I really enjoy these longer Tank Chats with David Willey - the context is fascinating and paints a clearer picture of why things were like they were. Of course I still also enjoy Davis Fletcher's shorter, more technical vignettes too. Great to have both.
One correction. Italy did in fact have the skills and capabilities to weld armor vehicles, what they did not have was enough trained individual to weld both ships and tanks, so they chose ships.
In the middle of it at 14:09 he said firing British 2Pdr Armour piercing discarding sabot which is absolutely something they never did. These videos are really badly done.
Or as another example to echo Twitchy somewhat, he says "That's why they go to the right" when describing the rise of Italian fascism, when fascism is a form of socialism (so left (though arguably socialism doesn't properly fit on the left/right spectrum)). But he says right because it has been a left wing thing to accuse the right wing of being fascist since the 50's. It would be more correct for him to just say "That's why they go to supporting fascism".
As an Italian, i thank you for bringing some justice to the Italian WWII Army by presenting a broader picture and putting things in perspective. Thank you for being respectful to those who, even though joining the wrong side, fought and sacrificed themselves for their country. Italians were not cowards, they fought how they could with what they had available, including abysmally bad leadership and poor equipment.
Questo e' vero ,però dovresti andare a fondo a questa giusta analisi Perché l' Italia si trovò impreparata nella ww2 Perché era firmataria del Patto d' Acciaio,take patto prevedeva l' entrata in guerra di ogni nazione facente parte dell' Asse ,anche se questa ne aggrediva un ' altra ,perché nn era difensivo ma di guerra.Mussolini rese noto a Hitler che l' esercito sarebbe stato pronto solo nel 1942 .l' aggressione alla Polonia del 1939 colse l' Italia alla sprovvista e impreparata ,costringendola di fatto ,ad entrare in guerra con una struttura industriale assolutamente nn idonea a sostenere un conflitto su larga scala .C'è un libro di un autore tedesco il cui titolo e' proprio : il tradimento tedesco.
The Italian mechanics worked wonders keeping these vehicles running in North Africa. “Iron Hulls, Iron Hearts” by Ian W. Walker gives examples, like at El Alamein that these mechanics actually increased the number of running vehicles before the defeat there. FIAT and its subsidiary companies had a near monopoly on equipment to all the military branches.
The real problem though was that Italy just couldn't stand up to the major powers. Italy's industrial output was about a sixth that of France and less than tenth that of Germany. Having something like the T-34 or M4 Sherman and mass producing them by the tens of thousands was something far beyond Italy's capacity. Italy's industrial output was more comparable to places like Spain or Turkey than Germany or Britain. Italy had quite a large population at the time about the same as France but they just didn't have the industry to equip that with modern stuff. On top of that heavy tanks were low on Italy's priority list. Italy focused most of it's resources on it's navy, then it's air force and the pride of Italy was it's mountain forces. In many ways the Italian military was very similar to the Japanese ones which had similar priorities though Japan's industrial capacity was considerably better. In WW1 the Italians were only really fighting on their own territory to get a few provinces from the Austro-Hungarian empire and they were allied with the rulers of the med. So they were working within their limits and even so in WW1 they had to call on the British and French for equipment several times. With Mousilini though he will never listen to any objections that trying to compete head on with the British in battleship construction and attack British forces head on in Egypt was a bad idea. Mousilini's Italy was a real cleptocracy where appeasing Mousilini's ego was the main way to advance rather than competence. Mousilini wanted to see Italy as an equal to Germany but in industrial capacity Germany was in an entirely different league compared to Italy.
@ They also needed a good source of oil. After the war the oilfields of Algeria were discovered. They were sitting over a resource that the Germans would have sent more resources to expand and protect.
Good to see you defend the Italian soldiers, the common soldier who often pays with his life deserves recognition for his valour and achievement regardless of their nationality.
I am deeply grateful to David Willey for this very objective and balanced review. It serves well the thousands of Italian tankers that died in these machines. And it well balances the smear that the likes of Liddel-Hart have piled up on our armed forces. Grazie.
@@mikepette4422 Accurate assessment. The only excellent Italian commanders were Messe, Guillet & Frattini. Their navy was very decent though but it suffered from terrible ammunition quality & lack of radar.
Italian weaponry wasn't subpar for the most part with _some_ lacking exceptions, the tank force was the most underwhelming and less developed branch, but small arms were comparable to their contemporaries, with exceptions.
Read ‘Iron Hulls and Iron Hearts’ by Ian Walker. This gives a great insight into Italy’s armoured doctrine at the time. I Might add there was no lack of courage from the Italians in ww2.
I've never doubted their Courage I always though it was kinda like the French. Brave men being stuck in vehicles that aren't well adapted to the times. Unlike the French they can't modernize well as the lack of Industrial capabilities
There certainly was a strong lack of courage and a lot of cowardice in the Italian army. During the American invasion of Sicily and lower Italy, most Italian soldiers happily surrendered instead of fighting to protect their own country, their own people, and their own families. Very cowardly. The Germans fought way harder to protect Italy than the Italian soldiers did. Those Italians should have been court martialed for high treason. The Italians were just as cowardly as the French army. Neither of those armies even attempted to defend their own country. Pathetic.
Thank you so much for this, a fair take on this issue. Italian soldiers did well and made the best of what they had to work with. They were not the "cowards" or slackers that common myth and propaganda has portrayed. A good man or a good crew takes what weapons or vehicles they are issued, and despite the faults carry on and do the best they can.
Italy fought in North Africa, East Africa, the Eastern Front and the Mediterranean with a small industrial capacity and few natural resources. The level of sacrifice and courage of the individual italian soldier was evidently higher then most other beligerants. Great honest and balanced review in this video.
Basically everyone at the start of the war had fairly poor tanks by comparison to mid/late war designs. The issue is Italy didn't have the manufacturing capability to get rid of those designs quickly enough, where as everyone else did.
For fun, check out Italian artillery production rates. All the artillery heavier than a 75 mm mountain gun were produced in numbers of a few hundred each. The industrial base was limited, though in fairness also restricted by a lack of raw materials. The Italians were very dependent on imports and the Allied naval blockade and the German appropriation of the wealth of conquered nations forced them to largely rely on domestic resources.
