4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
The regiment was shipped on the ill fated Neptune’s/Oceania convoy in September 1941. A report by the regiment’s Colonel is reproduced in La Difesa Vol I. And it speaks of heavy losses to the regiment when the ships went down.
Does anyone know how heavy these losses were, and what the destination of the regiment when it was shipped in September and when it did enter the line?
I’ve only got tanks for it arriving in January 1942:
https://rommelsriposte.com/2013/08/11/i ... 0-to-1942/
Always keeping in mind this list is not complete.
Does anyone know how heavy these losses were, and what the destination of the regiment when it was shipped in September and when it did enter the line?
I’ve only got tanks for it arriving in January 1942:
https://rommelsriposte.com/2013/08/11/i ... 0-to-1942/
Always keeping in mind this list is not complete.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
Re: 4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
Urmel
I am a bit confused. Are you sure you have the ships/dates correct? Checking La Difesa vol I, I find a report written by Colonello Angiolo Costa dated 11 June 1941 discussing the losses of the Conte Rosso (Appendice 4, attached 2, page 472). Appendice 5 contains the reports addressing the loss of the Neptunia and Oceania. These reports are written by Supermarina and Comando Superiore A.S. I didn't find any reports by a regimental commander addressing the Neptunia and Oceania.
Also note that while Colonello Costa was assigned to the 4º reggimento carrista, that wasn't the unit being transported. The 4º reggimento carrista that operated in A.S. was destroyed during Compass. The 4º reggimento carrista indicated here was mainly a depot/training organization. It is best to track Italian armor units by their battalion numbers, as those remain the same regardless to which regiment they are assigned.
I noticed several errors in your carri M table. I will try to post additional information that I feel is correct for your table. One question I can address now. The term 'carro d’assalto' describes a function rather than a specific vehicle. The other term is 'carri veloci'. The concept was that these terms would describe different vehicles. Technically the M11/39 and M13/40 would be considered 'carro d’assalto', but by the time these vehicles entered service, the term was not widely used. What you actually see is the L3/L5s in two doctrinally different roles. The btg. carri d'assalto were assigned to infantry divisions, the gruppi carri di veloci were assigned to the celere divisions. Same vehicles, different battalion organizations.
EDIT: I felt my short discussion about the carri d'assalto wasn't quite clear. Like all the armies, the R.E. was experimenting with mobile warfare. By 1936, Italy had a doctrine, they had designed the organizations, what they lacked was the equipment. Rather than wait for the equipment, Italy built the force and the carri Ls became the place holder until the carri d'assalti were delivered. This allowed the army to experiment/train the force on the new doctrine. Note the Fiat 3000 was listed as a carro d'assalto.
Pista! Jeff
I am a bit confused. Are you sure you have the ships/dates correct? Checking La Difesa vol I, I find a report written by Colonello Angiolo Costa dated 11 June 1941 discussing the losses of the Conte Rosso (Appendice 4, attached 2, page 472). Appendice 5 contains the reports addressing the loss of the Neptunia and Oceania. These reports are written by Supermarina and Comando Superiore A.S. I didn't find any reports by a regimental commander addressing the Neptunia and Oceania.
Also note that while Colonello Costa was assigned to the 4º reggimento carrista, that wasn't the unit being transported. The 4º reggimento carrista that operated in A.S. was destroyed during Compass. The 4º reggimento carrista indicated here was mainly a depot/training organization. It is best to track Italian armor units by their battalion numbers, as those remain the same regardless to which regiment they are assigned.
I noticed several errors in your carri M table. I will try to post additional information that I feel is correct for your table. One question I can address now. The term 'carro d’assalto' describes a function rather than a specific vehicle. The other term is 'carri veloci'. The concept was that these terms would describe different vehicles. Technically the M11/39 and M13/40 would be considered 'carro d’assalto', but by the time these vehicles entered service, the term was not widely used. What you actually see is the L3/L5s in two doctrinally different roles. The btg. carri d'assalto were assigned to infantry divisions, the gruppi carri di veloci were assigned to the celere divisions. Same vehicles, different battalion organizations.
