• Get Paid to Write for Comando Supremo: We are looking for talented researchers/writers who are fluent in English and can write original content on Italy in World War Two. Please reach out to webmaster@comandosupremo.com if interested!

Additional platoons in Ariete at El Alamein

Kustosz2137

New Member
Hello again! Sorry for posting many short threads recently (I hope it doesn't counts as spamming), but I just can't find answers for my questions anywhere else. Anyways; today I have met with information, that Ariete division received two additional platoons for their companies for El Alamein operations, rising amount of them from 3 to 5 per company. It's my first time ever meeting with that information, so I'm kinda suspicious here. Did this really happened, or is it another imaginary episode of someone's, like many others in the internet?
 

Kustosz2137

New Member
And a picture that I forgot to attach
IMG_20230222_124442.jpg
 

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
Kustosz2137

Don't worry about posting, it is the reason the forum exists. Ask away.

It would help if you provide the source of this new information (i.e. additional platoons). Where did you read this? What did the source actually state.

Pista! Jeff
 
The workforce of the 132nd Tank Regiment at the time of the battle of El Alamein provided for a theoretical total of 189 tanks divided into 33 tanks of which 6 radio tanks in the command and tank reserve company and 52 theoretical tanks in each tank battalion (4 tanks in the headquarters and 16 tanks for each of the three tank companies of the battalion). Each company consisted of a command tank and three platoons of 5 tanks each. Therefore, it does not appear to me that at the time of the battle the division had received replacements or additional tank platoons, indeed at the time of the start of the fighting it had a total of 129 tanks instead of the 189 foreseen.
All the best
Maurizio
 

Kustosz2137

New Member
Kustosz2137

Don't worry about posting, it is the reason the forum exists. Ask away.

It would help if you provide the source of this new information (i.e. additional platoons). Where did you read this? What did the source actually state.

Pista! Jeff
Tbh I was just looking through catalogue of small model company and noticed that one of the M14/41s in their offer comes with decals for 5th platoon, 2nd company (like on the picture). I thought it's kinda weird and just asked owner, response I received was "Hello, at the time of El Alamein, in an effort to replenish the Arm. Div. 2 more platoons were added" and the picture mentioned earlier.
This made me curious, because I've never heard of that before.
 

Kustosz2137

New Member
Well, to tell the truth, the 2nd company was already in charge of the 4th, 5th and 6th platoons, so I don't see the discrepancy......
All the best
Maurizio
I mean, technically you are right, but platoon marking is based on number in this particular company, for example in this case 4th platoon will be marked as 1st of the 2nd company, 5th as 2nd of the 2nd company and 6th as 3rd of the second company.
 
In fact I also found traces of tank companies with 5 platoons of 3 tanks each...I will do research to see if the company of the 8th tank battalion of the Ariete as at June 1942 (Knitsbridge area) according to the profile you posted was at the moment so ordered even if it remains a rather unusual use for the time and which does not lead to any change in the overall company .... still 16 wagons remain .... I'll tell you ...
all the best
Maurizio
 

Kustosz2137

New Member
In fact I also found traces of tank companies with 5 platoons of 3 tanks each...I will do research to see if the company of the 8th tank battalion of the Ariete as at June 1942 (Knitsbridge area) according to the profile you posted was at the moment so ordered even if it remains a rather unusual use for the time and which does not lead to any change in the overall company .... still 16 wagons remain .... I'll tell you ...
all the best
Maurizio
Great!
The model company guy said that he will look for documentation too, so I will post it if he provides something. Thanks for your effort!
 

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
I am also interested to see what Maurizio can discover. I looked in my limited sources and didn't find any indication of a five platoon company.

Pista! Jeff
 
I have examined all my notes on the Italian armored departments and also the notes made to the SME in Rome but I have only found conflicting news. The clear thing is that with Circular 4640 of 09/08/1940 which supplemented Circular 4400 of 03/28/1938 entitled Distinctive signs for tanks, the markings to be applied to all tank units of the Royal Army were defined, which I am attaching to you in copy and which provided for "up to 5 platoons per company". The problem, however, is that by re-reading all the reports of the tank crews engaged on various fronts, a different reality emerges, so much so that in the report of the commander of the 3rd tank battalion engaged on the African front in 1940, the graphic attachment of the battalion structure instead shows a different conformation of the unit (out of three platoons per company)(attached). I also found that certainly the L tank battalions operating on the Russian front had 5 platoons even if, however, it does not count since they are units mobilized by Bersaglieri or by the cavalry. To further complicate the matter, however, I also found between the lines of some of the reports of the armored battalions operating in AS phrases referring to the use of "platoons of 3 tanks" referring to the period 1941-1942. My conclusion is to assume that, as often happened in the ranks of the Royal Army, the application of the circular was not univocal and some units applied the reality of the 3 platoons and some that of the 5. After all, also the composition of the battalion which was fixed for the AS in 52 tanks underwent in some cases decreases to 46 and even to 37 which led the units to restructure on the spot on two companies instead of three even if this was not foreseen by the organic tables. However, there is also a fixed point that in the present case the M tank battalions of the Ariete in the period 1941-1942 never exceeded the total consistency of 52 tanks per battalion. Sorry but that's all for now maybe someone will be luckier than me to find certainties that maybe ..... they don't even exist...
All the best
Maurizio
 

