• 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!

OOBs for Bir el Gobi (19 November 1941)

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
Byron posted on 24 February 2009

Hello,

I couldn't find complete information in any of the other "Crusader" topics on this. Does anyone know the exact makeup of forces for the battle of Bir el Gubi? I have the following:

British: 158 Crusader AFV

Italian: 146 M 13/40, 7th Bersaglieri Battalion, 132nd Artillery Regiment (2 Group)

I have no data on the number and types of guns in the artillery regiment or the Bersaglieri Battalion (I believe there was more than one Bersaglieri battalion present as well). Were there any light tanks involved in this battle? I have reference to both 75mm and 105mm guns in the artillery regiment. Is this accurate? I appreciate any help provided to fill in this data!

Andreas posted on 24 February 2009

British 22nd Armoured Brigade, part of 7th Armoured Division, Brigade CO Brigadier Scott-Cockburn


Order of battle at Bir el Gobi:

11th Hussars (armoured car regiment)
2nd Royal Gloucestershire Hussars
3rd County of London Yeomanry
4th County of London Yeomanry
All of the three above cruiser equipped (should all be Crusader, 158 in total) yeomanry tank regiments in their first action ever.
8x 25pdr from 4th Royal Horse Artillery
1x Infantry Company from 1st Kings Royal Rifle Corps
AT detachment (no unit information, probably a battery from 102nd Royal Horse Artillery)
Light AA detachment (no unit information, probably a battery or troop from 1st LAA Rgt RA)
Detachment 4th Field Squadron Royal Engineers

http://www.btinternet.com/~ian.a.paters ... tm#Nov1941

All the best

Andreas

Byron posted on 24 February 2009

Thanks Andreas!

Do you have any details on the armored car type(s) and number in the AC regiment?

I had read somewhere that there was an infantry company and artillery (25 pndr) present. I take it the towed ATGs were 40mm? That would make sense during this timeframe.

Any detailed information on the Italian units available?

Andreas posted on 24 February 2009

The towed ATGs definitely 2-pdr (although probably not towed but portee'd). The LAA guns Bofors 40mm. The armoured cars... No idea. Probably Marmon-Herringtons of South-African manufacture.

http://www.btinternet.com/~ian.a.paters ... edcars.htm

All the best

Andreas

david posted on 26 February 2009

The 11th Hussars had had their Marmon Herringtons replaced by Humber MkII s by late October of 1941.

There should have been a total of 61 in a full strength Regiment.

Jeff Leser posted on 26 February 2009

Italian Forces at Bir el-Gobi (from Montanari)

Ariete Armored Division

132° reggimento carri medi
VII° battaglione carri M13/40
VIII° battaglione carri M13/40
IX° battaglione carri M13/40

8° reggimento bersaglieri
V/8° battaglioni bersaglieri
XII/8°battaglioni bersaglieri
battaglione armi accompagnamento

battaglione controcarri (47/32)

132° reggimento artiglieria
I/132° artiglieria (75/27)
II/132°artiglieria (75/27)

1 gruppo/3° Celere artiglieri (75/27)
1 gruppo/24° artiglieria d’armata (105/28)
MILMART (seven 102mm guns)

Pista!

Jeff

david posted on 26 February 2009

Jeff.

The I & II Gruppi 132 Artiglieria Reggimento should be on 75/27, not 75/18. Agreed?

Do we know which was the battaglione Controcarri?

David

Jeff Leser posted on 26 February 2009

You are most certainly correct. I was using the OB for the Ariete found in Seconda offensiva Britannica in Africa Settentrionale e ripiegamento Italo-Tedesco nella sirtica orientale (pages 176-178). I just copied the information for the units identified at Bir el-Gobi in Le operazioni in Africa Settentriontale vol II, as that volume doesn't provide as detailed an OB as the earlier volume. As our Italian members have pointed out, the earlier official books have their flaws.

I have corrected my post.

Pista!

Jeff

david posted on 26 February 2009

Jeff.

Any idea on which Controcarri Battaglione it was?

Dili posted on 26 February 2009

What would be the TOE quantities of this two units:

I am mainly looking for the weapons.

battaglione armi accompagnamento

battaglione controcarri (47/32)

Thanks

david posted on 26 February 2009

The Battaglione a.a. was formerly III Battaglione Bersaglieri (M/C).
As a Battaglione a.a. it was comprised of.....

1x Compagnia c.a. of 8 x 20mm Breda mod35 L/65. (Although shortages of this weapon often meant that only 6 were allocated).

1x Compagnia Mitraglieri of 12 x 8mm medium M/G.

1x Compagnia mortai of 9 x 81mm mortars. (Can someone please confirm that 9 is correct, as I only have it pencilled in.)

byron posted on 26 February 2009

This is the kind of stuff I was looking for guys! Thanks!

