Like most Italian WW2 tanks, they where well made for the battlefield they where designed for, but then thrown into a battlefield that was completely unsuited for it.
The pattern for Italian tanks I see a lot is that they are usually a year late. They are reactionary designs and by the time they are accepted into service and produce, Their design is obsolete. For example, the m15/42 would have seen more success if it was accepted and produced in 1941.
There was a lot of bureocracy and another bunch of problems that caused really needed designs to be late to be deployed, but even though the Italian tanks were not optimal, Italian tankers as the years passed became more aware of their disadvantages and slowly developed their tactics to counter their such disadvantages.
The Italian mitliary strategists were actually very good. What let them down was the fact that Italy had virtually no industries. The economy was vastly agrarian, which means that even if they had amazing ideas, they would be hard pressed to build military equipment of quality and in quantity. Nevertheless, some planes and ships were high quality. Had Italy been more industrialized, they probably would have been a formidable opponent in WW2.
@@Damorann Finally, someone who doesn't look at Italy from WW2 through the memes and actually looks at Italy with a more critic and knowladgeable approach. Thank you.
@@Damorann If you compare Italy's production numbers with a smaller axis nation like Hungary or Romania you would rate the industry as enourmous. Most nations were not able to create own designs. But compared to the main nations of the conflict Italy's industry was lackluster.
@@Damorann depends, the RIA had a lot of problems with it's officer corps (lack of actual officers and most of the officers were taught pretty much ww1 tactics). The Regia Aeronautica and the Regia Marina fared better when it came to their officers. Regia Aeronautica especially. The Regia Marine really had problems when it cane to their equipment though, no radar and their SAP shells often didn't work as well as normal AP.
When you see photographs of early war tanks with the crews for scale you realize just how tiny some of these vehicles were. The Semovente in this article is smaller than a pickup truck!
The italins needed small tanks that can traverse the alps and the dolomiti, wich they have fought during the ww1. Italy was not prepared for another conflict, thanks to the british we have declared war on our allies thanks to the fakes promise of the brits, there was no industrial planning for producing tanks, ppl were angry, then mussolini came, was forced to join hitler, and to go to war
@@jeremy9416 No one forced Mussolini to invade Ethiopia. Don't whitewash Italy's role in leading up to WWII and in the early war. It was a blatant attempt at a land and power grab. And don't forget, Mussolini created fascism, the political model for much of national socialism
That looked like a usable weapon for the start of WW-2 against allied light armor which there were a large number during the Polish and French Campaigns 1939/40, the 47mm was larger than most of the guns in allied tanks that had 2 pounders or 37mm at the time, and even if the Semovente had thin armor and low speed, it could have been used in ambush or a shoot and scoot type of use, fire off 1 or 2 rounds from a concealed position then run away before the enemy could zero in on them,
@@comentedonakeyboard Yes, I also meant the mid war and some late war tanks. Only after the war did Russian tanks like T-34/85 started to improve in quality.
@@narodwpsanialy1940 mass producing welded armor (at a high quality) is harder then it sounds (german mid to late war modells had troubles too). So perhaps the italian aproach of stick to what you actualy can, is not stupid?
@@comentedonakeyboard Welding on German tanks was always the best, that was not a problem. I recommend watching stuff like Bovington Tank Museum videos, or seeing real German tanks. The welding is awesome, trust me I have seen many German tanks irl. The problem was horrible steel quality. The armor would crack not because of welds, but because of very bad and brittle steel.
Very good video and content, i really appreciate both your youtube channel and encyclopedia and for what regards your videos on italian armour i can assure everyone, as an Italian, that their translation of italian words is perfect
I sometimes play a PS1 game called Panzer General and have used these a lot in North Africa because they are so cheap in the game, like 7 credits, lol. A Panzer I is like 20.
Nice to see some of the less well known vehicles being effectively covered. Now all I have to do it work out how to cover an S-Model kit to produce one of these!
Considering they where a small agrarian society trying to eek out an existence between technological giants.. they did a decent job. But by any standard they had excellent larger anti-tank guns, long 75s, 90mm anti aircraft guns, 105mm tank killers. The vehicles they mounted them to were mostly less than ideal.
I see the problem more that they were designed for fighting conditions they never encountered, i.e. they were designed for fighting in the narrow roads and bridges of mountainess of the Northern Italy Alps but we're employed in the vast deserts of North Africa.
