Semi OT, Italy in the Med, a good book

[Dili]

JeffK there were 3 CCNN Divisions:1,2,4; 3º CCNN was transformed into 64 ID AS Catanzaro shortly before war start, i also think you meant 6/40(war start) and not 9/40.

1 ID "C3" Superga in 11/42 Tunisia.

21 Panzer starts as Leichte(light) Afrika-Div.5 later its status is upgraded.

90 Light was never 90 Pzgr until it was back to Italy.

Another point most Italian Divisions had only 2 Regiments except 101 and 102 Motorized. Many of those AS divisions in NA had 4-5000 men at start. Not even near the established 10000.

82 Abn employed in Husky. There were some airborne jumps in Med. Example 2 Para/509 PIR in Torch directly from England.

[JeffroK]

3 CCNN 1939 sent to Taguria in Italy as part of 10 Army.Invaded Egypt Sept 40
181 & 203 Legions each 3 bns.The total was basically at Rgt size

64 Catanzaro Metropolitan Div based in Lybia as part of 10 Army. Invaded Egypt as part of 10 Army
141 & 142 Rgts

Clearly 2 different units.

You are right about 90 Light, I was trying to show is IRL role rather than being a typical German Light Infantry Div.

I didnt believe the conversation was going as far as Husky, I was trying to show what commitment the AXIS made to the Med, it wasnt only a major theatre for the Allies.

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
..by late autumn 1941 the Germans had about 16.5% of its frontline air strength in the Mediterranean/North Africa, rising to an average of 20% from the Spring of 1942 to summer 1943.

20% sounds a bit high for most of 1942. What figures are you using?

[anarchyintheuk]

The Luftwaffe had 3500-4000 aircraft in '42. 20% is only 700-800. Absent the oob for the med, it sounds reasonable.

Fear the wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luftwaffe ... _(1940–45)

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

The Luftwaffe had 3500-4000 aircraft in '42. 20% is only 700-800. Absent the oob for the med, it sounds reasonable.

Fear the wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luftwaffe ... _(1940–45)

warspite1

20% sounds a bit high for most of 1942. What figures are you using?

The source was John Ellis. How he arrived at that % i.e. the data behind it, I'm afraid I don't know - but look forward to any further info anyone may have.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Another point most Italian Divisions had only 2 Regiments except 101 and 102 Motorized. Many of those AS divisions in NA had 4-5000 men at start. Not even near the established 10000.

warspite1

Yes but regardless of the strength of each division, the numbers taken prisoner were the numbers taken prisoner - not the numbers that would have been taken prisoner had all units been up to establishment [;)].

'Wavell's 30,000' took 130,000 (although I have read one source states 110,000) prisoners of war. Those 10th Army troops were therefore there somewhere.

[Dili]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

3 CCNN 1939 sent to Taguria in Italy as part of 10 Army.Invaded Egypt Sept 40
181 & 203 Legions each 3 bns Basically at Rgt size

64 Catanzaro Metropolitan Div based in Lybia as part of 10 Army. Invaded Egypt as part of 10 Army
141 & 142 Rgts

Clearly 2 different units.

Please check your sources JeffK, or other sources. 3º CCNN was disbanded May 1940.
The troops went to fill/form 64 Div which was not an Infantry Metropolitan division, no Inf. Metropolitan Division(which were 2 types btw well more if we include autoportata, Alpini etc ) existed in Libya. Just A.S. divisions, Libyan Divisions and CC.NN. Divisions.

[Dili]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Dili

Another point most Italian Divisions had only 2 Regiments except 101 and 102 Motorized. Many of those AS divisions in NA had 4-5000 men at start. Not even near the established 10000.

warspite1

Yes but regardless of the strength of each division, the numbers taken prisoner were the numbers taken prisoner - not the numbers that would have been taken prisoner had all units been up to establishment [;)].

'Wavell's 30,000' took 130,000 (although I have read one source states 110,000) prisoners of war. Those 10th Army troops were therefore there somewhere.

That is my point when you dismiss that X or Y division disbanded so does not count, it was disbanded because losses in other units. [;)]

I made reference to divisions because a British Division is not equivalent to an Italian Division so the comparison is not like to like, that was what Mussolini liked to do to fool everyone, and be fooled... An Italian Division has 2 Regiments and 36 guns, a British one has 3 Regiments and 72 guns.

