- Yes
- No
Major-General C M Barber, GOC of 15th (Scottish) Division in conversation with the crew of an Achilles 17-pdr tank destroyer near Goch, 20 February 1945. - IWM (B 14769)
This suggestion is to have another 17pdr Achilles added to the British tree but fitted with the rare applique armour kit which added additional armour plates onto the hull front and sides and the sides of the turret giving it a survivability bonus.
While I firmly believe that the 3-inch SP should be added to the British tree, and there’s clearly evidence of them also receiving the applique armour, I have chosen the 17pdr SP as the base vehicle because it’s better suited to uptiers and is unique to the British tree.
History
When the M10 was still in its prototype phase, the US Army were choosing between the T35 and the T35E1. By mid 1942 the T35E1 was selected but a number of changes were made which included reducing the thickness of the armour. Concerns were raised about survivability and so the bosses/studs were added onto the hull front and sides and the turret sides for the fitting of applique armour plates. In July 1943, the bosses on the hull and turret sides stopped being fitted but those on the hull front were retained.
These applique plates were 14mm thick and added approximately 1 ton to the vehicle’s weight so the armour kit was not heavy enough to significantly affect the M10s performance but it would’ve been slightly reduced.
It seems that the applique kits weren’t meant to be a mass produced thing fitted to every M10 and instead were meant to be fitted only for special purposes and then removed again once the vehicle had returned from combat.
There’s conflicting information as to whether or not US M10s were issued any of the kits and even whether or not any of them were even produced. Photos exist of US M10s fitted with applique armour though, through my short time researching them, these appear to be unit-created field upgrades rather than the actual factory-produced kits.
M10 on display at Veckring, France partially fitted with applique plates.
It seems there’s also a slight debate as to whether the applique armour fitted to British M10s was the American produced kits or were produced separately by a manufacturer in Britain.
Given that the few photos and bits of film show the armour seemingly fitting perfectly to the studs and the shape of the vehicle (granted not a difficult thing for a proper manufacturer to do), and that Britain received 1654 (1017 converted to 17pdr) of the 4993 M10s that were produced, I think it’s most likely that some of the kits were sent over alongside the other bits of equipment that came with the M10s.
Either way, the kits were certainly quite rare and identifying M10s with them fitted is rather difficult considering how many are covered in camouflage, spare tracks, and other stowage not to mention that those without the side studs could still have a hidden plate on the front. I think there’s enough evidence of the applique armour to warrant this vehicle’s addition regardless.
17pdr SP ‘Chelsea’ of C Troop, 245 Battery, 62nd Anti-Tank Regiment, I Corps being examined by Germans after being knocked out southeast of Escoville. As this was converted from a later M10 it only has an applique plate on the hull front.
In-game
One reason I have suggested this as a separate vehicle, and not as a modification to the current Achilles IIC, is that the M10 and the IIC, despite having relatively thin armour, can be surprisingly tough to kill at times thanks to the angling of the armour (as well as any additional angling created by the player’s movement/positioning) and lower calibre guns, especially in 2.3 and 2.7 matches, can sometimes struggle against them.
Another reason is that the IIC already gets an add-on armour modification which adds a few strips of spare track and grousers. However, the applique kit consists of actual armour plating which would be much more effective than just some extra track. I think that this, combined with how much of the vehicle it covers, would make it a bit too tough at 3.3 for what is usually meant to be a long-range sniper.
As such, I’d like to suggest that it be added at 3.7 to bridge the gap between the current Achilles IIC at 3.3 and the M44 at 4.0 and help fill out the 3.7 line-up.
A 3-inch SP of 102nd Anti-Tank Regiment RA, heads across a Bailey Bridge spanning the Albert Canal near Het Punt. IWM (BU 842) / IWM (A70 156-4)
Specifications
Crew - 5
Weight - 30.5t approximately
Length - 19’-7”
Width - 10’
Height - 9’-6” (including .50cal)
Engine - Detroit Diesel 6046 twin-diesel (410hp)
Max speed - 25.6mph (41km/h) - Possibly reduced due to extra weight of armour though likely negligible.
Armament
ROQF 17-Pounder Mk. V
12.7mm M2HB
Max elevation/depression - +30/-10
Ammunition
50 shells
400 .50cal rounds
Figures taken from War Thunder Wiki
Armor penetration (mm) at a distance:
10m / 100m / 500m / 1000m / 1500m / 2000m
Shot Mk.6 - AP: 171 / 168 / 155 / 139 / 126 / 113
Shot Mk.4 - APC: 171 / 168 / 155 / 139 / 126 / 113
Shot Mk.8 - APCBC: 190 / 187 / 172 / 155 / 140 / 126
Shell Mk.1 - HE
17pdr Shell SS Mk.1 - Smoke
Armour
Upper Hull - 38.1mm + 14mm applique plate covering most of the surface
Lower Hull Nose - 50.8mm
Hull Sides Upper - 19.05mm + 14mm applique plates
Hull Sides Lower - 25.4mm
Hull Rear Upper - 19.05mm
Hull Rear Lower - 25.4mm
Hull Roof - 19.05mm
Engine Deck - 9.53mm
Mantlet - 63.5mm
Turret Sides - 25.4mm + 14mm applique plates
Turret Rear - 25.4mm
Turret Roof (Partial covering) - 19.05mm
Additional Images
IWM (A70 58-2)
IWM (A70 107-7)
Sources
British Battle Tanks: American-Made World War II Tanks - David Fletcher & Steven J. Zaloga
Tank Destroyer Achilles and M10 - British Army Anti-Tank Units Western Europe 1944-1945 - Dennis Oliver
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icR4UKOLr5A - Tank Chats #137 | Achilles | The Tank Museum
M10 tank destroyer - Wikipedia
M10 Achilles Chelsea – Mike's Research
