77/28 Skoda M05/08 in anti-tank role

[sultanbev]

Looking at 1942 OOBs, it seems some of the GAF 77/28 field guns were issued as anti-tank guns to infantry divisions in North Africa.
I haven't come across an AP round for this old gun, so did they have to suffer the indignity of only having HE rounds, or was an APHE or HEAT (EP) round issued?

Mark

 

[jwsleser]

What is your source for this info (that the guns were issued as c.c.)? I am not aware of any Italian artillery being issued as c.c. It is true that the artillery was trained/equipped to act in the this role if needed (self defense), but not assigned specifically for this role.

The 77/28 was a captured 1GM weapon that the R.E. had in small numbers. None of my sources state an PP, EP or EPS round was developed for this gun.

Please note I am not stating you are incorrect, just need a source. If a valid source, then more research is needed to see if anything special was done/provided to make this gun more effective in a c.c. role.

 

[sultanbev]

One source is Italian Army in North Africa, A Poor Fighting Force or Doomed by Circumstance, Walter S Zapotoczny Jr, Fonthill Media Limited, (2018) ISBN 978-1-78155-674-0
which cites Nafziger sourced OOBs for August 1942
showing 102nd Trento with 354th and 355th Battalions each 3 batteries each 4x 77/28
I know Nafziger is not to be totally trusted, but these OOB don't seem to be the ones available online, and the rest of the OOB lists individual variations in weapons within for example Bersaglieri battalions.
In addition, I'm sure I saw it the other day on Axis History Forum, typically I can't find the post now! But it mentions it here:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...47#v=onepage&q=77/28 as anti-tank gun&f=false

(With Rommel in the Desert: Tripoli to El Alamein By David Mitchelhill-Green pg 147)

Also, The Green Series 4119 Italian Artillery of WWII, Enrico Finazzer & Ralph Riccio(2015), ISBN 978-83-63678-61-6 pg.75 states:
"Later in 1942, dozens of these pieces were assigned to some infantry divisions in North Africa, such as Brescia, Bologna, Pavia Divisions, which used this veteran piece as an anti-tank gun, in the absence of anything better at hand; these divisions took part in the battle of El Alamein using this equipment. Other 77/28 were assigned in 1943, in Tunisia, to the (...) Centauro, Spezia and Trieste divisions as well as to the Raggruppamento Sahariano. The book also indicates no AP round available in it's data chart.

Mark

 

[jwsleser]

I looked at all the Nafziger OOBs at CARL and couldn't find one dated Aug 1942. I looked through the Italian officials and couldn't find a Aug 42 OB (the natural place for Nafziger to copy a OOB). I also looked at Niehorster and he doesn't have an Aug 42 OB.

The Oct 1942 OB in Terza offensiva Britannica in A.S. has the CCCLV gruppo da 77/28 with Trento. I didn't find the CCCLIV gruppo. CCCLV was assigned as reinforcing artillery. I will note that I didn't find any other 77/28 unit in this OOB.

Cappellano states on page 102 that 29 pieces were taken from the fortifications of Tripoli and issued to the Brescia, Bologna, Pavia Divisions for use as c.c. No exact date was given (just 1942) and only the CCCLV (12 guns) are listed as present in Oct.

Cappelloni states (ibid above) that Centauro, Spezia and Trieste divisions and the Raggruppamento Sahariano were issued 77/28. Here he only states they are reinforcing and doesn't state given as c.c. In La armata italiane in Tunisia the OOB for Mareth lists these guns as artillery.

Nothing prevents any unit from employing artillery as c.c. The key indicator would be location/placement on the battlefield. Looking at the pictures in With Rommel in the Desert, it appears that these guns were used as artillery. If used as c.c., they would be dug down into positions that would allow them to be harder to detect. After all, in a c.c. role, they would be right up on the front lines. How do guns like these survive in such positions shown in the pictures that close to the front? My guess is the author was trying to explain the use of older guns without knowing why they were used.

In reading the Finazzer & Riccio quote, nothing states that these gun were provided to the divisions specifically for use as c.c. The quote indicates that the divisions decided to use them in that role of c.c. Do the authors provide a cite for this info (I assume Cappellano)?

As I previously stated, no armor piercing ammunition was produced for these guns. The 75/27 was issued EP and EPS. Why use a 77/28 which only had HE as c.c. when you had the 75/27 with armored piercing?

