Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

Discussions on all aspects of Italy under Fascism from the March on Rome to the end of the war.
User avatar
Alpini Arditi
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 04 Jan 2022, 00:15
Location: North Wales

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#16

Post by Alpini Arditi » 18 Jan 2022, 22:10

It seems, judging by all the replies, opinions and explanations, and thanks to everyone for their input, that Italy was well and truly beaten by mid-1943, politically, militarily and economically. They'd arguably been carried by the Germans since 1941, though they had done well until November 1940, thereby fulfilling the task that had initially been planned for, a short war lasting a few months. Perhaps it was the only road the exhausted Italians could go down in 1943, asking for an Armistice, despite the German reaction. They were caught in a vice, with the Allies on one side and Germany on the other, with their best divisions lost, and nothing left to fight for or with.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020, 19:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#17

Post by daveshoup2MD » 19 Jan 2022, 04:39

Alpini Arditi wrote:
18 Jan 2022, 22:10
It seems, judging by all the replies, opinions and explanations, and thanks to everyone for their input, that Italy was well and truly beaten by mid-1943, politically, militarily and economically. They'd arguably been carried by the Germans since 1941, though they had done well until November 1940, thereby fulfilling the task that had initially been planned for, a short war lasting a few months. Perhaps it was the only road the exhausted Italians could go down in 1943, asking for an Armistice, despite the German reaction. They were caught in a vice, with the Allies on one side and Germany on the other, with their best divisions lost, and nothing left to fight for or with.
Think yours above is a fair judgment. One interesting alternative is if Italy could have detached itself from the Axis before 1943; obviously, staying out of the war in 1940 would have been the best move, by far.


User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#18

Post by AnchorSteam » 20 Jan 2022, 00:16

One thing that I have to ask; what sort of Coastal artillery did Italy have at that time?
Everyone seems to agree that they had something, but I will try to find out exactly what it was .... if that is possible.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020, 19:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#19

Post by daveshoup2MD » 20 Jan 2022, 04:35

AnchorSteam wrote:
20 Jan 2022, 00:16
One thing that I have to ask; what sort of Coastal artillery did Italy have at that time?
Everyone seems to agree that they had something, but I will try to find out exactly what it was .... if that is possible.
Fixed positions around all the major ports; beach positions where appropriate; the Army and Navy split responsibilities, depending on naval vs. commercial ports, and the like - pretty similar to all the major powers.

Here's an article that lays out the organization in Sardinia, for example:

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... n_Sardinia

User avatar
Alpini Arditi
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 04 Jan 2022, 00:15
Location: North Wales

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#20

Post by Alpini Arditi » 20 Jan 2022, 12:15

Contrary to popular belief, some of the Italian Coastal units, during the invasion of Sicily, performed quite well. In at least a few cases, they put up stiff resistance to the Allied attack.
https://www.historynet.com/in-defense-o ... isions.htm
ArtiglDahalach.jpg
Italian Naval Coastal Artillery in East Africa
ArtiglDahalach.jpg (27.43 KiB) Viewed 2829 times

User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#21

Post by AnchorSteam » 21 Jan 2022, 06:15

daveshoup2MD wrote:
20 Jan 2022, 04:35
AnchorSteam wrote:
20 Jan 2022, 00:16
One thing that I have to ask; what sort of Coastal artillery did Italy have at that time?
Everyone seems to agree that they had something, but I will try to find out exactly what it was .... if that is possible.
Fixed positions around all the major ports; beach positions where appropriate; the Army and Navy split responsibilities, depending on naval vs. commercial ports, and the like - pretty similar to all the major powers.

Here's an article that lays out the organization in Sardinia, for example:

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... n_Sardinia
Thanks, but I can't view content and I tried to create an account and they seem very suspicious of me and demanded my Company E-Mail.
Pity, there are very few sources on this matter.

User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#22

Post by AnchorSteam » 21 Jan 2022, 06:17

Alpini Arditi wrote:
20 Jan 2022, 12:15
Contrary to popular belief, some of the Italian Coastal units, during the invasion of Sicily, performed quite well. In at least a few cases, they put up stiff resistance to the Allied attack.
Thanks, and that's a nice pic, I wonder if they are still there.

