Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'italy'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Programs Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

  • World of Warships Events

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 9 results

  1. CylonRed

    I wish I understood

    Why am I pretty bad, on average, with ships that are considered to be biased (esp at tier X - where it is supposed to be Easy button win, huge numbers, no talent needed) but seem to do pretty well for the new Italian CA line that is - esp at tier 4-7 or so - considered to be poor...? I don't know what it is with my play 'style' that makes the Italian line better for me (though I will fully admit - not a large sampling of games...) but... I wish I understood so I could apply the lessons to the RU line... French cruisers I was better at than most cruisers and French BBs I was FAR better at than US BBs, or even German BBs in their heyday.
  2. Hello! I this would've been an interesting topic since the ship in question is in the tier tree - the Italian sloop / colonial ship Eritrea (Tier I). This ship had a very storied history, considering that she traveled to the Pacific and was actually docked at Japan for a time. When she was in Japan, Italy wanted to turn her into a commerce raider, but the Japanese distrusted the Italians so that plan never came to fruition. My question is this: How do you think the Eritrea would've done as a commerce raider, if she was assigned to operate in the Pacific? After all, the Germans had their own raiders in that part of the globe, so there is at least a few friendly ships doing such things in the local vicinity. Are her weapons good enough to take out vessels and is she fast enough to avoid attackers? This is her armament: 4 × 120 mm (4.7 in) guns (2 × 2) 2 × Vickers-Terni 40 mm/39 pom pom (2 × 1) 4 × 13.2 mm (0.52 in) machine guns (4 × 1) This is her speed: 20 knots (23 mph; 37 km/h) Thanks!
  3. Kochiyaaa

    one round in a Zara

    and surprisingly, she's a great ship
  4. Please notice the top ship for both the winners and those who did not win...(Losers) Yes my team lost..... How is it that the TOP SHIP for both teams was the much maligned and spit upon Italian Tier V Cruiser Genova?????? Don't listen to the complainers you did just fine War Gaming
  5. LL_JuneBug

    Andrea Doria A doable ship

    So while working on USS Nevada, (thanks goes out to Maxromash for base ship base models) I was referencing the other 10 gun Battle ships that are known. The 5 old Battleships of Italy. The Conte di Cavour class, and the Andrea Doria class. These were all WW1 Battleships built between 1910 nd 1916. They were all somewhat weak by WW2 standards but Italy had put quite a bit of time and money into modernizing them with modern propulsion and enlarging their main guns from 12 inch (305mm) to 12.6 inch (320mm), along with adding more aa guns and modern secondary turrets. They were sufficient to act as Battle Cruisers and should have been able to hold their own against the French Dunkerque's and the Pocket Battleships/armored cruisers of the Germans. They could outgun any British cruisers so could be used to tie up larger Battleships in the Mediterranean theater. Anyway I posted some pics of altering Giulio Caser into Andria Doria on the topic of the converted Nevada post. I got to thinking that this was probably not good as it skewed the topic over there and would make it to big and confusing. Plus some one might be interested in Nevada and not Italian ships, and or visa versa, so I started this as a new topic. A nice color line drawing showing the layout of Andrea Doria in the WW2 era. The ONI chart for her shows basic layout with out all of the small equipment onboard. This helps as some times the cluttered pics are good for information but hides basic deck detail. Roma model on bottom as seen from the top. Giulio Caser in the center, and reference image of Andrea Doria in scale with the models. A top angle view show again the difference in size between Roma and Giulio Cesar. Roma (45,000 tons) Giulio Cesar (23,000 tons) Here I am clearing the midship deck area of secondary guns and equipment to make room for the 10-90mm 90/50 Ansaldo 1938 DP guns, and the 12-135mm secondary triple turrets.
  6. Fair warning/Disclaimer: This post is rather long, but it is so for a reason. This is a very important topic and nothing about the discussion about the problems around the proposed changes can be left out without properly portraying every failure and flaw in its current situation Although Giulio Cesare was arguably too strong at tier V, (Okt Rev, Texas, and the ARP Kongo clones were about the same level as her performance wise let's be honest, especially the ARP Clones since if we're to judge things based on other ships stats of the same tier the ARP ships global average stats are practically the same.) but that isn't exactly the fault of the GC directly, think about it: what's the main thing that makes the GC tend to perform better than her contemporaries? Her accuracy. GC by far has the best accuracy of all the other battleships at her tier, and for most of the tech tree BB's at her tier their accuracy is downright atrociously bad (looking at you Texas/New York, König, and Bretange). So of course If you're more likely to actually land more shells on target, even though they're smaller, you're going to be doing more damage as a result. Again this isn't at fault of the GC for most of the other TV BB's just being mediocre at best, if anything they should be getting some tweaks to bring them more in line with the rest. But that's just a fraction of what's wrong at Tier B currently, which I'm planning to make a post on later today covering that in-depth, this is on the TVI problems so I'll get back to that. There are currently a lucritave amount of issues with her being at tier VI. So let's start off with a simple one: None of her stats have been buffed, aside from a pointless armor buff (since every cruiser and destroyer you're going to be facing can pen your bow with IFHE anyway it doesn't matter. Plus the fact that even some of your new Tier VI counterparts like the Warspite, QE, and Bayern can just lol-pen your bow anyway it again means your armor doesn't matter, which is beyond infuriating for a ship that is supposed to rely on its armor.), and a slight HP increase nothing has been done to make her even be able to be mediocre at her tier at best. Tier VIII and VI carriers will be able to strike you with impunity, Notser has even shown off how over the course of being constantly hounded by a carrier he never shot own a single attack aircraft. That's a pretty damn big problem. Then there's the fact that although her armor's been "improved" it hasn't actually made it better, let alone be enough to withstand shots at tier VI like she used to at Tier V, since this is a whole new ballpark of ships to face. Since beforehand when you fought Tier VII BB's you actually had a chance of fighting back with your armor and guns if you played your cards right. But when facing Tier VIII BB's you have zero chance of even having so little as a hope of being capable of fighting back, since your gun caliber is so low for its tier (beating out the previous Champ Dunkerque with its 330mm guns with GC's 320mm guns), imcombination of its short range for its tier now (that even most cruisers at tier VI can outrage her now, let alone higher tier ones,) with the addition of the fact that your armor