42 replies to this topic

[Robur]

Hi Guys, can you please help me who and when is driving this car?
My wife recently bought this poster to be placed in our living room and it's hard to look at this every day as at an anonymous one...
That's what I could expect: wet Monaco GP (training or qual) , Lotus, start no 1T, Attwood?, Amon?

[Vitesse2]

Attwood or Hailwood in one of the Parnell Lotus 25s, c/n R4, 1965.

[Rob G]

Judging by the helmet, I'd say it's Attwood.

Edited by Rob G, 21 April 2012 - 14:08.

[Barry Boor]

Yes, first practice in 1965. It was extremely wet and I got soaked.

It is definitely Dickie Attwood.

[Robur]

Thanks for your help guys!

[ChrisJson]

Judging by the helmet, I'd say it's Attwood.

Yes, BUT why 1T?

Attwood was #15 and Brabham was #1.

[Barry Boor]

I cannot offer any suggestion as to why 1T.

I hope we solve this one. I can't say I noticed the odd number the car was wearing on the Thursday or if I did I don't remember it - surprising really, it's only been 47 years!

[David Lawson]

Attwood or Hailwood in one of the Parnell Lotus 25s, c/n R4, 1965.

According to Eoin Young's, "Jim Clark and his most successful Lotus" Tony Maggs drove R4 at Monaco in 1965 and didn't start.

David

[Tim Murray]

No mention of Maggs in either the Motor Sport report or the F1R Black Book. Maggs had driven R4 in South Africa, but at Monaco it’s listed as the Parnell spare.

[Rob29]

According to Eoin Young's, "Jim Clark and his most successful Lotus" Tony Maggs drove R4 at Monaco in 1965 and didn't start.

David

according to John Thompson's "The Formula One Record Book"Attwood qualified & raced chassis R3-race#15-also practiced R4-T-along with Hailwood.

[Doug Nye]

That photo plainly shows Richard, no question...

DCN

[monoposto]

That photo plainly shows Richard, no question...

DCN

. . . and credited to Express photographer Victor Blackman

[Barry Boor]

Tony Maggs was a favourite of mine and I can say with 100% certainty that if he was there, it wasn't in a racing car. I have the official programme and he's not in there either.

Edited by Barry Boor, 21 April 2012 - 18:56.

[Tim Murray]

Here's the photo as it appears on the Getty Images site:

http://www.gettyimag...s-photo/3137698

This confirms that it's from 1965, although the actual date can't be right as 29th May was Saturday.

[Barry Boor]

That doesn't matter. The cars practiced on Thursday, Friday AND Saturday in those days. Saturday, one hour, from 16.15 to 17.15.

But Friday and Saturday were beautiful days, whereas Thursday was horrible.

IIRC not many cars went out at all on Thursday but I remember Stewart and Ginther braving the rain, but who else went out I cannot say.

Edited by Barry Boor, 21 April 2012 - 19:03.

[Tim Murray]

That was my point. The photo can't have been taken on the Saturday because it only rained on the Thursday.

[David Lawson]

according to John Thompson's "The Formula One Record Book"Attwood qualified & raced chassis R3-race#15-also practiced R4-T-along with Hailwood.

"Theme Lotus" only quotes R3, R7 and R8 being used at Monaco. I have the John Thompson book and see that it does include R4 as a T car. I have read DSJ's report and reflections in that month's MotorSport and there is no mention of Maggs entered and non-starting so I am puzzled where that came from in the Eoin Young book.

David

[Barry Boor]

It could be that the car was numbered 15 or 16 and they decided to run it as a T car so removed the second digit and substituted a T.

[Tim Murray]

I wondered about that. The only snag is that the Black Book has a best practice time for 15T of 2'01.5", the slowness of which suggests it was recorded in the wet session. If so, to get a time it must have been numbered as 15T in that session.

[Vitesse2]

I wondered about that. The only snag is that the Black Book has a best practice time for 15T of 2'01.5", the slowness of which suggests it was recorded in the wet session. If so, to get a time it must have been numbered as 15T in that session.

In the older F1 Record Book, no number is assigned to R4, for either driver. It's recorded only as "T", but the time for Hailwood also suggests he only drove it in the rain.

[MCS]

I don't think it's Attwood.

[Gary C]

I do.

[MCS]

Gary, enlarge the image and it really doesn't look like him.

[Vicuna]

Gary, enlarge the image and it really doesn't look like him.

Why is Maurice wearing Dickie's helmet?

[Gary C]

'Gary, enlarge the image and it really doesn't look like him. '
Really? I'll take a look tomorrow then.

[Doug Nye]

'Gary, enlarge the image and it really doesn't look like him. '
Really? I'll take a look tomorrow then.

Oh yes it does. And wearing his crash helmet. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...it's a Natwood.

DCN

[David M. Kane]

Yes, BUT why 1T?

Attwood was #15 and Brabham was #1.

T stands for trainer meaning it is a spare car.

[bikr37]

Why do the outside wheels appear to have so much positive camber? The inner wheels look ok compared to the road surface but the outside ones don't look right. Is this picture distorted?

Bob

[Tim Murray]

T stands for trainer meaning it is a spare car.

Yes, but the question being asked is why is it 1T and not 15T.

