The FReeper Foxhole's TreadHead Tuesday Tankettes Part II (Italian and Japanese) - Nov. 16th, 2004

mailer.fsu.edu ^

[SAMWolf]

Lord,

Keep our Troops forever in Your care

Give them victory over the enemy...

Grant them a safe and swift return...

Bless those who mourn the lost.
.

FReepers from the Foxhole join in prayer
for all those serving their country at this time.

...................................................................................... ...........................................

U.S. Military History, Current Events and Veterans Issues

Where Duty, Honor and Country
are acknowledged, affirmed and commemorated.

Our Mission:

The FReeper Foxhole is dedicated to Veterans of our Nation's military forces and to others who are affected in their relationships with Veterans.

In the FReeper Foxhole, Veterans or their family members should feel free to address their specific circumstances or whatever issues concern them in an atmosphere of peace, understanding, brotherhood and support.

The FReeper Foxhole hopes to share with it's readers an open forum where we can learn about and discuss military history, military news and other topics of concern or interest to our readers be they Veteran's, Current Duty or anyone interested in what we have to offer.

If the Foxhole makes someone appreciate, even a little, what others have sacrificed for us, then it has accomplished one of it's missions.

We hope the Foxhole in some small way helps us to remember and honor those who came before us.

To read previous Foxhole threads or
to add the Foxhole to your sidebar,
click on the books below.

Italian Tankettes

The "Carro Veloce" (CV) appeared in the Italian Army in 1928, when it bought 25 tankettes Carden-Lyod VI. The idea of a small, fast and cheap vehicule as an alternative to the costly tanks was widely accepted in Europe at the time. Italy adopted it and built almost nothing else until the eve of the war.



The conquest of Ethiopia in 1935 seemed to vindicate that theory, but the fightings in Spain two years later were a sharp rebuttal. Unable to stand any antitank fire, sometimes holed by heavy machinegun fire, they value on a real battlefield was almost nil.


Fiat Ansaldo L3 First Prototype

When Italy entered World War II in 1940, the CV were the most numerous vehicule of the Italian armored forces. It fought in Africa and in the Balkans on the frontline until 1941, suffering heavy losses. It then fulfilled second line missions until the Italian capitulation in 1943.

Carro Veloce CV-33, (L3/33) CV-35, (L3/35), (L3/35Lf)

Designed by Ansaldo but based upon earlier Carro Veloce 29. Although commonly referred to as a tank, this vehicle falls more properly within the classification of a tankette. The Italian authorities showed an interest in a small, light vehicle which would be suitable for use in mountainous terrain, leading to the acquisition of 25 British Carden Loyd Mark VI tankettes in 1929. A Fiat-Ansaldo modification of the Mark VI, armed with a Fiat Model 14 water-cooled 6.5 mm machine gun was designated as the carro i,elo(-e (CV) 29. The armament was subsequently changed to a single Fiat Model 14 air-cooled anti-aircraft machine gun, still 6.5 mm. Subsequent modifications resulted in the CV 3/33, still armed with a single 6.5 mm air-cooled weapon. Apart from its distinctive armament, this first series of CV 3/33 had a characteristic track tension idler mounted in a bracket which was attached to the rear idler wheel. In 1934, the second series of CV 3/33 appeared, with the track tension idler separated from the rear idler, and with two 8 mm machine guns as standard armament. The earlier series of CV 3/33 were eventually retrofitted with the heavier armament also. Development continued, and in 1935 the CV 3/35 appeared, incorporating minor design and production changes, and retaining the 8 mm armament. A final version, of which only a limited number was produced, was introduced in 1938. It differed significantly in its suspension system, and was armed with a single Breda 13.2 mm machine gun. External stowage of entrenching tools, etc, varied from series to series. The designation of both the CV 3/33 and 3/35 was changed to L.3 in the late 1930s.



Variations of the L.3 were built for special applications. The most frequently encountered variant was the flamethrower, which was built in a version with a self-contained tank for flame liquid, and also in a version in which a wheeled tank trailer carrying the liquid was towed behind the CV. There were a number of radio-equipped variants of the L.3 used by company and battalion commanders. A limited number of L.3s were modified to mount the 20 mm Solothurn anti-tank gun in lieu of the machine guns. T ' wo experimental variants of the L.3 were also produced, the first being the carro gettaponte, or bridge-laying tank, very similar in concept to present-day AVLBS, and the second being a recovery vehicle with an A-frame on the rear which could be controlled from inside the tank, making it similar in concept to present-day VTRS. It is interesting to note that this appears to have been the only Italian attempt at building a tracked VTR.