IEO seems to have had a good number of 76 and 120mm guns but nothing really heavy. I might have a few suggestions on what could have been done.... but that is probably something for Alt. History.

daveshoup2MD
Member
Posts: 1541
Joined: 01 Feb 2020, 19:10
Location: Coral and brass

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#23

Post by daveshoup2MD » 21 Jan 2022, 06:27

AnchorSteam wrote:
21 Jan 2022, 06:15
daveshoup2MD wrote:
20 Jan 2022, 04:35
AnchorSteam wrote:
20 Jan 2022, 00:16
One thing that I have to ask; what sort of Coastal artillery did Italy have at that time?
Everyone seems to agree that they had something, but I will try to find out exactly what it was .... if that is possible.
Fixed positions around all the major ports; beach positions where appropriate; the Army and Navy split responsibilities, depending on naval vs. commercial ports, and the like - pretty similar to all the major powers.

Here's an article that lays out the organization in Sardinia, for example:

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... n_Sardinia
Thanks, but I can't view content and I tried to create an account and they seem very suspicious of me and demanded my Company E-Mail.
Pity, there are very few sources on this matter.
Huh, worked fine for me.

Frollo
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 06 Dec 2021, 14:56
Location: Milan

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#24

Post by Frollo » 23 Jan 2022, 02:18

AnchorSteam wrote:
21 Jan 2022, 06:17
Alpini Arditi wrote:
20 Jan 2022, 12:15
Contrary to popular belief, some of the Italian Coastal units, during the invasion of Sicily, performed quite well. In at least a few cases, they put up stiff resistance to the Allied attack.
Thanks, and that's a nice pic, I wonder if they are still there.

IEO seems to have had a good number of 76 and 120mm guns but nothing really heavy. I might have a few suggestions on what could have been done.... but that is probably something for Alt. History.
There were larger caliber guns... the Augusta-Syracuse fortress, for instance, included six batteries with 381, 254 and 152 mm guns. The MILMART in 1942 operated six 381 mm batteries (two in Brindisi, one in Venice, one in Augusta, two in Genoa), eight 305 mm batteries (in Venice, Taranto, La Spezia and La Maddalena, 25 guns altogether), eight 280 mm batteries (48 guns altogether) on both sides of the Straits of Messina, three 203 mm batteries (in Augusta, Taranto and La Maddalena, ten guns altogether), two 190 mm batteries (in Naples and Pola, four guns altogether). And that does not include Army-operated coastal batteries.

User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#25

Post by AnchorSteam » 23 Jan 2022, 02:51

Frollo wrote:
23 Jan 2022, 02:18
There were larger caliber guns... the Augusta-Syracuse fortress, for instance, included six batteries with 381, 254 and 152 mm guns. The MILMART in 1942 operated six 381 mm batteries (two in Brindisi, one in Venice, one in Augusta, two in Genoa), eight 305 mm batteries (in Venice, Taranto, La Spezia and La Maddalena, 25 guns altogether), eight 280 mm batteries (48 guns altogether) on both sides of the Straits of Messina, three 203 mm batteries (in Augusta, Taranto and La Maddalena, ten guns altogether), two 190 mm batteries (in Naples and Pola, four guns altogether). And that does not include Army-operated coastal batteries.
Thanks, that's a lot more information than I had before, and it looks about right. There were some 381mm guns laying around after the WW1 project for super-dreadnoughts was cancelled. The battery at Venice was a twin turret for them, wasn't it?
Messina seems over-done, but it was a critical place.
You would think Genoa had good protection, but it was bombarded by the French navy in very early on, and the best the French would have had were 13" and 13.4" guns.
Curious, isn't it?

Frollo
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 06 Dec 2021, 14:56
Location: Milan

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#26

Post by Frollo » 25 Jan 2022, 09:46

It was a twin turret and the guns had originally been produced for the cancelled Caracciolo-class battleships, although I am not sure if the turret was actually one of those built for the battleships or it was specifically built for the battery.

The coastal defense in Genoa at the outbreak of the war only consisted of 120 and 152 mm guns, the heavier ones were added after the naval bombardments. It is worth mentioning, anyway, that the French naval bombardment was rather ineffectual and did suffer a casualty caused by the coastal batteries (destroyer Albatros, boiler room disabled by a 152 mm hit from the "Mameli" coastal battery, with twelve men killed).

