Mediterranean Scenario

[vinnie71]

 In practice the whole Italian fleet was about speed and secondly, firepower. Despite appearing foolish to some, speed in the Mediterranean is actually vital since airpower was relatively closeby (even enemy...). Protection was secondary. Note that the British convoys to Malta were all made up of the fastest merchantmen and tankers available at that time and the continous trickle of supplies were maintained to the island by fast ships like the Manxman. Also the Italian interwar doctrine centred upon its ability to dictate the pace and place of battle (since they had few ships when compared to the British/French combined fleets) and therefore speed was vital.

[xj900uk]

I also remember my father once telling me that the Italians had the fastest destroyer in WWII (think he said it was eventually sunk by British aircraft) but I can't remember the name. Anyone out there know it or have a picture?

[Nikademus]

I think that title belonged to the French.


Kind of moot. The 1930's speed craze was unrealistic in that trials were run optimized for setting speed records. In service actual speed would be slower and in the Italian's case, operational wear and tear quickly reduced max DD and cruiser speeds still further.

[Q-Ball]

The Italians also had alot of dual-turrets with guns placed very close together. So close, you have to look closely to see 2 guns.

The crews must have had to learn port/starboard loading routines, as each guns would have to be serviced from the outside. That had to have complicated crew training, and by extension re-load rates.

Why did the Italians do that, was it for weight reasons (center of gravity), or fire-control reasons (closer salvoes?)? Any clue?

Just one example of the dual turret arrangement, DD Fulmine:

[Nikademus]

weight. (and space saving)

US employed similar weight saving methods in their early "Standard" type battleships of the Nevada and Pennsylvania classes and in the early heavy cruisers. The tripple turret put all 3 barrels connected by one trunion and could not be raised individually. Concerns about interference in shell trajectories due to the closeness of the barrels was compensated for by alternating firing betweenst the three barrels of the turret.

[Dili]

In practice the whole Italian fleet was about speed and secondly, firepower.

That is not quite true. Some ships followed that, others didn't. There wasn't a rule. Italians for example had one of biggest belt armor in CL/CA with 150mm or equivalent in Abruzzis and Zara. Vittorio Veneto with cumulative 400mm was also good.

Why did the Italians do that, was it for weight reasons (center of gravity), or fire-control reasons (closer salvoes?)? Any clue?

One of the reasons was minelaying. As you can see the rear turret is elevated. The Italian destroyers sold to Greece had one gun per turret, so 4 turrets.