doesn't stand up like it used to against your highest tier possible opponents, as literally every single tier VIII BB will be able to just rip you apart no matter how you angle, as they all overmatch your bow, allowing them to do massive damage to you while you won't be able to do even moderate damage in return unless they're presenting practically a perfect broadside. Which isn't something that can be corrected to no longer make it the case without completely overhauling every other Tier VI BB, and at that point it'd make more sense to just leave her at tier V. Then there's the issue that the reload is now appalling given its new tier placement, given how ships like Dunkerque with its 2x4 330mm guns has a full 4 second faster reload, that's with 4 guns packed into two turrets and being 10mm larger yet still reloading faster than the GC. Then there's the Fuso: she has 6x2 356mm guns that reload in 28 seconds, while the GC has two less guns, again of a lower caliber, that still bafflingly manage to reload a full 2 seconds slower. Then there's the problem of her now having Tier VI MM, which not only is a far more aggressive MM tier than Tier V as you're far more likely to be bottom tier at tier VI than Tier V. Then there's the issue with that MM not being what those who bought the Giulio Cesare bought into: they bought a Tier V battleship because they wanted to play a battleship at tier V with that specific MM, if they wanted to play a BB at tier VI with tier VI MM they would have bought something else like the Warspite or Dunkerque. Which that same new MM placement also completely ruins the enjoyability of the ship due to you now running into so many tier VIII ships that are entirely designed around killing BB's: the Asashio (which I detest that monstrosity), the Akizuiki/HSF harakazae (with the Akizuiki gun turret hull) due to their ludicrous fire rates and being able to IFHE the entirety of the GC at tier VI, every single tier VI and VIII carrier (they can maul you but good luck shooting down a single plane), and again every Tier VIII BB can just lol-pen your bow and Godspeed trying to do anything to them in return unless they're broadside and even then you'll barely do any substantial damage to them. So unless you can make it not face Tier VIII's it will never be a comfortable fit at that tier like it was at Tier VI. Since it can't stand a chance of holding its ground like it could bottom tier at tier V like it would have to now at tier VI. Not to mention there's no role or job the Cesare can currently fill that another battleship doesn't do it massively better than the GC, which leads to there being no point to ever own or play her, as there's just a better ship for every role that does that job but better than the GC in its current state. Warspite does the accuracy and devastating salvo job better thanks to its 2.1 Sigma and 15" guns, that hit more often and hit harder Arizona also fills that same Accurate BB sniper role better as it is Dunkerque fills the same fast flanker role, but with a much faster reload, it is actually faster, and has all its guns in the front P E F already claims the Secondary/Brawler spot  The West V 1941 has better damage potential by far with the same reload speed.  There's just nothing it can do that any other Tier VI already does but better And this is without bringing up the issues of invalidating prior business agreements by changing a product in this manner after it was sold under the assertion that it would never be changed, nerfed, or made worse farther down the line. (Which wouldn't that technically be an invalidation of their previous EULA/TOS promises during the time it was being sold? As wasn't it advertised that it would never be tampered with later down the line?). That's not even mentioning the legal repercussions an action like this could entail, and am legitimately and rather unfortunately finding myself considering if they don't handle this properly. And finally to the argument of "Premium ships ahould be able to have their stats nerfed or made worse after their sold" I have this to say: alright, I'll take that moving forward from here on out only, but you still can't change those that have been already sold, as they were sold with the promise and contract that they wouldn't be changed or modified later down the line. As that's where I draw the line. Which is another reason every fiber of my being is against this change. In conclusion: what exactly am I wanting to happen? WG to cancel the move to teir VI and instead roll-back the buffs given to the GC over the period of time that she's been on sale, that way she's able to be toned down a notch, without it no longer being what people purchased to begin with. The buffs to her were unnecessary and were done after she was for sale, and would be enough of a change to make her no longer OP to the degree she's at; making the ones for the change happy as she's no longer as strong, and those that own her happy as they keep her at tier V, and not have her trashed by having to fight as a tier VI.
  7. Some first-hand accounts of WW2 by actual Italian Soldiers, I apologize but as their native Italian speakers the Audio is in Italian but there are English Subtitles already incorporated into the video. "Italian and American WWII veterans meet again on the mountains where they fought against each other. Part of the "On the Gothic Line" documentary.": "Corporal Colombo's company did not see frontline action, yet, in spite all the attempts to defuse tension, the situation in the rear was far from peaceful. And when the war was over and the San Marco Marines had laid down their arms, hundreds of them were seized by the partisans and shot dead in cold blood." "On January 17, 1943 at 17:30h, Ugo Balzari - ski messenger of the Tridentina Alpini Division - and the rest of the Italian 8th Army in Russia receives the order to leave the Don River Line and pull back. The Red Army has broken through the Axis lines down South, near Stalingrad. Temperatures as low as -40° and 11 Russian encirclement lines are now awaiting them. They will have to fight through all of them if they want to survive.": "After hundreds of miles on foot in the grip of the Russian winter, Ugo Balzari and what remains of the Italian 8th Army finally reach the last encirclement line at Nikolayevka. The 11th and final battle awaits them. Only 9,000 men are battle worthy, the remaining 30,000 are either wounded, frostbitten or shell-shocked. The long line of stragglers includes Germans, Hungarians, and Romanians. Men of the 40th Russian Army are waiting for them well entrenched in the village behind the railway line. Gen. Reverberi climbs up the self-propelled gun and famously shouts: “ Tridentina , forward!”" : "At the beginning of December 1941 Enzo Giordano's 6th assault company, 2nd Bn, GGFF Regiment, was deployed at the Bir el Gobi outpost. At that time Rommel was still trying to capture Tobrouk. Little he knew that General Norrie's Army Corps was heading towards him from the South in order to encircle his forces. Had Norrie succeeded, it would have been the end of the Africa Korps. Between the British VIII Army Corps and Rommel there were only these 2 battalions of the Italian GGFF Regiment. Taking them out must have looked like a walk in the park. What followed instead was the 2nd Battle of Bir el Gobi, one of the most surprising feat of arms of WWII in Africa.": "Historians often refer to Rommel's retreat in North Africa as a tactical masterpiece. Rarely