There were 124000 troops including GAF +24300 Libyan Regio Esercito troops in NA in 10 June 1940. About 8000 were sent until December 1940.
Tobruk was the major Regiamarina naval base in NA, it had probably around 3-4K( total was 6K). There were GAF(Frontier Guards) troops in Bardia and Tobruk probably around +10K, then all Division reinforcements and 5th Army divisions that were attached to 10th Army and some that were depleted to strength the 10th Army.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Dili

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Dili

Another point most Italian Divisions had only 2 Regiments except 101 and 102 Motorized. Many of those AS divisions in NA had 4-5000 men at start. Not even near the established 10000.

warspite1

Yes but regardless of the strength of each division, the numbers taken prisoner were the numbers taken prisoner - not the numbers that would have been taken prisoner had all units been up to establishment [;)].

'Wavell's 30,000' took 130,000 (although I have read one source states 110,000) prisoners of war. Those 10th Army troops were therefore there somewhere.

That is my point when you dismiss that X or Y division disbanded so does not count, it was disbanded because losses in other units. [;)]

I made reference to divisions because a British Division is not equivalent to an Italian Division so the comparison is not like to like, that was what Mussolini liked to do to fool everyone, and be fooled... An Italian Division has 2 Regiments and 36 guns, a British one has 3 Regiments and 72 guns.

There were 124000 troops including GAF +24300 Libyan Regio Esercito troops in NA in 10 June 1940. About 8000 were sent until December 1940.
Tobruk was the major Regiamarina naval base in NA, it had probably around 3-4K( total was 6K). There were GAF(Frontier Guards) troops in Bardia and Tobruk probably around +10K, then all Division reinforcements and 5th Army divisions that were attached to 10th Army and some that were depleted to strength the 10th Army.

warspite1

Indeed the TO&E of Italian divisions is well known and I alluded to the Italian situation in post 4 as a mitigant when assessing performance. The navy has less of an excuse than the army and air force as many of the RM ships were new and this service was in the best shape of the three to meet the demands of the coming war.

But the state of the Italian armed forces and the Italian economy leads us to another strange set of comments in O'Hara's conclusion to this book, and something that I will comment on tomorrow.

[Dili]

Luftwaffe in Med(including South France), by December 1943 the number of units if filled to the full complement would mean almost 3000 planes. By beginning of 42 the respective numbers would be 1000 and end of 42 1700. Like i said this would be nominal strength.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Dili

Luftwaffe in Med(including South France), by December 1943 the number of units if filled to the full complement would mean almost 3000 planes. By beginning of 42 the respective numbers would be 1000 and end of 42 1700. Like i said this would be nominal strength.

warspite1

I think 1943 is out of scope - the Italians having surrendered

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

The Luftwaffe had 3500-4000 aircraft in '42. 20% is only 700-800. Absent the oob for the med, it sounds reasonable.

Fear the wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luftwaffe ... _(1940–45)

The same source of the wiki (Price's Luftwaffe Data Book) gives a July '42 figure for the Mediterranean just under 15% of total Luftwaffe combat strength,
rising to almost 20% by May '43.

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
The source was John Ellis. How he arrived at that % i.e. the data behind it, I'm afraid I don't know - but look forward to any further info anyone may have.

It seems unusual that the strength would remain at 20% of the Luftwaffe total all the way from Spring '42 to Summer '43 given what was going on but if
the book was good enough for both you and O'Hara to use as a reference, it'll do me too.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

ORIGINAL: warspite1
The source was John Ellis. How he arrived at that % i.e. the data behind it, I'm afraid I don't know - but look forward to any further info anyone may have.

It seems unusual that the strength would remain at 20% of the Luftwaffe total all the way from Spring '42 to Summer '43 given what was going on but if
the book was good enough for both you and O'Hara to use as a reference, it'll do me too.

warspite1

As said, the figure was an average over that period. For example the Luftwaffe in the Med/North Africa was significantly higher in December 1942 than it was in June 1942 so Ellis has averaged this out.

