Global Scale Modeller

Late to the party as usual but here's my entry to the Mr Tamiya build.

I have wanted the Archer, along with the new Comet, since Tamiya released them. The Archer arrived by reindeer at Christmas so talk about perfect Timing. I like building SPs and TDs because you get an open fighting compartment with all the gun detail and sometimes a crew. And while I enjoy making tanks, an open fighting compartment is a real draw for me.

So here it is. Design philosophy - park a Valentine backwards and stick a 17 pounder tank busting boom stick on it. Job done, no further relevant argument required



Here's the blurb on the who, when, why and the what.

The self-propelled 17-pdr, Valentine, Mk I, Archer was a British tank destroyer of the Second World War based on the Valentine infantry tank chassis fitted with an Ordnance QF 17 pounder gun. Designed and manufactured by Vickers-Armstrong, 655 were produced between March 1943 and May 1945. It was used in north-west Europe and Italy during the war; post-war, it served with the Egyptian Army. This vehicle was unusual in that its gun faced the rear of the chassis instead of the front.

Design & Development

Compared to German tank designs, British tanks generally lagged behind in terms of firepower during the war. This prompted British planners to devise a short-term solution to enhance the firepower of the British Army. They investigated tank chassis in production and landed on the Valentine because of its rapid adaptability to a new role.

It was decided that the 17-pounder gun was to be mounted in a simple, low, open-topped superstructure with the gun facing to the rear to avoid the new design from being too front-heavy due to the 17-pounder's immense weight. The mounting allowed for 11 degrees of traverse to either side, with elevation from -7.5 to +15 degrees. The engine in the Archer had a higher power rating than in the Valentine.

The first prototype was completed in 1943, with firing trials carried out in April 1943. On firing, the gun breech recoiled just shy of the driver's space. The unorthodox way the gun was mounted let the driver stay in position ready to drive the vehicle away without turning around if needed to move quickly. The rear mounting combined with its low silhouette made the Archer an excellent ambush weapon, allowing its crew to fire, then drive away. Vickers-Armstrong were given orders for 800 vehicles—with 655 being made before the end of the Second World War.

Operational use & tactics

The rear-facing mount of the 17-pounder allowed crews to adopt "shoot-and-scoot" ambush tactics: Archers were typically emplaced behind cover, fired on advancing armour, then reversed away without having to turn the vehicle around, which aided rapid withdrawal and survivability in defensive operations. The Archer's low silhouette made concealment easier, increasing the effectiveness of such ambushes, though the confined fighting compartment and limited gun traverse reduced effectiveness in close or highly mobile engagements. Contemporary and later accounts also note that recoil and crew layout constrained ergonomics, but that the vehicle was a practical and economical solution for mounting the powerful 17-pounder on an existing chassis.

Service

Production started in mid-1943 and the Archer entered service in October 1944. It was used in North-West Europe and (in 1945) Italy.

Under military doctrines prevalent in Commonwealth armies at the time, vehicles such as the Archer were "self-propelled anti-tank guns" and operated by the Royal Artillery (RA), rather than the Royal Armoured Corps (RAC). This was the same for two vehicles of US origin that were initially conceived as "tank destroyers" though not used as such by the British: the 3 inch Self-Propelled M10 and the 17 pounder Self-Propelled Achilles.

Post-war, the Egyptian Army received 200 ex-British Archers after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Some were successfully used against Israeli armour in the 1956 Suez war. The Archer served with some units of the Royal Armoured Corps in the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR) in the early 1950s.

Jordanian Arab Legion and National Guard units were supplied with 36 ex-British Archers in 1952.

In box shots and first build session to follow later today

One trivial question, it says they shot and scooted away in reverse.
If the gun was rearward facing that would make them actually driving toward the enemy ?

I have one of these lurking in the stash so will be following along with interest

digger303 wrote: Wed Jan 28, 2026 12:06 pm One trivial question, it says they shot and scooted away in reverse.
If the gun was rearward facing that would make them actually driving toward the enemy ?

Yah, it's because the front is actually at the back so going backwards is actually going forwards...

digger303 wrote: Wed Jan 28, 2026 12:06 pm One trivial question, it says they shot and scooted away in reverse.
If the gun was rearward facing that would make them actually driving toward the enemy ?

I think it means they moved in 'reverse to the direction the gun was pointing'. In combat I think any reference to the word 'reverse' indicates putting MORE distance between you and the enemy's boom sticks, not less

The unit motto was 'He who shoots and reverses way can reverse away another day!'

I wouldn't want to be that driver though. Sitting there trusting the recoil is not about to put his head through the instrument panel. That's how tough them British armored boys were.