Like the 65/17 that was also used in a c.c. role (but not assigned to the units as a c.c. gun), the 77/28 could be used as c.c. That would be a unit decision.

I feel that the guns provided as c.c. above are likely issued in early 1942 after Crusader and used as a stop-gap to cover losses during that battle. it was a theater decision and not there policy of Comando Supremo. By Oct, the losses had been made up and few of these guns were retained and likely returned to Tripoli. They were once again fielded as artillery to equip units that arrived in Africa in bits and pieces. This is conjecture at this time and could be incorrect, but the available data leans in that direction. The lack of any armored piercing ammunition is a important point.

 

[sultanbev]

"I looked at all the Nafziger OOBs at CARL and couldn't find one dated Aug 1942. I looked through the Italian officials and couldn't find a Aug 42 OB (the natural place for Nafziger to copy a OOB). I also looked at Niehorster and he doesn't have an Aug 42 OB. "

Well this is it, I cannot find it either, so must be a new complilation. Perhaps Nafziger was commissioned to write it?
In the book it's specifically dated 22nd August 1942, in the appendices of the book, one each for 10th, 20th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd corps. I've no scanner so I can't repost it just now, and it'll take too long to copy out. Each one says "Created by George Nafziger. First published in English online at the U.S. Army Combined Arms Research Library. The database is open source."
In the bibliography for Nafziger he only quotes the standard three books put out by Nafziger on the Italian army, none of which have this detailed information.

 

[sultanbev]

"In reading the Finazzer & Riccio quote, nothing states that these gun were provided to the divisions specifically for use as c.c. The quote indicates that the divisions decided to use them in that role of c.c. Do the authors provide a cite for this info (I assume Cappellano)?"

The bibliography for this book cites extensive Italian books and articles, again too many for me to copy out, would a photograph be sufficient resolution for you to look at?

 

[sultanbev]

The Nafziger OOB for Trento on Aug 22nd 1942 on pg.166 of the book lists two battalions attached, quote: (my italics)
254th Artillery Battalion (attached from XXI Corps, sometimes identified as the 354th Artillery Battalion (1st, 2nd, 3rd batteries each 4x 77/28)
355th Artillery Battalion (attached from XXI Corps, sometimes identified as the 357th Artillery Battalion:
1st, 2nd, 3rd Batteries each 4x 77/28
412th and 414th Motorised Anti-aircraft Artillery Batteries each with two 20mm AA guns
In typical Nafziger misprinting fashion, the latter two may be indented incorrectly, as it looks as if the two 20mm Batteries are part of the 355th Battalion, and not the parent 46th Artillery Regiment. Incidentally, both battalions are indented to appear as if they are part of 46th Artillery Regiment, indicating they were attached to the 46th Artillery Regiment.

Also in typical Nafziger reportage, the 4th Anti-tank Battalion held at divisional level of Trento is listed as having the 51st Semi-motorised Medical Company and 51st Motoriesd Administrative Company under command, the way the text is indented, but with no anti-tank guns listed.

Also in typical Nafziger fashion the two artillery battalions with 77/28 are then repeated on the same page further down as corps assets of the XXI Corps, but with no page break to show corps assets as separate from Trento. On first reading they have made it to look like the 7th Bersagleiri Regiment, 8th Artillery Regiment (152/37, 149/28 and 149/40), 27th Motorised Engineer Mechanic Battalion, 65th Motorised Engineer Communications Battalion and a Supply Battalion are all part of Trento Division! Regular users of Nafziger sources will be used to this.

The book is on Ebay at £12.11, from books--etc, it's probably worth that just for these OOBs,

Mark

 

[diciassette2000]

The Italian Nafziger's OOb are a mix of misprinted and Secret service infos....many mistakes and poor infos.....for 77/28 they are only in Libia and in AOI (ex austrian WW1 wintage booty) . At the beginning of war they are only GAF and Libian ascaris guns but on 1941 some groups were reverted to field service (in Tripoli's factories) . During 1941 to 1943 were random attached to field divisions that use them like 4th or 5th divisional Groups. In some cases they were utilized like antitank guns but without special shells. (like british 18pdr or French 75mm (soixtante quinze) In many cases otherwise they fought like field guns .........
all the best
maurizio

 

[sultanbev]

Yes, although the British 18pdr and French 75mm M1897 did have APHE rounds available, but that's a separate topic.
I do accept that the Nafziger material is not 100%, but I do use it as a good starting point. And these OOB in this book are unusual in that it lists differing amounts of weapons per infantry battalion within regiments, so it infers access to a detailed source.