Why do the outside wheels appear to have so much positive camber? The inner wheels look ok compared to the road surface but the outside ones don't look right. Is this picture distorted?

Look at the third photo in the opening post. The poster on the wall was photographed at an angle, causing the distortion. Click on the link in post 14 for the undistorted photo.

[Barry Boor]

Cor, gentlemen, don't we get our bloomers in a bunch over silly things?

It's ATTWOOD, on THURSDAY. Why is it 1T? - we'll almost certainly never know. Accept it and move on......

[Stephen W]

Oh yes it does. And wearing his crash helmet. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...it's a Natwood.

DCN

Totally agree with DCN.

Cor, gentlemen, don't we get our bloomers in a bunch over silly things?

It's ATTWOOD, on THURSDAY. Why is it 1T? - we'll almost certainly never know. Accept it and move on......

I know why it is carrying 1T! Those dastardly French chaps decided to let the team use the number so that 47 years later a load of blokes would argue about it! Either that or with Clark not being at the event the organisers might have thought it was less confusing!

[Roger Clark]

I wondered about that. The only snag is that the Black Book has a best practice time for 15T of 2'01.5", the slowness of which suggests it was recorded in the wet session. If so, to get a time it must have been numbered as 15T in that session.

I think Sheldon is saying that the time was set by the driver allocated number 15 (Attwood) in a designated T car, not that he necessarily ran with number 15T.

More interesting (to me, anyway). DSJ wrote in his report: "From a collection of bits and by fabricating many parts themselves the team (Parnell) had built up a third car to the same specification to be used as a training car and as a spare."

This is presumably the car in the picture but which is it? All the books and magazines I have seen imply that it is R4, but Parnell had been using R4 since August the previous year. Attwood wrote it off two weeks later, of course, but did DSJ invent the story about Parnell fabricating a car themselves?

Edited by Roger Clark, 22 April 2012 - 09:12.

[Tim Murray]

I think Sheldon is saying that the time was set by the driver allocated number 15 (Attwood) in a designated T car, not that he necessarily ran with number 15T.

How would the timekeepers have known that it was Attwood, unless the car was wearing 15 or 15T? I feel sure that if they'd timed a car wearing 1T they'd have allocated the time to Brabham.

It was sent to me by a friend with no indication of the source.
If it causes problems with copyright I'll remove it.

The copyright holders would appear to be Getty Images (see the link in post 14). I understand they're pretty hot on copyright infringement.

[Rob Ryder]

Thanks Tim .... post deleted

[Catalina Park]

Is it possible that T cars were allocated their numbers differently to the normal cars?

[MCS]

Oh yes it does. And wearing his crash helmet. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...it's a Natwood.

DCN

I agree, finally

[ChrisJson]

Cor, gentlemen, don't we get our bloomers in a bunch over silly things?

It's ATTWOOD, on THURSDAY. Why is it 1T? - we'll almost certainly never know. Accept it and move on......

I beg to differ Barry.

It´s just these small mysteries that make TNF so great.
I love the discussions and educated guesses that will occur
on these topics.

Btw why didn´t Erik Lundgren go to Nürburgring in 1951?

Christer

[ChrisJson]

More interesting (to me, anyway). DSJ wrote in his report: "From a collection of bits and by fabricating many parts themselves the team (Parnell) had built up a third car to the same specification to be used as a training car and as a spare."

This is presumably the car in the picture but which is it? All the books and magazines I have seen imply that it is R4, but Parnell had been using R4 since August the previous year. Attwood wrote it off two weeks later, of course, but did DSJ invent the story about Parnell fabricating a car themselves?

I´m not a "rivet patterns expert" but I think there´s a small difference
between the spare car and the race car. There seems to be an opening
just under the windshield on the 1T which isn´t apparent on photos of
the race (15) car. Perhaps a fuel filler?

Christer

Edited by ChrisJson, 22 April 2012 - 10:30.

[ChrisJson]

That photo plainly shows Richard, no question...

DCN

Doug are you still in contact with Richard?

If so perhaps we would be able to get the tale directly
from the horses mouth.

Christer

PS Please excuse me if I got the grammar wrong.
English is not my native language. DS

[Tuboscocca]

"Theme Lotus" only quotes R3, R7 and R8 being used at Monaco. I have the John Thompson book and see that it does include R4 as a T car. I have read DSJ's report and reflections in that month's MotorSport and there is no mention of Maggs entered and non-starting so I am puzzled where that came from in the Eoin Young book.

David

Christian Moity mentions in his 4-volume Monaco book:

Parnell racing #R3 for Dick Attwood, #R7 for Hailwood..
BTW the weather on Thursday (1965) must have been very different: According to the same book, Attwood did on Thursday a time of 1'40''7(his best).Best was Hill on 1'37''1.


Best regards Michael

[D-Type]

Why do the outside wheels appear to have so much positive camber? The inner wheels look ok compared to the road surface but the outside ones don't look right. Is this picture distorted?

Bob

The picture posted is an oblique picture of the poster with some foreshortening. The picture on the Getty Images site shows far less camber

[Kpy]

The picture posted is an oblique picture of the poster with some foreshortening. The picture on the Getty Images site shows far less camber

As pointed out earlier by Tim Murray (post 29).

[D-Type]

Whoops! - dunno how I missed that!