WesWorld

I have read these, but am way to wiped out ATM to respond. Will get to it when I am more coherent (trying to teach little kids freestyle is hard work)

From what I have found, many of these Wartime special forces units were formed in response to British initiatives, and were very tentative in nature. The Decima Flottiglia MAS is a very notable exception, and this unit I have no trouble accepting.

Take the Arditi Distruttori Aeronautica Militare - while some may claim that they descend from the Arditi of the Great War, historically the were only formed late in 1942, and carried out only one operation before the Armistice in 1943 - and that operation was only moderately successful. They are an obvious imitation of the British Special Air Service, whose raids on Axis airfields and supply lines contributed so mightily to Allied victory in North Africa. Without the example of the SAS, what promoted Italy to field such a dedicated formation?

Brock has remarked on the 185th Target Acquisition - while I can accept some sort of long-range reconnaissance unit, such a dedicated target-marking formation seems totally superfluous given the technology of the 1940s - the means to target mark so precisely is not available, not is artillery fire so accurate as to require it.

The historical 26th Special Air Operations Unit was not officially activated until 2002, and its antecedents not until 1964 at the earliest. It strikes me that your predecessor drew too much on current Italian SOF information (found in the Italian Wikipedia) and merely projected it backward. This strikes me as unsound. While I realize that you are attempting to make the best of what you were left with, I think a reality check could be in order.



I am less concerned with the high-altitude parachutists, though I agree that in the 1940s the need for such has not yet been fully established to warrant an entire regiment.

I tend to agree with B&B here. These kinds of specialist units are best at small sizes. Economic but effective.
The 185th sounds an interesting unit, true technology now is pretty basic but in North Africa there could be the fluidity of movement to allow such units behind the lines. Something perhaps like a radio homing unit like Rebecca to guide in bombers? If its just for artillery then they should already have their own spotters anyway and guns haven't got that long a range to require teams to mark targets.
The Decima could easily exist in WW.

The SAS does exist, its noted in my Middle East OOB. Precisely how its composed and what it does I have not yet gotten around to defining in detail and anyway the Parachute Regiment is hogging what little aerial transport there is available. Probably they are little more than light infantry, certainly not the crazy daring guys we know from history.

Ok, so here are my modifications based on the responces thus far.

4th Alpini Parachutist Regiment: Change to battalion with the plan of forming two more battalion over the next ~5-8 years to make a full regiment.

185th Reconnaissance Target Acquisition Regiment: Change to single dedicated recon force (sub-battalion in size) for use in North Africa where conventional methods need to be augmented due to environmental factors.

Arditi Distruttori Aeronautica Militare: Change mission to one of disruption of forward airfields. Need based on preceved importance of disrupting close air support assets on the ground in ways that cannot be achieved via airpower or conventional ground forces. Call this unit approximately two battalions in size.

26th Special Air Operations Unit: I intended for this to be the dedicated support forces for both the 4th, 185th and ADAM. Support for both airborne insertion and extraction as well as very limited ground attack abilities (ie, shooting a MG at a single ground targate) Includes a variety of STOL and VTOL aircraft. Not very large, think two reinforced squadrons tops.

Quoted

Originally posted by snip
Ok, so here are my modifications based on the responces thus far.

4th Alpini Parachutist Regiment: Change to brigade with the plan of forming two more brigades over the next ~5-8 years to make a full regiment.

I think you mean "battalion"

Quoted

185th Reconnaissance Target Acquisition Regiment: Change to single dedicated recon force (sub-battalion in size) for use in North Africa where conventional methods need to be augmented due to environmental factors.

What environmental factors differ in North Africa from elsewhere? If anything, the general lack of cover would make target detection easier, unless you are talking camouflage.

Quoted

Arditi Distruttori Aeronautica Militare: Change mission to one of disruption of forward airfields. Need based on preceved importance of disrupting close air support assets on the ground in ways that cannot be achieved via airpower or conventional ground forces. Call this unit approximately two battalions in size.

This concept might work in North Africa; I cannot see it working anywhere else.

Quoted

26th Special Air Operations Unit: I intended for this to be the dedicated support forces for both the 4th, 185th and ADAM. Support for both airborne insertion and extraction as well as very limited ground attack abilities (ie, shooting a MG at a single ground targate) Includes a variety of STOL and VTOL aircraft. Not very large, think two reinforced squadrons tops.

This is still very 1960s, if not 1970s thinking. I cannot really see it evolving out of Italian battle experience.

