1938. Italy decides to scrap all of its surface navy and focus only on subs and frogmen.

1938. Italy decides to scrap all of its surface navy and focus only on subs and frogmen. How effective would they be against the brits?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not very

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Fricking stupid

  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >go all-in on subs against the world's leading expert in antisubmarine warfare
    fricking genius
    the bongs would simply have churned out cheap ASW escorts like they did anyway in WW2

  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >scrap all of its surface navy
    brits win via a superior surface navy

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      The biggest losses the axis inflicted on the allies came from submarine attacks. Both german and italian submarines destroyed countless ships all over the Atlantic. It's not unrealistic to presume that a force entirely made out of submersibles, submarines and other underwater warfare assets would be more effective than say battlecruisers or battleships

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        How is a submarine going to escort troop ships and supply vessels to North Africa?

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        But you NEED those capital ships or your submarine fleet geys ASW’d over time.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The biggest losses the axis inflicted on the allies came from submarine attacks.
        They were attacking trade ships not equipt for combat.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Hey our special Ops teams do a lot of damage relative to their size
        >What if we made our ENTIRE ARMY special forces?

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          The germans basically did. And they were a thorn in the ass for most of the war. All subs with little to no surface ships.
          >muh Bismarck
          Bismarck was an obsolete piece of shit that was actually inferior to the Vittorio Veneto class and only sank the Hood because of a lucky shot. More of a symbol than and asset

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The germans basically did. And they
            lost.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            The Germans didn't do that until they were forced to. The German Navy played a massive role in the occupations of Norway and Denmark, had Germany not taken Norway the war probably would have ended a few years earlier. The German surface fleet was very important during the early war.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Somewhere there’s a graph showing tonnage sunk by the Germans on a decline since 1942 with more losses on their side each year.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            The Germans wanted to pursue a fleet composed of cruisers and submarines. The British feared that and convinced the Germans to build battleships and aircraft carriers instead by offering them a treaty.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        The biggest losses the Allies inflicted on the Axis navies came from antisubmarine attacks. Both British and American escorts and aircraft destroyed nearly a thousand submarines all over the Atlantic and Mediterranean. It's not unrealistic to presume that a force entirely made out of submersibles, submarines and other underwater warfare assets would be totally raped

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        You never hear about Italian submarines of WW2.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Raid on Alexandria
          >Submarine nets? Lmao, frogmen can cut em
          >Place limpet mines on them ships
          >Get captured
          >Oi bruv, what were you doin'?
          >Say nothing until the mines go off
          >Great success
          tl;dr

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Okay now do the same to a fleet that is actively sailing and not stationary as well as being on maximum combat readiness. Maybe a situation like shelling the Italian coast line?

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              >actively sailing
              No can do, at least not with a manned torpedo with a top speed of 3 knots.

  5. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >1939 The Italian Army in Africa surrenders because all of their supply ships are immediately sank or seized when trying to depart Italian ports.

  6. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ineffective and they'd actually frick the nips a fair bit too since the RN would suddenly have a bunch of extra surface ships. Also apparently observation of a bong strike on an Italian port by air helped inspire the plans for Pearl Harbor so that goes missing too.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      What's with PrepHoleners and their awful reading comprehension?

  7. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Look at the amount of explosive power between their legs

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's a modified torpedo, but it doesn't explode on impact. It instead carries limpet mines, which the frogmen then attach to ships in harbour.

  8. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    They should have used the German Black
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neger_(torpedo)

  9. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Italy's mistake was not taking Malta at the begining of the war

  10. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Damn would have it been cool had the Italian surface fleet sortied after hitting HMS Valiant and HMS Queen Elizabeth.

    Decima Flottiglia MAS forgot to tell anyone what they where doing.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >forgot to tell anyone what they where doing.
      #justitalianthings

  11. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    subs during the era were only useful for raiding and picking off the rare capital ship that was unguarded in very niche scenarios, if they encountered an actual fleet they would get fricked

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *