Valentine Archer tank destroyer

Hi all

As anyone any info the Archer apart from the usual wiki stuff..where it was used, who by etc. any of the old sweats get involved with them. why were they used by RA and not RAC units?

Cheers

Smudge

 

Smudge im sure the Royal Artillery chaps will be able to assist

there is a lot on the internet about the Archer

 

I've never heard or een one before so I thought I'd through a pic up of it.

 

The Archer was only used in Northwest Europe, and then quite late on, first arriving with units during October 1944.

They were issued specifically to the Anti-tank Regiments, RA, serving with Infantry Divisions (both British and Canadian). The RA maintained responsibility for anti-tank defence and they were developed to make the 17-pr more mobile.

One picky point, the British Army never referred to such things as Tank Destroyers, that was a US term. Likewise it wasn't even called the Archer until the post-war, tending to be referred to as a self-propelled anti-tank gun.

Gary

 

Anti Tank

 

tragic waste of a good tiger

 

tragic waste of a good tiger


I agree.

Certainly punched holes in the tiger armour, but it looked to be reasonably close range.

If I remember correctly a Tiger was credited with knocking out a Sherman at around 1.5 kms.

The Archer reminds me of the numerous SP Guns of the German army, the Wasp in particular.

Regards
Tom

 

personally i thought it to be a blatant rip off of the Germans Porsche elephant i think it was porsche...couldnt have been Krupps surely.....that one didnt fair to well either

plus the wasp was a cool looking peice...just weak against bottles filled with fuel and a rag

 

Hi all

Just found out the Archer SPG was also used in italy by 2 Polish Corps, 7th AT regt. They used them in small numbers to suppliment teh M10's

Smudge

 

.

 

personally i thought it to be a blatant rip off of the Germans Porsche elephant i think it was porsche...couldnt have been Krupps surely.....that one didnt fair to well either

It looks to me like it was the British Armys attempt to do something usefull with a chassis it already had.

You always hear about the vulnerability of open top SP guns, but they were always meant to be more mobile versions of AT weapons already in use, that is to say, to be driven to a static position then fired. Something strikingly different to the doctrine of an assault gun. I Never knew about the driving backwards thing.. very interesting!

 

My new Dad had been rendered almost completely sterile and hospitalised after suffering a severe groin injury when he caught the full force of the restricted breach-recoil of a 17-pounder gun mounted in a Valentine-Archer tank


- pop - :mellow:

Anyway!

Interestingly - as late as 1967....those same Archers finally met direct combat with StuGs and PzIVs as AFVs rather than A/T guns - on a mountainside in the Golan Heights! After the war Britain eventually sold the remaining Archers to the new state of Egypt...while as we know, the Syrians scoured Europe for StuGs and PzIVs. During one of the many wars (possibly indeed the 1956 go-round!) the Israelis captured enough to make their reuse practical, incorporated them in their own OOB and IIRC they met during a mutual road dash for one of the dominating mountaintops in the Golan during the 1967 war.

 

personally i thought it to be a blatant rip off of the Germans Porsche elephant i think it was porsche...couldnt have been Krupps surely.....that one didnt fair to well either

plus the wasp was a cool looking peice...just weak against bottles filled with fuel and a rag

I think your right its has a very German feel about it.

I think a very different concept than the Elephant. The archer a sort of oh crap we need the 17pdr but it doesnt fit in anything or the things we thought it would fit in it doesnt.

Saying that once it ended up in the spare chassis ,nothing wrong with that, it was used correctly, by the RAR. probably more in common with Marder III in concept??? Cheap way to get a defensive longer range armour gun on the field.

Kev

 

They’d never been able to have children of their own. ... the restricted breach-recoil of a 17-pounder gun mounted
He was lucky! If the recoil were not so restricted he would have lost his ar#e as well

 

It looks to me like it was the British Armys attempt to do something usefull with a chassis it already had.

You always hear about the vulnerability of open top SP guns, but they were always meant to be more mobile versions of AT weapons already in use, that is to say, to be driven to a static position then fired. Something strikingly different to the doctrine of an assault gun. I Never knew about the driving backwards thing.. very interesting!


It is actually driving forward I believe. Just that the gun is mounted facing the rear, probably the only way to fit it around the engine bay.

Regards
Tom

 

The clue is in the front Glacis plate.

Regards
Tom