• 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!

Semovente 76/46 and 90/53 question

bestemperor

New Member
So I’ve been trying to find witch units the Semovente 90/53 and the Semovente 75/46. I know there were 6 Semovente 90/53 in axis control after the armistice and I think they belong to 26th panzer division but I don’t know haw many remained after the retreat from Rome. Also all I know about the Semovente 75/46 is that there was 11-14 produced and they all belong to a single German unit but I have no which division the Semovente 75/46 belonged to. I would apricate if you could tell me any information you know same with any avalible documents.
 

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
bestemperor

I am I not sure I can offer much help. As I don't track German units and their equipment, I am limited to what Italian sources say about your question.

RE: Semoventi 90/53. Yes six vehicles were used by the Germans. Gli autoveicoli da combattimento dell'Esercito Italiano vol. secondo, p.362 states that the authors couldn't find any documents that detailed the use of the vehicles after Sept 43. They do state the German designation for the Semoventi da 90 was gepanzerte Selbfahrlafette 90/53 (i) 801.

RE: Semoventi 75/46. According to Gli autoveicoli p.374, the authors determined that only seven vehicles were built (one prototype and six series vehicles). No information on which German units had the vehicles. The German designation was Sturmgeschütz M 43 mit 75/46 (852) (i)

I will check my other books, but I am unsure whether I will discover more.

Pista! Jeff
 
-An allied bombing of railway left 6 Semovente stranded on the railway cars till end of war.

-The 1x Semovente 90/53 abandoned on the Road between Anzio and Rome during allied drive from Anzio was the last one I could find. Just prior to this the 26th was deployed around the Alban hills and scheduled to relieve a unit at Anzio.

I could never verify if the single Semovente 90/53 was recovered from the 6 stranded on their railcars but
there isn't any other I could account for.

*Edit changed Alban to Anzio
 
Last edited:
The semoventi trapped on railcars is from an archive scan from Vollketten on the WOT forums. There's many archive scan pages and not sure which one. The page # might be listed in the old article in the armor section of this forum.
 

bestemperor

New Member
-An allied bombing of railway left 6 Semovente stranded on the railway cars till end of war.

-The 1x Semovente 90/53 abandoned on the Road between Alban hills and Rome during allied drive from Anzio was the last one I could find. Just prior to this the 26th was deployed around the Alban hills and scheduled to relieve a unit at Anzio.

I could never verify if the single Semovente 90/53 was recovered from the 6 stranded on their railcars but
there isn't any other I could account for.
i thought about this more and are you saying they the six on the railway was part of the 26th panzer? and the there was only six 90/53 ever in service according to every article ive read about so the single 90/53 mustve been part of the train. unless there was only five on the train.
 
To the best of my knowledge it's like this:

30 X total
24 x Sent to Sicily ( by the end of campaign all 24 remained in Sicily).

6 left in Italy and allied bombing leaves them stranded on rail cars till end of war

Info gap

At least one manages to show up in 26th panzer and is seen abandoned along side the road between Anzio and Rome.

I could never verify if the single Semovente 90/53 was recovered from the rail road flat beds or maybe it was already unloaded at the time of bombing.
*edit
Fixed location "Alban hills" changed to "Anzio"
 
Last edited:
There is a photo of the Semovente 90/53 abandoned on the road between Anzio and Rome in the old comando supremo forum. It should be in a thread titled "help ID decal" or something like that.

I signed in to wot forums and searched but sadly can't find the archive page.
It may have been deleted with the photo which is why it's marked with a question mark in the old tank article posted in this forum.

Apologies for any misunderstanding. I'm typing from my phone with weak wifi reception.

*Edit changed Alban to Anzio
 
Last edited:

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
I see bestemperor posted the same question on AHF. I have no issues with that.

My concern is the post claims 11 semoventi da 75/46 were built. As I posted above, that claim has been challenged. I cited my source, but will provide the discussion from Gli autoveicoli p.374.

