Pistoia Division at Halfaya Pass November 1942

[David W]

I am pretty confident that the Pistoia arrived in Africa already orgnaized as a tipo A.S. 42 and no converison was done in theater.

And yet it had no transport throughout it's time in N.A as far as I can see.

If you do nail down the passage, please let me know.

[jwsleser]

David

I am not sure what you are attempting to say. The divisione tipo A.S. 42 is not a motorizzata design. Like all other infantry divisions, it depended on the autogruppi at corps to move the division. Even if fully equipped, it does not have enough trucks. The division is only authorized 142 trucks and 72 tractors (gun towing vehicles). A British division is authorized 1999 trucks and 159 tractors and Trieste has over 1100.

So these divisions aren’t mobile even if they were fully equipped.

If I missunderstood your comment, please tell me.

Pista!

Jeff

[David W]

No, it's me Jeff.
I thought that AS42 had more motorised transport allocated to it than the older Fanteria concept.
I was aware that it was never meant to be motorised to the same extent as a Motorizzata design.
Sorry for any confusion!

[Peter W]

Jeff,

I am a novice at decrypting the Italian ORBAT. Is it correct to for me to interpret that once the bulk of the division had made ready to retire/ had retired, those Pistoia units left that ended up facing the New Zealanders were:

1st battalion, 35th Infantry Regiment (1/35°btg. f.)
III/35°btg. armi acc. e c.c.- not sure what this unit title means
25°cp. di marica - not sure what this unit title means

Total losses for the division was 512 and three German batteries ties in with NZ accounts.

Could you provide me with an anglicised title for the last two units please.

Thanks,
Peter W

[jwsleser]

Peter

Yes, those are the forces I believe were present when the NZ units attacked.

btg. armi accompagnmento e controcarro armi acc. e c.c. – accompanying arms and anti-tank battalion. Think of this as a heavy weapons battalion. Normally 20m anti-aircraft, 47/32 anti-tanks, heavy machineguns, and 81mm mortars.

Marcia – these are replacement units. The depots organize the new replacements into ‘march units’ to move them to the front. Once there, the men are given to their units and the marcia unit ‘dissolves’. It is not unusual for march units to be thrown into the field as combat units at times of crisis. These units lack training, equipment, and leadership. Bascially a group of men with rifles.

Now, hit me over the head.

I was looking at the details and lost sight of the big picture. Reviewing my notes, what is obvious is the tipo A.S. 42 structure didn’t use btg. armi acc. e c.c. units. These heavy weapons were distributed as part of the infantry platoons in the battalions in the tipo A.S. 42 regiments. These regiemtn consisted of three infantry battalions. As important, the only units that used a two btg. f. and a btg. armi acc. e c.c. organization were the motorized units during the brief time in 1941.

Pistoia is never identified as a motorized division in any of the sources. So why is the III btg. a armi acc. e c.c.? Is this an error in the sources? The 1 December 1942 lists three battalions, not two and an armi acc. e c,c.

Jeff

[David W]

Jeff.

I too was very suprised at your description of the third Battaglione as being a.a.
But as AS42 seemed to very often exist within units only in part, or later than planned etc, I assumed it was just another anomoly, but you now seriously doubt the veracity of your source?

What was the difference between a Complementi unit & a Marcia unit?

[jwsleser]

David

Yes, I have doubts. I have been writing a paper for Comando Supremo on the various tipo A.S. organizations. The btg. armi acc. e c.c. is only found in the reggimento motorizzata (both fanteria and bersaglieri). The earlier histories are know for errors, but the later Montanari work (Le operazioni) is consider an excellent, solid source.

Terza offensivsa actually states the III/35° as a btg. armi c.c., while Le operazioni vol IV calls it a btg. armi acc. e c.c. I felt the listing in Terza was miswritten, as a btg. armi c.c. is only a divisional asset and normally only seen as part of a divisione corazzata. I have never seen a btg. armi c.c. as part of a reggimento.I didn't connect the dots that Pistoia shouldn't have a btg. armi acc. e c.c. until I was rereading my paper to check something else. I plan to check the Yugoslavian history to see if it provides any details on Pistoia before being sent to Africa.

I agree that units can be in the middle of transforming from one organization to another, but there should be no way a btg. armi acc. e c.c. can be part of this process for a divisione fanteria. Of course, there could be a missing piece of the puzzle, but I have yet to find anything.