And here I thought German tank names were convoluted 😂👌! This is my favorite Italian AFV. I dug the video about the Italian armored car forces and their vehicles. Very interesting that the Italians seemed to rely on armored cars more than most other nations.
@Simon Colby i do love the italian tanks, and im trying to get a model kit group out of the ones thst you can get, because they're a poor mans attempt at armor industry. Italy had better planes and ships so not surprised their armor was what it was.
Very well done!! Professional presentation!! Can you image a world without Italian food?!?! If only a regiment of Texans captured Rome and introduced them to BBQ sauce.......then waited to see what they can create with it!!
One thing i could never work out is why they never put the spaag semovente m15/42 with the quad 20mm into production?, as they did with truck versions which these was greatly admired by the british like the lancia 3Ro and the bestest that was made but in too low numbers was the breda 52 ,90/53...equally as powerfull as the dreaded 88 and Qf 3.7inch...the 90/53 could have easily have been moulded into a turret like the germans had done with the 88, unfortunately it was the hulls of italian tanks that was the biggest let down as with the drive train and bogie system...
Ironic that during this period, when the Italian Army was equipped with such pathetic equipment, the Italian Navy was building some truly impressive warships, quite on a par with designs of the French and British navies of the day.
Italy is a peninsula, with a rough mountainous terrain. Mechanization in agriculture was hampered for decades by steep mountains and hills. Most tractors in central Italy in the 60s and 70s still had tracks, wheels couldn't cope. But as coastal areas are everywhere, there are many ports and developed shipbuilding industry has always been present since antiquity. Tanks in Italy are not a good idea, as they cannot climb easily the mountains or negotiate the small roads and tight turns there. Biggest battles in Italy have seen a lot of fighting between the Wehrmacht and the Allies (think Cassino, or the Senio offensive) while Shermans and Panzers mostly rusted in parking areas, waiting for a breakthrough run that really came only in the last days of the war in 1945. The Italian High Command was probably thinking to tanks as a mean to defend the Alps, basically, an outdated concept that reeks of WW1, this and the less developed state of Italian vehicle industry made tanks (and cars, trucks) unimpressive in quantity and less updated in quality as opposed to Germany or the UK, while the shipbuilding industry had no problem to cope with German and British quality (even if not quantity). Also Italian railways suffered this limitation, many engines were small due to turn radius and max weight constraints. Italian medium tanks were like tankettes . The fact that the Army (that still hadn't recovered and rebuilt materiel losses from the Spanish civil war!) was sent to fight in places like Africa and Russia,very conducive to 'pure' tank battles, where infantry still had a role only as 'panzer-grenadier', didn't help at all. Imagine the desperation of the best Italian troops sent to Russia, the undefeated specialized high-mountain Alpini, in the vast, flat expanses of the Russian front.. Or the sentiment of the Italian self-propelled M40 artillery units, designed for a past war , sent to attack the British in _front_of the infantry tank that they should have supported with their artillery indirect fire, because only their 75mm/18 cal howitzers had some hope of stopping or damaging British mediums and heavies .
Part of the reason their land forces were under equipped was the over focus on the navy. The italians should have focused on airforce>army>navy, rather than the irl navy>airforce>army. And airforce can fight naval or land targets. When itlay was still a British ally they had no real need for a string navy, and when they fell out and became enemies they lacked the fuel and shipyards to compete with the British direclty and relied on the airforce anyway. So with hindsight the priority should have been the airforce. Army second because the airforce can't hold or take ground. Navy last as its either unnessiary or has no chance for direct combat victory anyway.
@@matthiuskoenig3378Neglecting the Navy in that fashion would have seen them defeated even faster. Convoys to Libya were the only way to keep the army there supplied; when the Royal Navy cut the logistical chain, Italy's chances of victory in North Africa reached zero.
They kinda have to rely on the navy since Italian industry of 1940s depend on export. Regia Marina was also directly support and sponsored by the Royal Family. While Italy may have been a fascist state, it was still partially rule by it's king and this allow the navy to monopolize a lot of resource with the king's blessing.
@@matthiuskoenig3378You say that but the Regina Marina put up a pretty good fight against the British Mediterranean fleet, due to the Royal Navy being spread out across the globe.
I'm no expert on that theater but didn't most of those Germans end up in American prison camps? I know the Americans got smoked at the Kasserine Pass but saying they were worse than the Italians seems obviously false since they won.