I do understand that all field artillery could be and were used as de-facto anti-tank guns, it was common practice in the 1930s to include it in field artillery training, something I found when researching the 1939 Irish and Estonian armies for example.
In this case there is the hint of desperation in that there was no AP round available. The British 25pdr was in the same position up to 1942, as it's AP round wasn't fielded until early 1942. whereas it is recorded as being used successfully in the anti-tank role from 1940.

Anyway, it's got the conversation going, and jwsleser above has added valuable information about the allocations of the 77/28 in 1942 which appears to tally, even if the intention wasn't deliberately (or purely) anti-tank role.

Mark

 

[diciassette2000]

I check my notes and the answer to the 15/22 August 42 date phreaps its that the OOB "translated" from Nafziger come from NARA file (313 Roll 458) where the OOB date (Graphics OOB) it 15-8-1942 (you find it also in Nafziger's OOB online) but it's an "anlage" for the 22-8-1942 Panzerarmee Afrika diary........mah???? In effect the translation (graphic to word) with some "free interpretation" (in the grapichs version only a battalion (the 355) its attached to Trento division as 5.o Gruppo artiglieria divisionale and without the caliber indication) its in this case OK..........but also the german report are sometimes not OK for the allied nation (Italy, Romania, Ungary and so on ....).....????
All the best
Maurizio

 

[jwsleser]

Nafziger collected his OBs from books, NARA rolls, and possibly a few other places. Over the years I have been able to identify much of the source material he used. Note he didn't create anything, he just copied what he found. The main issues with his materials are poor quality control (not always getting the transcriptions correct), poor translation of any foreign material (words and terms), and not understanding the organizational design of the foreign armies he was collecting (which means he applied US organizational design concepts when he couldn't figure out what the lists/charts were telling him). He never cross-referenced the same material using several sources to establish what was likely correct, so you read exactly what that one source offered. IBWs he provided raw data but no analysis. This by itself is not a problem if he would have fully cited the source material, but in his later years he omitted that information.

This is not to diminish what he accomplished; he accomplished a lot in collecting this material but one must understand the limitations to what is presented.

And these OOB in this book are unusual in that it lists differing amounts of weapons per infantry battalion within regiments, so it infers access to a detailed source.

Not necessarily, he uses a lot of wartime US intelligence reports. Not always accurate. I use Nafziger with caution and usually as a last resort. I haven't seen his books, so I don't know if he reworked his material to improve it. I feel it is unlikely.

Maurizio's comment of only listing the CCCLV matches what I found in the Italian officials.

 

[Dili]

There is a map, that shows the defenses of Tripoli in 24 February 41, it lists 8 77/28 and 31 47/32 in contra-carri function for the GAF. same map also lists 1 gruppo 77/28 (2 bty) with artillery function for the GAF.

If the map is correct, there is already in begin of 1941 77/28 assigned to AT.

 

[jwsleser]

Feb 41. A time of great concern and the Italians are using everything they can to shore up the defense.

I feel the take-away from this discussion is that anything can be used in a c.c. role if you are desperate and have nothing else to use. The fact that no c.c. ammunition was developed for these guns and the decision to use them in a c.c. role was made in theater shows that this was a stop-gap measure and was not seen as a long-term solution/approved use for these guns. We find evidence of their assignment in a c.c. role after the two great British offensives that led to Axis defeat.

A local decision made by local authorities to handle a local problem. Compare this to the effort to provide c.c. ammunition to the 65/17 which was seen as a partial solution for the lack of c.c. capability.

 

[diciassette2000]

In Tripolitania (Cinta difensiva di Tripoli) the GAF since 1940 have replaced the 47/32 guns (all put in the 10.a armata by Superesercito) with 77/28 (42 guns in all). The map that Dili means says for 31 47/32 and 8 77/28 only in Zuara Sector, most probabily also Tripoli Sector have some 77/28 in antitank role on 24/2/41................
all the best
Maurizio