Restructured 9th Parachute Assault Regiment

--Men: 2000
--Rifles: 1500
--Machine Guns: 208
--Mortars: 18
--Artillery: 0
--Trucks and Other Utility Mechanized equipment: 215
--Wheeled Armor: 0
--Tracked Armor: 0
--Anti-Aircraft: 2
--Anti-Tank: 6

Im leaving the trucks listed as the external supply group is counted in these numbers, a Battalion of this regiment would look sort of like this (rough estimation, comments appreciated)
--Men: 550
--Rifles: 412
--Machine Guns: 68
--Mortars: 6
--Artillery: 0
--Trucks and Other Utility Mechanized equipment: 0
--Wheeled Armor: 0
--Tracked Armor: 0
--Anti-Aircraft: 0
--Anti-Tank: 2
The additional assess form the supply group.

Am I getting closer?

Quoted

Originally posted by snip
4th Alpini Parachutist Regiment: Change to brigade with the plan of forming two more brigades over the next ~5-8 years to make a full regiment.

Brigades are bigger than regiments. Do you mean battalions?

The description of the 185th sounds fine.

I think ADAM is still too large. You say "means that cannot be achieved by... conventional ground forces", but these units are so large that they are in fact conventional ground forces. I reiterate my earlier statement that something company-sized might be workable. As Bruce and Hood pointed out, the historical reasons which drove the creation of this unit are lacking.

The 26th still sounds completely superfluous to me.

Quoted

I think you mean "battalion"

Yes, corrected.

Quoted

What environmental factors differ in North Africa from elsewhere? If anything, the general lack of cover would make target detection easier, unless you are talking camouflage

The openness of the environment, hostility of the environment and the lack of many fundamental resources (ie water) mean that any recon that is needed significant distances away from the main force and its supply train is going to need to have some measure of specialized equipment.

Quoted

This concept might work in North Africa; I cannot see it working anywhere else.

Hence my use of "preceved importance" when describing the need.

Quoted

This is still very 1960s, if not 1970s thinking. I cannot really see it evolving out of Italian battle experience.

I'm failing to see how setting up a unit to insert specialist forces closer to there objectives is 1960's thinking. Doing it in serten ways (ie mass inserts by 2+ helos), yes. Doing it at all on a small scale (ie. 3-4 guys getting out of a light aircraft), I think is a logical thing.

Quoted

Originally posted by snip
Restructured 9th Parachute Assault Regiment

--Men: 2000
--Rifles: 1500
--Machine Guns: 208
--Mortars: 18
--Artillery: 0
--Trucks and Other Utility Mechanized equipment: 215
--Wheeled Armor: 0
--Tracked Armor: 0
--Anti-Aircraft: 2
--Anti-Tank: 6

Im leaving the trucks listed as the external supply group is counted in these numbers, a Battalion of this regiment would look sort of like this (rough estimation, comments appreciated)
--Men: 550
--Rifles: 412
--Machine Guns: 68
--Mortars: 6
--Artillery: 0
--Trucks and Other Utility Mechanized equipment: 0
--Wheeled Armor: 0
--Tracked Armor: 0
--Anti-Aircraft: 0
--Anti-Tank: 2
The additional assess form the supply group.

Am I getting closer?

Yes, I believe so.

One question. You list 68x machine guns in your breakdown. Where do you get this number from? You're consistently placing about 2-3 times more MGs per unit than is typical for a historical unit. Are you including SMGs in that tally by accident?

Quoted

I think ADAM is still too large. You say "means that cannot be achieved by... conventional ground forces", but these units are so large that they are in fact conventional ground forces. I reiterate my earlier statement that something company-sized might be workable. As Bruce and Hood pointed out, the historical reasons which drove the creation of this unit are lacking.

The structure of ADAM units is not the same as the Arditi units of the main army. I intended from the getgo for this to be a smaller force (company size sounds about right). My apologies for the confusion.

Quoted

Are you including SMGs in that tally by accident?

Yes, I have had them listed in combination to keep complexity down while firming up unit size.

Quoted

Originally posted by snip

Quoted

I think ADAM is still too large. You say "means that cannot be achieved by... conventional ground forces", but these units are so large that they are in fact conventional ground forces. I reiterate my earlier statement that something company-sized might be workable. As Bruce and Hood pointed out, the historical reasons which drove the creation of this unit are lacking.

The structure of ADAM units is not the same as the Arditi units of the main army. I intended from the getgo for this to be a smaller force (company size sounds about right). My apologies for the confusion.

Ah, okay.

Quoted

Originally posted by snip

Quoted

Are you including SMGs in that tally by accident?

Yes, I have had them listed in combination to keep complexity down while firming up unit size.

Okay, that explains it.

Any last comments on the non-specialist TO&E's before I edit the ency posts?