Landships II

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Bianchi armoured cars


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2332
Date:
Bianchi armoured cars
Permalink Closed


As I'm digging into this I thought it needed its own thread. Information so far.

1.Bianchi built a number of models of armoured cars, one distinctive feature of these was the bonnet (hood) was rounded and sloped. See the attached picture (comp). The car on the left is an Isotta Fraschini of 1911, the one on the right an early Bianchi. The two are virtually identical except that the Bianchi has a turret top and a rounded, slightly sloped bonnet.


2. The various web sites that attribute the 'Terni' armoured cars to Fiat all use information from the same source (the photos, their arrangement and the cropping of one of the pictures is identical (as in most cases is the accompanying text)). This does not mean that the information is incorrect (or for that matter correct) but we should be careful of the 'a lot of sources say this' effect when what is happening is a lot of sources are repeating a single original source.


3 I attach a photo (bianchi3) from a different source showing a patrol of cars in Tripoli, Unfortunately no make (or date) was attributed. These are of the 'side door' type with the high rear end. I add another shot of the same type showing the open door, again the source made no attribution of type.



Attachments
COMP.jpg (168.0 kb)
bianchi3.jpg (233.3 kb)
__________________
aka Robert Robinson Always mistrust captions


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
Permalink Closed

The Armoured Cars in 'bianchi3.jpg'  are Autoblinda FIAT TERNI (Tipo Tripoli) cars. An excellent 1:72 model of these is made by Il Principe Nero (The Black Prince):


http://www.ilprincipenero.it/Autoblindo%20Terni.htm


Mario



-- Edited by Mario Wens at 20:12, 2006-04-28

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2332
Date:
Permalink Closed

Mario - see my argument in the thread armoured cars that didn't quite...

__________________
aka Robert Robinson Always mistrust captions


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2332
Date:
Permalink Closed

There is, to say the least, considerable difference between accounts of early Bianchi armoured cars, for example there is a two year discrepancy between the dates ascribed to their design by works such as George Forty’s Armoured Cars of the World and Crow& Icks’s Encylopedia of Armoured Cars compared to B.T White’s Tanks and other Fighting Vehicles. The first two put these vehicles as being developed before Italy entered the war whilst the latter puts the date at 1916. Giulio Benussi’s Autocannoni, Autoblinde e Veicoli Speciali del Regio Esercito Italiano nella Prima Guerrea Mondiale acknowledges the existence of the turreted Bianchi shown in my previous posting but does not date it in any way. In general accounts do seem to agree that Bianchi produced a turreted prototype (in 1912 according to both Forty and White) and subsequently developed it. It is here that there is a divergence, According to Forty there were two models, an improved turreted version (which is that shown in his book and in Benussi’s) which he calls Model A and an open topped car called Version B. Both were produced in 1914. (Crow and Icks have a similar chronology) However White’s version of events is that the further turreted prototype was produced in 1915 and the open topped version was developed from this in 1916.
White’s illustration appears to have been taken from the two photos I attach. Unfortunately it appears to contain some errors. He appears to have misinterpreted the strut at the back as a second machine gun, and the view showing the port side has no flap on the cab side (looking at the side view of the starboard side in the attached photo the inside of the raised port flap can be seen). There are also differences between the two views. I have annotated the illustration and enclose this. However looking at the two photos it is clear that these are of two different cars and indeed it is possible that they are two different models (possibly from different manufacturers). I enclose an annotated photo highlighting the differences. I suspect that either White did not pick this up or ignored it and as a result there are discrepancies between the two views in his illustration. (There is also an oddity in the angled view, as one front wheel appears to be much  further forward than the other!)


Now the questions are – whose dates are correct? And were there two different versions of open top Bianchis or is one of these a different manufacturers car?


As far as the first is concerned Forty’s dates seem more reasonable especially as the turreted car looks much like the Isotta of 1911 and the Fiat of 1912 (indeed the only significant differences from the Isotta appear to be solid wheels, a different bonnet and a top to the turret). With regard to the second I confess some bafflement. No one mentions two models of the Bianchi version B. Italian armoured car designers of the time do appear to have come up with suspiciously similar designs. Some sources designate the first of the two photos as an Autocar rather than a Bianchi. This could be a mistranslation of Autocarro or possibly Bianchi bodywork was fitted to an imported Autocar chassis. This latter would explain the difference in the position of the front wheels.