La produzione del Semovente su scafo M 43 riprese dopo l’ Armistizio: un nuovo documento Ansaldo riferisce di 29 semoventi armati con cannone da 75/34 (10 prodotti nel 1944 e 19 nel 1° trimestre 1945), 11 con il 75/46 (8 nel 1944 e 3 nel 1945) e ben 91da105/25 (24 dal 9 settembre al 31 dicembre 1943 e 67 nel 1944). A questi ultimi vanno aggiunti 26 già del R. Esercito più uno recuperato previa riparazioni.
Il medesimo documento riferisce altresì della produzione di 142 complessi da 75/34 per semoventi M (54 già prodotti per le FF.AA. italiane e destinati all’O.K.H., più 20 di nuova costruzione dal 9 settembre al 31 dicembre 1943, più 68 costruiti nel 1944), di 7, tutti prodotti nel 1944 da 75/46 per semoventi M 43e di 88 da 105/25 (16 già prodotti per le FF.AA. italiane e destinati all’O.K.H., più 17 di nuova costruzione e prodotti dal 9 settembre al 31 dicembre 1943 e 55 realizzati nel 1944).
Questi dati sono in contrasto, per quanto concerne il semovente da 75/46, con quanto riportato circa gli esemplari prodotti (che sarebbero stati 11), giacché di norma si costruiscono più bocche da fuoco che affusti, semoventi o meno. Tuttavia le fotografie pervenuteci mostrano, di tale semovente M 43, un prototipo e sei esemplari di serie, corrispondenti esattamente al numero dei complessi.
Gli autoveicoli vol. secondo was published in 2002.

Ceva and Curami's La meccanizzazione dell'esercito fino al 43 tomo I, p.482, states that 11 semoventi da 75/46 were built. Unless there is another work that independently provides the same number, I will currently assume that La meccanizzazione is the original source for 11 vehicles. Note that this work was published in 1989 and doesn't directly address the post-armistice period (8 Sep 43-1945). The information on the semoventi da 75/46 is merely a list in appendice II and doesn't offer any cite or discussion of the information.

Meccanizzazione is a general work covering the development of mechanization in the R.E. by two authors who are not R.E. vehicle specialists. Their topic is broad and doesn't focus specifically on production. Gli autoveicoli was written by two specialists who are world renown authors on Italian military equipment and reflects newer research. Pignato and Cappellano's work is directly focused on production and employment of combat vehicles. The two researchers directly address the disconnect in the numbers, demonstrating that they have looked closely at the issue at some lenght and their research is cited.

Is what Pignato and Cappellano provide conclusive? Anyone can argue otherwise, but lack supporting evidence. What the two authors do offer is that the issue has been seriously researched and they determined that only 7 vehicles were completed. Until new material comes to light to indicate otherwise, 11 vehicles is very suspect and the number shouldn't be used.

Are there any other sources that state 11 vehicles and cite their work? That would be very useful for this discussion.

A great way to prove that 11 is the correct number is to find the German returns and see if they confirm 11 vehicles. I know this is the information bestemperor is seeking so I hope that someone has access to those documents and can provide an answer to the number actually employed by Germany.

Pista! Jeff
 

bestemperor

New Member
were was the 5 abandoned 90/53 on the train cars, were they abaoned in rome and the 1 90/53 taken with the 26th divition?

as for the 75/46 if we do find the german returns we are bound to find whitch divition used them. right now just a bunch or webcites that are probelby just taking a guess except tanks encyclopedia whitch is pretty good they claim one was captured by Brazilian soldiers in Piacenza and one was captured by partisans in Milan.
 
From memory, it was the Rail junction in Rome but I could be incorrect about the location.
A lot has been deleted from that thread over the years , even finding the one between Alban hills and Rome is proving difficult. Hopefully the picture still exists in the old Comando Supremo forum.
The decal is highlighted with a red rectangle.

*edit
Fixed spelling
 
Last edited:
Here's the picture.


Found abandoned on the side of the road between Anzio and Rome.
Photo was unpublished and posted by Vollketten on the WOT forums.
Perhaps you can pm him on the Landships 2 forum for the info about the bombing and Semovente m41m trapped on flatbeds.

I hope this helps.
-MCP
 

Attachments

  • images.jpeg-2.jpg
    images.jpeg-2.jpg
    8.1 KB · Views: 362

DonCarnage

New Member
I see bestemperor posted the same question on AHF. I have no issues with that.

My concern is the post claims 11 semoventi da 75/46 were built. As I posted above, that claim has been challenged. I cited my source, but will provide the discussion from Gli autoveicoli p.374.


Gli autoveicoli vol. secondo was published in 2002.

Ceva and Curami's La meccanizzazione dell'esercito fino al 43 tomo I, p.482, states that 11 semoventi da 75/46 were built. Unless there is another work that independently provides the same number, I will currently assume that La meccanizzazione is the original source for 11 vehicles. Note that this work was published in 1989 and doesn't directly address the post-armistice period (8 Sep 43-1945). The information on the semoventi da 75/46 is merely a list in appendice II and doesn't offer any cite or discussion of the information.