User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#27

Post by AnchorSteam » 26 Jan 2022, 21:44

Frollo wrote:
25 Jan 2022, 09:46
.......
The coastal defense in Genoa at the outbreak of the war only consisted of 120 and 152 mm guns, the heavier ones were added after the naval bombardments. It is worth mentioning, anyway, that the French naval bombardment was rather ineffectual and did suffer a casualty caused by the coastal batteries (destroyer Albatros, boiler room disabled by a 152 mm hit from the "Mameli" coastal battery, with twelve men killed).
Oh, that's interesting!
I have been sick for a while or I would have got back to this sooner. Did a little book-research while I was in bed, and found a few things I wanted to share.



There are many sources of artillery for Italy; the warships scrapped by them after 1923. I will limit myself to that so that only the weapons that came their way after the Fascists took charge are included.
I am NOT counting ships sunk and later recovered, immersion in slat water would probably make them a lot more expensive to put into service as shore batteries… and the whole idea here is to be cost-effective. Using guns that were going to be melted down into scrap seemed a good way to do that.
I will also go one better; let’s keep the turret guns in the turrets. The improved traverse should allow more coverage by a few guns, and also provide some fire against land-based attacks.
Three was one Radetzky pre-dreadnought and one V.B. dreadnought from Austria that were late to the breakers, so we can take their guns, and for politics sake we can include the army in this deal. It helps to have another department with an vested intrest in your schemes.
Two of the Regina Elena class fast battleships of 1907 also fall into our hands, and a couple of heavy cruisers were disarmed in the 1930s that come from the same era. The Dante Alighieri was also scrapped, and we also get a lot of guns from the four WW1 battlehips that were re-built, 6” guns and a triple 12” turret from each.
There also must have been a lot of 12” shells that became surplus once the Regina Marina went over to 12.6” guns.


First thing is the army share. I would take 6 x 12” guns out of turrets and put them on Railroad carriages so that they can be used anywhere. There are also 12 x 6”, 12 x 120mm and 18x 70mm. This would be enough for half a dozen forts with four heavy guns and three 70mm guns each, but I think a better use would be individual casemates in mountain passes in mutually-supportive positions, with the 70mm guns in more remote areas that the enemy would use to try to get around the passes.

What remains is 14 x triple 12” turrets, 2 x twin 12”, 4 x single 12”, 4 x twin 10”, 4 x twin 9.4”, 20 x twin 8”, 2 x twin 120mm…. and 16 x 6” guns from casemates.
If installations are thought out ahead of time, placing them will be easier. The first step in the ship’s scrapping would be to go where it’s guns are to be mounted and off-load them there. You don’t need the barbet, just the turret-race, the gun-house and a shorter version of the hoists. The emplacement itself is either going to be concrete or dug out of solid rock, and additional concrete over the top of the turrets that rotate with them would be a good idea.

This looks like a lot of guns, but Italy’s dilemma is a long and vulnerable coastline, and there were Colonial outposts to worry about as well. I gave it some thought and distribute it like this;


Genoa; 1 x triple 12”, 2 x single 6”
Anzio-Ostia landing areas; 4 x twin 8”, 6 x single 6”
(this is in anticipation of an enemy coming in by surprise or with overwhelming force - and while mobile guns and whole divisions will be quickly available there still has to be something there to buy time)
Palermo; 1 x triple 12”, 2 x single 6” +
the rest of Sicily; 4 x twin 10”, 4 x twin 8”
Naples; 1 x triple 12”, 2 x single 6”
Trieste; 2 x twin 12”, 4 x twin 9.4”
(yes, all the guns from the last Radetsky, near to where they were made and hopefully spares and more ammo can be found in the area, and a big spread of turrets because of exposure to land-attack)
Brindisi (?) 1x triple 12”, 3 x single 6”
(this is to cover anything between Venice and Sicily that can’t be covered by Railroad guns)
Messina; 2 x triple 12”, 3 x single 6”
Sardinia; 1 x triple 12”, 1 x single 12”, 8 x twin 8”, 4 x single 6”
(Sardinia is a big place and I have no idea what is vital there.... I suspect there isn't much of anything, but it is the most vulnerable part of Metropolitan Italy and the most difficult to get reinforcements to swiftly. Would that be enough to cover the best landing areas?)