do they mention that it has only been possible thanks to the fierce fight put up by Italian troops covering the Axis retreat. From El Alamein to Tunisia the men led by General Messe always held their positions against superior forces for an impossibly long time. Among them was 18 year old Enzo Giordano of the 2nd BN of the Italian GGFF Regiment. At Enfidaville the Regiment made its last stand as they kept their positions and even recaptured those lost by the Germans. The regiment kept fighting even when all German forces had surrendered. The GGFF were the last Axis unit to lay down their arms in North Africa.": "Marò Scelto (Corporal) Giovanni Tempra of the Italian Decima Mas Division talks about his close-range combat experience on the Senio River banks against units of the 8th British Army in early 1945. " "Towards the end of WW2, France wanted to payback Italy for its aggression in 1940, and started a series of actions on the border. When the French took Mt Chenaillet, a strategic outpost, from the Germans, Alpino Salvatore Daviddi, Tirano BN of the Monterosa division, volunteered to go take it back.": "In November 1944, Alpino Daviddi volunteered to capture Mt. Chenaillet, a strategic Alpine outpost in French territory. On the 21st the height was taken and he became part of the garrison in charge of defending it. He did not have to wait long for the French counterattack.": "Early in 1944, the Allies land at Anzio. Simultaneously they are also pushing from the South at Cassino where the Germans ask the Italian Decima Mas Divison for help. Egidio Cateni, 1st company of the Barbarigo Battalion and his anti-tank platoon is sent to replace a German SS unit that was in trouble. Since the Allies have more tanks than drivers, the order is to shoot to kill. Cateni in a few days claims the destruction of several Allied tanks. But it wasn't a pretty sight.": "In May 1944, Marò Antonio Crosio could not wait to join the bulk of the Barbarigo Battalion who were desperately trying to stop the Allied forces at Anzio and Nettuno. But by the time he reached his foxhole, the Allies were making progress on the Gustav Line behind them. One month later the Axis forces had to pull back from the Nettuno front to avoid encirclement. Rome was about fall. The Battalion had lost almost half of his men and what happened next, brought Crosio's service to an abrupt end.": "In April 1945 "Ardito" Domenico Lombini and his Fireteam of the "1 Battaglione d'Assalto Forlì", deployed North of the High Senio River, has to fight hard to defend his position in order to cover the retreat of Axis units pressed by the advancing Allies." "In the summer of 1944, 63 BN's artillery guns of the Legione Tagliamento were sent to the Southern Italian Front Line to face the advancing tanks of the British 8th Army. But when their 38/42 cannons got replaced with 81mm mortars, artilleryman Ernesto Trentini realized a different and uglier task was awaiting him.": "Following the September 1943 Italian Army breakdown, private Girelli was called to serve in the newly formed Italian Social Republic. As he did not care much about Fascist units, he decided to join the non-political corps of the Bersaglieri. His unit was deployed at the Italian/French border with the task of preventing the Allies from entering the country from there. In spite of the stalemate situation there, from time to time there was some shell fire exchange aimed at disrupting logistics. Little Girelli knew that after the war he would meet a fellow countryman who had been at the receiving end of his shelling..." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pb8QS8hJJ4 "On April 27 1945, Lt Capecci of the Monterosa Division is trying to take his men back home when he realizes that Shermans of the 5th US army are in hot pursuit. He orders his men to stop, turn their anti-tank cannon around and open fire.": "On Dec 26th 1944, Massimo Zamorani - Bersagliere of the Italian "Mameli" Storm BN - was sent with his platoon to free a German unit that had been surrounded.": "On Jan 17th 1945, Gian Ugo Taggiasco - Sgt of the Italian Alpine Division "Monterosa" - was sent to an advanced outpost in Tuscany's Serchio Valley. In the morning he found out that his position had been surrounded by a 100 man strong US Buffalo Div. patrol.": "Artillery LT Cesare Fiaschi of the Italian Monterosa Alpine Division, takes us through his memories of Operation Winter Storm. one of the Axis' last counter-attacks in WW2.": "On a cold December night of 1944 Helmsman Aurelio Cosatto and his crew set out on a mission. Together with 2 other MAS's (Assault Surface Vehicles) and a few smaller assault vehicles, they had to intercept an Allied supply convoy headed for Nice in the South of France. But when a silhouette finally appeared in the darkness, they quickly realized they were about to take on a tougher nut to crack.": "Lt Aladar Kummer takes us through his last commando mission beyond the Allied lines in WWII Italy." https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/162786-carlo-fecia-di-cossato/ Macchi C.202 Folgore "The Macchi C.202 Folgore (Italian "thunderbolt") was an Italian fighter aircraft developed and manufactured by Macchi Aeronautica. It was operated mainly by the Regia Aeronautica (RA; Royal (Italian) Air Force) in and around the Second World War. According to aviation author David Mondey, the Folgore has been considered to be one of the best wartime fighters to serve in large numbers with the Regia Aeronautica. The C.202 was designed by a team headed by the company's chief of design, Italian aeronautics engineer Mario Castoldi. As per company tradition, Macchi aircraft designed by Mario Castoldi received the "C" letter in their model designation, hence the Folgore is commonly referred to as the C.202 or MC.202. The C.202 was a development of the earlier C.200 Saetta, powered by an Italian-built version of the German Daimler-Benz DB 601Aa engine and featuring a redesigned fuselage for greater streamlining. During July 1941, the Folgore went into service with the Regia Aeronautica. In combat, it very quickly proved itself to be an effective and deadly dogfighter against its contemporaries. During its service life, the C.202 was deployed on all fronts in which Italy was involved. During late 1941, it commenced offensive operations over Malta and in North Africa, where Italian and German forces were engaged in heavy combat against British and later American operations. The C.202 continued to be used in North Africa as late as mid-1943, by which point the type was withdrawn to support defensive efforts in Sicily and the Italian mainland following their invasion by Allied forces. It also saw limited use on the Eastern Front. Following the 1943 Armistice with Italy, the type was mostly used as a trainer aircraft. The type was also operated by Croatia. The Australian ace Clive Caldwell, who fought a wide variety of German, Italian and Japanese fighters during 1941–45, later stated that the C.202 was "one of the best and most undervalued of fighters". The C.202 also had its defects: like its predecessor, the C.200, it could enter a dangerous spin. The radios were unreliable, routinely forcing pilots to communicate by waggling their wings and Western historians regard the C.202 as insufficiently armed, being furnished with just a pair of machine guns that had a tendency for jamming. Still in mid-Summer 1942, in North Africa, the Folgore achieved a ratio kill/loss better than that of the Messerschmitt Bf 109s." