A better 11/39

So let's change that and start from there

And there's your problem as I've already suggested, the political and military structure in Italy is flawed from the top down, a few technical tweaks here and there will not make them more competent, indeed given the political set up its hard to imagine them even managing the tweaks. After all its as likely as not that Mussolini would block a 'foreign design', especially if those with an interest in the existing design have his ear isn't it?

We only have to change the mind of one man and allow him better luck in choosing his colaborators. OTL Mussolini did everything so wrong even a little improvement could have made a big difference.
Regarding foreign designs remember dictatorships can lie as they want. They could copy the concept of the BT and still claim it was an Italian design.
It was after all a Russian evolution of a Christie design and the Russians claimed it was 100% russian.
 
We only have to change the mind of one man and allow him better luck in choosing his colaborators. OTL Mussolini did everything so wrong even a little improvement could have made a big difference.
Regarding foreign designs remember dictatorships can lie as they want. They could copy the concept of the BT and still claim it was an Italian design.
It was after all a Russian evolution of a Christie design and the Russians claimed it was 100% russian.

The Italians built Stuka's and German aircraft engines under license and installed German radar sets in their destroyers... Mussolini wasn't exactly as prideful as some histories tend to exaggerate
 
It helped that O'Connor was fighting a force that only had 24 real tanks, and those were M13/39. The rest were L3 series tankettes or relics from the 20s.
The Italians learned all the wrong lessons in Spain. They brought home the idea that biplanes could face modern fighters, that tanks were essentially infantry support vehicles, etc. But they could have learned the right ones. Tactically they could have learned from the republicans mistakes, not Franco successes those mistakes allowed, and thecnically they could have learned a few tricks from the soviet equipment the republicans had.
Give the Italians a better tank and the wisdom to deploy that tank in Africa from the start with a minimum of tactical sense and they could have reached the Suez. British forces in 1940 were spread very thinly and it was mostly the mistakes of their opponents that made them look so good.

And now we've gone far beyond the limited brief of the OP so I think personally I'll leave it there since I don't think we are going to see eye to eye.
 
Sorry but if you look at Italy's track record in the 1930's and WWII it really can't make any practical difference. The problems for the Italian army in NA lie in leadership, organization, morale and logistics. You would need a far larger and earlier POD than a slightly better tank in '39 to make any difference.

the first three items are covered by installing a better general; they didn't suffer from leadership problems, organizational problems or morale problems after Bastico and later Messe commanded forces
 
Window of opportunity

It would be September before Wavell would get the tanks and reinforcements that would make compass possible. Btw June and there the Brits were holding Egipt with a bluff the OTL Italians were too poorly set up to call. In those two months, there was a time frame for evem a moderatedly capable armoured corps to make a difference.
 
Last edited:
It would be September before Wavell would get the tanks and reinforcements that would make compass possible. Btw June and there the Brits were holding Egipt with a bluff the OTL Italians were too poorly set up to call. In those two months, there was a time frame for evem a moderatedly capable armoured corps to make a difference.


I have a general thought process for this that I have posted before

1. Bastico is made supreme commander in NA prior to Benny declaring war (eliminates the morale, leadership vaccume and organizational problems almost on contact)

2. Benny keeps the 4 divisions returning home from Spain who have extensive modernish combat experience together as a single elite corps and updates their equipment

3. Benny sends the 4 divisions at the expense of some of the footbound infantry to libya where they steamrole the British back to the suez
 

BlondieBC

Banned
It helped that O'Connor was fighting a force that only had 24 real tanks, and those were M13/39. The rest were L3 series tankettes or relics from the 20s.
The Italians learned all the wrong lessons in Spain. They brought home the idea that biplanes could face modern fighters, that tanks were essentially infantry support vehicles, etc. But they could have learned the right ones. Tactically they could have learned from the republicans mistakes, not Franco successes those mistakes allowed, and thecnically they could have learned a few tricks from the soviet equipment the republicans had.
Give the Italians a better tank and the wisdom to deploy that tank in Africa from the start with a minimum of tactical sense and they could have reached the Suez. British forces in 1940 were spread very thinly and it was mostly the mistakes of their opponents that made them look so good.

Better yes, but I think the Suez is a bit optimistic.

It would be September before Wavell would get the tanks and reinforcements that would make compass possible. Btw June and there the Brits were holding Egipt with a bluff the OTL Italians were too poorly set up to call. In those two months, there was a time frame for evem a moderatedly capable armoured corps to make a difference.

Do the Italians have the fuel need to fight their way to the Suez that fast? Also, the better the Italians do, the less help the Germans send. In many ways, a much better Italy in 1940/41 in Africa helps the Germans on the Russian Front more than it helps Italy.
 
Top