Help ! Tracked Afv Id answer Bagtignolles Chattillon DP 3

But surely the vehicle in the image is not ten metres long? Also, it's track path on the topside of the vehicle in question is not flat.

The track of the vehicle in the OP does not appear to form a trapezium, where the FCM F1 and FCM 1939 M1's do.

Chris

EDIT: Noticed the 1939 M1 is not necessarily 10m long... I can't decipher what's on the diagram to get a sense of scale.

 

Bodston,

I certainly would like to agree with you as the wheel configuration on the ground looks to be the same.

However the Rhomboid shape of the upper track and side is totally different and I would not have thought that the prototype would have differed so significantly.

Also if you look at the width of the captured AFV it looks a lot wider than the plan drawing.

I am still pulling my hair out, what is left of it.
Nothing I have searched looks the same as this beast.

Regards
Tom

 

I would agree that the mystery vehicle and the drawing are not the same, obviously. I cannot make out any dimensions or dates on the drawing due to it being a blown up low res scan. But a vehicle as long and narrow as the drawing suggests would be near impossible to steer. I can imagine that after seeing the rather poor design set out by the draft proposal, common sense prevailed and a more practical vehicle than the drawing proposed was actually constructed.
I do believe that what we have here is one of the prototypes built for the bridging ferry requirement set out in 1938. Whether it was called the FCM 1939 M1 by then I can't say.

 

I would agree that the mystery vehicle and the drawing are not the same, obviously. I cannot make out any dimensions or dates on the drawing due to it being a blown up low res scan. But a vehicle as long and narrow as the drawing suggests would be near impossible to steer. I can imagine that after seeing the rather poor design set out by the draft proposal, common sense prevailed and a more practical vehicle than the drawing proposed was actually constructed.
I do believe that what we have here is one of the prototypes built for the bridging ferry requirement set out in 1938. Whether it was called the FCM 1939 M1 by then I can't say.

I agree with most of what you are saying - indeed you could be quite right! However, for me, I can't see how a vehicle that is designed to get itself into a river, and then be driven across the top of, would not be flat across the top. It slopes at one end, so unless you needed two to make a bridge, with each forming a ramp and half a bridge (unlikely, but not impossible IMO) I don't think this is a bridging unit of the type it seems the French were experimenting with.

That is not to say that it is not a prototype vehicle in the same family, using similar components etc, or even exactly what you say it might be. Until it is positively identified, I have an open mind.

 

Could it be be a decoy made from parts of other tanks towed round by the truck in the other picture? This is just a bad hypothesis.

 

I agree with most of what you are saying - indeed you could be quite right! However, for me, I can't see how a vehicle that is designed to get itself into a river, and then be driven across the top of, would not be flat across the top. It slopes at one end, so unless you needed two to make a bridge, with each forming a ramp and half a bridge (unlikely, but not impossible IMO) I don't think this is a bridging unit of the type it seems the French were experimenting with.

That is not to say that it is not a prototype vehicle in the same family, using similar components etc, or even exactly what you say it might be. Until it is positively identified, I have an open mind.

I don't think that a sloping ramp one end is such a bad idea, if the idea was to clear a wall type obstacle it could be very handy. I would have thought that there must have been some sort of extra ramps to enable the deck to extend all the way to the riverbank anyway. The later british types of ARK's (Armoured Ramp Karrier) on the Churchill and Sherman chassis both had moveable ramps attached.

 

Kind of my point - those vehicles are flat on top. In the image under investigation if you measure the distance between the top and bottom tracks you find that there is a gentle slope and a sharper slope (although not as sharp as it appears in the picture because of the angle of the vehicle relative to the camera). Those sloping angles account for the whole top of the tank.

It could be argued that those are on the outside of the bridge path and traffic should pass within - but no-one in their right mind would reduce the clearance on top of the bridging unit, even on a prototype, surely?

Having those two angles of slope and the fact they are not 50/50 of the vehicle would unnecessarily complicate extendible ramps.

Possibly if a deck would be mounted above the superstructure... That I could buy. A top deck like the Sherman Octopus.

 

With apologies to Adam,

I think that it is time to re-gurgitate this thread as perhaps one or two of our newer members may be able to shed some light on the identity of the vehicle.





