WesWorld

Halftracks would be more expensive than a wheeled carrier and not much less expensive than a fully-tracked carrier.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral


I don't think it looks overly modern now. It's basically a stretched AB41 with the turret off the P43 tank. I don't think it's particularly advanced

Weight might be off by a few tons, but it doesn't seem overly difficult to carry the 75/46 on an armoured car this size. Quite a few vehicles in the same weight class with similar or larger armament. Take the M3 Portee for example with 75mm and 105mm guns at around 10t.

Vehicles on the same size carry 75mm guns, that is not an issue. The problem is the extra weight of a full turret carrying a 75mm with the related problems a rotating turret bring to any vehicle. A portee is not a vehicle with rotating turret. No matter. The vehicle is already obsolete compared with the Argun C anyway.

After more research in that great fountain of information that is wikipedia I stand corrected. The historical Staghound carried a 75mm low velocity gun in a turret in similar weight and armor than the italian vehicle. Of course rounds carried were low and it was more effective with a 6 pounder instead.

Quoted

No matter. The vehicle is already obsolete compared with the Argun C anyway.

Undoubtedly so, however it's better than no anti-tank guns or armoured forces. More importantly were the considerations of reliability, mobility and supply over rough country in Ethiopia. Should be cheap and relatively simple to use as well; not bad for forming up a first Ethiopian armoured unit.

Quoted

Still quite expensive for the task when trucks and halftracks can do the same job on the cheap

Trucks would be a little bit cheaper but no armour. Italy will likely introduce a few types carrying the new 76/70 AA gun along historical lines. They'll be for mobile AA rather than anti-armour.

Tracked vehicles are much more expensive to run than wheeled vehicles. I recently read one of Zaloga's papers looking at IFVs which put the cost of tracked vehicles at around 12-15 times the cost of wheeled ones. It's a pretty big cost saving if cross-country mobility can be sacrificed.

Quoted

I don't know if beautiful is the word I was looking for. Bland might perhaps be more appropriate.

Wait until it's painted Ferrari Red.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Tracked vehicles are much more expensive to run than wheeled vehicles. I recently read one of Zaloga's papers looking at IFVs which put the cost of tracked vehicles at around 12-15 times the cost of wheeled ones. It's a pretty big cost saving if cross-country mobility can be sacrificed.

Do you have a link? I'd be interested in reading that.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Do you have a link? I'd be interested in reading that.

I have it at work and should be able to email it back tomorrow. I'm pretty sure it's unclass.

Thanks. I'd appreciate it.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
Do you have a link? I'd be interested in reading that.

I have it at work and should be able to email it back tomorrow. I'm pretty sure it's unclass.

Could you send it here as well? Thanks.

I'm afraid I can't send it to you guys. It's unclass but isn't for public release. Pity as it's a rather interesting 300+ page presentation on armour/anti-armour from the 1980s.

I see. Unfortunate.

Top: M26/39 with 75/46
Bottom: M26/39 mod. with 105/25

In 1939, the M26/39 tank was hurriedly accepted into production. Throughout the 1930s, a number of prototype tanks had been built in small numbers but none ordered into production, the Esercito relying instead on a variety of semovente. In fact, the largest production order for tanks was a batch of 200 for Romania. In the mid 1930s, a number of countries started to adopt highly sloped armour on their vehicles for superior ballistic protection. This lead to a series of designs from Fiat and OTO (Odero-Terni-Orlando) which incorporated these ideas to some extent. With the production of semoventes and export orders winding down in 1938, there was considerable pressure on the Esercito to order another vehicle into production. The situation wasn't helped with the large numbers of modern tanks being built in other European armies, exemplified by types such as the French Char B1 and Atlantean AT-36.

As a result, the M26/39 was ordered into production, based on an OTO design, the ballistic sloping was minimal and is was married to the existing 350hp Isotta-Fraschini L15 engine. The M26/39 mounted a reasonable weapon for the time in the 105/25 or 75/46 but the mobility and protection were considered poor. The leaf spring bogie suspension was considerably worse off road than the torsion bar arrangement trialled years before, but it was easier to manufacture.

As soon as the M26/39 was put into production, work started on another vehicle to overcome it's limitations. The first type to enter production afterwards was the AutoCarro 40, which featured a new turret design with much superior ballistic shaping. The same turret shape would be seen in the next series of tanks. Work also went on to improve the mobility of the M26, with a prototype being converted in the middle of 1940 to a new engine. This vehicle featured a lengthened hull with a new 550hp 12 cylinder engine mated to a new transmission. The leaf spring suspension was replaced by a coil spring system and wider tracks for greater cross country mobility. Following successful trials, the same engine and suspension system would be used on Italian tanks for another decade.