WesWorld

Since Doorcf mentioned it, I checked some figures regarding the current Italian artillery as listed here in the ency. In doing so, I noticed a few discrepenses between RA's posted figures which I copied and the figures listed on the Italian wiki. These are relitivly minor, but I wanted to check before I revised the ency posted figures to match the historical guns. I also discovered a few ommisions from the historical artillery park that I would like to correct, ether retroactivly or in the imedate WW future.

WW 75/18 will be adjusted to the historic stats, including carriages.

WW 105/25 will be adjusted to the historic 105/28 as there never was a 105/25 in Italian service.

WW 149/40 will be adjusted to the historic stats.

Historic 149/19 will be detailed, gun is currently in WW use on a Self-Propelled gun but the stats were never transcribed.

I would also like to have the historic 210/22 added to the Italian artillery park. If backdating the design to historical introduction is acceptable, it would be an option. Otherwise it will be introduced in the beginning of 1945 with a ahistoric carriage\Self-propelled chassis [Which it will get if it was introduced as historically]

I am also wondering if the historical 75/32 is a worthwhile gun to introduce. Given its OTL introduction is about the time that RA departed, I do not know if it was in his plans to introduce the gun as historical. If the gun is suitable for introduction, I would be open to its introduction being ether the historic date or a date in the WW future.

Comments?

The Cannone da 75/32 modello 37 is certainly a piece that would be logical to have a part in the Italian artillery park, particularly as you would no longer have a light field gun or howitzer in the 105mm range, the Cannone da 105/28 (aka Schneider M1913) being a corps level heavy field gun.

I am a bit mystified by the idea of a self-propelled Obice da 210/22 modello 35. Historically, SP versions of such heavy artillery were few and far between, though I believe a few were employed by the US Army. Is there a particular reason for developing such a combination?

Quoted from "BruceDuncan"

The Cannone da 75/32 modello 37 is certainly a piece that would be logical to have a part in the Italian artillery park, particularly as you would no longer have a light field gun or howitzer in the 105mm range, the Cannone da 105/28 (aka Schneider M1913) being a corps level heavy field gun.

I am a bit mystified by the idea of a self-propelled Obice da 210/22 modello 35. Historically, SP versions of such heavy artillery were few and far between, though I believe a few were employed by the US Army. Is there a particular reason for developing such a combination?

So no qualms about introducing ether gun at the historical date even tho it is past? I was thinking a SP version for the 210 would be nice due to improved tactical mobility as opposed to towed carriage. If Im to early in this thinking for big guns, it can wait.

I have no qualms, but I am only one of our players. If anyone else has issues, I am certain they will raise them.

Quoted from "BruceDuncan"

The Cannone da 75/32 modello 37 is certainly a piece that would be logical to have a part in the Italian artillery park, particularly as you would no longer have a light field gun or howitzer in the 105mm range, the Cannone da 105/28 (aka Schneider M1913) being a corps level heavy field gun.

I also think it's a logical assumption to have that on hand.

Quoted from "snip"

Quoted from "BruceDuncan"

I am a bit mystified by the idea of a self-propelled Obice da 210/22 modello 35. Historically, SP versions of such heavy artillery were few and far between, though I believe a few were employed by the US Army. Is there a particular reason for developing such a combination?

I was thinking a SP version for the 210 would be nice due to improved tactical mobility as opposed to towed carriage. If Im to early in this thinking for big guns, it can wait.

A few were introduced by Russia as well, though at least the ones I recall were 1960s dated, and at least the larger ones were intended to fire chemical and nuclear shells.

I suppose for me it depends a bit on the specs. An 8" gun shouldn't really have "tactical mobility", in my opinion - 155mm is about the largest sort of gun used in this fashion, and anything larger is definitely falling out of style.

Quoted from "snip"

So no qualms about introducing ether gun at the historical date even tho it is past?

For the towed carriages, no qualms. For the self-propelled 210, I require further information to make a decision.

His SP howitzer would be akin to the M43 Howitzer Motor Carriage which was standardized in August 1945. Forty eight were built. Given the most recent Italian tank chassis, I do not see a technical reason why Italy could not construct such a vehicle. However, I have my doubts about the rationale and need for construction of such a vehicle. On those points I too would like to hear more.

Another example of a SP gun of that approximate caliber is the Soviet SU-14 from the mid 1930's. If I choose to go for that option, there are several historical examples that show it is possible. Mostly, I am slightly put off by how odd the historical carriage looks, tho I also wonder how efficient it would be to move such a weapon around by artillery tractors alone in a era of improving mobility of artillery.