Question: Did the Bersaglieri battalions have ATGs included in their TO&E; or did they only use the ones from the "battaglione controcarri" (which I think is an ATG battalion)? I only ask because I know the Italians were often short of ATGs throughout the conflict.

david posted on 26 February 2009

Question: Did the Bersaglieri battalions have ATGs included in their TO&E; or did they only use the ones from the "battaglione controcarri" (which I think is an ATG battalion)?

Which Bersag Batt?

When?

& yes it is!

byron posted on 27 February 2009

I'm only talking Bir el Gubi here! I know the 7th BB was there...not sure if others were present as well.

Jeff Leser posted on 27 February 2009

byron

The VII (7th) btg. bersaglieri was not at Bir el-Gobi. The VII btg. is part of the 1° reggimento bersaglieri that was assigned to the 1° Celere Division. The 7° reggimento bersaglieri was assigned to the Trento Division. It appears your information is from Iron Hull, Iron Hearts. That book is incorrect in placing that battalion at this battle.

I am currently working through the c.c situation. If all units were present, the Ariete should have one c.c. battery in each bersaglieri btg., and two c.c. companies in the c.c. btg., for a total of 32 guns. The acc. e c.a. btg. didn't have c.c. units.

During this time, all the units in A.S. were being transformed to the A.S. organization. Montanari (page 314) has an explanation and chart on how the artillery would be modified/upgraded in A.S. (a combination of transfers between divisions and new units arriving from Italy). What this means is that the units were influx at this time, so the standard OOB of the unit likely doesn't apply.

None of my sources provides a detailed OOB for the battle. Montanari describes the units in terms of their battle positions. As I noted, Iron Hulls has significant problems in the details. So this OOB remains a work in progress.

Pista!

Jeff

david posted on 28 February 2009

Agreed!

Jeff. What designation did Ariete's c.c Battaglione use at this time? And do you know the component Compagnia numbers please?

byron posted on 28 February 2009

More information I've dug up:

The 8th Bersaglieri Regiment apparently was present. The 5th battalion, supported by II/132 artillery (75/27), was near El Cuasc.

The 3rd Battalion, supported by guns of the 3rd Artillery (75/27) was East of the ridge.

The 12th Battalion, supported by the I/132 artillery was to the West.

To the North was the 24th Artillery (105/28 guns) and the seven 102mm truck mounted guns of the Milmart.

Further North was the 132 tank regiment.

Most of the artillery's guns were the 75/27 variety, I think. The exception was the 24th.
Does anyone know how many guns were included in the the 1/132 and II/132 artillery groups? What about the 3rd and 24th?

The ATGs of the batt controcarri appear to have been mixed throughout the formations as were the supporting units of the batt. armi accomp.

byron.

david posted on 28 February 2009

I gruppo 132 Art Reg had 3 batteries of 4 x 75/27 each.

II Gruppo 132 Art Reg was the same as I Gruppo.

III Guppo did not exist. The I/24 Gruppo of 12 x 105/28 is sometimes mistakenly reported as IIIGr/132.
The II/24 was attached to Divisione Pavia, in much the same way that the 1/24 was with Ariete. perhaps the 3rd artillery you mention is not even meant to be a part of Ariete? Let me know.

Jeff Leser posted on 27 February 2009

byron

The information you have provided is straight from Montanari vol II (pages 413-414). It proves that one shouldn't read a foreign language when they are tired. I wondered if the III btg. bersaglieri was present and there it is in black and white. I kept reading il instead of III. My bad.

The III btg bersaglieri was east of the triple crossroads (est del trivio), not the ridge. What this means is the III/8° bersaglieri has not been converted to a btg. acc. e c.a. as it is holding its own position and not broken up to support the other two battalions. So the III/8° bersaglieri is still an infantry unit. If the III btg. was originally a motorcycle unit, it wouldn't have a c.c company. This implies only two c.c. companies and sixteen 47/32 c.c.

David

Given this, I don't believe the btg. c.c had been established. I have attached the OOB from Seconda offensiva (allegato 2). As you can read, several units are marked mancante (lacking/missing). Also note the 75/18s shown in the artillery regiment (one missing). Note how the term mancante is positioned to indicate the unit. As the word is not placed next to the c.c. btg. itself, but the btg. HQ, I have been puzzled whether this means the entire btg. is missing or just the HQ. As I haven't found a total number of 47/32 present, I have not been able to pin down the number of c.c companies persent.

I have also attached the artillery reorganization from Montanari page 314. This was ordered in September 41, but how much of this was accomplished before November?

Okay, I am still working the few sources I have to see if I can pin this down. I swear I have an article somewhere on this battle. I guess it is to the filing cabinet downstairs.

Pista!

Jeff

[I will rescan the files that were originally attached. There is more to post tomorrow]
 
Last edited:

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
Jeff Leser posted on 28 February 2009

David

The 3rd Artillery byron mentions is the 3° Celere artiglieria.

