Jump to content


Italian Tanks and Military Vehicles

italian tank tree heavy medium light tank destroyer artillery semovente carro armato

  • Please log in to reply
8433 replies to this topic

WithinAmnesia #5541 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:14

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 1631 battles
  • 401
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012
Spoiler

It is Kind of Funny that, when all of the tanks are going for a 'uniform look' that the tank on the rightmost that is not 'cut-off' has its' gun barrel not fully elevated as in almost saying "Screw you guys and your 'Main-stream' Gun Barrels I do what I want." *lowers gun barrel slightly*.

 

Or you could just photoshop a sabre on that barrel and have the tank say "CHARGE! VIVA ITALIA! FOR THE FATHERLAND!"


Edited by WithinAmnesia, Aug 24 2014 - 02:16.


TheWolfie #5542 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:16

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 184 battles
  • 331
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    06-07-2014

View PostLife_In_Black, on Aug 23 2014 - 20:48, said:

 

I don't mind a little artistic license, for instance we know the Italians studied the idea of mounting a low velocity 149mm cannon onto an M.15/42 chassis. Something like that is easy to figure out, especially as the Semovente da 149/40 would have been a direct result of such studies. But in the case where the only mention of a vehicle is a not so reliable source, I can't in good conscience support it.

 

 

I believe Vollketten had found documents mentioning OTO's interest in such a Semovente but that due to the monopoly enjoyed by Ansaldo-Fiat, they refused to give OTO a P.26/40 chassis.

 

I had an idea about allowing the 47 mm L/32 as a gun option for the P.75, an analogy being the 15 mm BESA and the Vickers Mk I (less firepower but faster reloading), which could be construed as artistic license, although I think there was consideration for putting a 47 mm on the P.75.

 

From what I hear, Fiat-Ansaldo had quite the duopoly. Wonder how much they actually hurt the Italian war effort.

 

 



Life_In_Black #5543 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011
To my knowledge, the OTO concept came first or right around the same time as the other one, and when OTO couldn't get the P.26/40 chassis (which was an Ansaldo design/production), the Ansaldo-Fiat Semovente da 105/25 design using a widened M.15/42 chassis was used instead.

WithinAmnesia #5544 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:20

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 1631 battles
  • 401
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012
Spoiler

Hmmn, That could be Interesting.. I wonder what the other people could have to say for suggestions about this?


Edited by WithinAmnesia, Aug 24 2014 - 02:20.


Life_In_Black #5545 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostTheWolfie, on Aug 23 2014 - 21:16, said:

 

I had an idea about allowing the 47 mm L/32 as a gun option for the P.75, an analogy being the 15 mm BESA and the Vickers Mk I (less firepower but faster reloading), which could be construed as artistic license, although I think there was consideration for putting a 47 mm on the P.75.

 

From what I hear, Fiat-Ansaldo had quite the duopoly. Wonder how much they actually hurt the Italian war effort.

 

 

 

I wouldn't have any problem with that. In fact the current Pz.Kpfw. IV line at tiers 3 and 4 can use the 5cm guns from the Pz.Kpfw. III line, even though to my knowledge it's unhistorical.

 

And quite a bit I'd wager. had they been more competently run in support of the war effort and didn't strangle any competition, Italy's war effort might have been a lot better than it was.



WithinAmnesia #5546 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:30

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 1631 battles
  • 401
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012

View PostLife_In_Black, on Aug 24 2014 - 03:16, said:

To my knowledge, the OTO concept came first or right around the same time as the other one, and when OTO couldn't get the P.26/40 chassis (which was an Ansaldo design/production), the Ansaldo-Fiat Semovente da 105/25 design using a widened M.15/42 chassis was used instead.


That is such a Small D S[th]ink Move by Ansaldo-Fiat, They are at WAR! No wonder the Italian tanks 'Sucked' with those 'goofs' at the helm. Anyway seriously now: That must have sucked been very disappointing for O.T.O. and it sucks is rather unfortunate for us my fellow colleagues for we have less tanks reliable material in which to work with.

 


|'Ghetto Quote': Life_In_Black said: above me.

|"And quite a bit I'd wager. had they been more competently run in support of the war effort and didn't strangle any |competition, Italy's war effort might have been a lot better than it was."


That is like what happened In Canada in World War One with literally Cardboard Boots for soldiers and Sh.., Cra.., Very Poor Rifles that Su.... Were so bad with Jams and Malfunctions that The Canadian Trench Soldiers Would Grab The German Rifles at the first chance they got [Counter: Although the Snipers liked the Ross Rifle.]. That is where 'Profiteering' was coined if I recall correctly. [< You guys should say that instead on iirc, it just looks 100% less 'Ghetto'. [counter: says the guys with "Ghetto Quotes"; *Snap*]

 


But Still there must be 'Drawings' for the O.T.O. [Semovente] design somewhere, for one does not go "I have this Idea for X + Y = Z, please give me X and Y" without showing at least a plan/drawing when serious materials are at stake, especially when said materials are a tank. There must have been O.T.O. blueprints somewhere to justify a proposal for a tank hull for their Semovente design. It would seem to be very crazy [for me that is] to think that a 'proposed' tank design requires no plans/drawings/blueprints in order to get a hull for a test bed, especially when you are at WAR!