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macchi_C.202 Macchi C.205 Veltro "The Macchi C.205 (also known as MC.205, "MC" standing for "Macchi Castoldi") Veltro (Italian: Greyhound) was an Italian World War II fighter aircraft built by the Aeronautica Macchi. Along with the Reggiane Re.2005 and Fiat G.55, the Macchi C.205 was one of the three "Serie 5" Italian fighters built around the powerful Daimler-Benz DB 605 engine. The C.205 was a development of the earlier C.202 Folgore. With a top speed of some 640 km/h (400 mph) and equipped with a pair of 20 mm cannon as well as 12.7 mm Breda machine guns, the Macchi C.205 Veltro was highly respected by Allied and Axis pilots alike. Widely regarded as one of the best Italian aircraft of World War II, in action it proved to be extremely effective, destroying a large number of Allied bombers and capable of successfully clashing on equal terms with fighters such as the North American P-51D Mustang, a capability which encouraged the Luftwaffe to use a number of these aircraft to equip one Gruppe. However, while the C.205 was able to match the best Allied opponents in speed and maneuverability, it was introduced late in the conflict. Moreover, due to the poor Italian industrial capacity of the time, only a small production run was delivered before the end of the war. Like the Spitfire, the Veltro was tricky in its construction and thus slow to build. Italy's highest scoring ace, Adriano Visconti, achieved 11 of his 26 credited victories in the few weeks he was able to fly the Veltro, with the top scoring Sergente Maggiore pilota Luigi Gorrini shooting down 14 enemy aircraft plus six damaged with the C.205." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macchi_C.205 Fiat G.55 Centauro "The Fiat G.55 Centauro (Italian: "Centaur") was a single-engine single-seat World War II fighter aircraft used by the Regia Aeronautica and the A.N.R. (Aeronautica Nazionale Repubblicana, the Airforce of the Northern half of Italy that continued to fight for the Axis after the Armistice, refusing to accept such a humiliating surrender they fought until the war's end.) in 1943–1945. It was designed and built in Turin by Fiat. The Fiat G.55 was arguably the best type produced in Italy during World War II, (a subjective claim also frequently made for the Macchi C.205 Veltro as well as for the Reggiane Re.2005 Sagittario) but it did not enter production until 1943, when, after comparative tests against the Messerschmitt Bf 109G and the Focke-Wulf 190, the Luftwaffe itself regarded the Fiat G.55 as "the best Axis fighter". During its short operational service, mostly under the Repubblica Sociale Italiana insignia, after the 8 September 1943 armistice, this powerful, robust and fast aircraft proved itself to be an excellent interceptor at high altitude. In 1944, over Northern Italy, the Centauro clashed with British Supermarine Spitfire, P-51 Mustang, P-47 Thunderbolt and P-38 Lightning, proving to be no easy adversary. Italian fighter pilots liked their Centauro but by the time the war ended, fewer than 300 had been built.[3] By comparison, the Germans produced 35,000 Bf 109s." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_G.55 Why the M38 Carcano Fucile Corto is one of the best thought-out rifles for WWII To quote the Video Description: "I would like to propose that the M38 Carcano short rifle was, despite the poor reputation of the Carcano series of rifles, one of the best thought out bolt action weapons of World War 2. Why, you ask? Well, let's consider... Only a few nations actually recognized the short ranges at which combat actually took place. Germany was one, as seen with it's 8x33mm cartridge development, and Italy was another. The sights on the M38 series of carbines were made as simple fixed notches, with no adjustments to be knocked out of place unintentionally. With a 200 meter zero (or 150 meters, with the Finnish replacement front sight), the weapon needed no adjustment to make hits out to 300 meters, which is as far as anyone could realistically engage a target. The M38 is a light and handy weapon compared to its contemporaries - 8.1 pounds and 40.2 inches (3.7kg and 1.02m) - and it fired a significantly lighter cartridge as well. The 7.35x51mm round used a 128gr (8.3g) bullet at 2400-2500 fps (735-755 m/s) depending on barrel length. This produced noticeably less recoil than rounds like the .30-06 or 8mm Mauser, which made it easier for troops to shoot effectively. The Carcano also had a 6-round capacity and fed with Mannlicher type clips, which are potentially faster to load than Mauser-type stripper clips. Today we will discuss the M38 and these features (along with its predecessor, the M91 rifle) as they appear on paper. At the same time, over on InRangeTV, today we have the first stage of a 2-Gun Action Challenge Match in which I am shooting this M38 Carcano against Karl, who is using a Mauser K98k - so we will see how the theory works out in the field!" The Beretta 38A "The Beretta 38A is not a gun that comes to mind for many people today when discussing World War Two submachine guns, but at the time it was one of the most desirable guns of its type. So - does it live up to that reputation?" As for tanks the Italians are continuously and unjustly treated as a laughing stock by modern historians, yet they seemingly lack understanding of why such designs were used; As Italy at the outbreak of the war lacked the Manufacturing capabilities to produce a "Jack-Of-All-Trades" tank like the American M4 Sherman. As such Italy had a dilemma on it's hands; It needed armored vehicles that could fulfill a multitude of different Roles, but lacked an industry to develop a tank that could do all of them. As such Italy opt'ed to set about developing a multitude of smaller vehicles that would each fulfill a very specific role, and only to be designed with that role in mind. Which in turn led to a drastically different Tank Warfare Doctrine, which leads to confusion for those trying to look at their actions through the lens of the Doctrines of the US, UK, Germany etc. In that for Italy Tankettes like the CV.33 were never designed nor intended to engage in Tank v Tank combat, instead, they were designed to be used as an Infantry support vehicle, a Reconnaissance Vehicle, and could be easily modified to function as a tow vehicle to move larger Italian 90mm Anti-Air/Anti-Tank batteries. Thusly Light tanks were designed with the belief via their doctrine that Light Tanks are solely for Reconassaince and light infantry support, and under-no controllable circumstances were they supposed to engage enemy Armor. Medium tanks were designed for the task of giving infantry support in more heavily defended areas such as trenches or fortifications and were designed with a caliber of gun (as in the M15/42) that could realiably take out any tank it would encounter in the areas it would be engaging (the Cruiser series of tanks, and the Crusaders), and were to be accompanied by an Infantry Anti-Tank division (for example the Folgore) who would be tasked with taking out tanks like M4 Shermans and Matildas, which time and time again they did so bravely, and effectively. To give you a visual idea of how the Italian Infantry Anti-Tank style divisions would go about doing so here's a clip from an old WW2 movie that shows the Folgore (a division worthy of praise and more recognition today), and should give a relative understanding of what it was like, even though some of the