In any case, the number of these guns is likely to be small and given the number of the aforementioned historical types of SP carriages these would most likely have a limited number of them in WW as well.

Quoted from "Brockpaine"

Quoted from "snip"

So no qualms about introducing ether gun at the historical date even tho it is past?

For the towed carriages, no qualms. For the self-propelled 210, I require further information to make a decision.

I would only introduce the SP carriage in 1945 or later, with a historical introduction date comes the historic carriage.

Eh; okay.

One reason for the "odd" look of the carriage may be the fact that the weapon was transported in two loads and required assembly before firing; this could be a factor in whether it is possible to mount the weapon on a SP carriage. I do not know, I merely note the possible complications.

Ok, the updated specs and historical guns have been edited/added to the ency. Now onto Anti-Air and Anti-tank weapons. For the current list, see here and here respectively.

First, the historic 75/46 AC Mod34 stats will be applied to the WW version of the weapon. Due to me already making some decisions based on not having this as an AT gun, it will not be reprising that roll outside of its use as the main gun on the M26/39 and M34/44.

The 47/23 Mod35 also receives a stat reconciliation.

I think that the stats on the Solothurn S-18/1000 are reasonable and do not need to be adjusted.

The Historic 90/53 Mod39 will be added as the 90/53 Mod43, as it was delayed in WW to allow for additional development time as a tank gun. The historic 90/53 Lancia 3Ro will also be added as a mobile heavy AA/AT gun. These would be entering widespread service in the last quarter of 1944.

Now onto correcting some of the more outlandish stats. First up here is the OTO-Madsen 25mm cannon and its outlandish (for the period at least) 400rmp ROF. I would like to adjust its stats to more closely resemble the Type 96/25 mm Hotchkiss as they represent a period weapon that saw mixed land/sea use.

The listed 76/70 AA gun, as far as I have found has no basis in period and the examples that come close do not indicate that the listed figures are at all possible. I think it is best to remove it, tho I would like to keep the RPC carriage for use with the historic guns. I am open to hearing suggestions on this weapon.

The 100/65 is listed as being a "Naval gun adapted for land use" tho the noted naval gun of that caliber is the historic 100/47. I would like to adjust the stats to reflect such, the role of the gun will remain the same.

I do not see too much to object to so far; indeed, the "dialing back" of performance characteristics on some of the weapons seems a very positive step.

IMHO, the historical 90mm gun in its present mount would not be an optimal heavy AT weapon, but if a tank mounting has been developed, surely something like the OTL 88mm PaK43 "Doorknocker" can be.

By tank mounting, I mean that is it the main gun on the M37.5/45. Apologies for any confusion this caused.

As far as the 90/53 and its Lancia 3Ro-mounted version are concerned, if I am interpreting the translated Italian wiki correctly, the gun is primarily an AA gun with a posible secondary AT role.I agree that the historical towed carriage is a poor substitue for a more specialized AT version. I feel that the AT capabilities of the towed and truck models are more along the lines of "We don't recommend it, but if you happen to point this thing at a tank, its going to wreck it." unless more specialized mountings are developed.

The changes to AT and AA guns have been made.

And here we go again, this time with Infantry weapons. Current figures are here.

For the most part, this seems to be just stat reconciliations with the historic weapons. The Carcano Mod. 91, Beretta MAB M1938, Beretta Mod.34, Breda M37, Mortaio Brixia Modello 35 will all be adjusted to historical stats. This includes moving to a common designation system, tho this is a minor thing.

A few WW weapons apper to be historical ones under different names. The Carcano Mod. 35 seems to be the historical Carcano Model 38, the Breda Mod.31 appears to be the historical Breda Mod 1935 PG (I will note in this case I based the Breda Mod.31bis off the originally posted Mod.31 stats, and they will be changed in conjunction with the Mod.31), and the Mortaio da 81 Mod. 27 is the historical Mortar 81 Mod 35. If these comparisons are accurate, I will adjust the stats only to those of the historical weapons. They will keep there WW designations, adjusted to follow convention if necessary.

There is one weapon without a historic Italian analog, the MAR 38 LMG. I think the stats look reasonable for the most part given historical LMGs, specifically the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FM24/29 and Bren, tho the magazine might need some adjustment or another option. If anyone has thoughts on what, if anything, should be done to adjust this weapon I am open to hearing them.

The Fiat-Revelli M14 MG will be leaving service and so will not be receiving any reconciliation.