Yeah, but some countries had adequate tanks by early-war standards and some did not. Tactics and logistics also varies widely, the latter proving decisive imo.
Don't Forget that you have instances of Germany requisitioning materials that were being sent to Italy or when the Italians asked for German AA batteries to defend their factories Germany promptly said no, only for those factories to be bombed a year later. That was the main reason the P26/40 didn't enter production prior to late 1942/43
@@CaptainGrief66 Sure, but the base issue is still that Italy was not ready for a major war. Not enough technical base, not enough raw materials, not able to defend themselves when things went wrong.
These talks are excellent in their technical, historical and social content. By going far beyond the starting point (the tank) and providing so much context, my enjoyment is greatly enhanced. This becomes a really valuable learning experience. 10/10.
23:30 Also, in 1940 Italian troops in Africa were mainly low quality troops with very poor training, equipment and discipline, mainly part of the Fascist party's militia. A true story to be told is that the Italian military, some say under the suggestion of Mussolini in person, decided to form units to be sent to Africa exclusively with people of the Southernmost regions of Italy (like Sicily and Calabria) just because they said that they were used to the heat of the Southern Mediterranean. The problem was that those regions had a shockingly low level of alphabetization (probably the lowest in Europe at that time) and therefore it was extremely difficult to find trained specialists for communications and vehicle operations, leading to the actual impossibility of operating an efficient communication network just because there were too few people that could actually read and write.
It really makes you wonder how the fascists ever got that far. The way they make decisions is just so stupid. They manage to use racism in new and creative ways you wouldn't think is even possible.
that's fake, literally one of the elite unit in italian army (the anti-tank artillery and anti-aircraft artillery) were sent to africa and they were really good soldiers and very well trained, they were very precise and the allies feared them... what are you even bragging about? are you sure you are stating that right?
@@alessandromazzini7026 It’s you that are wrong. That happened after the disaster of Operation Compass, when finally the mechanised and armoured units were sent to Libya. Just be sure to read something else other than neo-fascist propaganda.
To add some information from an Australian. My father was 18th Australian Infantry Brigade (7th Div). The Australians who fought the Italian Infantry thought they were rubbish. In conversations during the Seige of Tobruk and later in Australia, all these poor blokes wanted to do was drink some wine and oggle the girls. They had no interest in Mussolini's new Roman Empire. BUT the professional troops were a different story. They were hard nuts to crack. As an Australian soldier myself, I had the privilege of serving alongside first generation Australians of Italian immigrants. 🇦🇺🐨🇦🇺
David Willey is by far my favourite for the tank videos! Usually longer, and includes more detail, particularly about the history and background of them, Where Fletcher tends to just stick to the technical details. Had a lovely long chat with David Willey while we there for Tiger day in Sept 21 about the tortoise! :) Would love to see that behemoth running!
Read “Iron Hulls, Iron Hearts” by Ian W. Walker about the 3 Italian armor divisions which were small in size, equivalent to a British armored brigade. The Ariete Division was part of the Afrika Korps in fact and was basically the only fully mechanized unit in North Africa. Ariete was the only fully functional of the 3, getting replacement armor by taking from the other 2. The infantry units lacked organic transport which was why they surrendered once abandoned in a retreat, no food or water and hundred of miles to friendly lines.
Thanks for the pronunciation corrections! Got a nice pic of this tank with my fiance beside from our visit in the museum, goes perfectly alongside the one with her granpa in uniform :)
David Willey does an excellent job explaining the history of tanks and other armored fighting vehicle. I appreciate his knowledge and dedication to the subject. I’m glad he’s part of The Tank Museum.
Finally, a bit of onesty from British side, the italian forces still suffer from the narrative of WW2, we lost it was inevitable, the only thing that wasn't missing in the italian forces was bravery, but we always been accused of cowardice by enemy and friends.
An excellent presentation which is both detailed and thoughtful. I wholeheartedly agree with the comments about the bravery of the Italian fighting man, and this is acknowledged (perhaps grudgingly) by some writers of the period and in some contemporary comments by allied commanders. Even Rommel acknowledged the loss of the Ariete armoured division with comments about their bravery at second El Alamein. With regard to the quality of armour, the Italians could make very good armour and their battleship armour was as good as any contemporary so the poor quality of tank armour may be another consequence of the army's third division status when compared to their other two services. Once again, many thanks for an excellently presented and thoughtfully worded video that puts the Italian war effot into its proper context, one which is often forgotten or deliberately ignored.
The British army used a lot of captured Italian tanks, because they had acquired them, and because their own had serious reliability issues, were broken down and not available. The British crews were not any happier about being in them than the Italians had been. It is another reason why Rommel had success when he showed up.
If you think this one was good, you should check out The Chieftan's video on the Development of Italian Armoured Doctrine. He goes into some of the other aspects of the social and economic handicaps the Italians were working with when developing an armoured force.
I'm enjoying listening to these tank chats that little mention German automotive engineering. It's good to hear stories of nations who had to innovate in an effort to keep up and sometimes surprise greater industrial powers.
Really appreciate the fact that you guys started talking more about Italian armour, the lack of industrial capabilities gave birth to some ineffective, yet really interesting designs.
That Italians used three engined bombers because they had not powerful engines is a mith. The Vickers Wellington had two 1050 hp engines. The Bristol Beaufort, two 1060 hp engines. The Bristol Blenheim, two 920 hp engines. The SM.79 had three 950 hp engines (later equipped with "etilizzatori", an equivalent of the MW50, to have a temporary 100hp boost, to disengage after torpedoing attacks). The Cant Z.1007 had three 1000 hp engines. The BR.20 had two 1030 hp engines. The performances of the twin engined Br.20 compare very well with those of the Wellington and Blenheim. The Br.20 was faster and with an higher ceiling than the Wellington, although with a lower bomb load, and had performances in line with those of the Blenheim, but with a better bomb load. In 1939 had been omologated the 1500 hp Piaggio P.XII. That used standard 87octane fuel. Probably the best radial engine that used standard fuel up to that point. The Italians used two models of three engined bombers simply because they were faster that way, and could still fly with an engine failure, while, for a two engined bomber, an engine failure meant a long descent. That's why they were preferred to the Br.20 too.