Edited by WithinAmnesia, Aug 24 2014 - 02:44.


Life_In_Black #5547 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011
There might be drawings or blueprints somewhere for the OTO version, but lots of things could have happened to them over the years.

WithinAmnesia #5548 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 02:47

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 1631 battles
  • 401
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012

View PostLife_In_Black, on Aug 24 2014 - 03:36, said:

There might be drawings or blueprints somewhere for the OTO version, but lots of things could have happened to them over the years.


I was dreading that realization.. C'mon Internet work your magic! Screw No to the Ponies and Ferries I want O.T.O. Semovente da 105/23 / 105/25 P.40 / M.42 Blueprints!... Internet Replies: *Rick Roll*.


Edited by WithinAmnesia, Aug 24 2014 - 02:48.


TheWolfie #5549 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 03:01

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 184 battles
  • 331
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    06-07-2014

I flicked through Heinz Guderian's Achtung Panzer book and the Italians came up.

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=tn85AgAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&pg=PP192#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Block Quote

 In Abyssinia the Italians put into the field about 300 Fiat Ansaldo tanks. They were equipped with machine-guns only, and did not have traversible (sic) turrets. The fixed positions of the machine-guns put the Italians at a disadvantage, and particularly when the tanks were employed one at a time, which enabled the natives to board the machines and kill the crews through the vision slits, which were inadequately protected. On the other hand the tanks were operated to generally good effect in spite of the difficulties presented by terrain and climate - neither the sandy deserts nor the high mountains proved to be insurmountable obstacles. However there is a limit to the lessons that are relevant for warfare in Europe, since the Abyssinians had no anti-tank defence and no armour of their own.

 

When we look at the categories of the Italian tanks, we see that they performed their tasks well, whether the armoured reconnaissance vehicles on scouting missions, or the tanks which operated with motorized infantry in a variety of assaults. Altogether the armour helped the Italians to finish off the campaign as quickly as they did

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Vollketten #5550 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 03:03

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 32940 battles
  • 8,672
  • [----] ----
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

View PostTheWolfie, on Aug 23 2014 - 20:16, said:

 

I had an idea about allowing the 47 mm L/32 as a gun option for the P.75, an analogy being the 15 mm BESA and the Vickers Mk I (less firepower but faster reloading), which could be construed as artistic license, although I think there was consideration for putting a 47 mm on the P.75.

 

From what I hear, Fiat-Ansaldo had quite the duopoly. Wonder how much they actually hurt the Italian war effort.

 

 

The 47mm was always a popular weapon as it was a powerful gun, was in supply, had plenty of ammo  and most importantly was cheap.

Putting a 47mm gun option in a P.75 prototype is fine historically as it was suggestion at the start of the project. For that matter of course so was a 90mm gun too. 75mm was the compromise.

 

In terms of hurting the war effort they crippled it undermining, undercutting and flat out lying to Mussolini, the Supreme Command of the Army and the Germans consistently.



TheWolfie #5551 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 03:45

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 184 battles
  • 331
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    06-07-2014

View PostVollketten, on Aug 23 2014 - 22:03, said:

The 47mm was always a popular weapon as it was a powerful gun, was in supply, had plenty of ammo  and most importantly was cheap.

Putting a 47mm gun option in a P.75 prototype is fine historically as it was suggestion at the start of the project. For that matter of course so was a 90mm gun too. 75mm was the compromise.

 

In terms of hurting the war effort they crippled it undermining, undercutting and flat out lying to Mussolini, the Supreme Command of the Army and the Germans consistently.

 

I suggested it because I knew it was a suggestion. :tongue:

 

They acted like spoiled children from what I have heard. All I knew was that they were the only two companies capable of producing tanks in Italy, and that they competed a lot (one example was the P.75 prototypes.) didn't know it was that bad.

 

 

 



Vollketten #5552 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 04:02

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 32940 battles
  • 8,672
  • [----] ----
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

View PostTheWolfie, on Aug 23 2014 - 21:45, said:

I suggested it because I knew it was a suggestion.

 

They acted like spoiled children from what I have heard. All I knew was that they were the only two companies capable of producing tanks in Italy, and that they competed a lot (one example was the P.75 prototypes.) didn't know it was that bad.

 

It really was as bad as it looks and undoubtedly worse than any book will perhaps let on. Constant one upmanship of which the OTO/Ansaldo Semovente is a good example.

 



Vollketten #5553 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 04:08

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 32940 battles
  • 8,672
  • [----] ----
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011

Shapshifter posted this doc on the T110 thread this evening:

Section V deals with Italy and I wanted to confirm if it was the same doc as I have a later reprint of.

He posted this for me to verify:

 

 



WithinAmnesia #5554 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 05:11

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 1631 battles
  • 401
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012

Good Post Vollketten, Bravo!

