Replacement for the CV.3

[MelaraClubPrez]

What would you replace the fleet of CV.3s with during the mid to late 30s?

-Vehicle can be wheeled or tracked.
-Can be a spin off or upgrade from a later date as long as it's derived from the CV 33/35/38 series (for example: Solothurn 20mm)
-An entirely different vehicle such as the C.A. 10t or Foster's CDR can only get upgrades from the 1939 limit.
-The L6 suspension can be used but upgrades limited up to 1939.
-Armored Cars and truck mounted guns are acceptable but only up to 1939.

 

[Dili]

A 4WD truck based autoblindo with 75mm gun based on AA models.
Also a lighter variant with 47mm gun.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

Not bad, not bad at all. We have the 76/30 truck mounted and the 75/46. Producing enough 75/46 guns might be a problem though.

 

[Dili]

Yeah, 75/46 would be an issue at that time. Even by late 30's.

Maybe get 76/40 from the Navy. They will have a bit more muzzle velocity with longer tube than 76/30.
But a 75/27 CK/AV would already be better than what they had. They had those mounted in Ceiranos for AA.

Heavy autoblindos were definitely a possibility, the so called dovunque so 6x6 truck chassis - there was prototype in 1943 with a 90mm gun -. The problem is they will try to over engineer it.

AB41 for example could have appeared earlier but they wanted 4 wheel steering!

 

[jwsleser]

This assumes that Italy gets its industrial/procurement act together in the 1930s. It also depends on which role in which you were replacing the CV33/L3.

As a light tank, I would use the L6/40.
As a reconnaissance vehicle, I would use the AB 41.

Both vehicles were well within the capabilities of Italian industry in the 30s.

 

[Dili]

No. this requires another way of thinking : realizing that existing wheel based armored based on 4x4 or 6x6 truck chassis is faster to get into production with a 75mm gun than a tank with same gun. Besides the advantages in replacements and economy of being bigger volume production.

Combat disadvantages is obviously less mobility in certain off road types , but much more operational and strategic mobility.

This is getting rid of tanks altogether until a 75mm and better armor can be made by Italian industry on tracks.

There is no point on CV33 and neither on L640 which btw was even younger than M13/40 arriving only in 1941 or 42.


- Edit, a think that just came up was the rubber production in Italy.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

Definitely a benefit in range and usually top speed. The "King of the Desert" being one of the exceptions.

Also, wasn't there ~40,000 rubber tires found in storage after surrender?
IIRC that's from Sweet, German Side of the Hill

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

I'm going to attempt to post pics of all the available tracked and wheeled armor fighting vehicles and trucks available from mid to late 30s. This will allow people unfamiliar with the names to pick their favorite choice.

C.A. 10ton:

I would prefer the M11/39 with radio over the (above) prototype with thinner armor.

Fosters CDR:

Too slow for my choice.

L.3s w/ Breda, Solothurn 20mm or 37mm:

Needs better firepower and increased combat range.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

The CV3 47/32:

 

[Dili]

Suicide call...

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

I was thinking of making it my air transportable tank for the airborne.

 

[Dili]

Seems too heavy/useless for that. A simple mortar can just destroy the crew.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

Meh, at least it has the ability to move on its own during adjust fire. And look at the concealment potential. I wouldn't create a large force of them maybe just 6 or so.

 

[Dili]

Would not be lighter a small tricycle to tow a 47/32 with advantage of better concealment in combat.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

Pics are from this article:
http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/04/17/ansaldo-5-tonne-light-tank/

Rather have an L6

Gun's too weak.

I just wanted to finish up some of the tracked options. I think AC and truck mounted will be next.

Would not be lighter a small tricycle to tow a 47/32 with advantage of better concealment in combat.

For the seizure of the DZ that would be fine, but I would like to keep the option of advancing and even maxing out its combat radius if need be. Plus, you can tow the 47/32 as well as keeping the mounted one. That's two 47/32s for each vehicle. Ammo crates can be strapped to the clips holding the metal panel. Not too shabby.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

Almost forgot this one:

It just makes the cut off date of 1939!
Article from tank encyclopedia:
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2-italy-semovente-m6/

 

[Dili]

I wonder what was the designer behind all this Italian tanks. Blocky, with too many fixed machine guns in the hull.
This at least seems a bit different with slanted armor.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

I can't remember the Gentleman's name, I believe it's Rossini. Here's the prototype:
http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index...s/page__st__7580__pid__10637081#entry10637081
Now it becomes a question of how many 75/18s are available to build these by 1940?

Only if a person would want a tracked vehicle as replacement for the L3s, of course.
I'm currently undecided. A Pavessi tractor tank destroyer with Perrelli desert wheels and upgraded engine sounds awfully tempting:

I Couldn't find the pick of the tank destroyer, so this'll have to do for now.

 

[Dili]

Pavesi is too slow.

 

[MelaraClubPrez]

Ya, it would need a new engine and tires.