EDIT: I felt my short discussion about the carri d'assalto wasn't quite clear. Like all the armies, the R.E. was experimenting with mobile warfare. By 1936, Italy had a doctrine, they had designed the organizations, what they lacked was the equipment. Rather than wait for the equipment, Italy built the force and the carri Ls became the place holder until the carri d'assalti were delivered. This allowed the army to experiment/train the force on the new doctrine. Note the Fiat 3000 was listed as a carro d'assalto.
Pista! Jeff
Jeff Leser
Infantrymen of the Air
Infantrymen of the Air
Re: 4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
4 Reggimento carrista never operated as such even in Africa before Compass so i don't think we even can say that unit went to Africa.
I checked my notes after writing the above and i have the 4ºRegg. HQ sent to Africa in 1940 where it got the I,II battalions of 32 Rg (on M11/39 - all of them except those in East Africa) and some tankette battalion(s?)
I checked my notes after writing the above and i have the 4ºRegg. HQ sent to Africa in 1940 where it got the I,II battalions of 32 Rg (on M11/39 - all of them except those in East Africa) and some tankette battalion(s?)
Re: 4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
Dili
I certainly agree that the I e II btg. didn't operate as a regiment in A.S. However, the two battalions were administratively part of the 4º reggimento carrista and they are carried as such in all the documents. See Gli autoveicoli da combattimento vol 2 page 75 for one example. It is like the btg. sciatori alpini Monte Cervino. An independent unit, but considered part of the 4º reggimento Alpini.
This is different from the example above involving the report. Any reparto carrista on board that ship isn't part of the 4º reggimento carrista. The officer writing the report was (to use the Uk term) seconded to another unit.
Urmel
You list three battalions of M11/39 in A.S. I only know of two (I e II btg. carri M). Do you have documentation for a third battalion? Also as I indicated above, these two battalions were part of the 4º reggimento carrista, not the 32º.
Pista! Jeff
I certainly agree that the I e II btg. didn't operate as a regiment in A.S. However, the two battalions were administratively part of the 4º reggimento carrista and they are carried as such in all the documents. See Gli autoveicoli da combattimento vol 2 page 75 for one example. It is like the btg. sciatori alpini Monte Cervino. An independent unit, but considered part of the 4º reggimento Alpini.
This is different from the example above involving the report. Any reparto carrista on board that ship isn't part of the 4º reggimento carrista. The officer writing the report was (to use the Uk term) seconded to another unit.
Urmel
You list three battalions of M11/39 in A.S. I only know of two (I e II btg. carri M). Do you have documentation for a third battalion? Also as I indicated above, these two battalions were part of the 4º reggimento carrista, not the 32º.
Pista! Jeff
Jeff Leser
Infantrymen of the Air
Infantrymen of the Air
Re: 4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
Thanks for all this Jeff, and really glad to see you on this.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
Re: 4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
Hi folks.
Just my tuppence!
I too have no reggimento carrista in A.S.
I also agree with Jeff regarding the three battalions of M11/39 in A.S. I only know of two (I e II btg. carri M). they are both in 4º Reggimento Corrazato (similar). Which arrived in A.S at Benghasi in 07/40.
Kind Regards,
David.
Just my tuppence!
I too have no reggimento carrista in A.S.
I also agree with Jeff regarding the three battalions of M11/39 in A.S. I only know of two (I e II btg. carri M). they are both in 4º Reggimento Corrazato (similar). Which arrived in A.S at Benghasi in 07/40.
Kind Regards,
David.
Re: 4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
Okay, I think 8 Army Intel Summary 73 just answered my question. It appears that the depot of 4 Tank Regiment was the central training depot for armoured personnel for North Africa, thus any replacements sent would have been under its jurisdiction prior to arriving in Africa, I guess.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
Re: 4 Regg Carristi Losses in Transit
Correct. An administrative HQs. Personnel management is done at the regimental level in the Italian Army. All independent units have a link to a regimental headquarters (usually a depot or training unit). In theater, they would be administratively linked to an operational unit.
Pista! Jeff
Pista! Jeff
Jeff Leser
Infantrymen of the Air
Infantrymen of the Air