 


Over to you gentlemen



Attachments
autocor.jpeg (33.2 kb)
bianchi.jpeg (24.3 kb)
bianchodd.jpg (124.4 kb)
details.jpg (105.3 kb)
__________________
aka Robert Robinson Always mistrust captions


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
Permalink Closed

Centurion wrote:


Mario - see my argument in the thread armoured cars that didn't quite...


Robert,


Have you checked the Ceva & Curami book I mentionned way back in this thread?:


http://www.activeboard.com/forum.spark?forumID=63528&subForumID=169814&action=viewTopic&commentID=3846979


Your 'Bianchi' is called a FIAT-Terni in it all through. I'd have to check the 1200 pages of Italian text for details though. I'm presently working through your arguments, but one remark I do not want to keep back: never trust dear old George Forty to correctly attribute an Italian piece of equipment! For example, his book "First Victory"  about the 1940-'41 North African Campaign under Wavell contains scores of mistakes where it comes to Italian hardware... Nice gentleman though, very nice (only met him once).


Mario



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2332
Date:
Permalink Closed

Mario


It isn't just Forty, Icks also ids the same as an updated Bianchi and I've found an Italian site that does the same.



__________________
aka Robert Robinson Always mistrust captions


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
Permalink Closed

Centurion wrote:


Mario It isn't just Forty, Icks also ids the same as an updated Bianchi and I've found an Italian site that does the same.


well:



Centurion wrote:


The various web sites that attribute the 'Terni' armoured cars to Fiat all use information from the same source (the photos, their arrangement and the cropping of one of the pictures is identical (as in most cases is the accompanying text)). This does not mean that the information is incorrect (or for that matter correct) but we should be careful of the 'a lot of sources say this' effect when what is happening is a lot of sources are repeating a single original source.


This applies to your answer too.


A more in depth answer will follow tonight I hope,


Mario



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2332
Date:
Permalink Closed

Mario Wens wrote:


Centurion wrote: Mario It isn't just Forty, Icks also ids the same as an updated Bianchi and I've found an Italian site that does the same. well: Centurion wrote: The various web sites that attribute the 'Terni' armoured cars to Fiat all use information from the same source (the photos, their arrangement and the cropping of one of the pictures is identical (as in most cases is the accompanying text)). This does not mean that the information is incorrect (or for that matter correct) but we should be careful of the 'a lot of sources say this' effect when what is happening is a lot of sources are repeating a single original source. This applies to your answer too. A more in depth answer will follow tonight I hope, Mario

Only if they all can be traced to the same source

__________________
aka Robert Robinson Always mistrust captions


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
Permalink Closed

Centurion wrote:


Only if they all can be traced to the same source


Have you checked wether Forty lists Icks or vice versa (don't have either book, so can't say which is oldest) in their bibliography? The one could well be the source for the other.


It takes a while to find what you are looking for in 1200 pages of Italian text, but I still found no reference to Bianchi whatsoever in regard to the FIAT Tipo Tripoli cars.


Mario



__________________


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
Permalink Closed


Centurion wrote:






As I'm digging into this I thought it needed its own thread. Information so far.


1.Bianchi built a number of models of armoured cars, one distinctive feature of these was the bonnet (hood) was rounded and sloped.




Well, yes, the one in the picture is a Bianchi, and it has a rounded nose, but other Bianchi's did not have this feature! Your Armoured Cars that didn't quite... thread has a drawing of an armoured car without turret and with machine gun and wire cutter: this is a Bianchi chassis and armour, though not a version I could trace.It looks a lot like the lower half of this one:


 



__________________


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
credit where credit is due
Permalink Closed


Both pictures are from


Lucio Ceva & Andrea Curami: La Meccanizzazione dell'Esercito fino al 1943 (Roma, 1994).