Fantastic. Have been curious about Italian armour as all I knew was the stereotypes. Love the North African theatre in WW2 so had built some 1/35 Italian tanks which were cool and different so good to understand the history. Usual high standard from the Tank Museum!
Thank you for a great story about this tank's predecessors. As a kid I assembled plastic kits of this one, and another, an assault gun, on the same chassis - there weren't many WW2 plastic kits available in Russia in early 90s, but many were made under license from the Italian hobby company, hence the focus on Italy. When later I got my first T-34 kit, it was a surprise to see how tiny M14/41 was in comparison.
I recommend looking at Italian War memorials if you ever go to Italy. You'll probably be surprised to see the level of Italian casualties on the Eastern front and the comparison with WW1.
David Willey made an important point by looking at the weak economical base of Italy ( See The rise and fall of the great powers, Kennedy). But I always wonder, how the Italians managed these huge offensives at the Capuretto-front over years. They had not more steel, coal, gas at this time, had they?
M13/40 (lll) is my favourite tank in War Thunder, it doesn't have the best gun but it has good armor and mobility. I can rack up 10+ kills in one match if I really focus. Excellent tank.
I certainly agree it was about 1942 being turning point, everyone was getting better kit, everyone but the Italians, they were fighting battles in 1943 with kit better suited to 1940.
What a superb and thought provoking resume of not just a vehicle but a system that existed to support both its manufacture and utilisation - bravo, the best yet in my view!!
One of my Granddads' was at the first siege of Tobruk where he fought the Italians and Germans. When you are being shelled or shot at, bombed or mortared its a bit hard to differentiate which Nationality is doing it and whether you think someone is a first rate or second rate Soldier hardly matters.
I love my little M14/41s in Mid War Flames of War (not exactly a simulation but hey ho). They always pull more weight than such a small under armoured tank should, plenty of MG fire and a reasonable gun has seen them stop offensives from superior tanks and swarms of infantry. My regular opponents have learnt to, if not fear, at least respect the Italian Carristi!
14:22 Though I would think something reinforcing that perception is that the main tank it was up against was the British Matilda II which was the most heavily armored tank in the world at that time. It indeed wouldn't be able to penetrate the front of that tank but the Matilda II's own 2 lbs gun couldn't penetrate it either.
According to Spielberger, Italy was planning to produce the Panther in 1943. The German manufacturers were instructed to provide the technical documentation free of charge. With the Italian surrender the project was cancelled. I have my doubts the Italian industry would have been able to build a tank of that size any time soon without substantial help from Germany.
Impeccable analysis I have to congratulate you for his honesty and correctness in giving the right information, I agree on everything except on one topic the Italians had excellent steel but everything was destined for the navy, the choice to use the bolts was another problem , it is not that there was no lack of skills in naval production, welding was used and that it was cheaper for manufacturers who unfortunately profited at the expense of quality. Congratulations on the channel I did not know but I will include it among my favorites
Thank you for giving a very unbiased account of Italian tanks. I, like many I'm sure was brought up with idea that all Italian tanks had one forward and 4 reverse gears!
I really like the Italian 47mm gun,In my opinion the best Tank/Anti-tank gun of the early war period with decent HE shell,decent penetraion,small size and low weight.
Not having the shield made it the biggest AT piece that could be towed by hand in case of necessity, and the small signature made it ideal for ambushes and setting kill zones. Obviously not having the shiled had its downsides, but it could be usually replaced by placing the cannon behind low walls and embankments. Also the shield of field guns protected only against small caliber weapons, and made the gunner even more exposed against heavy fire (see for example the gunner of the 2-pdr, how much above the barrel of the gun had to seat to aim).
Very interesting and well made, but I just want to point our that the armor/metal part is wrong. In fact the quality of Italian armor was extremely good on ships (the battleship TERNI armor was among the bests in the world) and Italian were capable with the welding technology (the firsts Carro Veloce were welded, some of the last too). The big issue was with costs, it costs less to rivet and bolt than welding. Also, it was assumed (and ultimately proven wrong) that bolting and riveting plates could be replaced easily when a tank was damaged.
Yeah, it's more "does Fiat want to train workers and change production," not so much "Fiat doesn't know how to do it." See Chrysler for the same issue in the US.
Pint of clarification, Rommel had massive issues with the officer corp not limited to the idiots from Italy which he was required to report to, which really did not happen much.
Misinformation and bias has done more harm to the Italian tank reputation during WW2 than anything else. I'm praising the fighting men's courage, their tenacity to fight with the equipment they were given, like every other fighting men in warfare.
I appreciate seeing more who understands the clear bias was ridiculous. Especially when most use little to no knowledge of actual tank armor. Italy had great designs and it shows with the M15/42 and pretty much all the Semoventes.
I’m glad you didn’t just dunk on the Italian tanks, they aren’t bad by early war tanks standards but Italy clearly didn’t have what Germany or Britain. Plus they had an idea that you could just replace the armor plate
Life in the Italian military (all branches) during WWII was essentially an exercise in getting shafted, repeatedly, by Mussolini for his own political miscalculations.
Could you even imagine what it sounds like inside any armoured vehicle, getting hit with any shell that bounces of it? It must have been horrifying and deafening.
New Italian content!!!! A good book for a better understanding of Italian armor and armored division’s is “Iron Hearts, Iron Hulls:Mussolini’s Elite Armored Divisions in North Africa by Ian Walker. An interesting side note is that in the book “Smashing Hitler”s Panzers” by Steven Zaloga there is a pic of a German Panzer IV auf F with cracked armor. Apparently in the middle to end of the Second World War Germany lacked tin making their armor brittle.
I like this Italian tank ,the M 13-40 was the core of the Axis tank in North Africa,if I 'm not mistaken ,your topic is really educating thank you sir,,,
Great video, possibly the best tank chat yet. Love the longer format and explaining the full historical context of this specific tank. Would love to see some interior shots though, and the best would be David having a go at the Chieftain's "Oh bugger the tank is on fire" test for some of these tanks.
Thanks David. As always, your chat was informative and balanced. Question: why would a country using the metric system build a 47mm gun? 50mm is only marginally larger and either 45mm or 50mm seem so much ... neater.