Sprue shots as promised. Its the usual Tamiya green for Allied western Europe subjects. Everything is nice and crisp and I'm sure it will all fit together nicely.











Standard instructions. Definite Tamiya DNA.



And here's the starting point.



Hopefully sniffing glue later today

This should be a fun build!

aur0ra145 wrote: Sat Jan 31, 2026 2:41 am This should be a fun build!

Lets hope so

As expected its off to a smooth start. Driver's position first, then a bit of interior detail then the running gear.

The driver faces backwards from the gun as explained previously





The lower hull is a bottom and sides job, not the bath tub style hull seen on many kits. It goes together well and sits nice and square



Storage boxes for the 17 Pounder shells





Running gear done for one side. Nice and straight forward although care needed to be taken as the units for each side fore and aft are mirrors, not duplicates.





All things being equal, I should be working and posting on this tomorrow.

My apologies Gents

Circumstances beat me today, no update.

Nothing bad. I have reached a certain age where pension questions require addressing and this, along with a really sh***y cough and cold, has kept me away from the bench today.

Rest assured, I am anxious to get on with the Archer and will get back into it ASAP

Been feeling rough all day after a surprise delivery of snot and sneezing arrived during the night.

Link and length tracks added without much drama

Nice bit of sag across the return rolers







Next up is the upper hull and the gun / fighting compartment



Sorry for the shortness of the post but I feel like death warmed up. Hopefully better tomorrow

Stokesy44-The dry fit of the parts looks good. I hope you get to feeling better.

Phillip1

In true Tamiya-san style that's going together really nicely mate - soon be time for some paint

Hope you get over the flu without much difficulty.
I somehow doubt my Bronco kit will go together as quickly or easily as your Tamiya kit.

digger303 wrote: Fri Feb 06, 2026 11:22 pm Hope you get over the flu without much difficulty.
I somehow doubt my Bronco kit will go together as quickly or easily as your Tamiya kit.

Thanks mate. It does feel like Tamiya kits come with an unwritten guarantee when it comes to the engineering.

Bit late to this one but you're off to a great start

These are interesting vehicles our first real attempt at a tank destroyer and it worked rather well when properly deployed it was devastating.

Kevthemodeller wrote: Sat Feb 07, 2026 11:35 am Bit late to this one but you're off to a great start

These are interesting vehicles our first real attempt at a tank destroyer and it worked rather well when properly deployed it was devastating.

Cheers Kev.

Its an interesting subject isnt it. The Germans, while being far from a mechanized army, produced countless TDs and SP variants while us and the Americans produced just a handful of types whilst having the most mechanized armies in the history of the world.

More progress today. I had hoped to built the kit like a sandwich and keep the upper and lower hulls separate for ease of painting. This isn't going to work as the gun mount attaches to both.

Glued together now. Looks much bigger and more formidable now. Basic gun mount dry fitted.







Gunner's controls and seat added along with various internal bits











Its a very busy kit and there's loads more to do. Just how I like it

digger303 wrote: Sat Feb 07, 2026 11:54 pm

That's a lot of pop corn mate. I hope you're keeping hydrated

Stokesy44 wrote: Sun Feb 08, 2026 7:36 am

digger303 wrote: Sat Feb 07, 2026 11:54 pm

That's a lot of pop corn mate. I hope you're keeping hydrated

It's touch and go with the weather topping 40 most days

Today was the walls for the fighting compartment.

Before I did that I cleaned up the seams and joins on the gun mount. The mount will be obscured by the gun once attached but you never know if some it will be visible. I cleaned it up and hopefully the primer will do the rest.

Before



After



And then it was an to the walls themselves. Test fitted after kitting out with various bits and bobs.











It all fits nicely (its Tamiya), next up is all the detail on the upper hull.

Stokesy44-Good progress. That is actually a lot of detail for the interior.

Phillip1

Build part is almost done. The crew has to clamber over the sides to get in and out so I should imagine there would be a lot of scratched surfaces to play with.

Phillip1 wrote: Sun Feb 08, 2026 5:57 pm Stokesy44-Good progress. That is actually a lot of detail for the interior.

Phillip1

Thanks, and yes, the interior is filling up nicely. I've still got to add all the shell cannisters which will partially fill the ammo boxes and then there's the gun too!

digger303 wrote: Mon Feb 09, 2026 12:01 am Build part is almost done. The crew has to clamber over the sides to get in and out so I should imagine there would be a lot of scratched surfaces to play with.