vehicles in the clip weren't actually used in WW2 at the time, due to it being an older film its somewhat understandable. British General Hughes of the 44th Infantry Division: "I wish to say that in all my life I have never encountered soldiers like those of the Folgore." According to American historian John W.Gordon, whose book Behind Rommel's Lines was recently translated into Italian, the British special forces were so impressed by the methods and tactics of the Italian desert corps that they actually copied them. Italy's crack paratrooper regiment, the "Folgore", sent some 5,000 of its men to El Alamein. Only 304 returned. ''The paratroopers threw themselves against oncoming tanks with Molotov cocktails and live mines,'' said Francesco Marini Dettina, a survivor of the battle who was awarded a silver medal for valor. Interviewed for a documentary, Dettina said: ''They urged us to surrender but the only answer they got came from the artillery with our last remaining shells. The British were surprised by the Italians' behavior.'' Churchill said in a speech to the House of Commons a month after El Alamein: ''We must honor the men that were the Lions of the Folgore''. As for Tank Destroyers, the Philosophy was rather simple: They were designed to deal with anything the rest of their armor couldn't deal with. And at that, they excelled! Not to mention Germany were quite fond of the Italian Tank Destroyers, using them extensively in their own ranks in the Deserts of Africa. As for a while, until they got their hands on the Italian Semovente da 75/18, besides Flak 8,8 and Italian 90mm gun emplacements, the Axis didn't have anything that could effectively take out tanks like the Matildas. The Semovente da 75/18 ( Sturmgeschütz M42 mit 75/18 850 (i) in German use ) "The Semovente da 75/18 was an Italian self-propelled gun of the Second World War. It was built by mounting the 75 mm Obice da 75/18 modello 34 mountain gun on the chassis of a M13/40, M14/41 or M15/42 tank. The first 60 were built using the M13/40 chassis and a subsequent 162 were built on the M14/41 chassis from 1941 to 1943, when the M15/43 chassis were introduced. The Semovente da 75/18 was intended to be an interim vehicle until the heavier P40 tank could be available." "Although these machines were not widely known, the vehicle performed well in its role. Though it was technically similar to the StuG III, it had a totally different role, serving as divisional artillery instead of a pure assault gun. The organic structure consisted of two artillery groups for every armored division, with two batteries each (four 75/18 each and a command vehicle). The total was of 18 75 mm L/18 (included two in reserve) and 9 command vehicles, which were characterized by additional radio equipment and a Breda 13.2 mm heavy machine gun mounted instead of the main gun. The number originally ordered, 60 total, was enough for the three armored divisions." "The Semovente da 75/18s were deployed in the North African campaign and during the Allied invasion of Sicily, alongside M tank units to provide additional firepower. Despite the fact that they were not designed to fight other tanks, their 75 mm howitzer proved ideal (thanks to its low muzzle velocity) for firing HEAT shells; its 5.2 kg HEAT shell ("Effetto Pronto" in Italian) could pierce 80 mm of armour at 500 meters, and could thus defeat tanks such as the US built M3 Grant and M4 Sherman used by the British Army. As such, these machines were responsible for many of the successes by the Italian armoured troops during 1942–43, when the medium tanks (all armed with a 47 mm gun) were no longer effective. On another account, the Semovente da 75/18 on M14 chassis allowed the Ariete and the Littorio division a somewhat wider tactical repertoire until British deployment of U.S. medium tanks negated that small advantage." "The most successful action fought by Semovente da 75/18 took place on 10 June 1942, south of Knightsbridge, during the Battle of Gazala. Thirty M3 Grant and ten M3 Stuart of 1st and 6th Royal Tank Regiment attacked a position held by the Ariete division but were repelled by Semovente da 75/18s as well as some M13/40s and gun trucks, losing three Grants and two Stuarts from 6th Royal Tank Regiment and twelve Grants and three Stuarts from 1st Royal Tank Regiment. The Italians lost two M13/40s." "Despite its limitations (namely its cramped interior and the insufficiently powerful engine in the M40 and M41 variants), the Semovente da 75/18 proved successful both in the direct support role and in anti-tank fighting; its main advantages, other than their sheer firepower, was in its thicker armor (relative to the medium tanks) and lower silhouette that made it more difficult to hit. Due to these features, the Semovente da 75/18 has been regarded as one of the few Italian armored fighting vehicles to be seriously feared by Allied tank crews, and despite the fact that it was originally conceived for a totally different role, the 75/18 often ended up replacing the standard M13/40." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_75/18 Semovente da 90/53 "The Semovente da 90/53 was primarily developed in response to demands by Italian forces on the Eastern Front for a vehicle-mounted anti-tank weapon that could take on Soviet T-34 and KV tanks. Italian armored forces on the Eastern Front were equipped only with the L6/40 tank and Semovente 47/32 self-propelled gun; neither of these had the firepower to cope with the Soviet medium and heavy tanks. However, no Semoventi da 90/53 was ever sent to the Eastern Front." "The major drawback of the Semovente da 90/53, as with many self-propelled gun types of World War II, was the open top and rear of the gun compartment, which left the gun crew exposed to shrapnel and small arms fire. In addition, the Semovente da 90/53 had little or no armor in most areas. Because these vehicles were designed to operate far enough away from enemy vehicles to not be subject to incoming fire, this was initially not considered a problem. The small ammunition capacity of the vehicle—six rounds—was also a problem, necessitating the creation of special ammunition carriers out of Fiat L6/40 tanks, one accompanying each Semovente da 90/53 in the field. The L6 ammunition carrier carried 26 rounds, plus an additional 40 rounds in a towed trailer. It fired Effetto Pronto, or HEAT rounds, which could pierce 200mm armor plating at a range of 2,200 meters." "In the North African Campaign, the Semovente da 90/53 proved to be an effective weapon and its long-range was well suited to the flat and open desert terrain. 24 Semovente 90/53s saw service against the Allies in the 10° Raggruppamento Semoventi, which was stationed in Sicily during the Allied invasion in 1943. Following the Armistice of Cassibile in September 1943, the few surviving Semoventi da 90/53 were seized by the German Army, but were of little value in the mountainous terrain of Northern Italy where they operated. As a result, most finished their careers as long-range artillery." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_90/53 Semovente da 75/34 "The Semovente da 75/34 was an Italian self-propelled gun developed and used during World War II. It was a 75 mm L/34 gun mounted on a M15/42 tank chassis. It saw action during the defense of Rome in 1943 and later served with the Germans in Northern Italy and the Balkans. 