Malta surrenders September 1942

Italian Naval Victory
I did a search on Malta surrendering, but only found two old (2004) threads. Does anyone have any fresh ideas? Mini-TL below.

At an Italo-German meeting concerning the latest British supply convoy to Malta on August 12th 1942, Kesselring refuses a request to supply air cover for an Italian naval attack. Subsequent negotiations don’t go anywhere. To resolve the issue, both sides agree Mussolini will be asked to give a deciding vote. POD Mussolini’s desire for a naval victory trumps his fear of offending Hitler and he chooses air cover for his navy over air attacks as the means to destroy the convoy.

At dawn on August 13th, the Italian 6-inch cruisers Eugenio, Montecuccoli, Attendolo, 8-inch cruisers Gorizia, Bolzano, Trieste and eleven escorting destroyers intercept the Malta-bound Pedestal convoy south of the island of Pantellaria. The remaining 6 merchant ships and the tanker Ohio are escorted by seven destroyers, the 4.5-inch cruiser Charybdis and the damaged 6-inch cruiser Kenya. The British lack aircraft for an effective attack on the Italian ships and can only engage the German aircraft providing cover.

By mid-morning, the convoy and its escorts have been sunk, the Italians losing 1 cruiser and 2 destroyers (am totally guessing as to losses). This means that Malta, with supplies of flour, fuel oil and kerosene for only 3 weeks, faces starvation and collapse. Another convoy cannot be organised in time. On September 7th 1942 Malta surrenders.

What effects? Rommel gets a bit further into Egypt? Delayed Allied North Africa victory? Irrelevant in the grand scheme?

Sources:
Shankland, P. and Hunter, A. Malta Convoy. Collins, 1961
http://www.naval-history.net/
http://www.regiamarina.net/
 
That will give the Axis much advantage, but even that does not change the fact that a supply-line from Italy to Egypt will be a very long and unefficient. Maybe Rommel will take the channel, but the British will stop him at Palestine
 
1942 is too late to save the situation, one of the tsouras compilation books has an interesting tl on this subject called "for want of an island"

basically having that extra island to capture after the allies capture north africa gives them misgivings about the soft underbelly strategy, and instead they opt for round up in 1943, which is a disaster due to lack of shipping, and airpower not being as dominent as it was in 1944
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
By September of 1942, it is too late for the fall of Malta to save the situation in Egypt, and I do not think it would impact Operation Torch (indirect butteflies aside). But would Axis control of Malta have any impact on the Tunisia Campaign in early 1943?
 

Markus

Banned
Rommel gets a bit further into Egypt? Delayed Allied North Africa victory? Irrelevant in the grand scheme?


No! Maybe. Yes!

There were three problems:
-getting supplies to Tripolis
-the limited capacity of the port of Tripolis
-the distance from Tripolis to the front

The surrender of Malta eliminates one but Tripolis-Egypt is waaaay to far. The Axis would have had to use a port closer to the front to shorten the distance trucks had to cover BUT the other ports had an even smaller capacity than Tripolis and were within range of allied aircraft.

Rommel can´t break through at El Alamein, the Allies will land in North-West Africa in November. Malta in axis hands could add a few more weeks to the campaing and it would complicate things a bit when Sicily is invaded but that would be it.
 
Markus
No! Maybe. Yes!


I figured as much. Although could Malta falling affect Churchill politically?
Also, would a definitive naval victory make the Italian navy more aggressive?
At least Italy and its navy get bragging rights for taking Malta if nothing else.
"We got thrashed but we took Malta".
 

Rebel

Banned
Even if we end up with a victory in North Africa, the Soviets are still likely to have taken Berlin by 1945.
 
Malta falls, and as a result Germany is able to send more troops to NA in late 42/early 43.
Thus allowing even BIGGER losses when Tunisia falls...:) :)
 
Getting back to the events south of Pantelleria: This is splitting hairs, but I believe Charybdis had 5.25 inch guns. Not that would have changed the outcome much. Also, despite the Italians having a decided advantage in cruisers, remember that in June, with another British convoy approaching Malta with only destroyers as escorts, an attacking Italian force was kept away from the merchantmen, with the loss of one British destroyer, [Bedouin] and one more, along with one Italian destroyeer damaged; in other words, the British might well not do as badly as one might think.
BTW, are you butterflying away the attack on the Italian fleet by HMS Unbroken? Bolzano and Attendolo were damaged, and the Italians were seriously rattled.
 
Like oudi14, I have serious reservations regarding the convoy battle described by the OP. I have even more reservations regarding the suggested events arising from that victory.

