I believe that by now it is wellknown among members of this forum that the Dutch Ministry of Defense made a cock-up designating the Veritas P350 (petrol) lamp for kerosene (paraffin) only, back in the 1950's. The result would be a non-functioning lamp, that simply was designed and build to use a more volatile fuel like petrol. Recently such a lamp, proclaiming in white paint "Kero" on the drab green tank, came my way complete with the carton box and accesories like a spanner, funnel and meth's can. It was the included official set of directions (labeled 'Dienstgeheim' or Service / Corporate Secret) that persuaded me to splash some cash however, as I wanted to find out more how this unexplainable mix-up came about. First of all the lamp, with a yellow label on the tank in Dutch by the then importer, suggests straightaway to "use clean lead-free petrol (benzine)" and concludes these directions that "the cap of the reservoir is not to be removed while the lamp is burning". The latter, of course, a typical advise for a petrol fuelled device, not so with a paraffin fuelled appliance. Mind, in theory a mistake in applying the direction in white paint on these lamps could be the simple explanation; nothing new really. The dutch army was at that point member of Nato, with the american forces the predominant member. Hence an introduction of new names for the same products like fuels that were not known to the Dutch before. 'Petroleum' is the dutch name for Paraffin in English, or Kerosene in American. Even today this is cause for confusion, and 60-70 years ago the language skills were simply at a lower level in the Netherlands. So I think this might have been a factor that the wrong labeling was not noticed by the lower ranks, who simply must have followed orders from higher up. But now the official 'Directions for use', imo a recipe for sanctioned confusion. The document claims to be a revised set of information from 1959, obsoleting the supposed earlier directions. The confusion is helped by the title in fat print for starters, as it mentions TWO different lamps. The crux lies with the word 'en' (and), not always a good idea when the same title then is trying to differentiate a second lamp M/Klemsluiting V/Kap. (with/clasp or clip for/cap or top). The very point is that two different lamps are indicated that, as we know today, are meant to be used with two different fuels, yet are proclaimed to use the same fuel, in this case Kerosene. 'Vergasser' is Dutch for an appliance that can turn a liquid into a gaseous state. With our practical knowledge today it is easy to understand the subtle differences when reading the instructions, as the lamp designed for Petrol has a few different requirements (closing off the hole within the pump knob with your thumb, opening and closing the pump valve by turning the pump kpob anticlockwise and clockwise respectively). But these different lamps are only described as 'with or without clips on the top'. And to blending both lamps together even more, the final direction in the booklet (with a plastic outer coating that explains its pristine condition) is given for both lamps: "it is forbidden to extinguish the lamp by loosening the filler cap". In short, a rather pompous document making the cock-up official. A typical phenomenon in big, burocratic organisations, with armies perhaps the most clear exponents. Luckily, no harm could come off it, as the petrol-designed lamps simply could not digest the less volatile Kerosene. It could have been the other way around, as there are Tilley X246's to be found in the Netherlands with a very distinctive and durable instruction in metal, not to use petrol in these lamps proclaiming"exlusively for paraffin". It suggests that the Dutch at that time - early 50's - were familiar with lamps that would use petrol, perhaps the result of dumping many petrol-fuelled lamps by the Americans for a structurally robbed and wrecked country draped mostly in darkness right after the war. With many Veritas lamps showing up in Holland without a handle or bail, a possible explanation was found within the official carton box, which consists of an inner and outer one: the longish handle was hidden in between. It is speculation, then, how many handles were thrown away after unpacking a lamp that seemed to be shipped without such a carrying device.
A good write up! Never knew they boxed the bail separately, indeed a potential cause for going MIA. The ‘eye’ on the bail is quite open and they tend to come off the lantern quite easily, which is likely also a reason they get lost.
There's one of these in Great Lumley, too. It's also got the clips which hold on the hood - a very useful addition which overcomes a basic design flaw in the X246. Sadly, I can't even give it away...
Yes, the 'market' has both sides, and a similar lamp in box, in a shown working condition and in very nice shape with very good speculum finish with an original gold waterslide on the bottom was auctioned at a £42.00 two years ago. A lucky american new owner, but to make some people happy is a bonus too. It is only dramatic if your livelyhood depends on it.