141 were produced during the war (60 before the Armistice of Cassibile in September 1943, 81 later under German control)." "While derived from the earlier Semovente, it differed somewhat from it; instead of two conjoined plates each 21 millimeters (0.83 in) thick, the frontal armor was made of a single 42 millimeters (1.7 in) thick plate and the casemate was modified to fit the longer gun. It had the same 192 HP petrol engine of the M15/42 which allowed for a reasonable top speed of 38.4 kilometers per hour (23.9 mph)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_75/34 Semovente da 105/25 or StuG M43 mit 105/25 853 (i) ^^German Semovente da 105/28 and Semovente Da 75/34 with name Heidi 3 from 71 Inf.Div. "The development of a self-propelled gun with high firepower was initiated during 1942 in parallel by Odera-Terni-Orlando (OTO) and Ansaldo. OTO proposed the installation of a 105/25 gun on the hull of a P26/40 tank. Ansaldo, for its part, proposed to use the hull of the Semovente M42 already in production and was, therefore, able to present, on 28 February 1943, its prototype to the Centro Studi Della Motorizzazione while the OTO model was still in development. The production of the Ansaldo proposal was therefore approved by the Royal Italian Army. In the final version, with an improved hull and the 105/25 gun, it was adopted on April 2, 1943, as the self-propelled M43 105/25, Bassotto ("Dachshund"). Twelve units were built and used in 1943 by the 135ª Armored Division "Ariete II", which clashed with German troops near Rome in the days following the armistice of Cassibile that went into effect on 8 and 9 September 1943. They acquitted themselves well in combat. Following the Italian surrender, the Germans, who regarded the Semovente 105/25 "Bassotto" as a very good vehicle, captured them and built an additional 91 units, renamed StuG M43 mit 105/25 853 (i) and used them against the Anglo-American forces." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_105/25 Semovente da 75/46 or Sturmgeschütz M 43 mit 75/46 (852) (i) "After the armistice of Cassibile signed in September 1943, Northern and Central Italy fell under German control. In 1944 the progress of the war led them to order a new Italian armoured vehicle for a tank-fighting role, based on the Semovente da 105/25 self-propelled gun. The result was the Semovente da 75/46, which was renamed Sturmgeschütz M 43 mit 75/46 (852) (i) by the Germans, following their naming convention. The 75/46 shared the same "M 43" hull of the 105/25. However, the 105 mm L25 howitzer was replaced by a longer 75 mm L46 cannon – originally conceived as a FlaK cannon but also used as an anti-tank gun – which ensured a higher muzzle velocity (750 m/s instead of 510) and a far greater effective range, being able to fire a 6.5 kg (14 lb 5 oz) shell up to 13,000 m (43,000 ft) away. This gun could be loaded with HE or AP rounds; when loaded with the latter, it could pierce up to 90 mm (3.5 in) of armour from 500 m. The other main difference with its precursor was in the overall increased armour: sloped plates were applied to the casemate and others were added on the sides, above the tracks. Due to these features and despite its origins, the 75/46 is considered a tank destroyer in every respect." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semovente_da_75/46 Semovente da 149/40 This vehicle was literally just the Italian "Cannone da 149/40 modello 35" field artillery gun placed onto a modified Carro Armato M15/42 tank chassis. Didn't really do much of anything but I found the design interesting enough to include. Now onto a big screw-up on wargaming's end when it comes to Roma in-game: (Commentor Nathan Stahlwirth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9YS3GcycNQ) "When it comes to the Roma and Littorio class, There is one major misconception that really should be clarified, and that is the cause of the problems with main battery dispersion for this class. After the war, remaining ammunition for the Ansaldo 1934, the 381mm gun used on the Littorio and Veneto (Roma's guns were made by OTO/Terni) was inspected for compliance with design specifications on mass, dimensions, and assembly. It was discovered that the overwhelming majority of the ammunition did not pass this inspection in one manner or another, with most of the problems being found in the condition of the critical driving bands on the shells. This reality was glaringly demonstrated in the contrast between the shooting manifested by the Littorio/Italia, vs. that of the Vittorio Veneto. Littorio/Italia demonstrated that its grouping was accurate enough, and tight enough to cause splinter damage to RN DDs during the first "battle" of Sirte Gulf (17 December, 1941 - I don't consider it much of a battle, since the action lasted under 7 minutes), starting from a range of 35,000 yards (Source; Robert O. Dulin & William H. Garzke: Battleships Axis and Neutral Battleships of WWII, page 397). What is even more telling about the main gun accuracy, and the exceptional fire control of the Vittorio Veneto class, was that range was determined, main battery was trained, and accurate salvos delivered repeatedly against fast-moving destroyers, in under 7 minutes, with only a single turret firing, with shell flight time being roughly 65 seconds. The splintering was not a single, lucky shell, but rather, was repeated in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th salvos fired, prompting the enemy to lay down a smokescreen for protection from further damage - from a ship that was over 35,000 yards (about 20 miles) away. Keep in mind that during Bismarck's last battle, Rodney, closing from 22,000 yards, required over 10 minutes for her gunlayer to get his first straddle on Bismarck ( a huge target compared to the DDs Littorio fired at, moving at only 8 knots, not 30+). Littorio doubtlessly had properly fabricated ammunition, but Vittorio Veneto suffered from wildly misplaced groups during her Guado encounter (28 March 1941), and at 24,000 yards only scored one near miss (splinters) against RN cruisers, during 25 minutes of firing. It should be fairly obvious that, had the gun been that fundamentally defective, the ships would never have been allowed to go into service with such a glaring defect in place, especially since the gun was first designed and tested in 1934 (hence the name; "Ansaldo Model 1934"), while the first two ships were fully operational by 1940. A far more likely scenario, supported by empirical evidence and assay, is one in which Italian industry, for whatever reason, was not fabricating projectiles of consistent, and proper quality, for the M1934, and other naval rifles. Had this problem been unique to the 381mm gun, there might have been a basis for the position that the guns were to blame for the dispersion; however, given that the problem was erratic, unpredictable, and happening on other Italian ships at the same time, it's possible that the increased demands and pressures of a wartime economy may have been cause for a breakdown of the serialized production of ordnance in Italy, and lead to some units leaving the factory in less than perfect working condition." Not to mention how incorrect the layout of her Ingame armor scheme is when compared to what it was historically, and actually should be Ingame. As this has continually Irritated me as the historical placement of her armor would (Imho) make her a much more sturdy and resilient battleship. And not so prone to getting half her HP chunked off in a moments notice, and that's if your lucky and dont get just flat-out deleted.