Tripoli; 1 x triple 12”, 4 x single 6”
Benghazi; 1 x twin 8”, 2 x 6”
Tobruk; 1 x triple 12”, 1 x twin 9.4”, 2 x 6”
Bardia; 1 x single 12”, 2 x twin 8”, 2 x 6”
(I don't know why, but the Army did it's best to make that area a fortress zone, so the Navy may as well put something there to help supply ships make it there)

Pantarella ; 1 x single 12”, 2 x twin 8”, 2 x twin 120mm
(I may have botched this name, but I am thinking of the fortified island the Allies decided they had to take before Operation Huskey. Arming it up like a Heavy Cruiser seems like a good idea, with that one 12" as a little surprise for any enemy cruisers that try to swing by and "beat-up" a minor target for fun)

Masawwa; 1 x triple 12”, 2 x twin 8”, 2 x twin 120mm
Mogadishu/Chismayo; 1 x single 12”, 2 x twin 8”
(The main naval base in Italian East Africa deserves a good armament and it is a great place to fortify because of all the rocky islands all around it. Turrets there give the option of landward fire ... something that would have been useful in the end as it turned out
Mog/Chismaya is the outermost post in the realm, and a single 12" is really just there to discourage enemy captains that might be too caliber-conscious" to risk a cruiser agianst an old battleship gun.

Now, these older guns might not have the range or accuracy the newer types would have, and they certainly wouldn't have the same rate of fire, but they still stand as a good deterrent to raiding and recon-in-force ... the sort of things that usually precede an actual invasion.

User avatar
Alpini Arditi
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 04 Jan 2022, 00:15
Location: North Wales

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#28

Post by Alpini Arditi » 27 Jan 2022, 00:12

Speaking of railroad carriages, I've read that the Italian Navy had twelve armoured trains ready for use in 1940, two being used in the Battle of the Alps. One was equipped with 120mm guns, and the other with 152mm guns. They supported Italian troops during the assault on Menton.

User avatar
Alpini Arditi
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 04 Jan 2022, 00:15
Location: North Wales

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#29

Post by Alpini Arditi » 27 Jan 2022, 00:59

Italian armoured naval train opening fire on the enemy. From L'Illustrazione Italiana, Year LXX, No 16, April 18, 1943.
dae-ba061540.jpg
Italian Armoured Naval Train 1943

Frollo
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 06 Dec 2021, 14:56
Location: Milan

Re: Could The Italians Have Organised An Effective Defense Against The Allies On Mainland Italy in 1943?

#30

Post by Frollo » 27 Jan 2022, 16:26

AnchorSteam wrote:
26 Jan 2022, 21:44
Pantarella ; 1 x single 12”, 2 x twin 8”, 2 x twin 120mm
(I may have botched this name, but I am thinking of the fortified island the Allies decided they had to take before Operation Huskey. Arming it up like a Heavy Cruiser seems like a good idea, with that one 12" as a little surprise for any enemy cruisers that try to swing by and "beat-up" a minor target for fun)
You are thinking of Pantelleria.

In 1943 the coastal batteries on that island were eight, for a combined twelve 152 mm guns, thirteen 120 mm guns, twelve 90 mm guns (but it is not certain whether all of the latter had actually been installed).
AnchorSteam wrote:
26 Jan 2022, 21:44
Masawwa; 1 x triple 12”, 2 x twin 8”, 2 x twin 120mm
Mogadishu/Chismayo; 1 x single 12”, 2 x twin 8”
(The main naval base in Italian East Africa deserves a good armament and it is a great place to fortify because of all the rocky islands all around it. Turrets there give the option of landward fire ... something that would have been useful in the end as it turned out
Mog/Chismaya is the outermost post in the realm, and a single 12" is really just there to discourage enemy captains that might be too caliber-conscious" to risk a cruiser agianst an old battleship gun.
Coastal batteries in the Dahlak Islands (in front of Massawa) according to the USMM history:

Dahlak Kebir - four 120/45 mm guns
Harmil - four 120/45 mm guns (which severely damaged HMS Kimberley during her duel with the destroyer Francesco Nullo, fatal for the latter, in October 1940; perhaps the only time the guns of these islands fired in anger during the war)
Dur Gaam - four 120/45 guns
Dehel - three 152/53, four 120/45 guns
Shumma - four 120/45 guns
Dilemmi - three 120/45 guns

Massawa proper had eight 76/40, three 102/35 and four 120/50 mm guns at the time of its fall.

The coastal defense of Kismayo consisted of two 120/45 and four 76/40 mm batteries, partly located on two islands.

Post Reply

Return to “Italy under Fascism 1922-1945”