Unidentified Anti tank Battalion

[jwsleser]

Posted 21 February 2009 - 02:10 PM by david

Reading through the transcripts of the war diaries of the D.A.K, I have stumbled upon the following..................Dated 17/12/41.
"The Italian command would order to Agedabia all the available resources that were available in Tripolotania, and an attempt would also be made to fly in a Battalion of anti tank troops, their guns, fuel & ammunition....................
XXI Corpo disengaged from the enemy with only slight losses in equipment and reached their new positions. These being Trento & Pavia Divisions at Tmimi, Brescia at Derna, where the Bologna already occupied the Southern sector.
An anti tank battalion which had just been made available by the Italian high command, to cover the withdrawal of XXI Corpo at Tmimi, was over run by the enemy & annaihalated.

I know of no such anti tank battalion. Which one could it be?

Posted 21 February 2009 - 04:44 PM by guests

What's the date of the Tmimi action?

All the best

Andreas

Posted 21 February 2009 - 04:52 PM by david

Andreas.

It's not clear.
It appears from the text that this also took place on the 17th, but that seems impossible to me, as the order for the replacements was only given at 9:30 the same morning. Unless of course it is two different anti tank battalions, but that would double the mystery!
Either way, with the speed of the Commonwealth advance, it can only have been a matter of days later (than the 17th) at the most, surely?

Posted 21 February 2009 - 05:28 PM by guest

17/11/41? Unpossible. That's the day before CRUSADER started.

Are you sure it's not 17/12? That would be the day when the order to abandon the Gazala position was given. The rest of the narrative fits.

My first guess would be that D.A.K. did get it wrong and that they are talking about the Valerini detachment.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t;=5387&p;=34893&hilit;=valarini#p34893

All the best

Andreas

Posted 21 February 2009 - 05:31 PM by david

A thousand apologies

I do indeed mean December. My typo, my fault!

I have edited my original post.

Posted 21 February 2009 - 05:34 PM by david

The Valarini detachment is in the area at the time I think, as it too gets a brief mention in the diaries.
But it's not the unit I am looking for, as it is not equipped with 24 anti tank guns, only 8 according to the link you posted above.

Posted 21 February 2009 - 06:53 PM by guests

There's nothing specific either in the 7th Armoured Division or 13 Corps reports.

All the best

Andreas

Posted 21 February 2009 - 07:33 PM by jwsleser

David

I took a quick look at Montanari (vol II) to see if I could help. No separate AT was mentioned in the account. I did read the following on page 685 (on the 16th of Dec):

Un altro contrattacco riportava la situazione in equilibrio, ma si trattava di equilibrio instabile. Verso sera, per effettuare la rottura del contatto, navarini ordinò l’impiego del complesso tattico motorizzato inviato a a tale scopo dal Pabzergruppe. Era costituito dal XLIV battaglione bersgalieri con due batterie da 88, e fu sotto la protezione do questo bravo battaglione che le divisioni poterono sganciarsi.

Another counterattack restored the equilibrium, but it was an unstable equilibrium. Towards evening, to effect a break in contact, Navarini ordered the employment of a tactical motorized group dispatched for this purpose from the Panzergruppe. It was established by the XLIV bersaglieri battalion with two batteries of 88s, and it was under the protection of this capable battalion that the divisions could break away.
My translation.

I was unable to find a XLIV btg. listed anywhere.

The 8th Bersaglieri was there (III, V, e XII) and I wondered if the AT battalion was possibly a heavy weapons battalion. When checking to see if the 8th Bersaglieri had such a battalion, I found this old post.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t;=3507&p;=23911&hilit;=8+bersaglieri+regiment#p23911

One of my sources has 3rd Anti-Tank battalion as a part of this Regiment as of Mid 1941. This doesn't conflict with what has gone before - the 72nd and 132 AT Coys could have been part of the 3rd AT battalion. Or they could have been part of the V and XII Bers. Bttns, which I understand consisted of 2 infantry coys and an AT coy. I'd say the first was most likely.

