Italian fleet v British fleet

[Dave Saxton]

A big factor, as always, is the battle range. Friedman reports that British fighting doctrine was to close to decisive range -12,000 yards -and force a decision-one way or the other. At 12,000 yards their own guns are going to be more effective, but their own armour is also over matched. It is basically a gamble to kill the other guy before he kills you. As the range closes the advantages begin to favor the Italians more and more. His problems with despersion and poor deck penetration become minimized, and the extraordinary belt penetration performance of his guns becomes paramount. The British are likely to avoid any extreme range combat, (their doctrine during WWII was to limit max battle range to inside of 28,000 yards in most cases) besides beyond 23km they throw away their radar ranging advantage of that time frame. The British may seek to pull off a night fight if possible. The Italians, especially after Cape Matapan, will avoid that scenario like the plauge.

[paulcadogan]

But Dave, don't forget the serious speed deficit of Neslon & Rodney - unless the Italians allow them to close, they would be unable to dictate the range or even select the timing of the battle for a night fight.

One thought on the effect of Ark Royal - the Italians rightly feared those Stringbags - Taranto had shown their BB's - even the Littorios - to be vulnerable to their 18-inch torpedoes. For all intents and purposes Littorio was "sunk" by 3 torpedoes, her bow becoming submerged - had she been at sea it would have been fatal. At Matapan, VV was just able to get away after being hit. The limiting factor would be the numbers that the Ark could deploy at a given time and the challenge of hitting fast moving, maneuvering targets.

[alecsandros]

The limiting factor would be the numbers that the Ark could deploy at a given time and the challenge of hitting fast moving, maneuvering targets.

At Matapan, VV and her escorts were attacked by only 5 (FIVE) Albacores, coming from Formidable. One obtained a crippling hit on Vittorio Veneto, showing just how poor Italian AA defense was at the time.

[RNfanDan]

...freakin' biplanes (but they carry torpedoes... but they're slow... but they're ship-killers... but not proven against escorted ships at sea... and so on).

This seems to overlook the fact that it's the TORPEDO that is the weapon, NOT the "freakin' biplanes" that deliver them; Swordfish were tenfold faster than a SUBMARINE, another primary deliverer of these weapons, and look what THEY achieved in the Med.

In addition, what the British destroyers could deliver, themselves--with or without air attacks--was likely enough to run the Italians off.

Earlier I was wondering how many torpedoes [Ark Royal] had available (and thus how many attacks can she launch). Now I'm wondering if losses to AA would attrit the airgroup faster than the magazine is depleted?

Taranto provides the answer, I think. The defenses there, including shipborne AAA, put up a better and bigger barrage than the moving Italian ships, no doubt commencing evasive maneuvers as soon as the planes began their attacks, could possibly muster. As well, the Italians had no fighter aircraft available to stop the Swordfish. If these factors are taken as valid, then attrition by aircraft losses is very wishful defensive thinking---to say the least.

As to needing multiple attacks, this is a far more plausible consideration (from the British view); I think it is reasonable to consider moving targets at sea, at least on the face of matters, as a greater problem for the planes to overcome. On the other hand, I don't believe it possible for the aircraft to attack, drop, return, land-on, ship below, re-arm, refuel, and take off again; in plainer terms, there would be no exhausting of Ark's torpedo magazines before the battle was overwith.

Which brings me to my final point, that the aircraft probably wouldn't need a second chance, unless they had time to chase the retiring (or fleeing, from the British view) Italians. Almost surely, the guns would have their turn at knocking the Italians around by the time Ark Royal could field another attack (except as above, chasing the Italians as they fled). Let's face it, the Regia Marina rarely went 9 rounds with the British --let alone 13-- for whatever reason, as history proved time and again in the Med theater.

FWIW,

--DB--

[paul.mercer]

Gentlemen,
As ever your knowledge far exceeds mine, If I may quote a quote from Paul!
The battleship action, the Italians would be able to choose how they fought it as Nelson and Rodney did not have the speed to compete. But since they were defending the convoy, they would just have to position themselves and fight it out. The outcome would be dependent as usual on who scores the most telling hits first - but we have 18 powerful 15-inch guns (yes they may have had spread issues, but that doesn't preclude hitting), plus 30 12.6-inch, vs. 18 16-inch and 10 14-inch. Radar ranging by PoW and Rodney might have been helpful, and we know from the DS that PoW was capable of close spreads (Schneider: "Enemy salvoes well grouped.", plus 3 straddles, 3 hits). Once she got on target, one would expect hits, but how would her quad turrets hold up this time? How would Nelson and Rodney's 16-inch? (Rodney had problems with 3 of her guns during the Bismarck battle). But still...the British position is unenviable..

