AHC: Malta has been taken by the Axis in World War II

I did find a video - very propaganda like as you will imagine - of the Sitia beach landings conducted by a Regiment of the Regina Division (actual video was likely a staged training exercise with the sound of gun fire overlaid as the OTL landings were unopposed and the camera positions are very 'exact') on the east end of Crete during the invasion in 41

The techniques being used are somewhat basic.....and if opposed would very likely have resulted in a disaster for the Assaulting troops

A dedicated Amphibious force requires development of suitable assault craft and equipment, will take up resources, manpower and time - even the UK and the US who were probably the 'Subject matter Experts' on Beach assaults - had skill sets and equipment in its infancy in 1940 compared to those being used Mid and Late war
I liked that so much that I watched it twice. I liked the video that followed with Oliver Reed as Graziani and what looked like Renault FT tanks even more.
 
A couple of points:

Malta isn't THAT small - not all of the British defenders would be at the point of contact. In fact, I'd venture a guess that a majority of them would be stuck defending places like the Grand Harbor or the island of Gozo. By the time you assemble enough of your non-motorized infantry and march them out from their static positions to where the enemy landing is (and the fact that the Italians were also planning a decoy landing on the opposite end of the island makes this even trickier), the battle will have been more or less decided, one way or the other.

Also, a lot of the numbers regarding British artillery etc can be misleading, as you can imagine quite a lot of that was stuck in static positions in and around the Grand Harbor.

It's smaller than you would think - I remember walking from Dingli cliffs to St Andrews one night [don't ask!] which is the full width of the island East-West at about it's widest point in somthing like three an a half hours. And I wasn't walking an anything resembling a straight line...

Gozo would have been pretty much undefended - there's nothing there to defend. Granted a lot of troops would have been in the grand Harbour area, but at the time pretty much all the roads on the island spread out from Valetta. but the main line of defence which WAS quite seriously defended, was the Cottonera Lines, which take advatage of natural defensive terrain, and are south of all the possible sandy beaches suitable for landing. I don't know if the British were panning to use the little forts the Kinghts of St John built around the coast, but they would have been formidable obstacles to unsupported infantry, being made of thick sandstone.
 
It's smaller than you would think - I remember walking from Dingli cliffs to St Andrews one night [don't ask!] which is the full width of the island East-West at about it's widest point in somthing like three an a half hours. And I wasn't walking an anything resembling a straight line...
That 1.5 hour bus ride from the airport appeared long as shit to me :p
 
A couple of points:

Malta isn't THAT small - not all of the British defenders would be at the point of contact. In fact, I'd venture a guess that a majority of them would be stuck defending places like the Grand Harbor or the island of Gozo. By the time you assemble enough of your non-motorized infantry and march them out from their static positions to where the enemy landing is (and the fact that the Italians were also planning a decoy landing on the opposite end of the island makes this even trickier), the battle will have been more or less decided, one way or the other.

Also, a lot of the numbers regarding British artillery etc can be misleading, as you can imagine quite a lot of that was stuck in static positions in and around the Grand Harbor.

A 9.2 inch gun based at grand harbour with a range of 21,000 yards or 11.92 miles could hit any spot on the northern coast of Malta.
It's smaller than you would think - I remember walking from Dingli cliffs to St Andrews one night [don't ask!] which is the full width of the island East-West at about it's widest point in somthing like three an a half hours. And I wasn't walking an anything resembling a straight line...

Gozo would have been pretty much undefended - there's nothing there to defend. Granted a lot of troops would have been in the grand Harbour area, but at the time pretty much all the roads on the island spread out from Valetta. but the main line of defence which WAS quite seriously defended, was the Cottonera Lines, which take advatage of natural defensive terrain, and are south of all the possible sandy beaches suitable for landing. I don't know if the British were panning to use the little forts the Kinghts of St John built around the coast, but they would have been formidable obstacles to unsupported infantry, being made of thick sandstone.

I would have thought Gozo would have had to be held even if only to protect the islands flank.
 
Some information I came across doing my research for the British hold Crete thread. The information is from page 269 of Volume 2 of the Mediterranean and Middle East.

The reinforcements sent in operations Substance and Style increased to the combat strength of the garrison to over 22,000 at the beginning of August 1941.

The number of infantry battalions had been increased from 10 (7 British and 3 Maltese) at the end of June 1941 to 13 (10 British and 3 Maltese).