@@stephenbrand5661 They were rescued by the 26th Armoured Brigade, remember at this time Rommels force was tiny and poorly equipped. The US suffered 3,300 casualties and a further 500 in Free French units under their command, 3,000 taken prisoner (between 3,700 and 4,000 total including French and British support units embedded in the US formation) and 1,000 tanks, artillery and vehicles destroyed or captured. The axis suffered less than 100 tank/gun losses, 1,000 casualties and 600 captured despite being outnumbered 3:2 in men and 7:1 in armour. The US commander was fired by Eisenhower and the US forces in North Africa put under British command.
I can see how this small vehicle updated with a German 50L60 mm ATG would be a real killer. The small dimension allows it to be easy to hide and camo, also not so easy to hit if spotted. Its speciality is not hunt and seek but hide and kill. It would be a real serial killer on the battlefield.
Italian soldiers had to go to battle vs brits and americans in those sardine cans. I really dont envy them. Italian "leadership" betrayed its soldiers in so many ways.
@caça minion In all fairness, despite the obvious fact that Italy was not industrialized enough to be dominant, Italian and Japanese tanks were good for their intended purpose, which was colonial warfare against enemies who had no armor and few heavy weapons. As such, they were adequate. They fell off when they met enemies with the ability to produce heavy weapons of quality and quantity. Had the Italians been given the industry to design and build what they military strategists wanted, it would have played out differently.
This is a light tank. Why comparing it with a medium one? The Germans had plenty of Pz II, with 15mm armour, leaf spring suspensions, and armed only with a 20mm gun, to compare with this.
@@neutronalchemist3241 Did you read and comprehend the comment before your reply or did you just let the autism take over? What makes you think Im not aware or interested of your additional information about German light tanks. Still its cheek in tounge and its what the Italians had to cover the flanks.
@@warwarneverchanges4937 Did you think to take your medicines before showing what a mental case you are? First of all, since you evidently need to be schooled about the topic, when you write a post in a public comment section, you are exposed to replies, and none is required to care about what you are aware of in your very private life. Nor to care about what you can or not care. Only what you wrote counts. Then, you still seem not aware that the Italians too had heavier tanks and self propelled guns to compare to the Pz IV, as the "Semovente da 75/18", so you need to be schooled about that too. You can thank me.
Actually, there were talks about having Italy produce Panzer III's. Mussolini declined because Italian industry kept telling him they would soon be producing better, heavier tanks. Italian industry did have some more advanced designs in the works, but progress was slow and Italian heavy tanks never made it into service.
Italian industry circa WW2 could produce first class limited production items, but really struggled with mass production. If you only had to build a handful of prototypes then Italian engineering was the equal of any of nation in the world as evidenced by their success with racing cars and planes in the 30s. However, they could not transfer that expertise across to the mass production of tanks and and to a lesser extent warplanes.
@@mattbowden4996 That's called cottage industry. The Italians as a whole were failures at building, maintaining, and using a modern fighting force. "They could not transfer their expertise?" You sound like an apologist for poor planning and poor adaptability on the part of the Italians.
@@lmyrski8385 I'm refuting your broad statement that Italian industry was primitive, not denying it's failings. You sound like you don't like being corrected when you make overly sweeping generalizations about complicated subjects.
They couldn't help it. Italy is very resource poor, having no native iron ore deposits and inadequate coal deposits. They could acquire the necessary from other European countries, but only after paying exorbitant prices. During WW1 their Entente allies provided these materials in abundance But in WW2 their only available supplier was Germany, who barely had an adequate supply for itsslf.
I bet you're from that country where its soldiers got their asses kicked by Vietnamese rice farmers and lately by Afghan shepherds lol, we're a country that's been in 10 wars and won 8 of them, lol
@@fabriziopastorino3792 Yeah, Vietnam and Biden´s Afgan mistake. So what? We won all the big ones..and we´re not finished as a power, like Italy. In fact USA is just getting started. Trump is coming back! Italy had trouble with Ethiopia..the USA defeated Germany AND Italy AND Japan. Italy is like France and Spain....basically weak and unfocused.
Like most Italian WW2 tanks, they where well made for the battlefield they where designed for, but then thrown into a battlefield that was completely unsuited for it.
Good point.
