Malta Garrison 1942

[JonS]

So I think we can try to provide more data

Crack on then, but I have little further intention to do so. I thought the map would be useful but instead certain parties decided it'd be more fun to disappear down rabbit holes, leaving me with the distinct impression of time wasted.

[pjdgm]

hi i was wondering if anyone may know anyhthing about the 30th LAA Battery. R.M.A., 3 LAA Reg't. i cant find any information onthem at all. this was who my late grandfather was with but i dont know anything about them i dont know where on the island they were based.


many thanks

peter ([email protected])

[Ironmachine]

Crack on then, but I have little further intention to do so.

As you like it. Anyway, many thanks for the information you have already provided.

[Michael Emrys]

If you have 112 guns to cover an area, overlapping fields of fire is what may allow you to fire 80 of them to a point in the area. But if you fire 80 to a point, you are left with only 32 to cover the other points in the area at the same time.

So what? In practical terms that is irrelevant. It is not as if Axis planes are suddenly to appear as if by magic over all parts of the island. They will be flying in formation over a given route. What the density map shows is how many guns will be able to fire at them over each part of their route. Plus, as has already been stated, there were additional light AA guns to engage lower flying aircraft, such as troop carriers or strafers.

Michael

[Ironmachine]

It is not as if Axis planes are suddenly to appear as if by magic over all parts of the island. They will be flying in formation over a given route.

Will they attack only one point of the island at a time? Will they travel to the island flying in formation over one unique route?

What the density map shows is how many guns will be able to fire at them over each part of their route.

The map only shows the maximum number of guns that can fire simultaneously to a unique point over the Malta (in fact it gives a numerical range, so in fact you are unable to know even the exact number; you know that between 60 and 80 guns, or less than 12, etc., are able to fire)... unless I am utterly wrong, in which case I will be very grateful if you can show me the truth. Or, in other worlds, perhaps you can explain to me how, with the only help of the density map, you can know how many guns will be able to fire at planes attacking simulataneously two different zones of the map.

Plus, as has already been stated, there were additional light AA guns to engage lower flying aircraft, such as troop carriers or strafers.

And now it is my turn to say so what? We can make a similar discussion about number of guns and density maps of light guns, and we will made no further advance.

[Michael Emrys]

It is not as if Axis planes are suddenly to appear as if by magic over all parts of the island. They will be flying in formation over a given route.

Will they attack only one point of the island at a time? Will they travel to the island flying in formation over one unique route?

Well, yeah, so far as I have heard that's pretty much what they did. Do you know otherwise?

What the density map shows is how many guns will be able to fire at them over each part of their route.

The map only shows the maximum number of guns that can fire simultaneously to a unique point over the Malta (in fact it gives a numerical range, so in fact you are unable to know even the exact number; you know that between 60 and 80 guns, or less than 12, etc., are able to fire)... unless I am utterly wrong, in which case I will be very grateful if you can show me the truth.[/quote]

How much exactitude is it reasonable to demand? This is war. Maybe one gun crew can't find the key to the ready ammunition locker. Maybe another is late returning from lunch. Who knows?

Or, in other worlds, perhaps you can explain to me how, with the only help of the density map, you can know how many guns will be able to fire at planes attacking simulataneously two different zones of the map.

Either each battery or gun crew has standing orders to choose its best target, or is directed from a central source, or some combination of the two. What is your point exactly?

Plus, as has already been stated, there were additional light AA guns to engage lower flying aircraft, such as troop carriers or strafers.

And now it is my turn to say so what? We can make a similar discussion about number of guns and density maps of light guns, and we will made no further advance.[/quote]

I raise that point because you seem to feel for some reason that the island was not adequately defended. I raised the issue of the light AA to ease your fears.

The bottom line, IMO, is that an invasion attempt would have faced a lot of AA making completion of the mission difficult but not impossible. Some bombs would have hit targets. Some paratroops, if they were employed, would reach the ground alive and in fighting condition. Since the actual operation was never attempted, more than that cannot be said pro or con with certainty. Any further speculation must be engaged in with greater uncertainty attached to it.

Michael

[Ironmachine]

Well, yeah, so far as I have heard that's pretty much what they did. Do you know otherwise?

Even should what you have heard be true, unless you can be sure that this is what they would have done in the event of a invasion, my point remains valid.

How much exactitude is it reasonable to demand? This is war. Maybe one gun crew can't find the key to the ready ammunition locker. Maybe another is late returning from lunch. Who knows?

Who knows? Then I see no reason for asking anything here. In fact I see no reason to make those density maps. I can imagine:
Malta, 1942.
Someone says: The Germans are coming! How many guns do we have to defend the Great Harbour?
Someone answers: Who knows? This is war. Maybe those German planes can't find this island in the middle of the sea...