I was assuming that all the guns of PoW, Nelson & Rodney were fully functional at all times and that as in the hypothetical Bismarck/Rodney one to one contest discussed elseware that if the italian fleet wanted to fight it out ship to ship they would have to regulate their speed to near enough that of the British fleet otherwise both sides would start to get out of range or have to constantly ajust their range, in other words, a slugging match.

[alecsandros]

Gentlemen,
As ever your knowledge far exceeds mine, If I may quote a quote from Paul!
The battleship action, the Italians would be able to choose how they fought it as Nelson and Rodney did not have the speed to compete. But since they were defending the convoy, they would just have to position themselves and fight it out. The outcome would be dependent as usual on who scores the most telling hits first - but we have 18 powerful 15-inch guns (yes they may have had spread issues, but that doesn't preclude hitting), plus 30 12.6-inch, vs. 18 16-inch and 10 14-inch. Radar ranging by PoW and Rodney might have been helpful, and we know from the DS that PoW was capable of close spreads (Schneider: "Enemy salvoes well grouped.", plus 3 straddles, 3 hits). Once she got on target, one would expect hits, but how would her quad turrets hold up this time? How would Nelson and Rodney's 16-inch? (Rodney had problems with 3 of her guns during the Bismarck battle). But still...the British position is unenviable..

I was assuming that all the guns of PoW, Nelson & Rodney were fully functional at all times and that as in the hypothetical Bismarck/Rodney one to one contest discussed elseware that if the italian fleet wanted to fight it out ship to ship they would have to regulate their speed to near enough that of the British fleet otherwise both sides would start to get out of range or have to constantly ajust their range, in other words, a slugging match.

I have my doubts about the effectiveness of Italian 15" guns. After all, they saw plenty of action, but AFAIK only obtained 1 single hit, ever (on DD Kingston, 6km away from Littorio).

Salvo spreads were appalling at times - at Matapan, photos clearly show Venetto's 3-gun salvos with at least 600y spread at 22km distance. This begs the question of how large the 9-gun salvos would have been ? Needless to say, Venetto didn't hit anything that day, and didn't hit anything in any other engagement.

The AP shells funcitoned with somewhat lower sensitivity fuzes, which usualy worked only after passing through at least 100mm of armor grade steel [IIRC from one of George Elder's studies]. Fuze delay was also somewhat longer, at 0.050 sec.

Add to those the low rate of fire (1.33 rpmpg, - and that obtained during target practise), dysfunctional RPC and poor command experience of Italian officers, and things seem very bad for the ITalian squadron.

[paul.mercer]

Gentlemen,
Once again, many thanks for your evaluations.
I wonder if we could go a step further and omit the British carrier but add Warspite and Valiant, this would give us two modern battleships and three older but modernised ones on the Italian side against one modern ship, (PoW) two relativly old ships (Nelson & Rodney) and two old but modernised ships (Warspite and Valiant).
Again,assuming both sides wanted to slug it out.

[paul.mercer]

Gentlemen,
Further to my last post, perhaps adding Warspite AND Valiant might make it too much of a walkover - what do you think?

[alecsandros2]

Gentlemen,
Further to my last post, perhaps adding Warspite AND Valiant might make it too much of a walkover - what do you think?

In my opinion, yes.
The British already had some strong points, and ading 2 modernised battleships with 16x15" guns would only make the battle clear from the beginning: the Italians, if they would engage in such a battle, would be torn to pieces.
It would be nice to have a "battle of Leyte" in the Mediteranean :) => as such a concentration of battleships would be similar, keeping proportions, to that great battle of the Pacific.

[RF]

But despite our hypothetical....the reality is that with the moral ascendancy that the RN had gained over the RM - from their many actions and skirmishes, chances are that once the British started hitting, the Italians would start to think twice.

This I think will be the crux of the matter. For success for the RM both Littorio and the VV have to launch a determined attack with accurate fire. That takes a determined Admiral which Iachino was not.
A different commander? Well, I think you would have to look at the KM for a suitable candidate - perhaps Marschall?