The pattern for Italian tanks I see a lot is that they are usually a year late. They are reactionary designs and by the time they are accepted into service and produce, Their design is obsolete. For example, the m15/42 would have seen more success if it was accepted and produced in 1941.
There was a lot of bureocracy and another bunch of problems that caused really needed designs to be late to be deployed, but even though the Italian tanks were not optimal, Italian tankers as the years passed became more aware of their disadvantages and slowly developed their tactics to counter their such disadvantages.
The Italian mitliary strategists were actually very good. What let them down was the fact that Italy had virtually no industries. The economy was vastly agrarian, which means that even if they had amazing ideas, they would be hard pressed to build military equipment of quality and in quantity. Nevertheless, some planes and ships were high quality. Had Italy been more industrialized, they probably would have been a formidable opponent in WW2.
@@Damorann Finally, someone who doesn't look at Italy from WW2 through the memes and actually looks at Italy with a more critic and knowladgeable approach.
Thank you.
@@Damorann If you compare Italy's production numbers with a smaller axis nation like Hungary or Romania you would rate the industry as enourmous. Most nations were not able to create own designs. But compared to the main nations of the conflict Italy's industry was lackluster.
@@Damorann depends, the RIA had a lot of problems with it's officer corps (lack of actual officers and most of the officers were taught pretty much ww1 tactics). The Regia Aeronautica and the Regia Marina fared better when it came to their officers. Regia Aeronautica especially. The Regia Marine really had problems when it cane to their equipment though, no radar and their SAP shells often didn't work as well as normal AP.
When you see photographs of early war tanks with the crews for scale you realize just how tiny some of these vehicles were. The Semovente in this article is smaller than a pickup truck!
Well, the Semovente is indeed small, but modern day American pick up trucks and some full size SUVs are just as big as Sherman tanks :)
I find it the opposite. They looks small in photos but in person they look huge. The first one that comes to mind is the Sherman.
Yeah pz2s and Russian t60s kinda look like toys.
The italins needed small tanks that can traverse the alps and the dolomiti, wich they have fought during the ww1. Italy was not prepared for another conflict, thanks to the british we have declared war on our allies thanks to the fakes promise of the brits, there was no industrial planning for producing tanks, ppl were angry, then mussolini came, was forced to join hitler, and to go to war
@@jeremy9416
No one forced Mussolini to invade Ethiopia.
Don't whitewash Italy's role in leading up to WWII and in the early war. It was a blatant attempt at a land and power grab.
And don't forget, Mussolini created fascism, the political model for much of national socialism
That looked like a usable weapon for the start of WW-2 against allied light armor which there were a large number during the Polish and French Campaigns 1939/40, the 47mm was larger than most of the guns in allied tanks that had 2 pounders or 37mm at the time, and even if the Semovente had thin armor and low speed, it could have been used in ambush or a shoot and scoot type of use, fire off 1 or 2 rounds from a concealed position then run away before the enemy could zero in on them,
Welded armor is a bit of a mixed blessing. Generaly great, but if done wrong, it causes cracks in the armor.
In that case all Soviet early T-34's would break like eggs lol
@@narodwpsanialy1940 over 90% of soviet war production tanks had faulty armor
@@comentedonakeyboard Yes, I also meant the mid war and some late war tanks. Only after the war did Russian tanks like T-34/85 started to improve in quality.
@@narodwpsanialy1940 mass producing welded armor (at a high quality) is harder then it sounds (german mid to late war modells had troubles too). So perhaps the italian aproach of stick to what you actualy can, is not stupid?
@@comentedonakeyboard Welding on German tanks was always the best, that was not a problem. I recommend watching stuff like Bovington Tank Museum videos, or seeing real German tanks. The welding is awesome, trust me I have seen many German tanks irl. The problem was horrible steel quality. The armor would crack not because of welds, but because of very bad and brittle steel.
Very good video and content, i really appreciate both your youtube channel and encyclopedia and for what regards your videos on italian armour i can assure everyone, as an Italian, that their translation of italian words is perfect
It was done by an Italian, so hopefully he'd know
Grazie paisano.
I sometimes play a PS1 game called Panzer General and have used these a lot in North Africa because they are so cheap in the game, like 7 credits, lol. A Panzer I is like 20.
Nice to see some of the less well known vehicles being effectively covered. Now all I have to do it work out how to cover an S-Model kit to produce one of these!
Semovente L40 da 47/32 was one of the finest Italian tanks of ww2! What a great tank! 💪🇮🇹
“So we shall see.”