I have updated my OOB with my latest thoughts. I have incorporated your comment that the I Gruppo/24° artiglieria d'Armata was with Ariete.

Pista!

Jeff

Italian Forces at Bir el-Gobi

Ariete Armored Division

132° reggimento carri medi
VII° battaglione carri M13/40
VIII° battaglione carri M13/40
IX° battaglione carri M13/40

8° reggimento bersaglieri
III/8° battaglione bersaglieri
V/8° battaglione bersaglieri
XII/8°battaglione bersaglieri

132° reggimento artiglieri
I/132° artiglieria (75/27)
II/132°artiglieria (75/27)

1 gruppo/3° Celere artiglieria (75/27)
I/24° artiglieria d’armata (105/28)

byron posted on 28 February 2009

Great stuff, everyone!

Jeff, the information I provided is actually out of an online article on the Flames of War (Battlefront) game website! I had no idea it was out of Montanari!

So your latest OOB drops the batt. c. c. (this would be the batt. controcarri [47/32 ATGs], correct? I sometimes get lost using the Italian formation names and abbreviations). And there would be only 16 47mm ATGs present based on that, as I understand it.

I guess you are including the armi accompagnamento with the Bersaglieri infantry regiment and the Milmart guns with the artillery since you do not list them? I just want to be sure I'm reading it correctly.

Another question, somewhat related: There seems to be very little information on the battlefield itself. Was Bir el Gubi a small town or just the name of the crossroads? I've read the Italians were dug in in prepared positions--sometimes a ridgeline is mentioned, other times it is implied that this area was pretty much flat and featureless. Does anyone have a topographical map of the battlefield? I've had no luck finding one online although I did find one for the battle of Sidi Rezegh, just to the North.

david posted on 28 February 2009

Bir el Gubi was a well, an airstrip and very little more than that. It is typical of the featureless landscapes that abounded in Western Egypt & Cyrenecia.

See..............http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ams/nort ... nh35-1.jpg

Jeff Leser posted on 1 March 2009

Given this, I don't believe the btg. c.c had been established. I have attached the OOB from Seconda offensiva (allegato 2). As you can read, several units are marked mancante (lacking/missing). Also note the 75/18s shown in the artillery regiment (one missing). Note how the term mancante is positioned to indicate the unit. As the word is not placed next to the c.c. btg. itself, but the btg. HQ, I have been puzzled whether this means the entire btg. is missing or just the HQ. As I haven't found a total number of 47/32 present, I have not been able to pin down the number of c.c companies persent.

Given that the "mancante" is next to the HQ, and not the two sepearate Compagnia, I would assume that the HQ was not present, but the Compagnia were. However, without an HQ, there is no Battaglione, and one would expect the Compagnia to be numbered individually & seperately. So we have conflicting clues.

My personal take, is that nothing is yet present. I base this purely upon the fact that I have never seen a II battaglione Divisionale controcarri in Ariete in either 1941 or the first 3/4 of 1942.

which leads me on to my next question. "When, if ever was it raised, and what were it's constituent Compagnia"?

Attilo posted on 8 March 2009

"Bir" means deep well

"Bir El Gobi is a WELL. Near the well was the ruins of a cabin used from the workers that had started and then stopped the construction of a fort of which were hardly the foundation. All around the desert"

Next to the well was a crossroad of three roads

From: Piscitelli Diario di un Combattente in Africa Settentrionale Milano, Longanesi 1971

Dor1941 posted on 28 March 2009

R. Riccio and other sources indicate the 32 Reggimento Carri d'Assalto was part of Ariete in Nov 41 with two of its battalions (of two companies each) and was equipped with 52 L.3 tankettes. Is there any indication of its presence at Bir El Gubi on November 19th?

david posted on 28 March 2009

That's odd. I was under the impression that Ariete's Armoured Regiment changed it's numbering from 32 to 132 somewhen in the first half of 1941.

Interesting question none the less. :)

Oasis posted on 28 March 2009

David
1 gruppo/3° Celere artiglieria (75/27)
I/24° artiglieria d’armata (105/28)

Hi Jwsleser
I have reported (Berdondini 1969, da Tobruk ad Agedabia) the presence with Ariete of 7th btry of III/3° artiglieria celere, instead of I/3°. Is your source sure ?
Regards

Dor1941 posted on 28 March 2009

It's clear from Jack Greene and Riccio that the 32 Reggimento Carri d'Assalto with its L.3's is in addition to the 132 Reggimento Corrazata and its 137 M.13/40 and the tanks and armoured cars of RECAM-all sorts of interesting little Italian units in this theater :eek: (theatre to you?).