Where O'Hara gets 15% from I don't know either, but I think even at 15%, when added to Luftwaffe nos. elsewhere, this is clearly not inconsiderable when your armies are dying in the east in the war that will decide Germany's fate.

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
As said, the figure was an average over that period. For example the Luftwaffe in the Med/North Africa was significantly higher in December 1942 than it was in June 1942 so Ellis has averaged this out.

I worded it wrong but I got what the figures represented.

Where O'Hara gets 15% from I don't know either, but I think even at 15%, when added to Luftwaffe nos. elsewhere, this is clearly not inconsiderable when your armies are dying in the east in the war that will decide Germany's fate.

Unless those forces would have made a decisive difference in Russia and avoided Germany's fate then using them instead to decisively avoid the risks
associated with the British dominating the Mediterranean in 1941 is probably not a bad alternative.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Dili

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Dili

Another point most Italian Divisions had only 2 Regiments except 101 and 102 Motorized. Many of those AS divisions in NA had 4-5000 men at start. Not even near the established 10000.

warspite1

Yes but regardless of the strength of each division, the numbers taken prisoner were the numbers taken prisoner - not the numbers that would have been taken prisoner had all units been up to establishment [;)].

'Wavell's 30,000' took 130,000 (although I have read one source states 110,000) prisoners of war. Those 10th Army troops were therefore there somewhere.

That is my point when you dismiss that X or Y division disbanded so does not count, it was disbanded because losses in other units. [;)]

I made reference to divisions because a British Division is not equivalent to an Italian Division so the comparison is not like to like, that was what Mussolini liked to do to fool everyone, and be fooled... An Italian Division has 2 Regiments and 36 guns, a British one has 3 Regiments and 72 guns.

There were 124000 troops including GAF +24300 Libyan Regio Esercito troops in NA in 10 June 1940. About 8000 were sent until December 1940.
Tobruk was the major Regiamarina naval base in NA, it had probably around 3-4K( total was 6K). There were GAF(Frontier Guards) troops in Bardia and Tobruk probably around +10K, then all Division reinforcements and 5th Army divisions that were attached to 10th Army and some that were depleted to strength the 10th Army.

As for losses/POW, the British Official History has
The campaign which began at Nibeiwa and Sidi Barrani and ended ten weeks later at Beda Fomm was the first in which two modern armies, with comparable airforces, had met and fought over undeveloped country. The result exceeded all expectations. A British force of never more than two divisions—one of them armoured —with a proportion of Corps troops, advanced 500 strenuous miles and totally destroyed an army of ten divisions, for a loss of 500 killed, 1,373 wounded, and 55 missing. The captures were 130,000 prisoners; 180 medium tanks and more than 200 light; and 845 guns of the size of field guns and above.

The 5th Squadra, whose first line strength early in December was about 38o aircraft, also suffered crippling losses. Apart from the wrecks of the many aircraft destroyed by the continual attacks of the Royal Air Force, 91 aircraft were abandoned intact on the enemy's main airfields. To these losses must be added those aircraft destroyed in combat, shown by the Italian records to have been 58 of all types. In fact, the 5th Squadra was so completely mastered by the Royal Air Force that it made no effective contribution to the campaign. The British had always assumed that reinforcements of aircraft would be sent from Italy if the need should arise, though the opening of a new front in Greece obviously affected the number that could be spared.

This would be the high point in numbers,and doesnt include Italian KiA or wounded evacuated from Africa.

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Dili

ORIGINAL: JeffK

3 CCNN 1939 sent to Taguria in Italy as part of 10 Army.Invaded Egypt Sept 40
181 & 203 Legions each 3 bns Basically at Rgt size

64 Catanzaro Metropolitan Div based in Lybia as part of 10 Army. Invaded Egypt as part of 10 Army
141 & 142 Rgts

Clearly 2 different units.

Please check your sources JeffK, or other sources. 3º CCNN was disbanded May 1940.
The troops went to fill/form 64 Div which was not an Infantry Metropolitan division, no Inf. Metropolitan Division(which were 2 types btw well more if we include autoportata, Alpini etc ) existed in Libya. Just A.S. divisions, Libyan Divisions and CC.NN. Divisions.