Meccanizzazione is a general work covering the development of mechanization in the R.E. by two authors who are not R.E. vehicle specialists. Their topic is broad and doesn't focus specifically on production. Gli autoveicoli was written by two specialists who are world renown authors on Italian military equipment and reflects newer research. Pignato and Cappellano's work is directly focused on production and employment of combat vehicles. The two researchers directly address the disconnect in the numbers, demonstrating that they have looked closely at the issue at some lenght and their research is cited.

Is what Pignato and Cappellano provide conclusive? Anyone can argue otherwise, but lack supporting evidence. What the two authors do offer is that the issue has been seriously researched and they determined that only 7 vehicles were completed. Until new material comes to light to indicate otherwise, 11 vehicles is very suspect and the number shouldn't be used.

Are there any other sources that state 11 vehicles and cite their work? That would be very useful for this discussion.

A great way to prove that 11 is the correct number is to find the German returns and see if they confirm 11 vehicles. I know this is the information bestemperor is seeking so I hope that someone has access to those documents and can provide an answer to the number actually employed by Germany.

Pista! Jeff
Yes, the German (Aufstellungsstab Sud) returns exist and are cited in Jentz/Regenberg Panzer-Tracks 19-02. They confirm that in addition to 7 semoventi produced in 1944, two were produced in January/February '45 and two in March with 4 more guns and 12 chassises avaiable as of March '45. Curiously they report only 13 M43 75/34 produced in January-March.
Also, i dont have the book, but i know that deliveries to units are listend in Guglielmi's Italian Armour in German Service, so if any one is intrested in what units had m43 75/46 should check there.
So the total of 11 seems fine, but the problem is why Ansaldo reports them 8:3 and Germans 7:4 (1944 to 1945).
 

bestemperor

New Member
Here's the picture.


Found abandoned on the side of the road between Anzio and Rome.
Photo was unpublished and posted by Vollketten on the WOT forums.
Perhaps you can pm him on the Landships 2 forum for the info about the bombing and Semovente m41m trapped on flatbeds.

I hope this helps.
-MCP
so we are sure that only one 90/53 was recoved after the retreat from rome and the five were abandoned correct?
Yes, the German (Aufstellungsstab Sud) returns exist and are cited in Jentz/Regenberg Panzer-Tracks 19-02. They confirm that in addition to 7 semoventi produced in 1944, two were produced in January/February '45 and two in March with 4 more guns and 12 chassises avaiable as of March '45. Curiously they report only 13 M43 75/34 produced in January-March.
Also, i dont have the book, but i know that deliveries to units are listend in Guglielmi's Italian Armour in German Service, so if any one is intrested in what units had m43 75/46 should check there.
So the total of 11 seems fine, but the problem is why Ansaldo reports them 8:3 and Germans 7:4 (1944 to 1945).
do you know where i can find a free version of the book because im a college student and its a bit pricey for me.
 
Sadly, I haven't been able to find the statements about the bombing and the stranded Semoventi 90/53 at rome's RR junction. It was most likely deleted along with the photo.

The picture of the Semovente abandoned on the side of the road between Anzio and Rome is all I have recovered.

I stopped the research with 2 question marks.

Vollketten on the Landships 2 forum might be able to help you further. It was his photos, scans and information.
 

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
Bestemperor

I became interested in the Italian military right after I graduated from college. I hope you maintain your interest. There is much to study as Fascist Italy is not well known/understood in the English speaking world.

DonCarnage

Grazie for the references. Some comments.

RE: Panzer-Tracks 19-02. The information provided is a mixed bag and is incomplete and unclear (The Italian section from 102-120).

The six semovente da 90/53 are not listed as captured on p.102. In fact, the 90/53 isn't mentioned at all in the entire booklet.

The semovente M43 da 75/46 isn't mentioned in the Italian Beute-Panzer Units listings (starting on p.110). I am assuming that the StuG Kz is the semovente da 75/18 (Kz for Kurz/short barrel) and the StuG L is the semonvente da 75/34 (L for lang/long barrel) as these abbreviations aren't explained. StuG Lg could also mean the semovente da 75/46, but there is no way to tell from the information provided.

The problem with the production information is that the authors don't use standard terminology for the data presented. I am sure this is due to the source information, but the authors should have done the research to create standard terms. We see completed, delivered, on their way, rearmed and repaired. The StuG M43 can refer to either the 75/34, the 75/46, or the 105/25 (the latter is usually referred to as the StuG 105, but we don't know how the original German reports presented this information).