Self propelled gun actually.
Forse ti confondi con il semovente da 75 mm montato in casamatta su scafo m 14
Please translate into English.@@yiliosfs
The Semovente was the best Italian armored fighting vehicle of WWII.
Even the Germans used it.
Great work Sir thank you
Considering they where a small agrarian society trying to eek out an existence between technological giants.. they did a decent job. But by any standard they had excellent larger anti-tank guns, long 75s, 90mm anti aircraft guns, 105mm tank killers. The vehicles they mounted them to were mostly less than ideal.
Beautiful tanks.
@@fraskf6765 checkout the m11-39
I see the problem more that they were designed for fighting conditions they never encountered, i.e. they were designed for fighting in the narrow roads and bridges of mountainess of the Northern Italy Alps but we're employed in the vast deserts of North Africa.
And here I thought German tank names were convoluted 😂👌!
This is my favorite Italian AFV. I dug the video about the Italian armored car forces and their vehicles. Very interesting that the Italians seemed to rely on armored cars more than most other nations.
Liked it a lot, thanks
There reason i like this Channel because the Content were good and very Objective
The italian tanks were anything but very good and objective oriented.
@Simon Colby i do love the italian tanks, and im trying to get a model kit group out of the ones thst you can get, because they're a poor mans attempt at armor industry. Italy had better planes and ships so not surprised their armor was what it was.
@@arandomfawn5289 Even italian tanks could deal with most of the early tanks of the Allies untill they received American equipment.
Excellent video 📹 ❤
Really great work thanks!
I like that 47mm gun against tanks with the 37mm in 1939-1940...or until the first 50mm guns started replacing those 37mm in Allied vehicles
Very well done!! Professional presentation!!
Can you image a world without Italian food?!?!
If only a regiment of Texans captured Rome and introduced them to BBQ sauce.......then waited to see what they can create with it!!
The deficiencies in the Italian Armor divisions at the start of the war was similar to the Japanese Armor divisions.
Always nice to see more videos about italian vehicles.
8:49 That some great penetration for such low caliber HEAT. I will make M15 tanks revant again in tank to tank combat.
One thing i could never work out is why they never put the spaag semovente m15/42 with the quad 20mm into production?, as they did with truck versions which these was greatly admired by the british like the lancia 3Ro and the bestest that was made but in too low numbers was the breda 52 ,90/53...equally as powerfull as the dreaded 88 and Qf 3.7inch...the 90/53 could have easily have been moulded into a turret like the germans had done with the 88, unfortunately it was the hulls of italian tanks that was the biggest let down as with the drive train and bogie system...
What a wonderful surprise.
Very nicely done.
Thank you.
Danke!
Ironic that during this period, when the Italian Army was equipped with such pathetic equipment, the Italian Navy was building some truly impressive warships, quite on a par with designs of the French and British navies of the day.
Italy is a peninsula, with a rough mountainous terrain. Mechanization in agriculture was hampered for decades by steep mountains and hills. Most tractors in central Italy in the 60s and 70s still had tracks, wheels couldn't cope. But as coastal areas are everywhere, there are many ports and developed shipbuilding industry has always been present since antiquity. Tanks in Italy are not a good idea, as they cannot climb easily the mountains or negotiate the small roads and tight turns there. Biggest battles in Italy have seen a lot of fighting between the Wehrmacht and the Allies (think Cassino, or the Senio offensive) while Shermans and Panzers mostly rusted in parking areas, waiting for a breakthrough run that really came only in the last days of the war in 1945. The Italian High Command was probably thinking to tanks as a mean to defend the Alps, basically, an outdated concept that reeks of WW1, this and the less developed state of Italian vehicle industry made tanks (and cars, trucks) unimpressive in quantity and less updated in quality as opposed to Germany or the UK, while the shipbuilding industry had no problem to cope with German and British quality (even if not quantity). Also Italian railways suffered this limitation, many engines were small due to turn radius and max weight constraints. Italian medium tanks were like tankettes . The fact that the Army (that still hadn't recovered and rebuilt materiel losses from the Spanish civil war!) was sent to fight in places like Africa and Russia,very conducive to 'pure' tank battles, where infantry still had a role only as 'panzer-grenadier', didn't help at all. Imagine the desperation of the best Italian troops sent to Russia, the undefeated specialized high-mountain Alpini, in the vast, flat expanses of the Russian front.. Or the sentiment of the Italian self-propelled M40 artillery units, designed for a past war , sent to attack the British in _front_of the infantry tank that they should have supported with their artillery indirect fire, because only their 75mm/18 cal howitzers had some hope of stopping or damaging British mediums and heavies .