The 1935 model. Bolted construction, twin 8mm MG, improved vision ports."

The CV was not meant to be used in lieu of heavier tanks, but was designed according to the Italian doctrine of the period, for security and reconnaissance duties, and was also to be utilized in the elimination of small pockets of resistance. However, the outbreak of hostilities earlier than anticipated by Italy forced them to use what was at hand, namely large numbers of the L.3. More than 75% of the tank formations encountered by the British in their desert offensive of late 1940 and early 1941 were comprised of the L.3, whose armor was not even proof against the armament of British armored cars which they encountered. The L.3 continued to be used throughout the war, being employed after 8 September, 1943 by units of the RSI.

CV 29


CV 29

The first fast Italian tank designed to accompany infantry and to be used for reconnaissance. The design was based on the Vickers Carden Loyd Mark VI machine gun carrier. Four had been purchased from England for that purpose. A total of 21 were made between 1929 and 1930.

L3/33


CV-33 (L3/33)

Developement of the CV 29 with a better armor and a closed combat compartment. A new model was produced after 1935 under the name CV 33 II. The new armament was afterwards adapted to the existing units. A flamethrowing version and a radio one were produced too. It operated successfully in Ethiopia against an army devoid of antitank weapons. Already during the civil war in Ethiopia, its weaknesses appeared. The original name of CV-33 was changed in L33 in 1938 and then in L3/33 in 1940.


The improved 1937/38 model. Stronger suspension, new track design, better episcope for the driver, and a Breda MG. Many older models were upgraded to this standard. In 1940, models were fitted with the 20mm Solothurn Anti-Tank Gun.

Identification: Very similar to the CV 35, but the latest has a bolted hull.

L3/35


CV-35 (L3/35)

Improved CV 33 tankette with among other better optical instruments. A flamethrowing and radio versions were also produced. In 1938, its original name CV 35 was changed into L35 and in 1940 into L3/35.


Sometimes known as the L35/Lf, the final designator was L.3/35Lf. Shown here in action. The "Lf" designator stood for Lanciafiamme."

The Italian tankettes took part in the Civil War in Spain on the Nationalist side. Its weaknesses came to light: ant armor too thin and an insufficient armament. Yet, the tankettes were still the backbone of the Italian armored forces in 1940.

Identification: Very similar to the CV-33, it differs by its bolted hull.

[SAMWolf]

Japanese Tankettes


Type 94 'TK' tankettes in a street of Hoihow, on the Hainan Island in 1939.

The Japanese Army essentially employed three categories of tank during the Second World War. Almost all these vehicles, regardless of category, were rather small by western standards. Their fighting compartments tended to be cramped, even for the smaller physique of the average Japanese (I can't cite the source but remember reading that the statistical average height for recruits accepted into the Japanese Army during World War II was five feet three inches). Perhaps most importantly, just about all of the Japanese tanks compared badly with many contemporary European and American designs in terms of such qualities as gunpower and armor thickness. However, before judging the Japanese too harshly on account of the latter, it should be remembered that the Japanese Army was not planning to fight on the open steppes of southern Russia or the hedgerows of Normandy, where tank versus tank confrontations were frequent, and the European opponents were relatively close to their own bases of power. The Japanese war would take place on the other side of the world, in Asia and on various Pacific islands. Here the opposition would either be the other independent or semi-independent Asian countries, who would have only small quantities of light armor, if indeed they possessed armored vehicles at all; or else western colonial powers, the European component of which was already involved in an all-consuming war closer to home, all of whom would be fighting at great distances from their native lands, and at the end of a very long supply line. In these conditions the technical qualities of the Japanese tanks were often secondary to the very fact that they had tanks available at all, since (at least during the Japanese period of conquest in the early part of the war) mere possession of tanks often proved a great advantage, as their enemies did not have any.