Good question 🤔 I think the French, Czech, Austrian and Italien all built 47mm guns. While 45 or 50 sounds more round it wouldn’t make any difference in production. The caliber of the shell isn’t necessarily equal to what it is called. German 10cm cannons actually fired 10.5cm projectiles and both US and Italien 12.7mm MGs actually fire bullets with 13mm diameter but both guns and bullets are still called 12.7mm.
Dear David: I wonder if you can make a video about the italian Ansaldo 75/42; a squat assault gun with a 75 mm. hull mounted short cannon. I understand they were quite succesful as a tank destroyer in the last stages of the desert war. i would love to know a little more about the contraption if possible. Thank you for the wonderful videos you make. Greetings!
Sometimes the Tank Chats come out with a new fact that I did not know or even think about. Mussolooney didn’t tell his merchant navy that he was going to declare war. So lost 30% of the fleet!!!!
in reality he had to do it, as shown by how many resources Italy produced it had to be getting them from imports 'till the last moment, if the merchant navy would have been stopped Italy would have had even less resources.
Basically, when Mussolini joined the war in 1940, he and many others thought the war would be over in months, so he thought he had to rush to grab his share of the loot in the new world order
Great vid. Might have been good to mention that at least one Italian tank formation was possibly better trained and motivated than others; the famous Ariete division.
Yes the stupidity of doing it would be terrifying. You dont engage a target that you cant destroy. Also were there any M14/41 on the eastern front, or are you just assuming they were there cause Italians were there.
Only the L6/40 was sent to the Eastern Front, although there was on paper 3 armored divisions based on the binary system, they were only the size of a British armored brigade. The Ariete Division that was working with Rommel and took up most of the tank production. The other two divisions were basically skeletons that were not fleshed out.
@@Paciat I thought this, or something very similar, was the primary Italian tank and would have served with Italian units on the Eastern Front. Come to think of it, this tank would have been pretty awful against a Churchill, M-3 Grant/Lee, or an M-4 Sherman in N. Africa. Outarmored and outgunned with rivets ready to fly inside.
I really enjoy these longer Tank Chats with David Willey - the context is fascinating and paints a clearer picture of why things were like they were. Of course I still also enjoy Davis Fletcher's shorter, more technical vignettes too. Great to have both.
I think they could combine them. David with the history and use and then Fletcher with his experience if he has driven them or has anecdotes
Yep, I love it that we get both.
@@WeirdSeagul They should bring over Chieftan to do the insides 🤣
@@thatfriggingbathroom2656 they complement each other
fletcher used to do longer ones as well, now its only the 5-10 minutes ones. i worry that he is getting old.
One correction. Italy did in fact have the skills and capabilities to weld armor vehicles, what they did not have was enough trained individual to weld both ships and tanks, so they chose ships.
Which is kinda understandable tbh, but it certainly didn’t help the army in any way
Yup, Britain had the same issue, hence why the first Crusaders were riveted while new welders were being trainer
Honesty, competence, reliable historical sources. Nothing more is asked and that's what I always find here. Thank you David.
I agree, you don't have to worry about Freeaboos, commieboos, or worse of all the Wehraboos. To speak of
They are brilliant. Just lacking in dog content😁
In the middle of it at 14:09 he said firing British 2Pdr Armour piercing discarding sabot which is absolutely something they never did. These videos are really badly done.
Or as another example to echo Twitchy somewhat, he says "That's why they go to the right" when describing the rise of Italian fascism, when fascism is a form of socialism (so left (though arguably socialism doesn't properly fit on the left/right spectrum)). But he says right because it has been a left wing thing to accuse the right wing of being fascist since the 50's. It would be more correct for him to just say "That's why they go to supporting fascism".
@@Twitchy1
Available ammunition[13][14][15]
Type Model Shot/shell Round weight Projectile weight Filler Muzzle velocity
Armour-piercing, tracer Shell AP/T Mk IT Shell 2.375 lb (1.077 kg) 11 drachms (19 g) Lyddite 2,650 ft/s (810 m/s)
Armour-piercing, tracer AP/T Mk I Shot 2.04 kg (4.5 lb) 1.08 kg (2.4 lb) 792 m/s (2,600 ft/s)
Armour-piercing, tracer, increased charge APHV/T Shot 2.04 kg (4.5 lb) 1.08 kg (2.4 lb) - 853 m/s (2,800 ft/s)
Armour-piercing, capped, ballistic cap, tracer APCBC/T Mk I Shot 2.22 kg (4.9 lb) 1.22 kg (2.7 lb) - 792 m/s (2,600 ft/s)
Armour-piercing, composite non-rigid
(used with the Littlejohn adaptor) AP/CNR (APSV) Mk I Shot ? 1.037 lb (0.470 kg) - 1,280 m/s (4,200 ft/s)
Armour-piercing, composite non-rigid
(used with the Littlejohn adaptor) AP/CNR (APSV) Mk II Shot ? 1.234 lb (0.560 kg) - 1,189 m/s (3,900 ft/s)
Practice, tracer[6] Shot, Practice, Mk IT Flathead Shot 2.375 lb (1.077 kg) - 2,000 ft/s (610 m/s)
High-explosive, tracer HE/T Mk II Shell 1.86 kg (4.1 lb) 0.86 kg (1.9 lb) 3 oz (85 g) TNT or RDX 792 m/s (2,600 ft/s)
As an Italian, i thank you for bringing some justice to the Italian WWII Army by presenting a broader picture and putting things in perspective. Thank you for being respectful to those who, even though joining the wrong side, fought and sacrificed themselves for their country. Italians were not cowards, they fought how they could with what they had available, including abysmally bad leadership and poor equipment.
Questo e' vero ,però dovresti andare a fondo a questa giusta analisi Perché l' Italia si trovò impreparata nella ww2 Perché era firmataria del Patto d' Acciaio,take patto prevedeva l' entrata in guerra di ogni nazione facente parte dell' Asse ,anche se questa ne aggrediva un ' altra ,perché nn era difensivo ma di guerra.Mussolini rese noto a Hitler che l' esercito sarebbe stato pronto solo nel 1942 .l' aggressione alla Polonia del 1939 colse l' Italia alla sprovvista e impreparata ,costringendola di fatto ,ad entrare in guerra con una struttura industriale assolutamente nn idonea a sostenere un conflitto su larga scala .C'è un libro di un autore tedesco il cui titolo e' proprio : il tradimento tedesco.