  8. TheDgamesD

    Dasha Captains

    No Italian/Regia Marina Dasha? I'm not mad wargaming, just disappointed and sad. Especially since there's bound to be a line for them eventually, same (possibly) for the Commonwealth. Sure its only premium ships currently but that doesn't mean you couldn't've released one anyway, The Italian Navy is not only my favorite from WW2 from a historical standpoint, but also based on designs/looks. As such it deeply saddens me I wont have a Italian Dasha captain to use on them
  9. TheDgamesD

    Battle of Espero Convoy

    The Battle of the Espero Convoy (Battaglia del convoglio Espero) on 28 June 1940, was the first surface engagement between Italian and Allied warships of the Second World War. Three modern 36 kn (41 mph; 67 km/h) Italian destroyers made a run from Taranto for Tobruk in Libya to transport Blackshirt (Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale) anti-tank units, in case of a British tank attack from Egypt. By coincidence, the Mediterranean Fleet was at sea to conduct a destroyer anti-submarine sweep around Crete and provide cover for three Allied convoys to Egypt, one from Turkey and two from Malta. British aircraft from Malta spotted the Italian destroyers and the 7th Cruiser Squadron turned to intercept them and a running fight took place south-west of Crete, in which the destroyers were impeded by their cargoes and an adverse sea. The Italian destroyer Espero (Capitano di Vascello Enrico Baroni) was sunk while covering the escape of Zeffiro and Ostro to Benghazi; 53 of the 225 crew and passengers were rescued, three of whom died of their wounds. The British and Australian cruisers expended a huge amount of ammunition and the Malta convoys had to be postponed until they had replenished from the 800 6-inch shells in reserve. Convoy AS 1 from Turkey arrived safely by 3 July. On 10 June 1940, Italy declared war on Britain and France. Comando Supremo (Italian Supreme Command of the armed forces) expected a British advance into Cyrenaica (eastern Libya) led by armored forces. An anti-tank unit comprising 162 gunners, ten anti-tank guns and 120 short tons (110 t) of ammunition was ordered to Tobruk by a fast destroyer convoy. On 27 June, five destroyers were to sail from Alexandria on an anti-submarine sweep near the Ionian island of Kythira and them sail on to Malta to form the close escort for convoys MF 1 and MS 2 to Alexandria. Intelligence about Italian submarines led to the sweep being diverted through the Kasos Strait east of Crete, then north of the island, thence past Kythira to Malta. Short Sunderland flying boats of 201 Group RAF, based in Malta, were to co-operate with the naval operations in the Ionian Sea. On the Italian declaration of war, the passenger liner El Nil, en route for Egypt from Marseilles, Knight of Malta and interned Italian ship Rodi were in Malta and in Operation MA 3 these ships formed the fast convoy MF 1 [13 kn (15 mph; 24 km/h)]. Five slower ships, Zeeland, Kirkland, Masirah, Novasli and Tweed carrying naval stores for Alexandria, formed the slow convoy MS 1 [9 kn (10 mph; 17 km/h)] were to depart from Malta for Alexandria. MF 1 carried civilians being evacuated from Malta and all of the Mediterranean Fleet was to sortie to protect them in Operation MA 5. Convoy AS1, with seven ships, was to sail from the Dardanelles to Egypt, with four ships joining from Salonika, Piraeus and Smyrna (İzmir), escorted by the light cruisers HMS Capetown and Caledon of the 3rd Cruiser Squadron and the destroyers HMS Garland, Nubian, Mohawk and Vampire, due to depart from Cape Helles early on 28 June. The timing of the departures was arranged so that on 30 June the three convoys would be at Position K (35°N, 22°E), south of Cape Matapan, about halfway between Malta and Alexandria. Five cruisers of the 7th Cruiser Squadron (also known as Force C, Vice-Admiral John Tovey) with the 1st Cruiser Division, the Leander class cruisers (eight 6-inch guns) HMS Orion (flagship), Neptune, HMAS Sydney and the 2nd Cruiser Division, the Town (Gloucester) class cruisers (twelve 6-inch guns) Liverpool and Gloucester, were to sail west of Crete near Position K. The 1st Battle Squadron (Rear-Admiral Henry Pridham-Wippell) with HMS Royal Sovereign Ramillies, the aircraft carrier HMS Eagle and the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla, were to be south-west of Crete also near Position K, ready to intervene according to circumstances. At 6:00 p.m. on 26 June, Caledon, Garland and Vampire sailed from Alexandria to rendezvous with Capetown, Nubian and Mohawk the next day while heading for the Dardanelles. A dawn on 27 June, five ships of the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla departed Alexandria and at 11:00 a.m., the 7th Cruiser Squadron left for Position K. The Italians chose the Turbine-class destroyers Espero (flagship, Capitano di Vascello Enrico Baroni), Zeffiro and Ostro to transport the anti-tank units, for their high speed [36 kn (41 mph; 67 km/h)] and loading capacity. Two smaller First World War era escort vessels, Pilo and Giuseppe Missori, which carried 52 troops and additional supplies, departed independently for Tobruk some hours later. As the sun set, the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla of Voyager, Dainty, Decoy, Defender and Ilex were 200 nmi (230 mi; 370 km) north of Alexandria. At 6:28 p.m. while 100 nmi (115 mi; 185 km) south-east of Crete, the flotilla spotted a submarine, Console Generale Liuzzi, which quickly dived. Four of the destroyers made depth-charge attacks and after the fifth an oil slick was seen and trailed by Dainty. The submarine had been badly damaged by the depth charging and was eventually forced to the surface. After a hunt of ninety minutes the submarine was seen again at 2,500 yd (2,300 m) and two destroyers fired on the submarines until a white light was taken to indicate a surrender. Dainty moved closer and began to take on survivors, along with other destroyers which lowered boats to pick up the Italians who had taken to the water. Three hours fifteen minutes lapsed before the last two men from the submarine were taken off and the boat sunk with depth charges. The Italian destroyers were spotted at 12:10 p.m. by a 228 Squadron Sunderland (L.5806) from Malta, about 50 nmi (58 mi; 93 km) west of Zakynthos in the Ionian Sea, west of Greece and about 150 nmi (173 mi; 278 km) from Position K. No course was given by the Sunderland crew and the Italian ships were thought to be heading for Kythira; at 4:10 