Type 97 Tankettes in Burma

Japanese armor is often dismissed rather hastily in writing about the Second World War, in part because of the small size and general unimpressiveness of most Japanese designs (at least by European standards), and also because of the relatively limited numbers of tanks the Japanese were able to produce during the war. In the entire period 1931-45 the Japanese built barely 6,500 tanks of all kinds (Mitsubishi, the most important firm in Japanese tank production, made 3,300, or just over half of these). That quantity may seem trifling compared to some of the other combatants-- for instance, the Germans built more than 20,400 battle tanks of over ten tons alone (and another 14,000 self-propelled guns), the Americans churned out some 49,000 Shermans-- not to mention their other types!-- in 1942-45, the Soviets produced some 40,000 T-34's alone 1940-45, and the British made 8,600 tanks of all models in a single year, 1942. But Japan's other Axis ally, Italy, was able to complete only a little over 2,000 battle tanks over ten tons during the war, and perhaps an additional 2,500 light tanks and tankettes. And the hapless Italians were indeed deeply involved in 1940-42 in a theatre (North Africa) where tanks were often the decisive arm, and where sizeable tank- versus-tank battles were the rule rather than the exception. More to the point, despite the relatively anemic overall production (a result of both an industrial base too small to sustain all the demands of total war against such powerful enemies; a scarcity of raw materials which drove the Japanese to initiate the war with the westerners in the first place, and which grew much worse in the second half of the conflict; and, lastly, of the relative priorities accorded tank production in the allocation of scarce materials and facilities), Japanese tanks did appear on a wide number of battlefields throughout Asia and the Pacific. And, as will be seen below, they often made a significant contribution to victory in the period of greatest Japanese success. Their significance in the Far Eastern conflict may well be underated.


Type 97 Tankette on Namur Island of Kwajalein Atoll

The smallest of the three main categories of Japanese tanks was not a tank at all, really, but rather a "tankette." That is what its British designers called it, at any rate, and in the late 1920's they sold these little tracked vehicles, with or without turret, to a plethora of countries not only throughout Europe but all over the world. Many of the major European countries which acquired examples-- for instance, Germany, the USSR, Italy, Poland-- subsequently modified and developed the designs to suit their own specifications, and this was true for Japan as well. Like the Italians and the Poles (and many smaller nations), the Japanese at first were interested in using the tankette as a reconnaisance vehicle, specifically (again like the Italians and the Poles) to support the horse cavalry that usually carried out the task of scouting in these armies. Having one or more mobile, armored machinegun nests-- which was essentially what the tankette was, in its most common variations-- to call upon for quick back-up seemed like a good idea to most of the horse troopers. The Japanese, though, came to also use the tankette in their infantry divisions, performing a direct reconnaisance role either as a substitute for the horse cavalry, or as a supplement to what was available.


Somewhere in the Pacific. An American GI surveys a Type 94 that has been knocked out

The chief Japanese tankette during World War II was easily the Type 97, also known as the "Te-Ke" (I believe this was just a Japanese phoneticizing of the abbreviation "TK" for "tankette"-- as opposed to tank-- a designation which was also retained by the Poles for their vehicles of this class). It was a small, four and a half-ton vehicle, with two crewmen-- a driver in the hull and a gunner, who was also vehicle commander, in the turret. The normal armament in that turret was a single 37mm cannon. The Type 97 did not carry a machinegun, although there was a variant wherein a 7.7mm machinegun replaced the 37mm gun as the tankette's sole weapon. However, the version with the cannon seemed to have been by far the most prevalent, at least by the time of Pearl Harbor. The Type 97's armor was about two thirds of an inch thick (16mm) on its front surfaces, at other places (like its belly) well under a quarter of an inch (4mm). With an acceptable but unspectacular road speed of about 25 miles per hour, it was hardly an overpowering fighting machine in any respect. Nonetheless, the Type 97 proved extremely versatile. As mentioned, its initial role was supposed to be reconnaisance, but often these little tankettes were forced into battle in an infantry support role, leading or closely following groups of riflemen in attack in lieu of regular tanks to perform that function. Some of the Type 97 tankettes were also employed as armored front-line observation posts, often for use by artillery forward observers. Not only was the Type 97 Te-Ke, therefore, utilized for infantry support, as a sort of armored cavalry, and by the artillery arm, but it also saw service in supply tasks. The vehicle was rather widely used as a front-line armored ammunition carrier (the Japanese even built a small trailer for the Type 97 in this role, although these did not always accompany the tankette when in an ammunition-carrier capacity. I'm not sure if the trailor was armored or not).


Tankette Type 97 Te-Ke during the victory parade in Manilla in 1942.