Yep. With the driver position being at the rear, the more usual exit basis isn't there. I think the design team behind the conversion must have been the same lot that came up with the Firefly. Stuff everything in then think about the crew afterwards

It's coming on a treat a nice detailed kit too, looking forward to the paint

Kevthemodeller wrote: Mon Feb 09, 2026 1:55 pm It's coming on a treat a nice detailed kit too, looking forward to the paint

Thanks Kev. For a relatively small AFV there's certainly a lot going on.

I got some more done today. Equipment boxes and a few greeblies on the hull. The walls of the fighting compartment are still only dry fitted and I've decided that I will paint the interior before they are installed. That will make the interior of the compartment and the walls themselves much easier to paint. There's also a small roof section that's been added over the driver compartment.

The fit of the sidewalls is so good, I'm going to glue the walls and roof section together while they are in place on the hull then I can remove them and check the joint and do any clean up before I start painting. Then I can slot the 3 sided piece back on when the interior's done and the exterior's primed for painting.





I then started on the gun, all very straight forward and it fitted nicely into the mount with Tamiya's usual Polycaps.









Gun shield is next then greeblies on the rear deck then priming

What a difference it makes adding the breech in, really makes it busy filling the spaces.

definitely coming on a treat, going to look great when the paint goes on!

Paul

digger303 wrote: Tue Feb 10, 2026 12:24 am What a difference it makes adding the breech in, really makes it busy filling the spaces.

You can see now why it was so difficult to fit the 17lb in the Sherman turret, even when they turned it on it side, it's a beast

Kevthemodeller wrote: Wed Feb 11, 2026 2:40 pm

digger303 wrote: Tue Feb 10, 2026 12:24 am What a difference it makes adding the breech in, really makes it busy filling the spaces.

You can see now why it was so difficult to fit the 17lb in the Sherman turret, even when they turned it on it side, it's a beast

Typical bloody-minded British attitude. The Yanks made a whole new turret for their 76 but we thought, nah, that's a waste of time! Just shove that thing in there. But what about the radio Sir? Do we need a radio Corporal? Yes Sir we do Sir. Now you're just being tiresome Corporal, very well, shove it on the back of the turret if you have to and add a storage bin as well to make it look cool.

Almost there with the construction now. Gun shield test fitted then attached along with the gun barrel and muzzle break.









I mentioned the painting plan previously. I have glued the fighting compartment walls together and checked they came out in one piece. This will make the interior and the walls much easier to prime and paint.

Looks great! I love the detail on the interior.

Having everything fit well, makes sub assemblies and painting a lot easier.

I was researching the Archer because it has become my new obsession. Found some great pics of the finished model at Tamiya's website,
https://www.tamiyausa.com/shop/135-mili ... propelled/

digger303 wrote: Thu Feb 12, 2026 1:27 pm Having everything fit well, makes sub assemblies and painting a lot easier.

There are a couple of pieces that attach to the wall and the hull. Thankfully they just seated on the hull so I was able to glue them ONLY to the walls, that way, the kit comes apart but is complete for painting with no messy additions that could spoil the paintwork with glue.

Its also good that much of the joint between the hull and walls is behind the storage boxes so you cant see it

runnerUA wrote: Thu Feb 12, 2026 9:20 pm I was researching the Archer because it has become my new obsession. Found some great pics of the finished model at Tamiya's website,
https://www.tamiyausa.com/shop/135-mili ... propelled/

Thanks Runner, I've had a good look at the photos, some good reference for the interior.

Also, a second thanks because one of the photos shows I have the breach block round the wrong way. It should be sticking out the bottom of the breach, not the top. Thankfully its only a pressure fit so I will fix it.

As previously mentioned, the breech block needed taking out and putting back in the correct position.

Magic! Now you can see where they put the pointy thing



The rest of the session was making sure all the greeblies had been applied







I finished off the session with some surgery on a shell casing. The kit comes with with 4 spent shell casings, I plan to show these on the hull and in the fighting compartment. Only problem is they are solid, so they look daft

Using my mini drill set and a knife for shaving the hole edges I was able to hollow them out. I went as thin as I dared and this is the result.



Now its painting time

Looking nice so far....

Good job correcting the breech and detailing the shells.

Are those molding marks on the seatback? If it is, I'm sure you will see them and fix it, (or not).

The backward driving method still has me.... I did like your history on it as I've never seen this vehicle until now.

DRUMS01 wrote: Sun Feb 15, 2026 12:45 am Looking nice so far....

Good job correcting the breech and detailing the shells.

Are those molding marks on the seatback? If it is, I'm sure you will see them and fix it, (or not).

The backward driving method still has me.... I did like your history on it as I've never seen this vehicle until now.

Thanks, the circles on the back of the seat frame dont look like injection pin marks but I am having trouble trying to get a decent photo to confirm.