My normally excellent source is Victor Madej, but checking another source doesnt mention 3CCNN, I'm checking more but we may have to deduct a small Rgt from the Italian OOB

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

Where O'Hara gets 15% from I don't know either, but I think even at 15%, when added to Luftwaffe nos. elsewhere, this is clearly not inconsiderable when your armies are dying in the east in the war that will decide Germany's fate.

Unless those forces would have made a decisive difference in Russia and avoided Germany's fate then using them instead to decisively avoid the risks
associated with the British dominating the Mediterranean in 1941 is probably not a bad alternative.

warspite1

Of course - Hitler did not have a choice given the position that Mussolini's actions put him in.

But that is not the point O'Hara is making. In order to lessen the effect of Italian poor performance, O'Hara tries to make out the Italian military was not as bad as is commonly made out and he subtly downplays the need for, and effect of, German assistance.

To do this he comes up with some unfair comments. E.g. to suggest that the performance in the Med was fine because very limited Axis forces were holding back the main British effort is - as has been shown - disingenuous. Contrary to the "good day for the Reich" comment, pretty much every day from 10th June 1940 was a bad day for the Reich because Hitler had no business in the south. His war was in the East.

Am I saying that Germany lost the war because of Italy? No, that is too simplistic, but there were a few areas in which the Germans were weakened both before and after 22nd June 1941, and the Med/North Africa was one of these. The totally unwanted diversion of finite German resources - tanks, aircraft, submarines, precious oil stocks for the RM, and wear and tear and losses in Greece and Crete - did not help.

Like with Napoleon and Spain, Mussolini joining the war gave Britain a chance to engage the enemy on land that they otherwise would have had no chance of doing. With their small army the British could never alone beat the French in the Napoleonic wars or the Germans in WWII, but they could help to wear the main enemy down by forcing them to place resources (and not to mention some of their best generals) in some side show, away from the battle that would ultimately decide the fate of the two little corporals.

Some pretty poor decisions (and the overriding needs of ensuring invasion was not possible and the Atlantic lifeline remained open) by the British gave Italy a chance to hit the Royal Navy hard and possibly force an exit from the Eastern Mediterranean - with all that that could mean. They could not do this alone and they got German assistance. There was no guarantee they would be successful of course, but they had a very real opportunity that they didn't even properly try and take.

[JeffroK]

Dili, you are mostly right about 3 CCNN.
In May 1940 the 21 April Libyan CCNN division was disbanded and its
Blackshirt personnel were used to strengthen the other three Blackshirt divisions. This
was due to the fact that they were not manned to their full strength for personnel. The
army personnel (which made up most of the supporting services) were used to help form
the 64th Catanzaro Infantry division for the same reasons. This reorganization started in
May 1940 was not yet finished as of June 1940

If anyone is interested, I have a pdf which I believe came from CARL (Combined Arms Research Library)
FALLEN EAGLES: THE ITALIAN 10TH ARMY IN THE OPENING CAMPAIGN IN THE WESTERN DESERT, JUNE 1940 – DECEMBER 1940
HOWARD R. CHRISTIE, MAJ, USA

If you cant find, drop a PM and I'll email the pdf.

The article goes into Italian doctrine and structure in lots of detail, explains why the Binary Div was chosen (to fight in The Alps/Abbysynia) and covers Armoured Forces in detail.

[rustysi]

ORIGINAL: Dili

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Wasn't Okinawa bigger than either?

Okinawa was in fact the single largest invasion ever made.

Okinawa had 7 Divisions i think just after a cursory look at wiki. I am not sure all were in first wave.

Husky had 3 US Inf.Div, 1 US Para, 1 Canadian Div, 3 British Infantry Divisions and 1 British Para/Airland. This was the first wave. The extension of the coast invaded was also several dozen km between extremes.

Also 1 US Armored, 1 US ID, 1 British ID and several brigades (reserve - follow up)

To begin with there was no 1 US Para. All that jumped in Husky was a regiment, 50? something. Last I stand by my assertion that Okinawa was the largest seaborne invasion ever made.

BTW the US airborne jump in Husky was almost the end for those forces as it was a fiasco. Many A/C shot down by friendly fire.