Looking at the state of WW II tanks it makes you realise how large a set of balls every tank crewman had to go to war in those things.
So big that they can't buy underwear.
The Caro Veloce drivers had bigger balls than the tank itself 🤣😂
Nah, the visibility was so poor they didnt know what are they going at.
Having to work in Armour occasionally, I will confirm that not much has changed in the intervening 70 years.
You should be scared to crew a modern tank too
The Italian mechanics worked wonders keeping these vehicles running in North Africa. “Iron Hulls, Iron Hearts” by Ian W. Walker gives examples, like at El Alamein that these mechanics actually increased the number of running vehicles before the defeat there.
FIAT and its subsidiary companies had a near monopoly on equipment to all the military branches.
Read that book.
It is an excellent account.
Excellent Book!
The real problem though was that Italy just couldn't stand up to the major powers. Italy's industrial output was about a sixth that of France and less than tenth that of Germany.
Having something like the T-34 or M4 Sherman and mass producing them by the tens of thousands was something far beyond Italy's capacity. Italy's industrial output was more comparable to places like Spain or Turkey than Germany or Britain. Italy had quite a large population at the time about the same as France but they just didn't have the industry to equip that with modern stuff.
On top of that heavy tanks were low on Italy's priority list. Italy focused most of it's resources on it's navy, then it's air force and the pride of Italy was it's mountain forces. In many ways the Italian military was very similar to the Japanese ones which had similar priorities though Japan's industrial capacity was considerably better.
In WW1 the Italians were only really fighting on their own territory to get a few provinces from the Austro-Hungarian empire and they were allied with the rulers of the med. So they were working within their limits and even so in WW1 they had to call on the British and French for equipment several times. With Mousilini though he will never listen to any objections that trying to compete head on with the British in battleship construction and attack British forces head on in Egypt was a bad idea. Mousilini's Italy was a real cleptocracy where appeasing Mousilini's ego was the main way to advance rather than competence. Mousilini wanted to see Italy as an equal to Germany but in industrial capacity Germany was in an entirely different league compared to Italy.
@ They also needed a good source of oil. After the war the oilfields of Algeria were discovered. They were sitting over a resource that the Germans would have sent more resources to expand and protect.
Good to see you defend the Italian soldiers, the common soldier who often pays with his life deserves recognition for his valour and achievement regardless of their nationality.
Other countries had heroes
Italy had martyrs
I am deeply grateful to David Willey for this very objective and balanced review. It serves well the thousands of Italian tankers that died in these machines. And it well balances the smear that the likes of Liddel-Hart have piled up on our armed forces. Grazie.
Vive il Duce.
@@TheBob3759 I would check the spelling. If you try to offend people...at least get it right...
I never doubted the bravery of the Italian army, just the Italian weaponry.
and their leaders
Their hearts weren't in WW2
@@mikepette4422 Accurate assessment. The only excellent Italian commanders were Messe, Guillet & Frattini. Their navy was very decent though but it suffered from terrible ammunition quality & lack of radar.
@@Perkelenaattori
Not terrible, just unreliable, and they had radars but not long range targeting radars nor radar guided individual weapon systems
Italian weaponry wasn't subpar for the most part with _some_ lacking exceptions, the tank force was the most underwhelming and less developed branch, but small arms were comparable to their contemporaries, with exceptions.
First time in my life that I see a British tank expert discussing Italian tanks and employing the word 'respect'. Who is this gentleman?
I didn’t realize the economic situation in Italy before WW2. Its a good history lesson as well as a lesson about tanks. Thanks!
You have done a great service with this video, exposing facts and dispelling wartime myths!
Read ‘Iron Hulls and Iron Hearts’ by Ian Walker. This gives a great insight into Italy’s armoured doctrine at the time. I Might add there was no lack of courage from the Italians in ww2.
I've never doubted their Courage I always though it was kinda like the French. Brave men being stuck in vehicles that aren't well adapted to the times. Unlike the French they can't modernize well as the lack of Industrial capabilities
There certainly was a strong lack of courage and a lot of cowardice in the Italian army. During the American invasion of Sicily and lower Italy, most Italian soldiers happily surrendered instead of fighting to protect their own country, their own people, and their own families. Very cowardly. The Germans fought way harder to protect Italy than the Italian soldiers did. Those Italians should have been court martialed for high treason. The Italians were just as cowardly as the French army. Neither of those armies even attempted to defend their own country. Pathetic.
@@chadmysliviec8449 I was saying that a lot of men died fighting for their country
@@chadmysliviec8449 british propaganda enjoyer detected
@@chadmysliviec8449 Maybe they were protecting their country. By not protecting fascism.
Thank you so much for this, a fair take on this issue. Italian soldiers did well and made the best of what they had to work with. They were not the "cowards" or slackers that common myth and propaganda has portrayed. A good man or a good crew takes what weapons or vehicles they are issued, and despite the faults carry on and do the best they can.
This episode has been a historical eye-opener. Thank you.
Italy fought in North Africa, East Africa, the Eastern Front and the Mediterranean with a small industrial capacity and few natural resources. The level of sacrifice and courage of the individual italian soldier was evidently higher then most other beligerants. Great honest and balanced review in this video.
Also Russia
Basically everyone at the start of the war had fairly poor tanks by comparison to mid/late war designs. The issue is Italy didn't have the manufacturing capability to get rid of those designs quickly enough, where as everyone else did.
@Salvador Vizcarra Tell that to the Challenger 2 operating near Basra that survived over 70 RPG hits.
For fun, check out Italian artillery production rates. All the artillery heavier than a 75 mm mountain gun were produced in numbers of a few hundred each. The industrial base was limited, though in fairness also restricted by a lack of raw materials. The Italians were very dependent on imports and the Allied naval blockade and the German appropriation of the wealth of conquered nations forced them to largely rely on domestic resources.
Yeah, but some countries had adequate tanks by early-war standards and some did not. Tactics and logistics also varies widely, the latter proving decisive imo.
Don't Forget that you have instances of Germany requisitioning materials that were being sent to Italy or when the Italians asked for German AA batteries to defend their factories Germany promptly said no, only for those factories to be bombed a year later. That was the main reason the P26/40 didn't enter production prior to late 1942/43
@@CaptainGrief66 Sure, but the base issue is still that Italy was not ready for a major war. Not enough technical base, not enough raw materials, not able to defend themselves when things went wrong.
