Italian MGs

John Secker · Post by **John Secker** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:28 am

In the Italian WW2 Heavy Weapons pack there are two weapons that looks like HMGs or MMGs. One has a long barrel, and two crew members moulded together on the base. The other has just a single gunner firing, and there are no obvious loader figures in the set. Can anyone cast light on what these two weapons might be? I have looked at a number of websites but I can't find anything very clear.

kiasutha · Post by **kiasutha** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:56 am

John:
Tammy would be the one to answer, but I've always thought-
the one with 2 crew is a Breda M-37 med/heavy.
the one with the prone gunner is a Breda M-30 light.
And of course, there is the Brixia 45mm mortar...

John Secker · Post by **John Secker** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:53 am

It's not the one with two crew that is puzzling me, or the one with a single prone gunner. I agree with you that they are the Breda HMG and LMG respectively. What has me stumped is the one with a single gunner sitting behind the weapon. It seems to have a tripod, but it is lower than the HMG and has a much shorter barrel. I even wondered if it was the Elefantino anti-tank gun, which is quite small - but that has wheels, which this model doesn't.

dragon6 · Post by **dragon6** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:27 am

John Secker wrote:It's not the one with two crew that is puzzling me, or the one with a single prone gunner. I agree with you that they are the Breda HMG and LMG respectively. What has me stumped is the one with a single gunner sitting behind the weapon. It seems to have a tripod, but it is lower than the HMG and has a much shorter barrel.

I haven't seen the figure but, as kiasutha wrote, it could be the Brixia mortar. It's small, has a seat and a tripod.

Forgotten what it looked like it.

TAMMY · Post by **TAMMY** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:50 am

I don't have IT 17 either but from your descripton I'll support the Brixia mod. 35 assault morta, 45mm caliber. The short barrel was usually angled upward.but could be used for direct fire too.Hoever the firer should not be seated. He should be prone with the top of the body on the "cushion".

The Elefantino was much bigger (see IT 13). It had wheels but these were usually removed when deployed.

kiasutha · Post by **kiasutha** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:03 am

John
I suspected you might be refering to that one, which is why i mentioned the Brixia mortar.
It is indeed the 45mm mortar that is shown above.

John Secker · Post by **John Secker** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:10 am

I think you guys have it right - though the gunner is definitely seated. Comparing the model with the photo above I am pretty sure it's the same thing. I didn't pick up on kiasutha's remark at first, because it is unlike any mortar I have seen before - the barrel is only just above the horizontal. But it matches the photo, and also Tammy's comment about it being used in direct fire mode. Pretty small, though - I guess 47mm puts it in the 2" category, for comparison with other nations?

kiasutha · Post by **kiasutha** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:46 am

John:
Sorry I was too subtle there; it's just so easy to say the wrong thing on line...
When I got mine, I expected the Brixia to be included and had seen the real thing too, so was pretty sure it was what they tried to make.
The mess-up with the gunner position doesn't help.
I guess they looked at the weapon and just made assumptions; as with some other things...

John Secker · Post by **John Secker** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 5:27 am

It was my fault - you clearly suggested the mortar, I just passed over the comment because I had never seen a mortar like that - especially with the odd figure position. It would look more like a mortar if he was lying down. Anyway, thanks for the quick replies, you have solved my problem and I have now based and labelled the figures correctly.

Mk 1 · Post by **Mk 1** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:18 pm

Yep, pretty clearly we are all talking about the Brixia 45mm mortar.

A bit of an odd weapon. Vastly over-designed for the role, for which it under-performed. Such a large, heavy piece of kit, twice the weight (or more) of other nation's equivalent 45mm and 50mm mortars, yet with a smaller bomb and shorter range. The range, if your rules are well written on this point, should be less than the range of small arms. Which makes it VERY difficult to use well.

Oh, and BTW, even if the pad was intended for the chest of a prone gunner, it was by no means unheard of for gunners to sit on it.

kiasutha · Post by **kiasutha** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:40 pm

Mk 1:
Thanks for the photo. Hadn't seen that.
And fully agree about the weapon. What were they thinking?
My apologies to GHQ. But-
I don't see any ammo. It looks rather "casual". Staged.
Maybe some kind of training, or just a pic for the folks at home?
With the very limited range, that looks like it would be suicide in "action" ...
So It would be nice if at least some had been made "per regulation use".

TAMMY · Post by **TAMMY** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 10:24 pm

They would never be seated in action. Aside from the exposure you cannot aim the weapon as the aiming plate for curve fire was in the lower part of the mount, while for diret fire it was along the barrel, front and back like a rifle. like a rifle. Moreover it was a breech-loader and this was easier done from a prone position.

The standard cew was 3 men: 1 firer, 1 ammunition handler staying near him and another one transposting furher ammunition. They were deployed in squad of 3 weapons supporting an infantry company.

The rage was about 500 yard (like the British 2" mortar), short but it was designed to support the infantry in the last 200 meter of the assault.

The main defect were the light ammunition (1 pound against 2 pund for the British 2", for example) and the excessive complexity of the mount that weighted 15 kg.

kiasutha · Post by **kiasutha** » Fri Jul 15, 2016 12:14 am

Tammy:
Thanks for the additional clarification.
So- a staged photo for...something?
Maybe that explains the look on the face of the nearest gunner.
He doesn't seem "amused"...
It sounds like GHQ really should re-design this one.
Maybe they could add a few ATR's to the pack at the same time...

John Secker · Post by **John Secker** » Sun Jul 17, 2016 3:20 am

I think he's looking owrried, and who wouldn't be? That does not look like a safe position to be firing off a high explosive projectile, even a small one. And especially on slippery ground. I guess that's what the "seat" was for, to prevent unwanted recoil.

But at least this looks like a mortar firing. with the barrel angle about 45 degrees to the ground. If you look at my picture of the GHQ models above, they have the barrel nearly horizontal - as I said, that looks like no mortar I have seen.

TAMMY · Post by **TAMMY** » Sun Jul 17, 2016 3:38 pm

The elevation of the Brixia was from 100 to 1.600 mils (5 to 90 deg.) so a near horzontal barrel is possible.

Noe that the danger field of the shell was evaluated in 20m of radius so you have a lot of safety margin.

Anyway the lelevation has no direct relation to the range due to the firing system. It used a separate cartridge /loaded in a 10 cartridge magazine) while the shell were breach loaded one by one. The gas of the cartridge passed to the breech through a regulating valve. Closed will give the max range, opened in various position willl decrease the gas arrivin to the breech, The choice between direct or curve firing depended from the ostacles on the ground.

I do not know what was thw scope of the men in the iphoto but they were surely not in action as clearly shown by the men standing behind them and by the lack of any ammunition box.