Part of the reason their land forces were under equipped was the over focus on the navy.
The italians should have focused on airforce>army>navy, rather than the irl navy>airforce>army. And airforce can fight naval or land targets. When itlay was still a British ally they had no real need for a string navy, and when they fell out and became enemies they lacked the fuel and shipyards to compete with the British direclty and relied on the airforce anyway.
So with hindsight the priority should have been the airforce. Army second because the airforce can't hold or take ground. Navy last as its either unnessiary or has no chance for direct combat victory anyway.
@@matthiuskoenig3378Neglecting the Navy in that fashion would have seen them defeated even faster. Convoys to Libya were the only way to keep the army there supplied; when the Royal Navy cut the logistical chain, Italy's chances of victory in North Africa reached zero.
They kinda have to rely on the navy since Italian industry of 1940s depend on export.
Regia Marina was also directly support and sponsored by the Royal Family. While Italy may have been a fascist state, it was still partially rule by it's king and this allow the navy to monopolize a lot of resource with the king's blessing.
@@matthiuskoenig3378You say that but the Regina Marina put up a pretty good fight against the British Mediterranean fleet, due to the Royal Navy being spread out across the globe.
Germany: "Italians are the worst performing army in North Africa"
US: "Hold my beer"
I'm no expert on that theater but didn't most of those Germans end up in American prison camps? I know the Americans got smoked at the Kasserine Pass but saying they were worse than the Italians seems obviously false since they won.
@@stephenbrand5661 They were rescued by the 26th Armoured Brigade, remember at this time Rommels force was tiny and poorly equipped. The US suffered 3,300 casualties and a further 500 in Free French units under their command, 3,000 taken prisoner (between 3,700 and 4,000 total including French and British support units embedded in the US formation) and 1,000 tanks, artillery and vehicles destroyed or captured. The axis suffered less than 100 tank/gun losses, 1,000 casualties and 600 captured despite being outnumbered 3:2 in men and 7:1 in armour. The US commander was fired by Eisenhower and the US forces in North Africa put under British command.
@@stephenbrand5661 At this point the British refered to the Americans as "our italian allies”.
same thing- brave men, bad leaders.
@@stephenbrand5661 the Bersaglieri played a massive part in Americas defeat at Kasserine Pass.
Bonne prononciation de l'italien, bravo. 😃
Basically a budget Stug III G.
Stughetti
I can see how this small vehicle updated with a German 50L60 mm ATG would be a real killer. The small dimension allows it to be easy to hide and camo, also not so easy to hit if spotted. Its speciality is not hunt and seek but hide and kill. It would be a real serial killer on the battlefield.
that gun would have stressed a lot the chassis, the torsion bar were needed bcs the recoil of the 47/32 broke an L3 chassis during tests.
@@adrianzanoli well reinforce the chassis....not a problem
It’s the Squeaky Boi!
I difetti del carro medio italiano, sommati ai difetti di un semovente
I had a fatal attraction to this 47mm cannon in War Thunder :D
Cool....
2:07 Poor man's VFW lmao
Italian soldiers had to go to battle vs brits and americans in those sardine cans. I really dont envy them. Italian "leadership" betrayed its soldiers in so many ways.
Okay, that semovente against an M3 Stuart?
Okay, that semovente against an M3 Stuart?
Semovente L40 da 47/32. ➡️ Mini-STUGino 👈😁👍See what I did there?
Probably closer to the Panzerjager 1 in capabilities
Semovente
Ah yes, pasta roller 1940... great tank
A pasta roller is made of solid wood, much better armoured then these “tanks”
fiat topalino with a pop gun
Why did they not just copy/paste, the Stug3?
I mean there was the semovente 75? Kinda similar?
Imagine rolling up in this next to the Pz IV no wonder the Germans didnt think much of their allies.
@caça minion In all fairness, despite the obvious fact that Italy was not industrialized enough to be dominant, Italian and Japanese tanks were good for their intended purpose, which was colonial warfare against enemies who had no armor and few heavy weapons. As such, they were adequate. They fell off when they met enemies with the ability to produce heavy weapons of quality and quantity.