I has baffles many for a long time and it would be nice to have a positive ID.

Fingers crossed, here goes.

Regards
Tom

 

And likely to stay that way

 

I see a resemblance to this tank: the "paper project" ARL-1937 heavy tank. ARL 1937 Variante C

It has the same track shape and the same Churchill-like arrangement of small road wheels. The big variations are (obviously) no turret, no hull-mounted gun and non-shielded tracks on the top. The height and width seem to be in the correct range, although the length is questionable -- it seems more compressed in the photo.

I think its highly unlikely, but is it possible the Germans restarted the project and built a prototype unit after May 1940? For some reason I feel the photo was taken late in the war. On the other hand, this could be some sort of partially complete mock-up.

 

Just had a reply from Holger Erdmann of Kfz der Wehrmacht
Sheds a little light on the Guy number plate:
For sure, these photos were taken in 1940 or 1941. The Guy points to the western front. But it could also be Yugoslavia or Greece – thought the Germans were there also encountered by British troops.

In my opinion, this is a prototype of a heavy French tank from the late 1920’s or early 1930’s. For sure not a new construction. But I have no idea about the type. French tanks are not my special interest.

The registration on the Guy is standard. The number points to a registration in 1940 or 41.

Transport afficionados might want to have a look at his Unidentified Vehicles also.

 

Bump for an iD

 

Does anyone know if there is a List available for WH number plate allocations.

If so the Number Plate on the Beute Tractor could provide a clue to the unit working on the unidentified Tank.

It Looks to me like WH 597646 or similar.

Regards
Tom

 

Sorry chaps, cannot help with solving your mystery but I just had to say I am enjoying reading your comments. Elsie

 

Hello Tom,

This Russian website suggests that WH vehicles numbered in the range 50,000 to 59,000 were registered in the military district ('Wehrkreis') of Stuttgart in ?1939-1941: http://www.autogallery.org.ru/i/ynomdewh.htm

However, that system only includes five digit numbers beginning with 5 and I too interpret the number on the Quad as 597646 .

CS

 

CS,

I looked at a few sites and Forums last night and came to the conclusion that we will struggle down this Avenue.

Trying to find clues and think outside the box is not so easy in this case.

Regards
Tom

 

Hi,

Lets have shot at identifying the vehicles purpose ?

AS a non expert let me observe using the "Form Follows Function" addage.

The general design reminds me of a WW1 Tank, designed to cross/climb steep sided obstacles eg: Trenches.

The Vehicle appears too high for a fighting machine, but could be a troop carrier.

The "Turret" ? under the Tarp doesn't appear to have a turret ring, or maybe it's sealed, (waterproofed) also the turret will have a limited arc of fire.

Bear with me.

At first I thought it may be a recovery type of vehicle, however the track layout and small running wheels would probably not be able to handle too much torque.

On the front at the top of the Glacis Plate level with the heads of the 2 men (L to R) of 4 standing on the ground there appears to be a Snorkel Tube with a wide bore. The bend in the "Tube" appears to be resting on the Right Track so I assume the vehicle is either being serviced or out of action.

When I enlarged the photograph I noticed in the shadow of the man left of the 2 on the top of the vehicle there appears to be a vision (Drivers) slit.

When I enlarged the photograph on the Top decking under the tarp there appears to be a large bore pipe. Perhaps an exhaust extension with a non return valve and a floatation device.

The general shape of the vehicle seems designed to be able to cross Rivers underwater and then climb up relativley steep banks.

My guess, it's an underwater River crossing vehicle ?


Regards, Mick D.

 

Believed I've finally nailed it!
Had it confirmed by Antoine Misner of the splendid Chars Fracais.Net site, and Bovington are also pointing this way

It's a .... Bagtignolles Chattillon DP 3.
Amphibious French prototype tank from 1939, tested in May1940 and captured by the Germans in June. I'm guessing these guys (Germans) are either engineers assessing captured stuff from the fall of France. That is a Morris Quad in the background. Or recycling captured equipment for their own use, i.e. The use of captured french turrets in defensive positions later built in the Channel Islands