p.m. the 7th Cruiser squadron turned north to intercept the Italian ships. At 4:40 p.m. a sighting by Sunderland (L.5803) had them still heading south, about 35 nmi (40 mi; 65 km) from Orion. Tovey ordered a turn to the south-west and an increase in speed to 25 kn (29 mph; 46 km/h). The cruisers sailed on a course of 180°, the 1st Cruiser Division, Orion, Neptune and Sydney to overhaul the Italians to starboard and the 2nd Cruiser Division, about 5 nmi (6 mi; 9 km) apart from Liverpool and Manchester to overtake them to port. The Italian destroyers were steaming south-east at high speed when they were spotted by Liverpool at 6:30 p.m., about 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) north of Tobruk; the cruiser commenced firing three minutes later at 18,000 yd (8.9 nmi; 10 mi; 16 km). The Italian ships had the notional speed to outrun the cruisers but their age, heavy loads and the sea state meant that the British ships slowly caught up. The Italians had been taken by surprise and could not launch torpedoes because of their deck cargoes but they were difficult to hit as they made smoke, darkness gathered and the ships sailed towards the afterglow of the sun. At 7:05 p.m. Neptune reported torpedoes and the British ships changed course to comb the spread. The 2nd Cruiser Division concentrated on Espero and by 7:20 p.m. had closed the range to 14,000 yd (7 nmi; 8 mi; 13 km) and the 1st Division turned 50° to starboard to bring all their turrets to bear ("opening 'A' arcs") but Espero was not hit until the fifteenth salvo. Baroni realized that his faster ships were doomed and decided to sacrifice Espero to enable the other two to escape, laid smoke and maneuvered evasively as Zeffiro and Ostro raced south-west. At 8:00 p.m. Espero was hit and brought to a stop. As night was falling and short of ammunition, Tovey abandoned the chase ten minutes later and changed course for Malta. Tovey ordered Sydney to finish off Espero and when at 6,000 yd (3 nmi; 3 mi; 5 km) received two shells from Espero and replied with four salvos, scoring hits. Espero began to burn from the bow to midships and at 8:35 p.m., Sydney closed to 2,000 yd (1,829 m) astern of the destroyer. Men jumped from the burning ship and there was an explosion near the bridge. At 8:40 p.m., with a list of almost 90°, Espero sank at 35° 18' N; 20° 8' E. Sydney lowered both of its boats to rescue survivors and used Jacob's ladders and Bosun's chairs to bring them aboard. The glare from Espero before it sank and the presence of Italian submarines led to the rescue effort being ended at 10:19 p.m. when all 47 survivors in sight had been collected. before Sydney sailed away, one of the cutters with oars, sails, foodstuffs, water and rifles was left behind and with a signal projector illuminated so that remaining survivors could board it. Three of the survivors died before the ship reached Alexandria and six others were found alive on a raft by the Italian submarine Topazio fourteen days later. At dawn, the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla was 160 nmi (184 mi; 296 km) west of Crete when the submarine Uebi Scebeli was caught on the surface. The submarine dived and was depth charged by three of the destroyers which forced Uebi Scebeli to the surface, where survivors were rescued. Dainty sank the submarine with gunfire at 8:20 am.; the destroyers made for Alexandria, arriving at about 7:00 p.m. on 30 June. Information was gleaned from the prisoners, of a submarine patrol line between Crete and the African coast; two destroyers were dispatched from Alexandria on an anti-submarine sortie near Derna, detected a submerged submarine on 1 July and claimed its sinking, although this was disproved when the ships returned on 2 July. Zeffiro and Ostro had reached Benghazi on 29 June and arrived at Tobruk shortly after; two-thirds of the convoy had survived. The smaller Pilo and Missori also reached Libya after being diverted to the port of Tripoli. The engagement had lasted for about 130 minutes and the 7th Cruiser Squadron fired about 5,000 shells. An Italian 4.7 in (120 mm) shell hit Liverpool 3 ft (0.91 m) above the waterline but caused little damage. Some of the prisoners on Sydney disclosed the purpose of the operation, that Espero had a company of 225 men and passengers embarked and that Baroni had been killed in the explosion near the bridge. The ammunition consumption of the British cruisers exacerbated a shortage of ammunition at Alexandria, where only 800 6-inch shells were in stock. The Battle of the Espero Convoy demonstrated that a daylight naval action at long range was likely to be indecisive and extravagant of ammunition. The 2nd Cruiser Division was so short of ammunition that it returned to Alexandria and the Malta convoys were postponed. The 1st Cruiser Division reached Alexandria on 1 July, having also been ineffectually bombed. Convoy AS 1 from the Aegean was attacked from 29 June to 1 July by Italian aircraft based in the Dodecanese Islands but reached Alexandria and Port Said undamaged on 2 and 3 July. In 1998, Green and Massignani wrote that had Italian aircraft spotted the Allied cruisers before they came within range, all three destroyers could have escaped. Baroni was posthumously awarded the Medaglia D´oro Al Valor Militare. The lack of ammunition and the danger of Italian submarines, led to the two Malta convoy sailings being postponed for two weeks, followed by Operation MF 5, culminating in the Battle of Punta Stilo (9 July 1940). On 5 July, nine Fairey Swordfish torpedo-bombers of 813 Naval Air Squadron, Fleet Air Arm flew from Sidi Barrani near the Egypt–Libya frontier, to attack the ships in Tobruk harbour. Twelve fighters of 33 Squadron covered the Swordfish and 211 Squadron attacked the airfield, damaged eight Fiat CR.42 fighters and flew reconnaissance sorties. The Swordfish dropped seven torpedoes in the harbour, sank Zeffiro and damaged the destroyer Euro; the merchantmen Manzoni and Serenitas were also sunk and the liner Liguria was damaged. On the evening after the attack on Tobruk, 830 Naval Air Squadron from Malta bombed the airfield at Catania in Sicily. Capetown and Caledon of the 3rd Cruiser Squadron with four destroyers, bombarded the port Bardia from 9,000 yd (5.1 mi; 8.2 km) at dawn on 6 July and hit two ships, before making ready to assist the crews of any aircraft damaged on the Tobruk raid; Italian aircraft attacked the ships to no effect. The guns of Zeffiro were salvaged from the harbour and sent to Bardia to augment the coastal defences.
×