Stokesy44-Very nice progress. Looking forward to seeing painted parts! Will it be a single color of camouflage?

Phillip1

Phillip1 wrote: Sun Feb 15, 2026 6:37 pm Stokesy44-Very nice progress. Looking forward to seeing painted parts! Will it be a single color of camouflage?

Phillip1

Thanks mate. Looks like a single color scheme so I'll be doing a lot of modulation to avoid it getting too dark.

Stokesy44-

Phillip1

Stokesy44 wrote: Thu Feb 12, 2026 6:35 am Typical bloody-minded British attitude. The Yanks made a whole new turret for their 76 but we thought, nah, that's a waste of time! Just shove that thing in there. But what about the radio Sir? Do we need a radio Corporal? Yes Sir we do Sir. Now you're just being tiresome Corporal, very well, shove it on the back of the turret if you have to and add a storage bin as well to make it look cool.

There is no real comparison between the 17lb and the US 76mm, the 17lb although not being massively longer than the 76mm it had both longer and bigger diameter shell case, it was almost twice the diameter and a fair bit heavier. If you look at the Comet it wasn't fitted with the 17lb but a 77mm which had a shorter and smaller case diameter compared to the 17lb but it was still bigger/longer compared to the US 76mm. Given the time they had and the fact they couldn't change the size of the Sherman hull/turret ring, I think on balance getting the 17lb in the Firefly was a stroke of genius.

Kevthemodeller wrote: Mon Feb 16, 2026 3:39 pm
There is no real comparison between the 17lb and the US 76mm, the 17lb although not being massively longer than the 76mm it had both longer and bigger diameter shell case, it was almost twice the diameter and a fair bit heavier. If you look at the Comet it wasn't fitted with the 17lb but a 77mm which had a shorter and smaller case diameter compared to the 17lb but it was still bigger/longer compared to the US 76mm. Given the time they had and the fact they couldn't change the size of the Sherman hull/turret ring, I think on balance getting the 17lb in the Firefly was a stroke of genius.

Great info. I had read somewhere recently while doing some Comet research (ahead of a potential buy) that the gun was not a 17pdr, now I know why. Its also nice to know that once in while, we build them bigger than the Americans do! Even if its just ammo.

The power of a 17pdr must have come as a rude shock to the enemy when they met the Firefly on the battlefield if they hadn't spotted the longer barrel. Must have been a moral boost for the Allied crews too.

A bit like when the Mk IX Spitfire began replacing the Mk V, the enemy would have been none the wiser unless they had got really close. Normally assured of their greater speed, many a Luftwaffe pilot would have seen their quarry leave them standing courtesy of their new 2 stage blowers.

Stokesy44 wrote: Mon Feb 16, 2026 4:50 pm Great info. I had read somewhere recently while doing some Comet research (ahead of a potential buy) that the gun was not a 17pdr, now I know why.

Its was well known the 17pdr although very powerful, couldn't fit into any current allied tank at the time, without major trade offs. Not only was the gun heavy, it was long, the ammunition was big and heavy at something like 17kg that's more than a Tiger 2 round. The Firefly was a desperate attempt to give us hitting power in Normandy mainly against the Panthers and Stugs. For the Comet they cut the gun barrel length redesigned the breach to take the shorter/smaller 77mm round, the recoil mechanism could be smaller too, although less powerful it was a much better tank gun.

Stokesy44 wrote: Mon Feb 16, 2026 4:50 pm The power of a 17pdr must have come as a rude shock to the enemy when they met the Firefly on the battlefield if they hadn't spotted the longer barrel. Must have been a moral boost for the Allied crews too.

They were a surprise and issued orders even offered rewards to knock out the Firefly's. But like the Tigers (1s approx 1300, 2s 380ish) there wasn't that many of them about 2000ish, deployed one per troop so 1 in 4. Seeing a Tiger was thankful rare, but devastating if you did. Panthers were far more of the threat with approx 6000 of them, most were on the Eastern front, but still way more than Tigers.

My old next door neighbour was a loader/radio op in a Firefly.

That picture is from the book he wrote before he died, he is second from the right, standing in front of his Firefly.
Later he was in the first Comets to see action, here's another picture of them taking on 77mm on the Comet, you can clearly see the smaller case.
The man himself after being in hospital from Op Good Wood and post engagements.

He did run into Tigers, on more than one occasion.

And his book if you're interested

He was an amazing chap small but stocky had to be to load them 17pdr shells, he had many fantastic pictures. Many of German armour which they had knocked out.

Great bit of history.

digger303 wrote: Tue Feb 17, 2026 4:18 am Great bit of history.

Absolutely. Its more than a hobby this modelling lark. Its an education.

Thanks Kev