Had the Italians been given the industry to design and build what they military strategists wanted, it would have played out differently.
This is a light tank. Why comparing it with a medium one?
The Germans had plenty of Pz II, with 15mm armour, leaf spring suspensions, and armed only with a 20mm gun, to compare with this.
@@neutronalchemist3241 Did you read and comprehend the comment before your reply or did you just let the autism take over? What makes you think Im not aware or interested of your additional information about German light tanks. Still its cheek in tounge and its what the Italians had to cover the flanks.
@@warwarneverchanges4937 Did you think to take your medicines before showing what a mental case you are?
First of all, since you evidently need to be schooled about the topic, when you write a post in a public comment section, you are exposed to replies, and none is required to care about what you are aware of in your very private life. Nor to care about what you can or not care. Only what you wrote counts.
Then, you still seem not aware that the Italians too had heavier tanks and self propelled guns to compare to the Pz IV, as the "Semovente da 75/18", so you need to be schooled about that too.
You can thank me.
@@neutronalchemist3241 NO ONE CARES!!! It was a joke you didnt read, you decided to answer some stupid off topic answer form wikipedia, Be gone
Cocky color, the official color of Chad vehicles everywhere.
FIAT= Fix it again Tony!
I heard the main problem Italian tanks had were their speed. They only had one forward gear and at least five revearse gears.
that is a joke not a tank,compare that with a KV1
Adequate fo Ethiopia?
Adequate for memes
A backbone with osteroperosis
Design for mountains, use on plains.
you would think if italians were so bad at design that they couldnt get something to copy from their allies...
Actually, there were talks about having Italy produce Panzer III's. Mussolini declined because Italian industry kept telling him they would soon be producing better, heavier tanks. Italian industry did have some more advanced designs in the works, but progress was slow and Italian heavy tanks never made it into service.
When I read "backbone of the Italian army" I pictured a limp spaghetti noodle.
Sounds like Italian industry was pretty primitive.
Italian industry circa WW2 could produce first class limited production items, but really struggled with mass production. If you only had to build a handful of prototypes then Italian engineering was the equal of any of nation in the world as evidenced by their success with racing cars and planes in the 30s. However, they could not transfer that expertise across to the mass production of tanks and and to a lesser extent warplanes.
@@mattbowden4996 That's called cottage industry. The Italians as a whole were failures at building, maintaining, and using a modern fighting force. "They could not transfer their expertise?" You sound like an apologist for poor planning and poor adaptability on the part of the Italians.
@@lmyrski8385 I'm refuting your broad statement that Italian industry was primitive, not denying it's failings. You sound like you don't like being corrected when you make overly sweeping generalizations about complicated subjects.
They couldn't help it. Italy is very resource poor, having no native iron ore deposits and inadequate coal deposits. They could acquire the necessary from other European countries, but only after paying exorbitant prices. During WW1 their Entente allies provided these materials in abundance But in WW2 their only available supplier was Germany, who barely had an adequate supply for itsslf.
@@petergray7576 I'm afraid Italy's failures go beyond iron and coal. They never unified their industries.
Italian army 😅😅😅
'Backbone of the Italian army'
smh
Italians and backbone don't go together like France and a backbone!!! Remember? Of course you don't.
This is funny... implying the Italian army actually has a backbone 😂😂😂
@Simon Colby thats true... though the video fails to mention that the only gear Italian tanks have is reverse...
@Simon Colby I like the cut of your jib sir 😂😂😂😂😂😂
@Simon Colby so if you steal why not from the best but from the second last ( the one before you)(🤣🤣
Some Italian units under the right leadership (usually German) fought well. Rommel wrote about this in his diaries
@@danielcharnock8975 those were the British tanks in France, Gazala and most embarrassing moment is Singapore
Yeah...the Italian army...a backbone with no spine..LOL!
I bet you're from that country where its soldiers got their asses kicked by Vietnamese rice farmers and lately by Afghan shepherds lol, we're a country that's been in 10 wars and won 8 of them, lol
@@fabriziopastorino3792 Yeah, Vietnam and Biden´s Afgan mistake. So what? We won all the big ones..and we´re not finished as a power, like Italy. In fact USA is just getting started. Trump is coming back! Italy had trouble with Ethiopia..the USA defeated Germany AND Italy AND Japan. Italy is like France and Spain....basically weak and unfocused.