 

Side Note Time: B.o.W. Historical Italian 'Alpha' Tech Tree / Progression Structure:

Spoiler

Yes it is that huge and it is mine... Note: This is not a 'Super Amazing' Public Version of my Tech Tree, It will most likely be the 'BackBone' to an upcoming Tech Tree Video that I will release on an undisclosed time frame. If you want to actually see the 'dang' tanks just download the source file here, all of the images are not resized thus, perfect for using elsewhere... DeviantART Host Link: http://withinamnesia.deviantart.com/art/Historical-Italian-Progression-Structure-Alpha-477720571?ga_submit_new=10%253A1408851883

 

Take Care Everyone and Thank You for Your Time, Bandwidth and Patience. Widdily Trogdor Wah.

[Double Inside Joke].


Edited by WithinAmnesia, Aug 24 2014 - 21:34.


WithinAmnesia #5555 Posted Aug 24 2014 - 21:57

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 1631 battles
  • 401
  • Member since:
    07-11-2012

Does anyone know of any 'Realistic' (Applicable for Real World Military Service) Fictional / Semi-Historic Italian Tanks? (Or any Nation, but hopefully Italy.)


I Plan to make a 'Fictional' and 'Semi-Historic' Tech Tree / Progression Structure. I know of some Vehicles but most definitely not all. I figured that you guys, with all of the historical research that you have done, you 'must' have bumped into more than a few 'Fakes' (but hopefully 'Good' Fakes) of Italian Tanks / Mechanized Armour. I'm looking for Tanks Between the Years: 1899-1980+ [Analog Versions Required after Later 1970's]. The Tanks in question have to mostly be 'grounded in reality' and have a realistic approach to their design, as if a 'modern' designer was 'reincarnated' 'back in the day'. No Lazar Stalin Tanks with 1000ft high battleship tracks and Aircraft Wings. I am looking for basically any Italian 'E-90s' and 'T25/2's'; although other nations are welcome, although I am currently looking for Italian Armoured Fighting Vehicles / Tanks.


 

Thank you for your Time, Bandwidth, and Patience; Have a Good Day.



TheWolfie #5556 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 03:43

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 184 battles
  • 331
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    06-07-2014

This book mentions the CV-3, both the 33 and 35 models, in service in the Austrian army (under the label Kleinkampfwagen m. 1933 / 1935 respectively) before being handed over to the Germans after Anschluss.

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=zzBForupwBoC&lpg=PT22&ots=6dJ-IDlOwY&pg=PT22#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Did some searching and found an image from the Austrian State Archives -

 

Block Quote

Kleinkampfwagen (tank) "Fiat Ansaldo" M in 1933 during an exercise in Bruck an der Leitha, 1937. The armored vehicles of this type were part of the "Fast Division", which was a comparatively modern federation. The weapons, each with a machine gun allowed the small battle wagons but no fight against more armored and equipped with cannons tanks, as they were used by the German Wehrmacht.

(Photo: Austrian State Archives - War Archives)

http://old.doew.at/s...1938/6/6_5.html (translated from German)

 

 


Edited by TheWolfie, Aug 25 2014 - 03:44.


TheWolfie #5557 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 06:57

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 184 battles
  • 331
  • [ANZIO] ANZIO
  • Member since:
    06-07-2014

CV-33 in China.

 



Vollketten #5558 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 13:41

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 32940 battles
  • 8,672
  • [----] ----
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011
Is that a second vehicle behind it or the engine doors open or some kind of modification? I can't tell.

rivit #5559 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 18:19

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14073 battles
  • 1,532
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012

View PostTheWolfie, on Aug 23 2014 - 19:49, said:

 

... Umm, you might be arguing with the wrong person, because I don't support making an imaginary self-propelled gun and putting it in the tree.

 

 

 

Cappellano and Battisteli are alright. They make mistakes just like the Hunnicutts and Speilbergers of the world. The Sahariano Semovente was just mentioned as an evaluation before the project was scrapped, so there most likely wasn't any further drawings or mockups. Plus, the source doesn't mention a gun type, so it all comes down to whatever is found in the archives. The archive information that Vollketten, Raptor, and Zarax give to the single game developer is what's important.

 

Because of non-disclosure agreements between Wargaming and these three, the rest of us aren't privy to the real information. Everything else you  hear about the Italians on the forums is pretty much just ranting, or out of date information.


 

Anywho, welcome to the thread. I don't believe we met before my 3 month hiatus. I hope you enjoy your time spent on this thread.:smiles: 



sp15 #5560 Posted Aug 25 2014 - 18:31

    Captain

  • Players
  • 20 battles
  • 1,460
  • Member since:
    02-27-2012

View Postrivit, on Aug 25 2014 - 18:19, said:

Because of non-disclosure agreements between Wargaming and these three, the rest of us aren't privy to the real information. Everything else you  hear about the Italians on the forums is pretty much just ranting, or out of date information.

 

honestly there isnt really much (if any) info from wargaming that you wont know by reading FTR, and there isnt really any non-disclosure agreement as far as im avare unless volketten is more involved in this than i am




4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users