Oasis posted on 28 March 2009

I have the following indication as reported by Parri (http://www.paginedid...ri/carristi.rtf):

On 1 sept 1941 it borns in the area of Elnet Lasga, along the trail Berta-El Mechili, the 132. Regt carristi of Ariete that joints to the 32. less powerful in tanks, but strong of its african experience.
regards

Toni

Andreas posted on 28 March 2009

Montanari (2nd edition, Vol. II p. 349) gives the Ariete OOB as of 10 September 41 as follows:

8 Bersaglieri
132 Carristi (M13/40)
32 Carristi (L3)
132 Artigliera

However, the end of August OOB on p.321 is without 32 Carristi, and the text on p.320 states that 32 Carristi remained attached to Ariete, but was not organic to it.

Jeff Leser posted on 28 March 2009

Toni
have reported (Berdondini 1969, da Tobruk ad Agedabia) the presence with Ariete of 7th btry of III/3° artiglieria celere, instead of I/3°. Is your source sure ?
Regards

Your information is likely correct. I wrote that one gruppo/3°, not the I/3°. Your source identifies the gruppo as the III/3° Celere.

RE: 32° reggimento carristi. While this regiment was attached to the Ariete, I have not read any source that stated the regiment maneuvered or operated as part of the division during Crusader.

Pista!

Jeff

byron posted on 28 March 2009

Here's an interesting note from another forum:
The 8th Bersaglieri Regiment had about 30 47/32 AT guns and a unclear number of 81mm mortars (1).
The 132nd Artillery Regiment was equipped with about 30 75/27 guns (1) and a unclear number of 20mm automatic cannons. Just few weeks before the battle, a batch of at least 200 new type “EP” A/T rounds was provided to the division (2), likely for the 75/27. (EP=effetto pronto, i.e. quick/ready effect as Italians named their first generation of hollow-charge grenades.)

Ariete had 3 battalions of “carri M” (M13 tanks) as well as 3 battalions of “carri L” (L3 tanks), the latter being relegated to minor or second-line duties (2). No L tanks are mentioned in any report of this fighting I happened to read. All Italian tanks involved should be M13/40, a few of them in the “Carro comando” version.

A section of 7 self-propelled 102/35 naval guns from MILMART (MILizia MARittima Territoriale, i.e. coastal artillery) was aggregated to the CAM (Corpo d’Armata di Manovra – Maneuvering Army Corps), which the Ariete belonged to. Of these guns 5 were assigned to the Ariete (2) and were present at Bir el-Gobi, all of them mounted on FIAT 634 trucks.
A reference (3) states that in the fighting some of these weapons started fire at 1000mt distance from targets with effective results.

Another reference (4) mentions a battalion of 105mm guns of the 4th Artillery group from the CAM, but this does not result in other publications.

References:
(1) Storia Militare n. 83 (August 2000), “Carri M in Africa settentrionale, parte II” by L. Landi and D. Guglielmi
(2) Storia Militare n. 136 (January 2005), “L’Ariete a Bir el-Gobi” by A. Maraziti
(3) “Le artiglierie del Regio Esercito” by F. Cappellano
(4) Iron Hulls, Iron Hearts by Ian W. Walker
Apparently the 75/27 guns were well supplied with AT rounds for this battle? If so, were they used in a direct fire AT mode? I have not read anywhere that they were set up and used in this manner although I have read that they were very effectively used in the battle....

Oasis posted on 29 March 2009

I have a report that from late 1941 italian artillery was supplied with EP: particularly, self.prop. 75/18 of 3. Articelere were supplied with it.
On 2 nov. 1942 advancing US Grant tanks (with british pilots) were stopped at Sidi Abd el-Rahman by the 2nd arm. battery of I/3 Articelere employing EP (shaped charge, or EPS Mod.42).

david posted on 29 March 2009

It would be interesting at this point to do a study into the proportion of E.P rounds / ordinary A.P rounds available to all units in N.A.
And to the relative penetrative statistics of both.

Oasis posted on 29 March 2009

Here some poor informations.
Grenades type EP (Effetto Pronto), EPS (Speciale) and EPS Mod.42 (shaped charge). Equivalent to the allied HESH or HEP.
The last (shaped charge) penetrated the Grant developing 2000°C of heath, but had no effects against the T34 when employed with 75/27 (only 100/17 was able to perforate the T34).
Regards

Andreas posted on 29 March 2009

I have a report that from late 1941 italian artillery was supplied with EP: particularly, self.prop. 75/18 of 3. Articelere were supplied with it. posted on 29 March 2009

Were those the Semovente, or were they put on a truck?

All the best

Andreas

Andreas posted on 29 March 2009

Toni

Here some poor informations.
Grenades type EP (Effetto Pronto), EPS (Speciale) and EPS Mod.42 (shaped charge). Equivalent to the allied HESH or HEP.
The last (shaped charge) penetrated the Grant developing 2000°C of heath, but had no effects against the T34 when employed with 75/27 (only 100/17 was able to perforate the T34).
Regards

Could have something to do with the armour angle?