The III Bers (which started as an M/C Bttn) seems to have converted to a heavy weapons Bttn around mid 1941. This consisted (AFAIK) of an AA coy, a Mortar coy and a Machinegun coy.

Does anyone know how coys were numbered in battalions, by the way? Was it 1st, 2nd and 3rd coys or company A, B and C? And in the case of the AT coys, were they numbered, lettered or just called the AT coy? Likewise, the Heavy Weapons Bttn, how were its coys numbered?

Unfortunately the poster didn't provide a source.

The British official doesn't mention overrunning/destroying a enemy unit (Playfair vol III pages 82-85). In fact, the attacks on Gazala and Tmimi were pretty much unsuccessful. The 4th Armor did run into enemy guns on the 16th.

That is alll I have found so far.

Pista!

Jeff

Posted 21 February 2009 - 08:14 PM by david

OK.
We'll have to keep looking then!

Posted 21 February 2009 - 09:16 PM by jwsleser

Look no more.

In Allegato 31 in Montanari (page 863) I found a discussion at Berta at Panzergruppe Afrika HQs on 17 December:

Rommel: ...We have not abandon hope to get reinforcements, but we uselessly wait.

Bastico: The division Sabratha will be moved toward Sirte, and we will try to remove all possible weapons from Tripolitania.

Cavallero: We will do everything possible to send by air a grenadier antitank battalion with 24 pieces of 47[mm].
My translation.

It appears that a c.c. btg. from the Granatieri Regiments/Granatieri di Sardegna was the unit under consideration.

I cross-checked in Verbali, but nothing is said about this.

Pista!

Jeff

Posted 21 February 2009 - 09:33 PM by inhocsinovinces

If you look here
http://digilander.libero.it/lacorsainfi ... anovra.htm

you can read attached at the Trento Division a 551° btg aa.ac. Maybe is this the Battalion?

Posted 22 February 2009 - 12:45 AM by david

Jeff.

IV Battagliano Granatieri Di Sardegna seems to fit the bill, but I don't have it arriving in N.A until May 1942. And it certainly wasn't destroyed in late 1941.

However, I have heard of another Granatieri unit in N.A about this timeframe, but have never been able to prove it. on the contrary, convential wisdom has said no.

But we may need to challenge the conventional wisdom. Can we trace a timeline on the Granatieri units that were in existance in december 1941? We may be able to find our unit by a process of elimination. I will try to find where I have seen mention of the "other" unit in N.A.

Watch this space.

Posted 22 February 2009 - 12:56 AM by david

inhocsignovinces.

The only Battaglione nmbered DLI (551) that I know of was a Mitraglieri Battaglione, and therefore unlikely still to be around in late 1941.

HOWEVER! You have reminded me that there were indeed 3x c.c.c attatched to Trento; 102, 104 & 106.
Unfortunately, these can not be the unit in question, as they were already present in N.A @ the end of April 1941, if not earlier. Remember, we are looking for a unit that was flown in at very short notice.

I prefer Jeff's suggestion. But thanks for your interest & input.

Posted 22 February 2009 - 03:19 AM by jwsleser

David

I believe we are talking about two different btg. For your original post, there is a battalion that might be flown in from Italy. My second post discusses the possibility of a battalion being airlifted. I believe this is the from the grenadiers.

Later in your original post they discuss a battalion that HAD been made available to cover the retreat as being overrun. I believe this is the XLIV Bersaglieri btg. My first post discusses a c.c. btg that had just been released by higher HQs to cover the retreat.

I believe the unit supposedly overrun is the XLIV Bersaglieri. I believe the c.c btg that might have been airlifted is the IV btg. Granatieri you mentioned. I will continue looking but I think the c.c btg wasn't actually transported to A.S. until later (I will bet your May 42 date).

I will take a closer look at Allegato 31. I believe it is the Italian version of the same conversation in your original post.

Pista!

Jeff

Posted 22 February 2009 - 08:35 AM by david

inhocsignovinces.

If Jeff is correct, and we are in fact looking for two different units, your theory suddenly carries more weight.

Let's all dig deeper & see what we can find.

