Hi all, I purchased these images, and wonder if anyone has any info on the stove. I am advised that it was made by Townson and Coxson, who according to Grace's Guide, were Gas and electric fittings manufacturers of Essington Street, Birmingham. It's clearly a prototype, by the instructions being hand written, and stating Project No. 290. It's clearly the same folding pot stand as seen in the T&C Military Double Burner thread Townsend & Coxson Military Double Burner I'm waiting to hear if the stove still exists, but don't think it does. I can't find any reference in any of the usual archives to Townson and Coxson. Any help greatly appreciated. Many thanks Mark
@Mark_Ellis Many thanks Mark for posting this. Very interesting. Indeed, the pot stand is the same as that on the Army Mk3 of 1953 from Townson an Coxson and I think I can see an indication arrowed … … of the control levers of the distinctive axial-regulating burners, with ‘Open’ and ‘Close’ labelling. I can make out ‘Filler Cap’ on the screw cap on the left in that photo but am at a loss to understand what the cap I’ve circled does. John
John, thanks for the information. Is the circled not the knob of the pressure pump Looking close up at the high res copy, there is a lever knob/end cap above the Open/Close sign
@presscall would you know how many different stoves Townson and Coxson made, please? I know they made the Hurlock under licence. It's suggested that this might be the prototype for the Army Mk 3, but I don't think it is, as this one is nice and shallow.
@Mark_Ellis T&C were a major player in British stove manufacturing and you’ll get an idea of their output from their listing in the Stove Reference Gallery on site HERE. Although not how the No.3 eventually appeared, the burner design … … and the concept and layout of the stove are distinctive enough - unique even - to suggest a very close relationship. I’d venture to suggest that ‘Project No.290’ may not have been a prototype for the No.3 but a refinement of the concept for a civilian market, because it appears to be more compact and has sleeker lines. Irrespective of its qualities, cost and complexity must have influenced its demise.
Just Kidding, of course. I find dual tanks impressive, even in a squad cooker. I guess the theory is it's easier to keep high pressure in two smaller volume tanks, than one big tank. But I'm no engineer.