For example, completed could be fully operational, without the engine (always listed as such for P40s), or without guns. The Italian data reported by Ansaldo states completed means built by Ansaldo, but might not include the engines which were built by SPA. You see this same issue in Panzer Tracts on p.106.

Are the two semoventi 75/46 listed in the Feb-Mar 1945 repaired or newly completed? Are the shortfall of 6-8 StuG 43 listed on p.19-106 either 75/34 or 75/46 or a mix? What goal is this a shortfall of? Is it the 50 StuG per month? If so, the shortfall is greater than 6-8 vehicles. Were any of the other existing semoventi rearmed with the 75/46 as discussed on p.106?

In the end, Panzer Tracts doesn't provide a roll up of total captured vehicles used by Germany. The authors provide a lot of primary source information, but don't attempt to organize the information to present a comprehensive picture of the use of Italian armor vehicles. As important, the authors don't try reconcile the planned, built and delivered numbers in their data set. I am sure there are gaps in the available data, but the author should have tried to identify them for the reader.

RE: Guglielmi's Italian Armour in German Service. While not my main area of interest, I decided to order this book. I should have it by 12 Nov and will share what it offers. The question of Italian equipment in foreign use comes up often enough that I might as well have it in my library.

Pista! Jeff
 
Last edited:
Another possibility is that the single Semovente 90/53 was the older prototype with new armored hood applied and assigned to 26th Panzer, but again, I have no evidence to back this up.
 

DonCarnage

New Member
Hi Jeff
I completely agree with most of your observations on P-T 19. The Beutepanzer books are for sure the weakest in the series and a source of only supplementary information on Italian vehicles. However, I do believe that you are overly cautious when it comes to the production numbers of semoventi 75/46.

"Rearmament" - i think this is a mistranslation from German. The paragraph is about guns' supply - the main issue with semovente 75/46 production. Raport aims at clarifying difficulites with the production. We know that Germans were desperate to roll out as many tanks as possible and this urge was the sole reason for production of m43 75/34. It is hard to believe that they would disarm otherwise ready for action (e.g. after repairs) m43 75/43 and wait untill the 75/46 guns were ready thus depriving themselves of valuable vehicles on the frontline and not helping production of 75/46 at all since chassises were not the problem. I suspect that the original used "Aufrüstung", which can be translated both "arming" and "re-arming" and here the first one seems more correct. The two vehicles in this category are mentioned as both armed and supplied to the troops in february/march and should be identified with the two vehicles listed earlier under the same time period. The report discussed produced/delivered/repaired vehicles earlier and this parapgraph clarifies circumstances of production in march '45 and not lists additional production as an afterthought (note - even if rearmed, these still would be two "new" semoventi 75/46 in addition to the '44 production). Now, while speaking about completed vehicles in january/february the report does nof differentiatie between various types of vehicles, i.e. all were completed in the same way/level. This suggests that the two semoventi "completed" in january/february are not identical with the two from february/march, because unarmed tanks could hardly have been listed as completed. This on its own does not mean that completed=delivered, but since the february/march semoventi were both completed and delivered in the same 30 days, there shouldn't be any delay in delivery of the januray/february ones. Note that the report under the february/march entry contains vehicles no longer produced (m42) - in my opinion this explains why the paragraph changes vocabulary from "completed" to "on the way". But we can't be certain that the two january/february semoventi were indeed delivered - Guglielmi book should clarify this (i hope - i don't want you to regret the purchase).

Engines - P40 are listed with the engines specified because it was an issue with the earlier production. I don't think that this warrants doubts about existance of engines in other vehicles listed as "completed", especially that Ansaldo was tasked with instalation of all parts and Germans had contract only with it and not SPA.


Best regards and thanks for the insightful comments
DonCarnage
 

jwsleser

Administrator
Staff member
DonCarnage

Fun discussion.
However, I do believe that you are overly cautious when it comes to the production numbers of semoventi 75/46.
Possibly, but there is too much which remains unknown. Of the sources we have discussed so far, the only book where I am certain a significant degree of research is behind their statements is Gli autoveicoli. The other sources offer some good primary information and shouldn't be ignored, but they don't attempt to fully answer the question. Panzer Tracts doesn't attempt to reconcile the German data into totals and match those against Italian sources.

"Rearmament" - i think this is a mistranslation from German.
Agree. Without having the original documents (or copies), we don't know whether the translation is accurate. I have often found mistakes when comparing the original to a translation. This is often caused by the translator not having a military background or not familiar with the military terms used by that nation.

