great to see these vehicles still working

[@nor0845]

Simply can’t go wrong with a Carrier. Just brilliant!! Thanks for posting.

[@siem3113]

Beautiful. Seriously beautiful.

[@Stoic-of-Rome]

I would love to see one up close. My great uncle went to war in one of these. BEF in France, left his 1st one on the beach at Dunkirk, then fought through Africa, Italy, Greece then D-day where he was killed on D-day +6, going up against SS Panzers in the battle for Caen.

[@yourievers4859]

Mark Jennings thats kinda sad 😢

[@thetourettesgamer8851]

Mark Jennings sir your great uncle sounds like a hero, and it’s sad he made the ultimate sacrifice for his country.

[@ianryan5727]

From this clip you would hardly believe it was a brit weapol lol :)

[@Adrek181063]

More than happy to be corrected but I was under the impression that vehicle tactical markings and serial numbers were displayed on the 'same side' of the vehicle, not opposites like the carrier in the clip. So, for example if the vehicle was 11th armoured - like the one in the clip denoted by the 'bull' tactical marking (and by the way the bull should have red horns and hooves) the tactical ,marking should be on the nearside of the vehicle (for UK vehicles, that's the side closest to the pavement). So, viewed from the front it would appear on the right - when viewed from the rear it would be on the left side of the vehicle. i.e. the same side of the vehicle. The Serial number - in the case of the carrier in the clip the 52 for Armoured Regiment - would be shown on the opposite side from the tactical marker. So, viewed from the front it would be on the left ad from the rear it would be on the right, again the same side of the vehicle. The carrier in the clip has them on opposite sides front and rear... which is incorrect? Simplified, the bull symbol should be on the passenger side front and back and the 52 should be on the drivers side front and back. I would have thought the poster - Army Vehicle Marking... etc. and indeed the owner of the carrier should have got this right. I am using information published in The British Soldier D-Day to VE-Day by Jean Bouchery - but like I said at the start I'm happy to be corrected if wrong - let me know.

[@rikhermans1]

Adrek181063 on original pictures you see both ways. Your way was more common but you see them both

[@Armyvehiclemarking]

If you check WWII photographs in series in the area or moving video footage a lot of painting was done in the field and regulations were not always followed or interpretation was done otherwise. There are regulations confirming your statement above. If you check masses ETO photographs and reels of commonwealth markings opposite fender / bumperette markings was no rarety and quite common as well.

[@dambuster6387]

@@Armyvehiclemarking I have seen vintage film stock with the white star painted on vehicle,s and either British troops or Canadian troops operating them I thought these where American.

[@ATOMTAYLOR]

Always worried about the protection for the driver, heads always up above the armoured plates. Mr Machine gunners alright.

[@inkedseahear]

So what did you do today? Oh just making doughnuts with a WW2 tracked vehicle, the usual.

[@rikhermans1]

RaPtorteAm you need to do something

[@Emtbtoday]

Thats one thing I hate about our British vehicles they carried that god awful white star!

[@keithammleter3824]

Without it the dumb Americans would probably shoot at it.