Agreed. Just something I picked up when reading about South African operations in East Africa in WWII. Very determined and spirited fighting by the Italians under very adverse conditions and good leadership too. Of course the lack of will to fight later on was very clear.
Keren is a good example. Also the Amba Alagi. Thanks Daan.
There habe been plenty places and battles where our guys fought well, but there are also plenty prejudices which, after almost 80 years, are difficult to change now.
Unluckily, most literature is in Italian only.
Just think about the retreat of the Alpini in Russia.
It was the same as for the Marines at Chosin, just much longer, much colder and under much more adverse conditions.
No tanks, little artillery (mountain pieces, towed by horses and mules on a plain comparable to a billiard table), little ammunition, no food. No aerial cover.
Just great will, tough people and good leadership.
So they beat every Russian division sent to encircle them, destroyed a lot of tanks and came back home, bringing tens of thousands of German and Hungarian troops with them.
All by foot.
That is a great epical story that would deserve to be known also by English speaking history buffs.
I remember reading somewhere, some 40 years ago, in a book about the North African campaign that the Italian fought well when they were fighting for Italy (and Italians). One thing many military historians have noted time and again is that Italian armour, aircraft and weaponry was virtually obsolete - out-dated at least - before the war began.
We had very modern ships, but no radar.
Very good fighter planes, but just a few and with very light armament, because we had to keep the brass and so carried less machine guns with half the ammo. Most fighter planes were biplanes...
Good soldiers, but mainly badly led, badly armed and with no clear idea what they were doing or fighting for.
Almost no armour and little modern artillery.
Also Rommel said that the Italian allies fought well and were to be admired considering the conditions and armaments they were dealing with.
I have been honored to know a few of these great veterans, and to listen to what they went through.
I must admit I don’t know if I would have accepted such conditions, though they certainly had no saying in the war and so would I have had...
The old Diggers I've known who fought in North Africa said that the Italian Army was the best fed. They said the loved it when they captured a store of Italian rations.
With respect, have you considered the extra amount of force needed to press down more than five rounds of ~.30 size cartridges from a stripper clip? Would/could the frictional force not be a (or the) reason why 7.62 NATO comes in 5 round strippers while smaller 5.56 NATO comes in 10 round strippers?
You could perform a test and find out for sure. It would require however, finding some of the aftermarket 10rd 7.62 nato strippers. I've seen a few up here in Canada at Gun Shows, so they do exist. So does the mag charger, which is simply a larger version of the AR15 charger.
Interesting topic! I'm no expert at all, but I'm not surprised that the #4 Enfield has risen to the top of this discussion. I have a #5 - and I can crank out 10 rounds in a "mad 15 seconds" or so - that bolt is butter smooth compared to even the excellent Mausers I've shot (shot not a lot though). Of course, the #5 is notorious for the "wandering zero" pseudo-problem that nobody seems to be able to replicate today. *shrug* OTOH, there's also the rear locking lug situation with the LE action that supposedly can cause eventual problems with stretched receivers that a front lug action (i.e. Mauser) don't have. I have no idea how "real" that "problem" is either...
#109 Without starting another lengthy thread search the site for stretched receivers and you will find that after many & lengthy conversations by the armourers here (not me) but have read those threads and witnessed how long the debate went for that receivers do not "Stretch" in the Enfield line or any other firearm for that matter.