A btg. complementi is an actual depot unit. It receives replacements, equips them, trains, and houses them. The btg. complementi would form cp. marcia to send the replacements forward to their units of assignment. A btg. complementi is a permanent unit, and reparti marcia is an temporary/ad hoc unit. The units in A.S. had btg. complementi because they were overseas and didn't have access to the regular depots in the military districits. Units in the Madrepatria did not have btg. complementi.

Jeff

[David W]

A btg. complementi is an actual depot unit. It receives replacements, equips them, trains, and houses them. The btg. complementi would form cp. marcia to send the replacements forward to their units of assignment. A btg. complementi is a permanent unit, and reparti marcia is an temporary/ad hoc unit. The units in A.S. had btg. complementi because they were overseas and didn't have access to the regular depots in the military districits. Units in the Madrepatria did not have btg. complementi.

Thanks for that.

[jwsleser]

David

Your welcome.

Did some digging and pulled out all my sources.

Pistoia served in southern Italy and transferred to Greece in late June 42 for transfer to A.S. The division never served in the Balkans, hence I found no information in Le operazione delle unità italiane in Jugoslavia (1941-1943).

Greene in his Handbook on the Italian Army in World War II: 1940-1943 states that Pistoia was to be rebuilt as a divisone motorizzata in 1941 (page 10). He then states “How complete this was for Pistoia is questionable.” Then on page 13 in 1943 he states the division was to be formed as a 1942 O.B. (I assume a fanteria tipo A.S. 42). The Regio Esercito website http://www.regioesercito.it/reparti/fan ... ediv16.htm states “Il 10 ottobre la divisione viene organizzata quale grande unità motorizzata tipo A.S.” (On 10 October [1941] the division was organized as major motorized unit tipo A.S.”). No other organization change is mentioned in the site. So these two sources state that division was originally to be converted to a motorized unit. If one assumes that the regiments had reorganized but not yet received the equipment (especially the trucks), this would explain the btg. armi acc. e c.c. in the Halfaya Pass action.

But…..

Montanari in Le operazioni vol 2 page 264 (May 1941) when discussing the plans for the reorganization of the units in A.S. states “La divisone occupazione Pistoia…”. So in May 41 Pistoia is already identified to transfer to A.S. as an occupation division. Throughout Montanari, Pistoia is always listed as a d.f. (divisone fanteria), not a d.mot. (divisone motorizzata). La prima controffensiva also states Pistoia was an occupation division (page 161). So the sources don’t agree.

The difficulty I have is that Greene extensively used the Italian officials as his main source. I have pretty much all the official volumes and can’t find any mention of Pistoia as a motorized division (planned or actual). So where does Greene and the Regio Esercito website get their information?

Pista!

Jeff .

[David W]

Jeff.

It certainly is a quandary.

Jack Greene is a member at C/S forum, why not PM him?

[Peter W]

Thanks everyone for your assistance, your input has given me a truer perspective on the state of Pistoia units at Halfaya Pass than is available through the NZ official histories and archives. Much appreciated, regards Peter W

[David W]

Jeff.

Did you ever get any further with this anomoly?

[David W]

I have been writing a paper for Comando Supremo on the various tipo A.S. organizations

Jeff, how are you getting on with this?

[dor1941]

Montanari in Le operazioni vol 2 page 264 (May 1941) when discussing the plans for the reorganization of the units in A.S. states “La divisone occupazione Pistoia…”. So in May 41 Pistoia is already identified to transfer to A.S. as an occupation division. Throughout Montanari, Pistoia is always listed as a d.f. (divisone fanteria), not a d.mot. (divisone motorizzata). La prima controffensiva also states Pistoia was an occupation division (page 161). So the sources don’t agree.

The difficulty I have is that Greene extensively used the Italian officials as his main source. I have pretty much all the official volumes and can’t find any mention of Pistoia as a motorized division (planned or actual). So where does Greene and the Regio Esercito website get their information?

Actually Montanari does identify a tenative proposal to include Pistoia among a group of new motorized divisions in mid-1941. A chart entitled "Programma per l'ipotesi 'Armata D'Africa' " (l'ipotesi=hypothesis?) on page 220 (2nd Ed.) lists Pistoia along with Trento, Trieste, Piave, Pasubio and Torino as "divisione motorizzate". Another group of 10 divisions-including Pavia, Brescia, Bologna and Savona, those in North Africa at the time-would be classed as "coloniali autotrasportabile".
It would be interesting to see any documentary evidence showing the actual modifications made to these divisions. Of course, given the lack of vehicles and other equipment those plans were mostly a pipe-dream.

David R

[David W]

If we assume that no modifications to Pistoia took place, what is the Division's correct designation for the latter half of 1942?