| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| WorldWar2.ro Forum > WW2 in General > Regia Aeronautica Vs. Elleniki Vassiliki Aeroporia |
| Posted by: Iamandi January 31, 2005 02:11 pm |
| How could you explain results in confrontation between Italy and Greek air forces? Italyans was not a gang of amateurs... Some fought in Spain. Were greeks so good? With what? PZL with rifle calibre mg with not so much ammo... I am curios to "hear" (ok, to read) your opinions. So, why were such results? Iama |
| Posted by: PanzerKing February 01, 2005 04:36 pm |
| Well the only thing I know was that the Italians were not able to gain complete air superiority over northwestern Greece/Albania, according to the few books I've read that give a general overview of the campaigns. |
| Posted by: Iamandi February 02, 2005 11:54 am |
| Some of the Italian pilots who fight in Greece had seen service in the "Aviazione Legionaria" during the Spanish Civil War and those who not served in Spain had a verry high standard of trainings. EVA had PZL 24, Bloch MB.151, Gladiators, british manned Hurricanes. Macchi MC.200 and Fiat CR.42 not as good as PZL 24? Iama |
| Posted by: PanzerKing February 03, 2005 02:11 am |
| It's not a question of superior planes, but how, when, and where they were used. Really there are more variables than that. I'll try and do some research and shed some light in this subject. |
| Posted by: mr.bluenote February 04, 2005 10:03 pm |
| Well, first of all the Italians didn't plan the campaign in Greece very well, so to say. They lacked nearly everything... Second, their aircraft were either outdated or beginning to get outdated - the RA had modern metal mono-planes with enclosed cockpits, but they were few and as with the older models generally lightly armed (7,7mm macineguns or 12,7mm ditto), badly armoured and underpowered (the Italians had lots of problems with liquid cooled inline engins and thus used old and weaker design for much of the war). The Italian planes also generally lacked radios. Third, the RA hadn't really learned the lessons of the Abyssinian campaing and the Spanish Cuvil War. As the Germans begun to use the finger-four formation and flyving two and two (you now, wingmen), the Italians till more or less used the flying circus. Furthermore the Italians placed great emphasis on manouverbility in aerial combat and thus negleted, as mentioned above, armour, firepower and speed. Quite a few of the pilots came home from Spain with the idea that open cockpits were necessary (remour has it that som RA pilots actually refused to fly in planes with an enclosed cokpit) etc etc. So all in all, the RA was not geared to fight a modern air war and thus ran into a world of trouble the minute they came up against a determined opponent (as we must say the Greeks were). The RA only got into more hot water as the RAF began to make its presence felt... Best regards! - mr.Bluenote. |
| Posted by: Ruy Aballe February 06, 2005 11:40 pm |
| Hello, Yes, that's true. The front-line figthers fielded by the Regia Aeronautica by 1940, like the Macchi MC.200 or the Fiat G.50 (I will not even comment the sizeable numbers of Fiat CR 32’s that still remained in service in several outposts of the Italian Empire when Mussolini decided to join the shooting...), although reasonably modern, were actually suited to a 1937 scenario. And some hard lessons experienced in Spain seem to have been ignored by the Italians... Take for instance, the absence of an armoured seat for the pilot: many Italian pilots fell in Spain under the high rate of fire of the PV-1 machine guns used in the I-15 and I-16 fighters flown by the Russian "volunteers" and the Republicans. The situation got much worse when the PV-1's were replaced by the dreaded ShKAS. The firing rate was so high that the effect on enemy aircraft was said to be similar to that of a mechanical saw... That said, it should be noted that both the Russians and the Germans were quick into adopting armour to defend the pilot. The first I-15's were fitted locally with armour, but then the armoured seat became standard equipment. The I-15's built in Spain, at Reus and Sabadell, were fitted from the outset with that feature. Iama, can you read Spanish? There's a couple of interesting articles I could send you on the subject. However, on the other hand, the Italians had a sort of innate ability to design good, structurally sound airframes, with excellent aerodynamics, but they lacked suitable in-line engines by 1940. Well, the problem was eventually solved when they acquired the licence to produce the DB 601 from the Germans. The next generation of Italian fighters was nothing short of superb, mixing excellent airframes, superlative manoeuvrability (and beautiful, sleek lines) with German engines. The results (the MC 202 "Folgore" and the Reggiane Re-2001) were well above the average Allied fighters employed