Attachments

  • Settembre 1940.gif
    Settembre 1940.gif
    32.9 KB · Views: 157
  • battaglione carri M13.pdf
    23.6 KB · Views: 163

Kustosz2137

New Member
I have examined all my notes on the Italian armored departments and also the notes made to the SME in Rome but I have only found conflicting news. The clear thing is that with Circular 4640 of 09/08/1940 which supplemented Circular 4400 of 03/28/1938 entitled Distinctive signs for tanks, the markings to be applied to all tank units of the Royal Army were defined, which I am attaching to you in copy and which provided for "up to 5 platoons per company". The problem, however, is that by re-reading all the reports of the tank crews engaged on various fronts, a different reality emerges, so much so that in the report of the commander of the 3rd tank battalion engaged on the African front in 1940, the graphic attachment of the battalion structure instead shows a different conformation of the unit (out of three platoons per company)(attached). I also found that certainly the L tank battalions operating on the Russian front had 5 platoons even if, however, it does not count since they are units mobilized by Bersaglieri or by the cavalry. To further complicate the matter, however, I also found between the lines of some of the reports of the armored battalions operating in AS phrases referring to the use of "platoons of 3 tanks" referring to the period 1941-1942. My conclusion is to assume that, as often happened in the ranks of the Royal Army, the application of the circular was not univocal and some units applied the reality of the 3 platoons and some that of the 5. After all, also the composition of the battalion which was fixed for the AS in 52 tanks underwent in some cases decreases to 46 and even to 37 which led the units to restructure on the spot on two companies instead of three even if this was not foreseen by the organic tables. However, there is also a fixed point that in the present case the M tank battalions of the Ariete in the period 1941-1942 never exceeded the total consistency of 52 tanks per battalion. Sorry but that's all for now maybe someone will be luckier than me to find certainties that maybe ..... they don't even exist...
All the best
Maurizio
Thank you for your work!
Could you just re-upload battalion structure file please? It seems like it was corrupted and I can't open it :/
I think that situation with btn. structures might be similar to way they applied markings;
Some did it as order said, some placed their marks in different spots, some applied them incomplete and some didn't applied them at all etc. ...
Seems like this "variety" applied to units structure as well...
 

Slavomir

New Member
I also reviewed my resources, and I believe the most relevant for El Alamein would be "Formazioni Provvisorie di Guerra dei Comandi, Reparti e Servizi in A.S. Fascicolo D - Truppe Corazzate" dated June 1942. It still says that Batalions M were organized in three companies, of three platoons, five tanks each. The closest to the five platoons would be Battalion L, where in the company (or squadron), there would be four platoons and reserve platoon. I still believe it would be tiny hint, as I don't believe the reserve platoon would have the number...

I also found between the lines of some of the reports of the armored battalions operating in AS phrases referring to the use of "platoons of 3 tanks" referring to the period 1941-1942.
Maybe it is reference to ad hoc reorganization within the companies/battalionsto distribute evenly remaining tanks? I believe something similar to what was mentioned in Montanari (if I remember correctly) reorganization of infantry regiments with two battalions of two companies each in spring 1942?

Regards
 
Last edited:
I think Slavomir is right, after all it was usual practice for the Italians to adapt to any eventuality with solutions on the field given that the vehicles and their number were always scarcer than that foreseen by the organic tables. It must also be said that during the campaign I repeatedly noticed changes in the field due to the shortage of means both in the number of companies and in the number of platoons and even in the number of battalions.
All the best
Maurizio
 

Kustosz2137

New Member
I just realized that VIII BCM didn't even participated in battles of El Alamein, because it was disbanded at similar time when 1st battle began...
If I remember correctly the Knightsbridge was ending faze of the battle of Gazala.
Just tought that would be worth mentioning...
 
Top