Parallel War

[Lupo Solitario]

Back to original question: the answer is political. Italy did not want to have a too much close relation with Germany because basically feared Germany. So the idea was to split physically in "only italian battlefields" and "only german battlefields" without any real correlation or interference.

This idea failed totally in late 1940-41 but this was the target for italian intervention in war

(note: it's impossible to understand the Balkan campaigns of 1940-41 without knowing italo-german rivalry....)

[Dili]

" If she chose force (which she chose) she needed the money to operate the military industrial complex nessecary to turn out the weapons and munitions needed to sustain her armies."

Would doubling the budget would double the production when Italians didn't had the number of engineers and workers with necessary know-how to produce in higher quantities?
For example i read the problems that Italy had with aircraft building - from engineering to efficient construction and money don't fix any of that.

[Messe62]

Im not totally clear on what your asking or stating. Would I personally scrap ta BB to make a carrier? or would it have been better for the Italians to do so?..Getting one of what out there ?....Im not following your line of thought Im sorry. Without question Oppertunism played a huge part in Italys entry into the war. So did Il Duces own greed, vanity and misguided thinking. As far as the italian officer class went, italy didnt possess the type of deeply imbued military professional class as Germany. Italian society differed in its view of what the military was and what role it played. Italys officer class (by and large) were old and like thier French counterparts were not thinking in terms of World War II but of World War I. Italy did possess a number of forward thinking generals who were quite good. Amdeo Duca de Aosta, Messe, Balbo and several others. But these men saw Italys entry into war for what it was, folly. It was Il Duce rather than the generals who shoved Italy into war. Most of the competent generals foresaw War for Italy was little more than ritual suicide. Many Italian officers made an attempt wherever possible to reign in Il Duces idiotic views of war and "empire building" but as the command system itself was built BY MUSSOLINI there was very little Generals could do to stop Il Duce once he put his mind to wanting something. The oppertunities Italy had upon the outbreak of war were as much dictated by geography as they were by ability. North Africa was the obvious choice for the theatre that would recieve the bulk of Italian military attention and rightly so, even the Germans tried to steer them that way. But Mussolini saw otherwise. Corsica, Tunisia, Morocco, Southern France, Greece, Yugoslavia all figured into Mussolinis dis jointed and far flung strategy. You point out Egypt. Perfectly reasonable place to start except the Italians lacked the ability to do it. They advanced a meagre 60 odd miles into Egypt and promptly dug in. Only a tiny force was mechanized which precluded sweeping operations of any kind. as Italo Balbo , Governor of North Africa and a GOOD general told Il Duce only 3 months before the outbreak of war " It is not the number of men which causes me anxiety but their weapons ... equipped with limited and very old pieces of artillery, almost lacking anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons ... it is useless to send more thousands of men if we cannot supply them with the indispensable requirements to move and fight." Balbo asked for 1600 trucks, modern artillery and above all water trucks. Balbo pointed out (correctly) that the lack of water supplies ALLOWED the Italians to advance only so far and even then not far from existing water supplies for fear of dying of thirst. Had the Italian army possessed the motorized units, the fuel, the artillery and the adequate supplies? yes by all means its likely they could have driven the British from Egypt. But as it stood?....it was hopless. Eat Africa was worse. It was a strategic backwater of very little value, containing almost no viable resources. Whats worse was that geographically the minute war was declared? It was completely cut off from either resupply or evacuation. Aosta one of Italy finest commanders told Mussolini that repeatedly. He pointed out that should war break out his stockpiles were enough to last perhaps a year at most. Its true that Aosta gave Italy one of its few brite spots when he successfully invaded and seized British Somaliland, Aden,The Sudan and parts of Kenya. Then what? Aosta proceeded to fight a defensive war which would be lost when as he predicted his supplies ran out. Nothing had been accomplished. What Mussolini wanted Italy to do militarily and what Italy COULD do militarily were two entirely different worlds.

[Dili]

I think that Italy could have taken Egypt but then it would need to think about war unlikely any other country and maybe there were countermeasures available.

The first thing is a motorized army obviously, but not on tracks - too expensive, slow and unreliable -
On tires with 75mm AA guns AA guns mounted in heavier autoblindos, with high speed guns they could take Matildas at longer range much before Matildas could answer. 300 autoblindos of that kind instead 300 L3, 70 M11/39, 100 or so M13/40 could advance 200km per day with all other troops on trucks.

Here is a version with 90mm gun. https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breda_501
75 and 76mm guns were available much before and there was time in late 30's to build an Army in Africa with that kind of vehicles, maybe even a turret could be done or a Semovente on wheels.

Also things like this earlier to transport troops also could help http://www.italie1935-45.com/regio-eser ... tetto-s-37,
but even trucks would have done.

[Phaing]

Messe - see here;

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=227491

...
Also things like this earlier to transport troops also could help http://www.italie1935-45.com/regio-eser ... tetto-s-37,
but even trucks would have done.

That looks pretty good, but how many were there?
I have been trying to figure out what the Armored Cars in East Africa were composed of, and it involves too much guesswork.
Best i could figure, it was about 60 x Lancia, 30 x Fiat 611 and about 36 x AB-40.... but I find that last one hard to believe.

[Dili]

No Ab-40 in East Africa.

http://www.italie1935-45.com/regio-eser ... 1-fiat-611 says only 5 with machine guns and 5 with guns unclear if all operational in 1940

Doubt there were so many Lancia in all "Imperio". So i would bet around 20 in EA.

But this require a more deep search. I am just doing scattering shots.

[Phaing]

Oh.... thanks!
Wiki said there were 126 and Italy only mass-produced 3 types up to 1940.
And Yes, I didn't think that any AB-40 had made it there. I saw a pic that was supposed to show a couple of them there, and the terrian looked right... but one had a 20mm gun.
No way, Hosea.
I'm rally starting to hate Wiki.

[Dili]

Note that the designation of AB-40 and AB-41 is "complicated". While it seems the manufacturer changed from AB-40 to AB-41 with 20mm installation,Regio Esercito only changed the designation for models at some point in 1941 or 1942. So for Regio Esercito there dozens AB-40 with 20mm gun.