The Germans also shipped shaped charge rounds to Africa in late 41, but did not issue them to the gunners I think.

All the best

Andreas
 

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
david posted on 29 March 2009

Andreas.

75/18 in N.A is always Semovente.

Andreas posted on 29 March 2009

Ah, thanks. In that case, none of those before Jan 42, I guess? I got confused by Toni's date of late 41.

All the best

Andreas

david posted on 29 March 2009

3rd Reggimento ArtiCelere used 75/27. It wouldn't be the first time that I have seen 75/18 written instead of 75/27.
Although I must say that I thought that the 75/27 of 3 ArtiCelere were towed.

Oasis posted on 29 March 2009

I understand I created some confusion as I was not too clear.
I always referred to 3rd Articelere.
75/27 - towed - were supplied with EP since late '41
75/18 - semoventi - result supplied with EP shaped charges in '42.
sorry and regards

Toni

byron posted on 29 March 2009

I'm gathering by all this good discussion that the towed 75/27 guns did not have a really effective direct fire role in Crusader. My impression is that they were used only as supporting artillery, not ATGs.

david posted on 29 March 2009

Absolutely! :)

Andreas posted on 29 March 2009

Every gun becomes an anti-tank gun when the tanks get too close to it.

Oasis posted on 30 March 2009

Hi Andreas, here follows a small memory of an artillery man of 1 Articelere serving 75/27:

"Caporalmaggiore Negrin Augusto after that the seven soldiers assigned to the service were dead, made all alone, he opened the shutter of the gun, headed against the tanks and the armored cars at two km distance, watched inside the muzzle with the eye if the gun was centered. Then he placed in the shattering grenade: it was sure center. Every blow was a center: tank or armored car."

Regards

Toni

All the best

Andreas

Athanatos posted on 17 May 2009

Order of battle at Bir el Gobi:

11th Hussars (armoured car regiment)

http://www.btinternet.com/~ian.a.paters ... tm#Nov1941

All the best

Andreas
Of interest is that "D Sqn' 11 Hussars was the RAF's No2 Armoured Car Company which became 2 Sqn RAF Regt after the war (although the RAF Regt was formed during the war, the two Armoured Car Companies that had been in existence in the Middle East since the twenties were not part of the Regt during the war) 2 Sqn RAF Regt has El Alamein as an embazoned Battle Honour on its Sqn Standard.

edit monday 18th
I have joined this forum to look for OOB in North Africa of Italian units (preferably including motociclisti) to allow me to use my (Flames of War) wargames models based on real units with historically accurate support. There is a wealth of information on this excellent forum, which will take some time to find and look at; if anyone can point me in the direction of some good threads, I'd be grateful.
(I am also interested in RAF Regt history, hence this post; information from Kinglsey Oliver's "Through Adversity")

Athanatos posted on 17 May 2009

Jeff

I've been looking at the excellent pdf you attached to your earlier post (I've got an online Italian translating widget though it cannot cope with the abbreviations eg acc. to e c a and acc. to e c c)

I note that 8 Rgt Bersaglieri has a Compagnia Motociclisti documented. Does this unit have an identifying company number?

Jeff Leser posted on 18 May 2009

Athanatos

I will check tonight.

Yes, most translators can't handle the military terms, let alone the abbreviations.

Pista!

Jeff

Jeff Leser posted on 23 May 2009

Athanatos

Okay, a few day later than I had planned. The problem is what organization did the 8° Bersaglieri have at that time? The OOB .pdf I posted reflect the reorganization planned for the Ariete. The III btg bersaglieri was the unit selected to transform into the btg. acc. e c.c. It is likely the motorcycle cp. for the HQ would come from this battalion. However, Montanari states the III btg. was present at Bir el Gubi. So it is unlikely that the hqs had a motorcycle cp. during Crusader, as the III btg. had not reorganized.

Pista!

Jeff

Jim Broshot posted on 23 May 2009

British 22nd Armoured Brigade, part of 7th Armoured Division, Brigade CO Brigadier Scott-Cockburn

http://www.generals.dk/general/Scott-Co ... itain.html

Order of battle at Bir el Gobi:

11th Hussars (armoured car regiment)
2nd Royal Gloucestershire Hussars
3rd County of London Yeomanry
4th County of London Yeomanry
All of the three above cruiser equipped (should all be Crusader, 158 in total) yeomanry tank regiments in their first action ever.
8x 25pdr from 4th Royal Horse Artillery
1x Infantry Company from 1st Kings Royal Rifle Corps
AT detachment (no unit information, probably a battery from 102nd Royal Horse Artillery)
Light AA detachment (no unit information, probably a battery or troop from 1st LAA Rgt RA)
Detachment 4th Field Squadron Royal Engineers

http://www.btinternet.com/~ian.a.paters ... tm#Nov1941

All the best

Andreas
Belatedly, since I finally registered as user with this fine forum, and FWIW:

as of 19 November 1941:
22nd Armoured Brigade (Brig Scott-Cockburn) - 8 Crusaders in Brigade Hdq
2 Royal Gloucestershire Hussars (LtCol Birley) - 47 Crusaders and 4 Crusaders Close Support (CS)
3 County of London Yeomanry "Sharpshooters" (LtCol R Jago) - 47 Crusaders and 4 Crusaders CS
4 County of London Yeomanry (LtCol W Carr) - 43 Crusaders and 5 Crusaders CS