Because of its versatility and general usefulness, the Type 97 was encountered virtually everywhere the Japanese Army fought during World War II. But it was seldom encountered in any great numbers. The Japanese generally did not group their tankettes into units larger than a company, which would be anywhere from 10 to 17 vehicles, and a total of at least 80 men including the organic supply and maintenance personnel and the command staff. Most regular Japanese divisions were organized to include a so-called "infantry group," which essentially consisted of a separate headquarters establishment which directly controlled the division's three infantry regiments, subordinate to divisional headquarters. In addition to the 70-110 men comprising the "infantry group" HQ, that headquarters also normally controlled one tankette company, as its own separate reconnaisance resource. This was the case, at least, in the type "B" divisions which made up the bulk of the Japanese Army, and most of the units employed against the westerners.



The Japanese also used considerable numbers of the older Type 94 tankette, especially in China (and China, where security duties and counter-insurgent warfare made huge demands on the Japanese forces throughout the Second World War, was a theater and a type of fighting where older armored vehicles could remain useful far beyond their prime). Even smaller than the Type 97 Te-Ke, it weighed less than three and a quarter tons. Like the Type 97, the Type 94 had a two-man crew. Its small, offset turret housed a single 7.7mm machinegun, and was so primitive that the means of traverse was by the crewman inside pushing it around with his shoulder! Armor was at most only half an inch thick (12mm), and speed 25 mph on a good road. Japan's first tankette design, the Type 92, also remained in service in China (there is some confusion because for a time the Type 94 was mistakenly called the Type 92 by the Allies, but both vehicles were employed, the Type 94 in greater quantity by 1941). Like the Type 94, the Type 92 was a two-man tankette mounting a single machinegun in its turret.



The Japanese tankettes were in reality auxiliary vehicles, designed and adapted for a variety of support tasks.

[SAMWolf]

Model 94 Tankette "TK"

Model 94 Tankette had a codename, "TK", which means "Tokushu (Special) Ken-in sha (Tractor)". The TK's true purpose was to pull the supply/toxic gas/bleaching powder (to counteract toxins) trailer.


Model 94 Tankette "TK"

In the late 1920's, the Japanese purchased six British Carden-Loyd Mark machine-gun carriers, and two Mark Vlb carriers for testing. As a result of trials the Japanese decided to develop a small vehicle in Japan based on what was learned. The prototype was built in 1933-34 by the Tokyo Gas and Electric Industry (later known as Hino Motors) and after trials in both China and Japan it was standardized as the Type 94 tankette. Oddly, American sources have always referred to it as the Type 92 tankette.



The hull of the tankette used a riveted construction, with the engine and driver at the front and the small turret at the rear of the hull. A large door was provided in the rear of the hull so that stores could be loaded. Armament consisted of a single 6.5mm machine-gun in a turret with manual traverse. The suspension was designed by Major Tomio Hara and was similar to most Japanese tanks. It consisted of four bogies, two on each side. These were suspended by bell-cranks resisted by armored compression springs placed horizontally, one each side of the hull, externally. Each bogie had two small rubber-tired road wheels with the drive sprocket at the front and the idler at the rear. There were two track-return rollers. When in service, the Type 94 was found to be very prone to throwing its tracks when it made a high speed turn. Further redesign work was carried out on the suspension and the small idler was replaced by a larger idler, which was now on the ground... it did not solve the problem. An air-cooled gasoline motor that developed 35hp @ 2,500rpm powered the tank. Armament initially consisted of a single Type 91 6.5mm machine gun, although in later model this was replaced by a single 7.7mm machine gun. Some appear to have been fitted with a 37mm gun, but this is unconfirmed.



The primary role of the Type 94 was to carry supplies in the battlefield area but it was often used in the reconnaissance role for which it was totally unsuited as its armor could be penetrated by ordinary rifle bullets. In 1936, each Japanese Infantry Division had a Tankette Company that had 6 Type 94s, for use in reconnaissance role. It was often used to tow a tracked ammunition trailer in a fashion similar to the British and French tankettes of this period. The Type 97 replaced the Type 92 in service. There was also a chemical/biological trailer constructed for this tank.

Type 97 Te-Ke Tankette

Last development of the Japaneses tankettes, it was enlarged compared to their predecessors, so much so that a gun could be mounted in the turret. It took part in most campaigns of the Japanese army in Asia and in the Pacific, in reconnaissance regiment of infantry divisions.


Type 97 Te-Ke Tankette

As in Europe, the least antitank resistance made the tankettes useless, because of their lack of armament and armor.


Type 98 APC

A variant of the Te-Ke was the Type 98 APC "So-Da". So-Da was designed as ammunition carrier.