These talks are excellent in their technical, historical and social content. By going far beyond the starting point (the tank) and providing so much context, my enjoyment is greatly enhanced. This becomes a really valuable learning experience. 10/10.
Had the pleasure of seeing a running example of this in Ontario, Canada. Amazing piece of tech!
23:30 Also, in 1940 Italian troops in Africa were mainly low quality troops with very poor training, equipment and discipline, mainly part of the Fascist party's militia. A true story to be told is that the Italian military, some say under the suggestion of Mussolini in person, decided to form units to be sent to Africa exclusively with people of the Southernmost regions of Italy (like Sicily and Calabria) just because they said that they were used to the heat of the Southern Mediterranean. The problem was that those regions had a shockingly low level of alphabetization (probably the lowest in Europe at that time) and therefore it was extremely difficult to find trained specialists for communications and vehicle operations, leading to the actual impossibility of operating an efficient communication network just because there were too few people that could actually read and write.
It really makes you wonder how the fascists ever got that far. The way they make decisions is just so stupid. They manage to use racism in new and creative ways you wouldn't think is even possible.
@@lobsterbark the Italian Fascists were a bunch of Looney Toons
that's fake, literally one of the elite unit in italian army (the anti-tank artillery and anti-aircraft artillery) were sent to africa and they were really good soldiers and very well trained, they were very precise and the allies feared them... what are you even bragging about? are you sure you are stating that right?
@@alessandromazzini7026 It’s you that are wrong. That happened after the disaster of Operation Compass, when finally the mechanised and armoured units were sent to Libya. Just be sure to read something else other than neo-fascist propaganda.
To add some information from an Australian. My father was 18th Australian Infantry Brigade (7th Div). The Australians who fought the Italian Infantry thought they were rubbish. In conversations during the Seige of Tobruk and later in Australia, all these poor blokes wanted to do was drink some wine and oggle the girls.
They had no interest in Mussolini's new Roman Empire.
BUT the professional troops were a different story. They were hard nuts to crack.
As an Australian soldier myself, I had the privilege of serving alongside first generation Australians of Italian immigrants. 🇦🇺🐨🇦🇺
David Willey is by far my favourite for the tank videos! Usually longer, and includes more detail, particularly about the history and background of them, Where Fletcher tends to just stick to the technical details. Had a lovely long chat with David Willey while we there for Tiger day in Sept 21 about the tortoise! :) Would love to see that behemoth running!
I believe a museum recently built a working replica of a Fiat 2000. Another great video as always, thanks David.
Just search it on TH-cam.
Read “Iron Hulls, Iron Hearts” by Ian W. Walker about the 3 Italian armor divisions which were small in size, equivalent to a British armored brigade. The Ariete Division was part of the Afrika Korps in fact and was basically the only fully mechanized unit in North Africa. Ariete was the only fully functional of the 3, getting replacement armor by taking from the other 2.
The infantry units lacked organic transport which was why they surrendered once abandoned in a retreat, no food or water and hundred of miles to friendly lines.
Thanks for the pronunciation corrections! Got a nice pic of this tank with my fiance beside from our visit in the museum, goes perfectly alongside the one with her granpa in uniform :)
David Willey does an excellent job explaining the history of tanks and other armored fighting vehicle. I appreciate his knowledge and dedication to the subject. I’m glad he’s part of The Tank Museum.
Thanks for dispelling many of the misconceptions about the Italian army and armor in WWII. Great video.
Finally, a bit of onesty from British side, the italian forces still suffer from the narrative of WW2, we lost it was inevitable, the only thing that wasn't missing in the italian forces was bravery, but we always been accused of cowardice by enemy and friends.
An excellent presentation which is both detailed and thoughtful. I wholeheartedly agree with the comments about the bravery of the Italian fighting man, and this is acknowledged (perhaps grudgingly) by some writers of the period and in some contemporary comments by allied commanders. Even Rommel acknowledged the loss of the Ariete armoured division with comments about their bravery at second El Alamein.
With regard to the quality of armour, the Italians could make very good armour and their battleship armour was as good as any contemporary so the poor quality of tank armour may be another consequence of the army's third division status when compared to their other two services.
Once again, many thanks for an excellently presented and thoughtfully worded video that puts the Italian war effot into its proper context, one which is often forgotten or deliberately ignored.
we Italians we have a saying , that , we were brave but unlucky !! Nice video i really enjoyed !!
The British army used a lot of captured Italian tanks, because they had acquired them, and because their own had serious reliability issues, were broken down and not available. The British crews were not any happier about being in them than the Italians had been. It is another reason why Rommel had success when he showed up.
I was surprised he did not mention the Australian's using captured M13/40's at Tobruk.
They all used each others equpment ;)
@@SCscoutguy The Australians also used the Italian tanks when they invaded Syria.
They used them out of desperation
The M13/40 actually had rather good firepower for a tank in the first years of the war, but its mobility and protection left much to be desired.
I think the economic insight is an excellent 'lens' to view the tanks and Italy's resources.
If you think this one was good, you should check out The Chieftan's video on the Development of Italian Armoured Doctrine. He goes into some of the other aspects of the social and economic handicaps the Italians were working with when developing an armoured force.
thank you for dispelling these horrific misconceptions of Italy during the war
Very good insight David, different from what we’d always been led to believe. 👍🏻🇦🇺
I'm enjoying listening to these tank chats that little mention German automotive engineering. It's good to hear stories of nations who had to innovate in an effort to keep up and sometimes surprise greater industrial powers.
Thank you for a deep and well-balanced exposition about Italian tanks.
Very informative and interesting video. Nice to see a balanced and fair analysis of Italy in WW2.
How refreshing to hear such a well documented and balanced report. Thank you!
Really appreciate the fact that you guys started talking more about Italian armour, the lack of industrial capabilities gave birth to some ineffective, yet really interesting designs.
Finally a documentary where a foreigner doesn't play Spiderman's theme Funniculì Funniculà while laughing at italy. Thank you
That Italians used three engined bombers because they had not powerful engines is a mith.
The Vickers Wellington had two 1050 hp engines.
The Bristol Beaufort, two 1060 hp engines.