in the M.T.O. up to 1943, with the sole exception of the Spitfire Mk V. It is also interesting to note that the best Italian fighter of the first generation of modern monoplanes, the Re-2000 was seen as a secondary alternative to the Macchi and Fiat products. It was exported to Sweden and Hungary, but its career in Italian service was insignificant (some were used as catapult launched, shipboard fighters in some Regia Marina vessels as late as early 1943). Last but not the least, EVA's P.24's, coupled with the Greek pilots willingness to defend their homeland, were more than a match to the Fiat CR 42. As a matter of fact, the P.24 (as its Yugoslav counterpart, the IK-2) was completely able to tackle any late biplane fighter, such as the afore-mentioned Fiat, the Gloster Gladiator and possibly the I-153, although the later was faster. Cheers, Ruy |
| Posted by: Iamandi February 07, 2005 07:02 am |
| I read an article were ground crews - mechanics teams - were also a big fact in greek good results. They used 2 P- 24 who colided to build one in a single night! Iama |
| Posted by: Iamandi February 07, 2005 02:24 pm |
| Ruy, i have a software - "Power Translator" who knows 6 languages. From spanish, he will translate to me in english. But, spanish is not so hard. If i started to learn spanish and not english, now il be a good skilled spanish speaker. A! Most of the romanian women knows spanish from "telenovele"... Maybe i find some help, in this more pleasant way!  Iama |
| Posted by: Ruy Aballe February 08, 2005 07:40 pm |
| Yuck!!... Women and "Culebrones"!!* The same thing everywhere! But what you say is true: I heard about three different cases, where lady fans (all non-Iberian speakers!) of Latin American soap operas managed to learn through Spanish - and Portuguese also, in one of the cases, also by listening to Amália Rodrigues! - thanks to their TV tastes...  So, I can send then some things to you in Spanish! Not difficult at all for a Romanian. Lastly, and to avoid staying for too long off-topic, I also read about the almost mythological efficiency of Greek ground crews, but man, to build a P.24 from two damaged ones (I suppose the damages were extensive...) in a single night seems incredible! But in war, under pressure, men can perform amazing deeds... Ruy *note: "culebrón" - singular form - means big snake, or, more appropriately, long snake: it is a derogatory word used to describe the lenghty, boring plots of the Latin American "telenovelas", especially Mexican and Venezuelan ones - Brazilian ones are, of course, spoken in Portuguese in their original versions... |
| Posted by: JulioMoc March 26, 2005 09:13 pm |
| I think the italians lacked doctrine above all. Of course they had inferior equipment, but they didn´t fought correctly. The italian pilots only began to fight properly in 1941 in Lybia. THe greeks also had a huge moral strength, cause they were defending their homes. Júlio |
| Posted by: Ruy Aballe March 27, 2005 11:59 am |
| Júlio, Yes, it is true that the Italians lacked a modern air combat doctrine. As a matter of fact, the most effective Italian fighter units ended up to be the ones fielded by the A.N.R., when several tactical approaches of the Luftwaffe were duly learnt and put into good use. However, to say that the "The italian pilots only began to fight properly in 1941 in Lybia" maybe be correct in a World War II scenario, but we must remind that they fought bravely during the Spanish Civil War, providing a invaluable help to the Nationalists. There's plenty of evidence on that. Ruy |
| Posted by: Dénes March 27, 2005 03:10 pm | ||
Talking of the A.N.R., a couple of days ago I received a complimentary copy from the Author (Ferdinando D'Amico) of a superb new book on the camouflages and markings of the A.N.R., published by Chevron/Classic in the U.K. Highly recommended to everyone interested in the topic. Gen. Dénes |
| Posted by: Ruy Aballe March 28, 2005 11:40 am |
| Dénes, I also got a copy of the same book just after it came out in the U.K. It is really a superb title, and one that certainly goes beyond the mere study of markings, colours and camouflage. The only annoying thing are the faulty printing of a small number of colour profiles and views (unacceptable in a book with such an high price tag), a problem the authors immediately took care of by putting within the reach of their readers the correct artwork in the internet, something which says a lot about the professional and serious approach they took (the responsability lies totally on the publisher). Unfortunately, publishers sometimes mess up the artwork before the author can do anything and/or when it is already too late (I experienced the nasty flavour of this a few weeks ago...). I also recommend the book not only to those interested in Italian subjects, but also to anyone who enjoys a well researched, deeply detailed historic work! Ruy |