Additional Sources:

www.wlhoward.com
www.istrid.difesa.it
www.wwiivehicles.com
stef124.tripod.com
www.panzerdiesel.com
digilander.libero.it
www.shift.sk/military
www.star-games.com
au.geocities.com/hardnbold
www.geocities.co.jp
www.freewebs.com/ samu_ofp
users.swing.be/tanks.tanks

[SAMWolf]

By 1940 the Italians had built 1,320 tankettes, 27 light tanks, and 100 medium M11/39s.

[SAMWolf]

Here are the recommended holiday mailing dates for military mail this year:

For military mail addressed TO APO and FPO addresses, the mailing dates are:

• Parcel Post - November 13
• Space Available - November 27
• Parcel Airlift - December 4
• Priority Mail, First Class cards and letters - Mailing date is December 11 to all locations
  • EXCEPT for locations starting with ZIP 093. For all locations starting with ZIP 093 the mailing date is December 6.
• Express Mail - December 20 to locations where Express Mail service is available. Check with your local post office to determine which APO/FPO addresses can receive Express Mail. Note: This service is not available to ships.

------

For military mail FROM APO and FPO addresses, the mailing dates are:

• Space Available - November 20
• Parcel Airlift - December 4
• Priority Mail, First Class cards and letters - December 11
• Express Mail - December 18 from APO/FPO addresses where Express Mail can be accepted. Check with your local military post office to determine if they can accept Express Mail. Note: This service is not available from ships.

Thanks for the information StayAtHomeMother

---

Veterans for Constitution Restoration is a non-profit, non-partisan educational and grassroots activist organization. The primary area of concern to all VetsCoR members is that our national and local educational systems fall short in teaching students and all American citizens the history and underlying principles on which our Constitutional republic-based system of self-government was founded. VetsCoR members are also very concerned that the Federal government long ago over-stepped its limited authority as clearly specified in the United States Constitution, as well as the Founding Fathers' supporting letters, essays, and other public documents.

---

Actively seeking volunteers to provide this valuable service to Veterans and their families.

---

UPDATED THROUGH APRIL 2004



The FReeper Foxhole. America's History. America's Soul

Click on Hagar for
"The FReeper Foxhole Compiled List of Daily Threads"

[snippy_about_it]

"FALL IN" to the FReeper Foxhole!



It's TreadHead Tuesday!


Good Morning Everyone

If you would like added to our ping list let us know.
If you'd like to drop us a note you can write to:

The Foxhole
19093 S. Beavercreek Rd. #188
Oregon City, OR 97045

[snippy_about_it]

Free Republic Treadhead Ping





mostly cajun ;archy; Gringo1; Matthew James; Fred Mertz; Squantos; colorado tanker; The Shrew; SLB; Darksheare; BCR #226; IDontLikeToPayTaxes; Imacatfish; Tailback; DCBryan1; Eaker; Archangelsk; gatorbait; river rat; Lee'sGhost; Dionysius; BlueLancer; Frohickey; GregB; leadpenny; skepsel; Proud Legions; King Prout; Professional Engineer; alfa6; bluelancer; Cannoneer No.4; An Old Man; hookman; DMZFrank; in the Arena; Bethbg79; neverdem; NWU Army ROTC; ma bell; MoJo2001; The Sailor; dcwusmc; dts32041; spectr17; Rockpile; Theophilus;


************Snippy, I bequeath to you the FR TH PL.

148 posted on 08/24/2004 11:39:45 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4 (I've lost turret power; I have my nods and my .50. Hooah. I will stay until relieved. White 2 out.)

Hi Cannoneer, we hope this TreadHead Tuesday finds you safe and sound. :-)

[SAMWolf]

I'm about to drop off to sleep

Good Night Snippy.

[snippy_about_it]

Me too. Good night Sam.

[E.G.C.]

Good morning, Snippy and everyone at the Foxhole.

[soldierette]

soldierette likes tankettes!

[The Mayor]

November 16, 2004

As Is

Read: 2 Corinthians 5:14-21

If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. —2 Corinthians 5:17

Bible In One Year: Ezekiel 3-4; Hebrews 11:20-40

---

The beat-up old car sits on the used-car lot, rusty and forsaken. Years of abuse and hard driving have taken their toll on the formerly shiny automobile.

A man walks onto the lot and is attracted to this rust bucket. He plunks down cash and the salesperson hands over the keys while saying, "I'm selling you this car 'as is.'" The new owner just smiles; he knows his cars, and he's about to restore this castoff to its former beauty.