The convoy is either destroyed or driven of on 13 August yet the WAllies cannot manage to dispatch another within three weeks? And Malta surrenders as a result? Sorry, I'm not buying it.

The Wallies are less than 90 days away from launching Torch so they have the assets available. In the past the WAllies have also shown themselves able to take great risks to keep Malta supplied. You only need to look at Operations Calendar and Bowery for an example of that.

Sink one convoy in mid-August and another is steaming for the island before August ends and this time with a heavier escort.

Accepting for the moment that Malta does fall during this period, Astrodragon's comments are correct. All that happens is that more Axis troops are rushed to Tunisia to be eventually captured. It's too late for Malta's capture to make much of a difference.
 
Hi, thanks for reading & commenting:
oudi14, I checked with naval-history.net. Charybdis was meant to have 5.25s but a shortage meant 4.5s were used instead. As far as the battle goes, I figured the Italians stood an excellent chance, attacking in daylight with air cover and outnumbering and outgunning the British. Admiral Burroughs, the British commander, was expecting to die the morning of August 13th and lose the convoy.
Not sure Unbroken could still attack, but maybe. If Attendolo was lost in the battle, Bolzano could get two torpedos and be sunk.

Don Lardo: apparently the Deputy Governor of the island had calculated at the start of August Malta would have to surrender between August 31st and September 7th, due to lack of food and fuel supplies for the civil population. In addition, Malta Convoy stated that another convoy wouldn’t have been possible before that date was reached. According to the book, the key problem was a lack of fast tankers. I suspect you’re right about Tunisia, but Malta falling might buy the Afrika Korps another few weeks/months.

Thanks again for the comments and especially the questions.
 
Don Lardo: apparently the Deputy Governor of the island had calculated at the start of August Malta would have to surrender between August 31st and September 7th, due to lack of food and fuel supplies for the civil population.


The same calculations had been made before and found to be less than accurate.

In addition, Malta Convoy stated that another convoy wouldn’t have been possible before that date was reached. According to the book, the key problem was a lack of fast tankers.
Given the efforts and risks the WAllies had made and taken when it came to supplying Malta, either the necessary fast tankers would have been found or some other way to get the fuel to Malta would have been tried.

It's one thing to say in hindsight "The tankers weren't available", it's another to say after at the time and after a failed resupply effort "We will find a way lest Malta surrender". Seeing how many times either side during the war found a way, I'm betting one would be found again.

Remember, after a few stillborn attempts to get additional fighters to Malta, the WAllies risked one of the few carriers left to them at the time not once but twice in order to get the job done.

I suspect you’re right about Tunisia, but Malta falling might buy the Afrika Korps another few weeks/months.
I wasn't the only one suggesting that and once Torch kicks off Panzer Armee Afrika is just a POW cage in waiting, Malta or no Malta.

Malta is different things to different occupiers. Malta can hurt the Axis more than it helps them and Malta can help the Wallies more than it hurts them.
 
Fair comments. One hypothetical situation, different viewpoints. From what I’ve read, I still think Malta would have surrendered in early September if Pedestal failed. As some of you have pointed out, North Africa still goes under, although maybe slightly later.
Also, it’s not going to change the end result but, would the Italians winning the naval battle have made their navy more aggressive?
 
Fair comments. One hypothetical situation, different viewpoints. From what I’ve read, I still think Malta would have surrendered in early September if Pedestal failed. As some of you have pointed out, North Africa still goes under, although maybe slightly later.
Also, it’s not going to change the end result but, would the Italians winning the naval battle have made their navy more aggressive?

An aggressive jellyfish is still a jellyfish.....:p
 
Yea, not enough. Too little, too late. The supply lines in the mid-Med corridor are a little more secure, but as otghers have mentioned the only Axis port of any note is Tripoli, and that's too far from the front.

Although could Malta falling affect Churchill politically?

Yes, but probably not decisively. If Greece didn't topple him OTL Malta probably does not ATL

Also, would a definitive naval victory make the Italian navy more aggressive?

Probably not as long as Cavagnari is still in charge. He was so afraid of losing ships he avoided any battle that wasn't in his eyes a guaranteed victory, deciding instead to keep them "safely" in port. :rolleyes:

Now, if a butterfly is that Mussie sacks Cavagnari due to the latter's unwillingness to attack Malta and replaces him with a more aggressive Admiral then perhaps we see a more agressive RM...too late to change anything, though.

At least Italy and its navy get bragging rights for taking Malta if nothing else.
"We got thrashed but we took Malta".

That's about it. A minor bragging point for RM vets and the vestigal Far Right.
 
Top