There were also:
112 heavy anti-aircraft guns in 14 batteries (8 RA and 6 RMA) so the requirement set in 1939 had been filled
118 light anti-aircraft guns in 11 batteries (7 RA and 4 RMA) so the requirement set in 1939 had been exceeded
104 light, field and medium artillery pieces for use in beach defence and mobile operations
The stocks of most items of military stores were sufficient for eight months, and of some for as much as fifteen.

The original 'target' figure for fighter squadrons had been fixed at four, but by January 1941 there was only one. Now, at the beginning of August 1941, there were fifteen Hurricane Is and sixty Hurricane IIs serviceable.
 
If only there was a way to game this out...

s-l300.jpg

740821.jpg

one of the best of the table top wargames too

wish I still owned it as I am looking at an Axis assault on Malta as per Operation Hercules as a butterfly in my timeline
 
IMHO Malta was there for the taking in June 1940. However, the casualties would have been considerable possibly worse than Crete.

OTOH the Italians didn't have the forces needed to take Malta in June 1940 so ipso facto it's only going to happen as part of a better prepared Italy timeline.

IMHO one of those preparations has to be an effective force of anti-shipping aircraft. That is at lease 150 S.M.79 torpedo bombers (including 30 based in East Africa) and a dive bomber force of similar size (and deployment) equipped with Ju87s (built under licence because IMHO the Germans couldn't spare that many Ju87s) or an equivalent Italian design.
 
also all those RA and Luftwaffe aircraft- afaik much larger in numbers than what the UK had in Malta- historically tied to sieging Malta could be used elsewhere
Exactly right. Like Fliegerkorps X, which, AIUI, was diverted from the East Front at a key moment so it could bombard Malta at Rommel's insistence. And WAllied forces not used in supplying Malta can also be used elsewhere. The knock-ons are huge...
 

Deleted member 1487

Exactly right. Like Fliegerkorps X, which, AIUI, was diverted from the East Front at a key moment so it could bombard Malta at Rommel's insistence. And WAllied forces not used in supplying Malta can also be used elsewhere. The knock-ons are huge...
2nd Air Fleet was moved from the East, Fliegerkorps X was in the Mediterranean throughout 1941.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
2nd Air Fleet, Fliegerkorps X was in Greece throughout 1941.
Not quite.

Fligerkorps X was moved to Sicily at the end of 1940 and in June 1941 moved to Greece to take the place of Fliegerkorps VIII which had moved to the eastern front. Luftflotte 2 was moved from the eastern front at the end of 1941 following Operation Crusader. Fligerkorps II was moved from the eastern front to Sicily at the end of 1941.

Fligerkorps X was the Luftwaffe's anti-shipping command. Had there been no need to move it to the Mediterranean it would probably have gone to France to attack British shipping in the Western Approaches. It would have compliment Fligerkorps IX the mining command and might have been merged with Fligerfuhrer Atlantik.
 

Deleted member 1487

Not quite.
How does anything you wrote contradict what I said in any way?

Fligerkorps X was moved to Sicily at the end of 1940 and in June 1941 moved to Greece to take the place of Fliegerkorps VIII which had moved to the eastern front. Luftflotte 2 was moved from the eastern front at the end of 1941 following Operation Crusader. Fligerkorps II was moved from the eastern front to Sicily at the end of 1941.

Fligerkorps X was the Luftwaffe's anti-shipping command. Had there been no need to move it to the Mediterranean it would probably have gone to France to attack British shipping in the Western Approaches. It would have compliment Fligerkorps IX the mining command and might have been merged with Fligerfuhrer Atlantik.
 

Deleted member 1487

What you wrote was.Fliegerkorps X was in Greece in the second half of 1941 not throughout 1941. It didn't come under the command of Luftflotte 2 (2nd Air Fleet) until the end of 1941.
Gotcha, I meant to write Mediterranean and thought I did. I also meant 2nd Air Fleet was moved from the East, not X Fliegerkorps.
 
As I think the Italians could have only invaded Malta successfully in June 1940 if they were much better prepared its very likely that they conquered mainland Greece without any help from the Germans, mount an airborne invasion of Crete (using the airborne forces that took Malta) again without German help, and held/regained Cyrenaica without help from the Germans too.

The best I can work out is that at the beginning of July 1941 the Luftwaffe had 2,770 combat aircraft on the Eastern Front, 780 in the west under Luftflotten 3 and 5 and 390 combat aircraft in the Mediterranean (150 in Libya and 240 in Greece). No Mediterranean commitments would allow a 50% increase in the forces in the west or a 15% increase in the forces on the Russian front.

About 60% of the aircraft in the Mediterranean were bombers. If transferred to Russia it would increase the German strength on that front from 775 to 925 long range bombers and from 310 to 400 dive bombers.
 
Top