Across town, a troubled woman sits in forlorn sadness, contemplating where she went wrong. Years of abuse and hard living have taken their toll on what was once a vibrant young girl. She's been mistreated by others so many times that she feels she has little value anymore. And after making her own mistakes and living with her own bad choices, she's sure she will be left on life's junk heap forever.

But then someone tells her about Jesus. Someone mentions that Jesus specializes in castoffs, that He is waiting to transform anyone who trusts Him—even her. Someone tells her that Jesus will take her "as is." She believes. She trusts. And Jesus begins to restore another lost person to the abundant life He has promised. —Dave Branon

The new life in Christ has begun—
The past with its darkness is gone;
Look closer to see what the Savior has done,
For change is beginning to dawn. —Hess

Salvation is not turning over a new leaf, but receiving a new life.

[blanknoone]

Thanks for a good summary of the technical aspects of some of the light tanks. The only thing I found a little lacking was the strategy/doctrine that gave rise to such vehicles. The reason that I bring it up is that I think it is becoming relevant again.

Tanks were divided into 2 types for 2 purposes. There were 'Heavy' tanks which were designed for battle...breaking through enemy lines, slugging it out with AT guns and other tanks etc. Their purpose was to confront and break prepared organized enemy main positions.

The light tanks were never designed to slug it out in this environment...they were designed to exploit the gaps opened by the heavies. The heavy tanks were not logistically effective at exploitation...in terms of mechanic, parts, fuel and ammunistion support as well as reliability.

You can see this distinction clearly in Brit, french and German armor designs. Both the Americans (with the Sherman) and the Russians (T-34) tried to bridge that gap and do both, with varying degrees of success, and most everyone for the last fifty years have used multipurpose 'battle' tanks.

Take for example our Shermans...when going toe to toe with German 'heavy' tanks like the Tiger, they were out classed and often suffered high losses. That was one of the reasons the allies were boxed up in Normandy for so long...when our armor tried to break through, we met their armor and lost or at best made very limited gains. In the environment of the 'heavy' tank, the Sherman was in trouble. However, compare that to the exploitation phase. Once the Americans did break out, the exploitation was highly effective. The Germans were not able to really establish another effective defense until their border.

Compare Russian and American tank designs. Both are 'battle' tanks designed to do both 'heavy' and 'light' tank work, but you can clearly see that the Americans are much more on the heavy side of the equation and the Russian designs are much more on the light side of the equation.

My personal feeling is that the American design is a little too 'heavy' And in fact, that is not an objection to the design of the vehicle so much that we have basically migrated from multi-purpose battle tank to 'heavy tank'. That is not to say that the Abrams cannot do exploitation, its time in the desert has proved it can. However, the logistical requirements for it are MASSIVE...especially in fuel. To count on a fuel logpac every 12 hours in exploitation is severely limiting...and against a better trained, organized and equipped foe with higher discipline and morale (read PRC) it may well prove impossible. We did it against the Iraqis because their entire defense crumbled. Against a foe where we achieve a local breakthough, but the rest of the line holds and they aggressively try to seal the breakthrough, we could easily end up with tanks out of gas behind enemy lines.

If nothing else, we should consider a diesel version of the Abrams, something with better fuel efficiency. The turbine Abrams units can do the breaking through, the diesels pass through to exploit.

Another thing to consider is future vehicles. The FCS is the 'tank of the future' replacement for the Abrams. Perhaps we could benefit from something lighter in the interim, then allow the FCS to bulk up a bit. Basically alternate between battle tanks that are truly heavy tanks and battle tanks that are more capable of exploitation, something akin to to Russian models in size, weight and range.

[manna]

Present!

[alfa6]

It's a Treadhead Tuesday Bump for the Freeper Foxhole.

Hi manna

How about a couple of Italian aircraft to go with the Itialian tankettes. A couple of Fiat Cr-42s should do the trick.

Regards

alfa6 ;>}

[Professional Engineer]

Good morning ladies. Flag-o-gram.

[SAMWolf]

Morning E.G.C.

We've had a "heat wave" been warm in the mornings but getting rain and fog.

[SAMWolf]

Morning Soldierette.

We have one more thread on tankettes coming up. ;-)

[SAMWolf]

Good Morning Mayor.

[The Mayor]

Mornin Sam!

did you get your tools cleaned?

[SAMWolf]

Morning Blanknoone.

Thanks for the excellent analysis. You're correct in saying that the main purpose of the tankette was to provide mobility with some light armor protection on the battlefield.