11th Hussars (LCol Leetham) - "approximately" 50 Humber Mk II armored cars

- from Desert Tracks British Armour Camouflage and Markings in North Africa, by William E. Platz (1978)

and
C Battery, 4th Royal Horse Artillery with 8x guns
one troop, (from D Battery?), 102nd (Royal Northumberland Hussars) Anti-Tank Regiment
3rd Battery (less one troop), 1st Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment
B Company, 1st Kings Royal Rifle Corps

- from History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery The Years of Defeat 1939-41, by Gen Sir Martin Farndale (1996)

Jim Broshot

Andreas posted on 28 May 2009

Hi

I just noted this error which you might want to correct? http://www.comandosu...o.com/1941.html
Michael Carver, author, writes of the Italian parachute division at Bir El Gobi:

"...The "Folgore" parachute division "gave a very good account of itself" and that it was "the best of the Italian divisions" should not be taken as simply a random observation."

Folgore was of course nowhere near North Africa in December 1941.

All the best

Andreas

Athanatos posted on 31 May 2009
Athanatos

Okay, a few day later than I had planned. The problem is what organization did the 8° Bersaglieri have at that time? The OOB .pdf I posted reflect the reorganization planned for the Ariete. The III btg bersaglieri was the unit selected to transform into the btg. acc. e c.c. It is likely the motorcycle cp. for the HQ would come from this battalion. However, Montanari states the III btg. was present at Bir el Gubi. So it is unlikely that the hqs had a motorcycle cp. during Crusader, as the III btg. had not reorganized.

Pista!

Jeff
Do you know if or when the reorganisation took place?
I am looking to use a Motociclisti coy in North Africa during what the Flames of War game calls 'MidWar' (includes Crusader, Torch etc) and thus could utilise your OOB reorg when it occured. Had it happened by the El Alamein battles (July, mid-August or the decisive Oct/November actions)?

Dor1941 posted on 29 June 2009

Jeff

Have you since found any confirmation that III/8 Bersaglieri was not a battaglione armi d'accompagnamento on 19.11.41?
I noticed that XL/9 Bersaglieri (definitely a support weapons battalion) was separately deployed alongside two other battalions of that regiment on the Sidi Rezegh escarpment on 26.11.41 (Montanari, II, 581 -2nd ed.) when they were attacked by 6th New Zealand Brigade.
I agree that a btg acc. e c.a. might sometimes have its elements distributed among other battalions for various missions, but it seems a bit hasty to conclude that such a unit would not be assigned a position of its own and therefore III/8 Bersaglieri must still be motociclisti/infantry :?: :eek: .

David R

Jeff Leser posted on 3 July 2009

David

RE: Reorganization of the Bersaglieri units. The simple answer is no. The official sources don’t provide the necessary information. Because this transition to the A.S. structure was decentralized and based on the availability of equipment, the best sources to pin this down would unit histories. I have not collected these books, so I am not in a position to resolve this matter to any satisfactory conclusion. I have squeezed every bit of info I can from the books on my shelves, but I can’t pin this down. But I have been looking.

Agar-Hamilton and Turner’s The Sidi Rezeg Battles 1941 lists the 8th Bersaglieri with three motorized battalions (page 476). Given the focus of this work is not on the events of the 22nd Armoured Brigade, this is certainly not definitive.

RE: XL battaglione (page 577 1st Ed). Seconda Offensiva lists four battalions with the 9th Bersaglieri: XXXII btg motociclisti, XXVIII e XXX btg autoporto, and XL btg armi acc. (Allegato 3; pages 178 e 179). Montanari also lists all four battalions for this regiment on page 577 (1st ed). As I read the passage, it appears the XL btg was with the German 361st which had retreated to hill 175. So the XL btg is reinforcing an infantry unit, not holding ground on its own.

The XL btg. bersaglieri came from Italy; it was not created in A.S. Montanari vol II fn 12 Page 381 (chapter on Battleaxe) indicates (as I stated earlier) that the units being transformed to btg. acc. were sent to Tripoli for equipping and training. I haven’t found a time when the III btg. was in the rear. Doctrinally, I have not read of any situation where Italian units cross-attached within battalions. The Italian Army certainly formed ad hoc groupings, but not ‘battle groups’ akin to US task forces. Instead, one unit (especially if it was a supporting arms unit) would be broken up, providing its unique capabilities to the maneuver units.

