Page 1 of 1

Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2022 10:44 am
by andrewhogg
Can anyone help identify the stamp on the skeg of my SD102? Looks like a crown with line underneath and number but been polished. -Refer attached photo.

I believe it's a 'Navy' model??

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2022 8:00 pm
by Oyster 49
There is no such thing as a "Navy model"

Any better photos of the stamp?

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2022 8:42 am
by andrewhogg
Oyster 49 wrote: Wed Jun 15, 2022 8:00 pm There is no such thing as a "Navy model"

Any better photos of the stamp?
See the close-up which has been well polished in the past, but you can make out the crown. The serial number is SD123.P3 which I understand would be one of the earlier ones. Who do I contact to get this engine put into the register?

After doing a bit of searching through the posts, I saw another user posted an photo of an early SD with the same crown stamp.

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2022 7:44 pm
by Oyster 49
That’s the stamp used by the ministry inspector. Indicates an original gearbox for sure.

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 11:16 am
by andrewhogg
That's cool.

I'm trying to find where the JM number on the stator plate would be located. I removed the coolie hat cover, but couldn't see it. Do I need to remove the fly wheel? For some reason my old man seems think a puller would be OK on the SD? I've never seen any Seagull literature saying a flywheel pulley is OK to use??

What is interesting is what presumably is the original army camo gree paint to the inside of the fly wheel.

Does anyone know who I should speak to about getting this on the register?

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2022 10:24 pm
by Hugz
20221120_074354.jpg
On SD 125. If l recall the navy being the first service ie navy, army, airforce was allowed to have the crown emblem. This emblem is also seen on drinking vessels which also could signify navy to measure a tot of rum. So this may well signify that it was stamped by a navy stores department or navy inspectors. This stamp was discontinued in favour of the CIESS stamp which presumably stands for Chief Inspector Engineers Stores Supply. Was this part of the War Department?

I've had a few request recently about the SD registry. Whilst l'm not actively playing with it l am considering updating it with additional motors at a later date. As age marches on l have become more IT illiterate. 🤔

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2022 12:01 am
by andrewhogg
My SD with number SD123 presumably would have been next door but one to SD125?

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2022 1:32 am
by Hugz
Correct. Both are in the southern hemisfear.

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2022 9:14 pm
by Charles uk
Great to see you again Hugo it's been too long!!
Charles

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2022 9:48 pm
by Hugz
Hi Charles! I'm slowly reducing my seagull/outboard collection but will keep the SDs and will further research them. Might be another year or so. They seem to get heavier and heavier as time goes on! I'll peruse the forum a bit more to see if there are any enquiries on the SD l can help with. The picture of the crown stamp did pique my interest. My dead father was a RN officer during WW2 and l asked him about the seagull and his view was that the navy would never use such an underpowered motor and he had no recollection of seeing one. I dont think any of the Navy museums have reference to them. The RAN museum in Sydney certainly doesn't. I no longer use skype. Cheers.

Re: Identify the stamp on the skeg of SD102??

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2022 8:34 am
by Charles uk
I've seen 3 or 4 with traces of navy grey paint under the flywheel cover.

But have never heard any hints of any order by the Naval ministry of supply but then nothing from back then seems very logical!