The Bristol Blenheim, two 920 hp engines.
The SM.79 had three 950 hp engines (later equipped with "etilizzatori", an equivalent of the MW50, to have a temporary 100hp boost, to disengage after torpedoing attacks).
The Cant Z.1007 had three 1000 hp engines.
The BR.20 had two 1030 hp engines.
The performances of the twin engined Br.20 compare very well with those of the Wellington and Blenheim. The Br.20 was faster and with an higher ceiling than the Wellington, although with a lower bomb load, and had performances in line with those of the Blenheim, but with a better bomb load.
In 1939 had been omologated the 1500 hp Piaggio P.XII. That used standard 87octane fuel. Probably the best radial engine that used standard fuel up to that point.
The Italians used two models of three engined bombers simply because they were faster that way, and could still fly with an engine failure, while, for a two engined bomber, an engine failure meant a long descent. That's why they were preferred to the Br.20 too.
Fantastic. Have been curious about Italian armour as all I knew was the stereotypes. Love the North African theatre in WW2 so had built some 1/35 Italian tanks which were cool and different so good to understand the history. Usual high standard from the Tank Museum!
Oh yes. Respect to those Italian crews, and respect to David W for the perspective he gives
Thank you for a great story about this tank's predecessors.
As a kid I assembled plastic kits of this one, and another, an assault gun, on the same chassis - there weren't many WW2 plastic kits available in Russia in early 90s, but many were made under license from the Italian hobby company, hence the focus on Italy.
When later I got my first T-34 kit, it was a surprise to see how tiny M14/41 was in comparison.
17:17 Pirelli tires on a tank....may wonders never cease!
I recommend looking at Italian War memorials if you ever go to Italy. You'll probably be surprised to see the level of Italian casualties on the Eastern front and the comparison with WW1.
David Willey made an important point by looking at the weak economical base of Italy ( See The rise and fall of the great powers, Kennedy). But I always wonder, how the Italians managed these huge offensives at the Capuretto-front over years. They had not more steel, coal, gas at this time, had they?
M13/40 (lll) is my favourite tank in War Thunder, it doesn't have the best gun but it has good armor and mobility. I can rack up 10+ kills in one match if I really focus. Excellent tank.
I certainly agree it was about 1942 being turning point, everyone was getting better kit, everyone but the Italians, they were fighting battles in 1943 with kit better suited to 1940.
Brittle Italian armour vs tank buster Hurricanes at that point.
well they got better stuff too it's just that their upgrade in 42 was equivalent to what everyone else had in 1940...yikes !!
I really enjoyed learning more about Italian armor and clearing up some of the views we have of them during WWII. Awesome video!
What a superb and thought provoking resume of not just a vehicle but a system that existed to support both its manufacture and utilisation - bravo, the best yet in my view!!
I love the slightly longer format than normal. That and the presentation was fantastic, and the information invaluable. Thank you!!
One of my Granddads' was at the first siege of Tobruk where he fought the Italians and Germans. When you are being shelled or shot at, bombed or mortared its a bit hard to differentiate which Nationality is doing it and whether you think someone is a first rate or second rate Soldier hardly matters.
This is the first time I hear some particular topics outside Italian sources, awesome video!
I love my little M14/41s in Mid War Flames of War (not exactly a simulation but hey ho). They always pull more weight than such a small under armoured tank should, plenty of MG fire and a reasonable gun has seen them stop offensives from superior tanks and swarms of infantry. My regular opponents have learnt to, if not fear, at least respect the Italian Carristi!
Well said, respect to those men that had to go to war in these things knowing you were outgunned in every way
Anyone fighting inside a tank in that heat has my respect .
Brilliant presentation, as italian what you presented as background is sharp and plane.
I love these longer Tank chats. Especially with David Willey, the Bob Ross of Tanks.
I don't think I could ever tire listening to your tank chats, keep up the good work
14:22
Though I would think something reinforcing that perception is that the main tank it was up against was the British Matilda II which was the most heavily armored tank in the world at that time. It indeed wouldn't be able to penetrate the front of that tank but the Matilda II's own 2 lbs gun couldn't penetrate it either.
According to Spielberger, Italy was planning to produce the Panther in 1943. The German manufacturers were instructed to provide the technical documentation free of charge. With the Italian surrender the project was cancelled. I have my doubts the Italian industry would have been able to build a tank of that size any time soon without substantial help from Germany.
A project for the P43 heavy tank had a model that looked like a downscaled Panther
It is always a great pleasure to attend your “classes”. Thank you for your dedication! greetings from 🇵🇹
Impeccable analysis I have to congratulate you for his honesty and correctness in giving the right information, I agree on everything except on one topic the Italians had excellent steel but everything was destined for the navy, the choice to use the bolts was another problem , it is not that there was no lack of skills in naval production, welding was used and that it was cheaper for manufacturers who unfortunately profited at the expense of quality. Congratulations on the channel I did not know but I will include it among my favorites
Thank you for giving a very unbiased account of Italian tanks. I, like many I'm sure was brought up with idea that all Italian tanks had one forward and 4 reverse gears!
Well done. Kudos for a fair, unbiased and methodical analysis of the Italian tank corps and its role in early WW2.
I really like the Italian 47mm gun,In my opinion the best Tank/Anti-tank gun of the early war period with decent HE shell,decent penetraion,small size and low weight.
Not having the shield made it the biggest AT piece that could be towed by hand in case of necessity, and the small signature made it ideal for ambushes and setting kill zones.
Obviously not having the shiled had its downsides, but it could be usually replaced by placing the cannon behind low walls and embankments. Also the shield of field guns protected only against small caliber weapons, and made the gunner even more exposed against heavy fire (see for example the gunner of the 2-pdr, how much above the barrel of the gun had to seat to aim).
Very interesting and well made, but I just want to point our that the armor/metal part is wrong. In fact the quality of Italian armor was extremely good on ships (the battleship TERNI armor was among the bests in the world) and Italian were capable with the welding technology (the firsts Carro Veloce were welded, some of the last too). The big issue was with costs, it costs less to rivet and bolt than welding. Also, it was assumed (and ultimately proven wrong) that bolting and riveting plates could be replaced easily when a tank was damaged.