This suggests that the two semoventi "completed" in january/february are not identical with the two from february/march, because unarmed tanks could hardly have been listed as completed.
Here we are not on solid ground and shouldn't be treated as a validated assumption. The German report in several places uses completed but unarmed. For example:
Twelve competed Stu. Gesch (but with out guns) are located....
Is but one example.
The two vehicles in this category are mentioned as both armed and supplied to the troops in february/march and should be identified with the two vehicles listed earlier under the same time period.
This is another example.

Why state completed but add a qualifier which basically means 'not completed'? A likely answer is that the report reflects the Italian factory data as I previously stated.
I don't think that this warrants doubts about existance of engines in other vehicles listed as "completed", especially that Ansaldo was tasked with instalation of all parts and Germans had contract only with it and not SPA.
We don't have the actual contract, but it wouldn't be that simple. Contracts can work many ways. Germany needs to guarantee the raw materials as it controls them. Germany need to guarantee the work force, transport, etc. Given that Ansaldo is both producing the main assembly and is also responsible for assembling the final product, billing the Germans for the completing their assemblies is how companies must operate. You can't withhold payment from the prime contractor for work they have done because a sub-contractor didn't deliver their assembly to finish the product. Ansaldo certainly reported that they have completed x number of assemblies and that these assemblies are still awaiting other components (see above). As the 75/46 was an effective c.a. gun which was also needed, there would be completing priorities which the Germans are the ones making the decisions. A possible scenario is that the two M43 da 75/46 were completed in Jan-Feb and then finished and delivered in Feb-Mar.

I am not saying that is what happened, but it is certainly a possibility and entirely logical.

An unverified assumption that has underpinned this discussion is that the seven M43 da 75/46 completed in 1944 were actually finished and delivered in 1944. We don't know that. The two vehicles delivered in Feb-Mar 45 might have been from the 1944 production that finally received their armament. I am not saying that is what happened but it is a possibility which can't be ruled out with our current information.

What is clear is the Panzer Tracts data is a mix of two different categories, completed and finished/delivered. None of the data given uses both types of numbers consistently in every report. It would be great if we had data on the 75/46 production and were those guns were used.

There is a better than average argument for 11 vehicles being finished/distributed during the 1944-45. The question then is why did Pignato and Cappellano believe only 7 vehicles were finished? The paragraph I quoted is in someways unclear. If it wasn't for the inclusion of the number 11, I could say they were only talking about 1944. But if they were only discussing 1944, the discrepancy should be been between 8 and 7, not 11 and 7.
Guglielmi book should clarify this (i hope - i don't want you to regret the purchase).
I had considered buying this book when it was first published, but the post Sept 43 period is of less interest. I had read good reviews of the book, so I am not worried. If it is only of average quality, it is still better than anything else I have. We will see if it has some answers.

Pista! Jeff
 

DonCarnage

New Member
Why state completed but add a qualifier which basically means 'not completed'? A likely answer is that the report reflects the Italian factory data as I previously stated.
For me the answear would be (excluding da 105/25 for a moment; did they still intend to produce it?): because without the 75/46 a chassis could still be easily modified to accomodate 75/34. This is how the m43 75/34 was created in the first place - they did not want the chssises wait for the guns. This would explain why they talk about completed "Stu. Gesch" wihout specifying what kind of StuG was meant. But I am not willing to die on this hill.

There is a better than average argument for 11 vehicles being finished/distributed during the 1944-45. The question then is why did Pignato and Cappellano believe only 7 vehicles were finished? The paragraph I quoted is in someways unclear. If it wasn't for the inclusion of the number 11, I could say they were only talking about 1944. But if they were only discussing 1944, the discrepancy should be been between 8 and 7, not 11 and 7.
Pignato observed a difference in number of completed semoventi 75/46 (8+3) and 75/46 guns produced (7 till end of '44) as reported in the same Ansaldo document. Because 75/34 guns produced in '44 seem to cover also semoventi m43 da 75/34 produced in '45, he concluded that there is a discrepancy commenting that normally there should be more guns than chassises ready - he seems to assume that no guns were produced in '45. He supports his doubt with the photographs (the group of 6 + prototype; but on the photo it is impossible to see clearly the vehicle furthest right). Now, the German text proves that there were at least 6 75/46 guns produced for semoventi in '45 and that there were more chassises than guns, thus lifting Pignato's main points of objection (but not yours). Why Ansaldo document does not mention the guns produced in '45? I have no idea.
8 or 7 in '44 - the same Ansaldo document mentions 8 semoventi and 7 guns produced in '44. It would be good to know what gun the prototype had - specially produced (one of the 7) or modified directly form an AA version (an extra 8th gun).
 
Last edited:
Top