 

[jwsleser]

Posted 22 February 2009 - 09:54 AM by david

Jeff.

I could not find any trace of an XLIV Bersaglieri Battaglione either.
The three Italian 88 armed units were; XVIII, XXIX & XXXI Gruppi, and the latter never left Tripoli.

Re 8th Bersaglieri.
It all seems ok that you quoted from the poster in the other thread, except that the III Battaglione was never anti tank. It was the structure quoted later in the same post.
Also 132 Co was XII Btg in early 1941, not III Btg.

Two different units remains a possibility, but we can't identify the over run unit. If it was indeed XLIV Btg, why can't we find any other references to it?

Keep digging!

Posted 22 February 2009 - 02:54 PM by jwsleser

David

I am not sure we will find much more. My rational:

We are dealing with discussions for the time, not researched history. The Panzerarmy war diary and the meeting notes reflect what was know at the time and doesn’t mean these things happened.

In regards to the unit to be airlifted. It is clear that a granatieri unit was being considered. I have not found anything demonstrating the unit was actually sent during this time period. If, as you have indicated, the IV Granatieri btg. c.c. was sent in May 42, I feel this is the unit discussed at the 17 December 41 meeting.

In regards to the c.c. btg., I haven’t found any mention in the histories that a c.c unit was overrun. I have checked Playfair, Montanari and the earlier Seconda offensiva Britannica in A.S. Both the Italian histories have the transcripts of two meetings on the 17th, one at 0930 and one at 2300. While the issue of disengagement at Tmimi is discussed, there is no mention of a unit being overrun. Montanari states that the XLIV was sent by higher HQs to cover the retreat, therefore fulfilling the facts presented in your original post. Therefore I believe this was an erroneous report and no unit was overrun.

In regards to the XLIV bersaglieri, I posted the both the Italian and my translation for a reason. When reading the passage, I felt the correct translation was that the btg. was created using the two 88mm batteries. However, my dictionary didn’t provide created as a possible use of the word constituito. I felt the translation should be “the battalion was constituted using two 88mm batteries”. I am hoping that one of our Italian members will look at this passage and provide some insight to its meaning.

So I believe the XLIV bersaglieri is a new organization (ad hoc) that was disbanded after the retreat was completed.

Pista!

Jeff

Posted 22 February 2009 - 03:05 PM by Lupo Solitario

I have no data (interesting debate, anyway). I want to make some note:

1) In Italian Army 88mm guns were stuff for artillery, not infantry. I don't believe we could find them in a bersaglieri battalion organization
2) As always, the Roman letters numbering system is a usual source of mistakes
3) I don't remember data about a XLIV bersaglieri battalion, but I can't exclude it. A complete list of bersaglieri battalions during WWII is something which I'd really like to have...

Posted 22 February 2009 - 03:58 PM by david

Jeff.

I hear what you are saying regarding the IV Granatieri as being the unit being flown in. My biggest problem with that, is the fact that it arrives four months too late to be of help in the rearguard of the withdrawal, which was after all, what was being discussed. However that still may be what happened.

Whilst you may be correct in assuming that the over run unit didn't exist, and that the over run didn't occur, as there is no other evidence that we have found as yet.
I personally would rather keep the possibility open, and not reject it out if hand, until there is no other choice.

Lupo raises good points regarding units with 88's & the dreaded Roman numerals. Though I would expect Montanari to be Ok with them.

Pasta! :wink:

Posted 22 February 2009 - 05:51 PM by Oasis

AFAIK Rgpt Vaiarini (no a.t. artillery btn) is destroyed on 20 dec.'41 in Berta by 3/1 Punjabi and 42. RTR.

The very next rearguard was kept on 22 dec.'41 by 3. Regt Artiglieria Celere and 26. Artiglieria (Pavia div.) between Ain Gebàra, El-Abiar and Er-Regima where they tried to slow the advance of british troops: british did not exercite high pressure and the real problems came from the heavy rain: 3. Articelere will bring his guns north of Agedabia three days later.

No other notice about artillery on rearguard.

Toni

Page 2 is missing (9 replies)