Reading again the account of the battle on 19 November in Montanari, he states that the III btg. was disembarking its last units from the trucks (page 446 1st ed). This phrasing sounds like infantry. Unlimbering or positioning would be better terms for a btg. acc., but again this is a stretch.

In all, a very flimsy argument on my part. I certainly agree that my tentative conclusions are just that: based on very limited information and their interpretation. I am not saying that the III btg. isn’t a btg. acc.; only that everything I have read tends to indicate something else. I can be very wrong on this. I hope our Italian members can add their research using primary Italian sources and discover the truth.

Pista!

Jeff

Dor1941 posted on 4 July 2009

Thanks for your candid acknowledgement of this question. A few comments:
Agar-Hamilton and Turner’s The Sidi Rezeg Battles 1941 lists the 8th Bersaglieri with three motorized battalions (page 476). Given the focus of this work is not on the events of the 22nd Armoured Brigade, this is certainly not definitive.

RE: XL battaglione (page 577 1st Ed). As I read the passage, it appears the XL btg was with the German 361st which had retreated to hill 175. So the XL btg is reinforcing an infantry unit, not holding ground on its own.
I note that Agar-Hamilton & Turner also show Ariete's artillery as gruppi of 75/18 Semovente and 90/53 HAA (which we know to be incorrect) on p. 476, and on p. 54 offer a completely different artillery armament (also in error) for the division. Ironically, the primary source for their Italian OOB appears to be Seconda Offensiva Brittanica, but your post of Feb 27 has an attachment from Seconda Offensiva which shows Ariete's 8th Bersaglieri with two btg fucilieri/autoportati and one btg armi acc.to e c.a. (with MG and mortar companies present and the 20/65 company missing) rather than the 3 "motorized battalions" on p. 476.

Re: XL Btg Bersaglieri, I believe Montanari's account has telescoped the gradual withdrawal of Afrika Regiment 361 from Pt. 175 and the Blockhouse in the face of successive attacks by 6th N. Z. Brigade on Nov 23rd, 24th and 25th to the point where the N.Z. brigade attacked the 9 Bersaglieri (and XL btg) at Sidi Rezegh on Nov 26th. My review of Murphy (p. 193 on) shows Sidi Rezegh and Pt. 175 to be about 5-6 miles apart along the escarpment and that XL Btg was not near Pt. 175 in support of the German regiment.

I hope you're right that some Forum member might have a unit diary that could clear this up. Thanks for your insight on this issue. :)

David R
 

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
Andreas posted on 5 July 2009

If by Unit records, you mean the war diary of 90th Light, there is nothing in there about co-operation with Trieste that I could find, for those days.

All the best

Andreas

Dor1941 posted on 6 July 2009

If by Unit records, you mean the war diary of 90th Light, there is nothing in there about co-operation with Trieste that I could find, for those days.
That certainly suggests that there was no operational connection between XL/9 Bersaglieri and Afrika Regiment 361 and would support the idea that XL Btg armi d' accompagnamento could be holding a position of its own as I originally proposed. Thanks for that information.

Actually, the focus of my discussion with Jeff was the status of III/8 Bersaglieri and we were consequently expecting an Italian source/unit diary to resolve our differing views. Of course, information from any quarter is welcome.

Thanks again :)

David R

Andreas posted on 5 October 2009

Okay, I now have information that 9 Bersaglieri were under command Arko 104, as part of Kampfgruppe Boettcher. After 4 NZ Brigade more or less wiped out I./Afrika-Rgt.361 during the night 25/26 Nov, 9 Bersaglieri were thrown into the gap.

All the best

Andreas

Dor1941 posted on 5 October 2009

Do you mean 6th N.Z. Brigade? (note The Relief of Tobruk, pp.243-53 and maps on p. 252 and 270)

The Germans appear to be particularly flexible and adept at forming kampfgruppen and command considerations would dictate combining all operational units in a limited zone for a particular mission at least temporarily under a single headquarters, but some lack of cohesion and/or cooperation could result and might understandably exist between different formations (divisions) and nationalities.

Does your source go into greater detail on the operations of the subordinate units of Kampfgruppe Boettcher? Bender and Law (p.100) do not mention 9 Bersaglieri as part of this kampfgruppe.

David R

Andreas posted on 6 October 2009

David

No, I mean 4 NZ Brigade, the night of 25/26 Nov, the attack by 18 and 20 Battalions. At least it is the guys of I./361 I believe they hit, although it could conceivably also have been elements of Pi.900 (and to be honest, I think a few companies are needed to provide the POW numbers reported by the Kiwis, and liberated on 28 November by 15th Panzer).