Either each battery or gun crew has standing orders to choose its best target, or is directed from a central source, or some combination of the two. What is your point exactly?

My point is that you can not know from the map how many guns are available against two different targets, whatever the case. That's all.

I raise that point because you seem to feel for some reason that the island was not adequately defended. I raised the issue of the light AA to ease your fears.

Then I think it is not me but someone else that you are thinking about. I have stated nothing about the capacity of the defensive forces. All this was started just because I stated that in this particular case I found the total number of guns far more informative that the density map.

The bottom line, IMO, is that an invasion attempt would have faced a lot of AA making completion of the mission difficult but not impossible. Some bombs would have hit targets. Some paratroops, if they were employed, would reach the ground alive and in fighting condition. Since the actual operation was never attempted, more than that cannot be said pro or con with certainty. Any further speculation must be engaged in with greater uncertainty attached to it.

As all this is obvious, it is obviously true. It is not just your opinion, but the opinion of anyone who has a brain in working order. And as such, I have never said anything different.
Regards,
Gonzalo

[Michael Emrys]

Well, yeah, so far as I have heard that's pretty much what they did. Do you know otherwise?

Even should what you have heard be true, unless you can be sure that this is what they would have done in the event of a invasion, my point remains valid.

Although it was theoretically possible to stage an attack where different formations appear from many points of the compass simultaneously, as a practical matter it would have been next door to impossible to stage with any reasonable degree of confidence and I doubt that it would have even been attempted for such a critical mission as this involving the coordination of two different air forces of two different nationalities.

Time and again in reading of air missions of the Second World War I have come across accounts of failed rendezvous, the consequences of which were usually higher casualties and reduced effectiveness. Whenever possible, formations would form up over or near their home base and proceed in a single body to the target to perform their mission. Air commanders were very concerned to maintain coherence and cohesion in their formations. To lose that often meant to lose the battle. Prior to the introduction of AWACS, about the only way to do that was to remain within visual distance of all the parts of your formation. The British had a pretty good ground control system over the UK from the Battle of Britain onward, and the Allied navies developed and practiced something similar, but I don't believe the Axis had anything of the sort that would control their aircraft over Malta.

Michael

[Andy H]

Thanks Jon S and Tony R for those earlier postings.

One other aspect in the AA coverage would be the AA input provided by RN vessels in port at the time of any attack.

Regards

Andy H

[Tony R]

One other aspect in the AA coverage would be the AA input provided by RN vessels in port at the time of any attack.

Valid point Andy.

[kingston 1]

I had an old uncle who died a while ago who had a story to tell about Malta

He joined the Royal Irish Fusiliers at the start of the war and was posted to the 2nd battalion had his orders changed at the last moment and ended up with the 1st battalion instead which cheesed him off no end because he had made friends with other guys who did in fact join the 2nd battalion

Well to cut a long story short 1st battalion had a very active war he was sent to France with the BEF, they were the first troops into Belgium was part of the regard defence that allowed the miracle of Dunkirk to happen, escaped back to England was then sent to North Africa where they fought througout that campaign, onto the invasion of Italy fighting right the way up the country and ended up on garrison duty in Austria, a real fighting unit

Meanwhile 2nd battalion was having a whale of a time for years on end based in malta where no enemy invasion was attempted, no casualties with the 1st battalion boys thinking they were lucky bastards sun bathing drinking and chasing Maltese women! however towards the end of the war 2nd battalion left malta on what turned out to be a suicide mission to attempt the capture of a Greek island and were wiped out to a man with all forces being killed or captured!

All his mates were killed........Lucky break

[Davide Pastore]

In Davide Pastore's own words:
[..]
In general, the whole discussion at http://groups.google.com/group/sci.mili ... 256?&hl=en is of great interest to this thread.

Caveat: this was the level of my researches as of ten years ago, based only on secondary sources. My posts on SMN newsgroup are to be taken only with the utmost caution, since by now (after having virtually turned navy's historical archive upside down) I have discovered a huge amount of errors.

P.S. please don't ask me to publish here the complete updated OOB... otherwise, who will buy my forthcoming book?

[waterloo]

hi Im looking for information on Fort Tarja.
not much on the net.
Ithink its a medieval fort? - of the period of the crusaders

has anyone any information thanks.

(about to attack it with 3 falshimjager companies and it would be good to model it correctly)

[Davide Pastore]

hi Im looking for information on Fort Tarja.

I suppose you are referring to Targa Battery?

(about to attack it with 3 falshimjager companies)

They will have no problem in conquering it, since Targa Battery ... was never finished

Work started in 1887 and were stopped in 1888. During WW2 it basically consisted in some amount of earth plus some amounth of stones.

[sallyg]

There was a square ditch and a causeway to the (future) entrance, possibly a tree.