Yeah, it's more "does Fiat want to train workers and change production," not so much "Fiat doesn't know how to do it." See Chrysler for the same issue in the US.
This is very informative! Thank you.
Very much enjoyed this balanced look at Italian WW2-era armour that goes beyond the familiar tropes
Excellent content. May the Algorithm bless you Tank Museum!
Pint of clarification, Rommel had massive issues with the officer corp not limited to the idiots from Italy which he was required to report to, which really did not happen much.
Sometimes, a few of these Tank reviews can be a bit pedantic. But this one was just outstanding!!! Thoroughly enjoyed it! Well done Mr. Willey!
Misinformation and bias has done more harm to the Italian tank reputation during WW2 than anything else.
I'm praising the fighting men's courage, their tenacity to fight with the equipment they were given, like every other fighting men in warfare.
Italian tankers equipped with obsolete R-35's fought incredibly bravely against the Americans during the Battle of Gela in Sicily
Their equipment was rubbish. I've never heard the soldiers themselves were not competent fighters.
I appreciate seeing more who understands the clear bias was ridiculous. Especially when most use little to no knowledge of actual tank armor. Italy had great designs and it shows with the M15/42 and pretty much all the Semoventes.
I’m glad you didn’t just dunk on the Italian tanks, they aren’t bad by early war tanks standards but Italy clearly didn’t have what Germany or Britain. Plus they had an idea that you could just replace the armor plate
Life in the Italian military (all branches) during WWII was essentially an exercise in getting shafted, repeatedly, by Mussolini for his own political miscalculations.
Could you even imagine what it sounds like inside any armoured vehicle, getting hit with any shell that bounces of it? It must have been horrifying and deafening.
Thanks. A thoughtful and reflective assessment.
Very fine and well-reaoned presentation, as always on your channel. Great job.
New Italian content!!!! A good book for a better understanding of Italian armor and armored division’s is “Iron Hearts, Iron Hulls:Mussolini’s Elite Armored Divisions in North Africa by Ian Walker. An interesting side note is that in the book “Smashing Hitler”s Panzers” by Steven Zaloga there is a pic of a German Panzer IV auf F with cracked armor. Apparently in the middle to end of the Second World War Germany lacked tin making their armor brittle.
Albrecht, the face hardened armour of the German tanks was more prone to splitting with heavier shot. A downside of their armour.
I like this Italian tank ,the M 13-40 was the core of the Axis tank in North Africa,if I 'm not mistaken ,your topic is really educating thank you sir,,,
Once again v interesting, especially the exposition of the limitations of the industrial base.
Great video, possibly the best tank chat yet. Love the longer format and explaining the full historical context of this specific tank. Would love to see some interior shots though, and the best would be David having a go at the Chieftain's "Oh bugger the tank is on fire" test for some of these tanks.
Great video especially putting the context around the Italian army’s performance and that of their tanks. Share. Share. Share.
5:13 "Missaloony"? Someone's been watching too much 'Allo 'Allo? ;-)
Gruber's Kleiner Panzer ("little Tank") was a wonderfully well done conversion.
What ah mistake ah to make ah
@@michaelprobert4014 Alberto Bertarelli for the win!
Haul Missaloony!
great point on the myths and even somehow thinking the Italian soldiers were cowards.
amazing presentation with such good insides..
Thanks David. As always, your chat was informative and balanced.
Question: why would a country using the metric system build a 47mm gun? 50mm is only marginally larger and either 45mm or 50mm seem so much ... neater.
Good question 🤔
I think the French, Czech, Austrian and Italien all built 47mm guns.
While 45 or 50 sounds more round it wouldn’t make any difference in production.
The caliber of the shell isn’t necessarily equal to what it is called.
German 10cm cannons actually fired 10.5cm projectiles and both US and Italien 12.7mm MGs actually fire bullets with 13mm diameter but both guns and bullets are still called 12.7mm.
im liking the new thumbnail for the tank chats. much nicer looking in my opinion. this tank is kinda fun in War Thunder.
Another informative and well presented video!
An extra long tank chat makes my day! 👍
Excellent!
Dear David: I wonder if you can make a video about the italian Ansaldo 75/42; a squat assault gun with a 75 mm. hull mounted short cannon. I understand they were quite succesful as a tank destroyer in the last stages of the desert war. i would love to know a little more about the contraption if possible. Thank you for the wonderful videos you make. Greetings!
Sometimes the Tank Chats come out with a new fact that I did not know or even think about.
Mussolooney didn’t tell his merchant navy that he was going to declare war. So lost 30% of the fleet!!!!
yeh crazy lack of wisdom
in reality he had to do it, as shown by how many resources Italy produced it had to be getting them from imports 'till the last moment, if the merchant navy would have been stopped Italy would have had even less resources.
Basically, when Mussolini joined the war in 1940, he and many others thought the war would be over in months, so he thought he had to rush to grab his share of the loot in the new world order
Great vid. Might have been good to mention that at least one Italian tank formation was possibly better trained and motivated than others; the famous Ariete division.
Amazing video. Thanks for the great work guys.
對於對於義大利戰車與部隊在北非的戰事貢獻，這集談的極為客觀中肯，另人敬佩！
A little correction: Italy was founded in 1861, ten years before Germany.
Terrifying to imagine oneself in this Italian tank on the Eastern Front facing the T-34 and KV-1.
Yes the stupidity of doing it would be terrifying. You dont engage a target that you cant destroy.
Also were there any M14/41 on the eastern front, or are you just assuming they were there cause Italians were there.
Only the L6/40 was sent to the Eastern Front, although there was on paper 3 armored divisions based on the binary system, they were only the size of a British armored brigade. The Ariete Division that was working with Rommel and took up most of the tank production. The other two divisions were basically skeletons that were not fleshed out.
imagine the poor Romanians driving to battle against the USSR in a Renault R35 tank !! Now thats just suicide
@@Paciat I thought this, or something very similar, was the primary Italian tank and would have served with Italian units on the Eastern Front. Come to think of it, this tank would have been pretty awful against a Churchill, M-3 Grant/Lee, or an M-4 Sherman in N. Africa. Outarmored and outgunned with rivets ready to fly inside.
Matilda has almost the same armor as KV-1. So they were royally screwed from the very beginning.
The objective approach is appreciated. History is written by the victor. But is read by the historian.