<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Friedrich H:
I do not agree.
have you ever seen pictures of the ships? They are bloody incredible and modern. Obviously, they were not built before WWI.<hr></blockquote>
Well truth is (according to my Jane's ships of WW2) they WERE built before WW1. All of Italy's battleships were older or as old as the Royal Navy ships you mentioned except for the 3 under the Italia class. (Although you mentioned King George the V class which was more modern than the Italia class by a few years)
Also the look of a ship has nothing to do with performance. The only thing that matters is speed,armament, and defense. The look is purely cosmetic and really means nothing.
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
They were built under Mussolini's government. If all of them were built before WWi then why was England so worry about the Italian fleet? They could have destroyed the whole fleet in a conventional battleships-battle like many comanders should have wanted.<hr></blockquote>
That is easy to answer...The Italian fleet never confronted the British, except for the battle of Cape Matapan. In that battle One of Italy's best ships confronted the older british force...and was defeated thanks to an aircraft carrier and better leadership/tactics.
The British were concerned about the Italian navy because although it was not very active...in good hands could be a handful...which required a strong force to counter it in case it did force it's way to sea.
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
Then why did they do something so modern and risky like the strike in Taranto Harbour?<hr></blockquote>
Why have Aircraft Carriers and not use them? The British had the means of conducting a very efficient attack. A small squadren of Swordfish bi-planes are alot cheaper to risk than battleships and cruisers...plus the destruction of the enemy with planes like that is very how you say, economical and smart! So smart that it paved the way for the aircraft carrier in becoming the ship of the future.
The Italian Navy in combined strength really was stronger and more modern than the British Mediteranean fleet...BUT it was all the Italians had...and any losses surely could not be replaced...and that meant that any losses would REALLY make their situation precarious.
So even though the British were over stretched they could still afford more losses than the
Italians and probably would trade those ships in order to completely wipe out the power of the Italian Navy.
After the battle of Cape Matapan the Italians realized that they really would have a tough time defeating the British unless they risked the "meat" of their Navy. And that just wouldn't be smart for losses surely would be expected...and in a few months the British would have replaced their's...while the Italians would be made more and more weaker.
So i think in the end the reason the Italians pretty much under-utilized their navy was simply because They figured that as long as they had capitol ships in the area the british would be weary of them. If they engaged the British and suffered losses...they would easily loose TOTAL control to the british.
So in the end, the answer simply for the Italians was that caution was better than risk and a potentially dangerous navy was better than a destroyed/depleated Navy.
[ 22 February 2002: Message edited by: Ron ]</p>