Trieste was under XXI.CA at the time, and I think 9 Bersaglieri were only with Boettcher for a short time, before the whole division reverted to direct control of Panzergruppe on 28 November.

My source does not go into greater sub-unit detail for those days. But the events of the night 26/27 November are well covered elsewhere in any case.

My reading is as follows, based on the war diaries etc.:

late evening 25 Nov: Tobfort cleans up remaining parts of Butch, Butch 2 (probably Germans from Div. z.b.V. and Wolf/Grumpy - again Germans from Div.z.b.V., I'd say) (I tanks and 2nd Y&L;); an Axis counterattack on Wolf retakes part of it - going out on a limb, this could be Trieste elements, who would have been in the vicinity, just arrived.
Night 25/26 4 NZ Brigade with 18 and 20 Battalion under Kippenberger wipes out a German force in the centre of KG Boettcher and occupies Belhamed. 6 NZ Brigade attacks into the hornets nest of Sidi Rezegh, with far less success. They also hit KG Boettcher, in this case probably most of SR155, and maybe also arriving elements of 9 Bersaglieri.
Early morning 26 Nov: Tobfort figures out that they did not quite do the job and they put in subsidiary attacks on Wolf/Grumpy and Butch 2.
11.30 to 15.00 26 Nov: Tobfort takes out what I presume is a part of Bologna holding on Ed Duda, without too much trouble (can't blame them, after receiving a good stonk they got treated to the not so tender attentions of up to 50 tanks). (32 ATB, 2/13 AIF, 1st Essex, RNF)
Evening 26 Nov: 44 RTR and 19 Battalion show up on Ed Duda.
Night 26/27 November: 6 NZ Brigade tries to get out of the hole they are in by attacking KG Boettcher forces, and the famous fight with 9 Bersaglieri and some Germans (of SR155?) happens.

BTW - I believe that Capt. Jackman's VC citation has the wrong date, since nobody went to Ed Duda on 25 November:

http://en.wikipedia....i/James_Jackman

But I could well be wrong. I'd be interested in any corrections. In any case this probably deserves its own thread.

All the best

Andreas

Dor1941 posted on 7 October 2009

David

No, I mean 4 NZ Brigade, the night of 25/26 Nov, the attack by 18 and 20 Battalions. At least it is the guys of I./361 I believe they hit, although it could conceivably also have been elements of Pi.900 (and to be honest, I think a few companies are needed to provide the POW numbers reported by the Kiwis, and liberated on 28 November by 15th Panzer).
I don't think the two N.Z. battalions engaged part of Afrika-Regiment 361 in their assault on Belhamed on the night 25-26 November.
After being forced off the middle escarpment by 6th N.Z. Brigade following the actions of Pt. 175 and the Blockhouse the German regiment retired to an entrenched pocket located between the escarpment and Belhamed to the north. Murphy's map on p. 252 (N.Z. OH) shows this position and notes it contains "Remnants I/155 Inf & 361 Afrika Regts". When the 18th and 20th N.Z. Battalions of 4th Brigade attacked Belhamed the resistance was relatively minor (compared to the violent battle later at Sidi Rezegh between 9th Bersaglieri and 6th N.Z. Brigade) and casualties low. Murphy writes " A large measure of surprise had evidently been achieved on Belhamed itself; but the enemy was in far greater strength to the south, between there and Sidi Rezegh,.." [i.e., the pocket on Murphy's map] "..and those on the extreme left crossed the flank of this position and passed 'row upon row of MGs'..". The primary foe the New Zealanders faced on Belhamed itself was probably Pi. Btl. 900 (as suggested on the map) and support troops. Before the attack, Murphy writes "The German supply troops near Belhamed had given 4th Brigade Headquarters a false impression of strength and when [Brigadier] Inglis came back from the conference [Brigade-Major] Bassett was 'alarmed'; ' I'd checked on hordes of Boche stacking up in thousands in that area..". These support troops may have been the source of the large number of captured Germans reported by 4th Brigade.
Note this entrenched pocket of Germans was finally eliminated on Nov 28 by the Matildas of 44th Royal Tanks which literally rolled over the position, and 637 unwounded Germans were captured, including Oberstleutnant Mickl of I.R. 155.

I believe your reading of the war diaries is accurate with the exception of the above-I presume your word "Tobfort" was meant to be"Tobforce"?

A new thread sounds like a good idea to me :)

David R

Andreas posted on 7 October 2009

Thanks David. That does make more sense.

All the best

Andreas

Andreas posted on 22 February 2011

Some more information on Ariete:

32x 47/32 ATG in the capisaldi at el Gobi.
5 (!) companies of L/3 tanks.

For a more detailed equipment list of a cruiser regiment in 22 Armoured Brigade:

http://crusaderproje...ve-of-crusader/

Assume they were all three equipped like that before they crossed the wire.

All the best

Andreas
 
Top