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2332
Date:
RE: Bianchi armoured cars
Permalink Closed


Mario Wens wrote:


Centurion wrote: Only if they all can be traced to the same source Have you checked wether Forty lists Icks or vice versa (don't have either book, so can't say which is oldest) in their bibliography? The one could well be the source for the other. It takes a while to find what you are looking for in 1200 pages of Italian text, but I still found no reference to Bianchi whatsoever in regard to the FIAT Tipo Tripoli cars. Mario


No they don't quote each other at all. Forty shows two abandoned Italian ACs in Libya (Tripolitania)  and describes them as being Bianchi hulls remounted on Spa 38r chassis. Icks (and Crow) list a number of different Bianchi  armoured cars as having been sent to Tripoli Circa 1913-1915 and then list the same as having been modernised by the addition of Spa 38r chassis in the early 30s. They do not list the Terni at all. I have also found an Italian web site that shows the same photo as Forty but the text is different, however it still defines them as Bianchi. 


There are numerous armoured cars described as 'Fiat' from a number of countries (the UK, Russia, Mexico etc etc) where the Fiat connection is that someone has taken a Fiat chassis and added an armoured body to it, the Fiat company has no direct connection whatsover (in the same way that Rolls Royce did not design the clasic Rolls Royce armoured car). My concern with the Terni label is that as far as I can see Terni hived off its weapons business to OM in 1904 (I believe that OM is still with us as an Italian company but that Terni having once passed to  Thysson Krupp is now defunct). If this is so it seems strange that Terni would have designed an armoured hull although they might still have built one to someone elses design. Given that a great many different sources indicate that the Autocarro Fiat 15 ter was chosen as the standard model for use in Tripoli it would make sense for any armoured car design for use in Tripoli should use the same chassis to ease the issue of spares. I think that my original thesis of a car designed by Bianchi on a Fiat chassis with armour fabricated by Terni still makes sense 



__________________
aka Robert Robinson Always mistrust captions


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
Permalink Closed

Centurion wrote:


2. The various web sites that attribute the 'Terni' armoured cars to Fiat all use information from the same source (the photos, their arrangement and the cropping of one of the pictures is identical (as in most cases is the accompanying text)). This does not mean that the information is incorrect (or for that matter correct) but we should be careful of the 'a lot of sources say this' effect when what is happening is a lot of sources are repeating a single original source.


At present I still disagree with you. So far I do not find any reference whatsoever to Bianchi concerning these vehicles in the Ceva & Curami book, which is the history of Italian Military Mechanization, written for the Historical Department of the Italian Army. They made extensive use of the Italian archives of the period, something which Forty certainly did not, and Icks probably not either. And as 'proof' from a website: I can go and claim anything on a website, so I would not count that as solid proof either.


Both Icks and Forty wrote about a subject about which at the time little was known firssthand in Italy, let alone ourside the country. I do not have the respective publication dates at hand here, but my guess is one of them (Icks?) made a false assumption, and all further claims just repeat this ´source´. Historians and Cultural Anthropologists know the effect very well: once a rumour or oral tradition makes it into a book, it becomes the ´established truth´ for many. The number of quotes from a false source add to the credibility, but this does not make it true. Dutch military history is a good example, with erroneous publications from the sixties being repeated for forty years, until someone actually took the trouble to look in the archives, to find out they were all wrong.


What do the Italian period records tell us, as quoted in Ceva & Curami?


The Italian Army was quite impressed by the use of Armoured Cars against the Senussi at Siwa during the Great War, and ordered two Lanchesters from the British and some Machine gun Ford T's. Having tested some FIAT 15 ter chassis-based makeshift AC's in Libya during the War, they now set about building a real force. For this they also constructed at Terni, still during the last phase of the war (photo marked may 1918!)


"some light armoured cars on a FIAT 15 ter chassis called "FIAT tipo Tripoli". Research of some photographic documents shows that the first prototypes of this vehicle used a turret identical to the Lanchester and Rolls Royce used by the British Allies":


 


Two squadrons of Armoured cars were raised in Lybia in 1919, one armed with  8 Lancia 1ZM cars, the other with 12 FIAT Tipo Tripoli. Later (1923) a third squadron was added with 2 Lanchesters, 3 further Lancia's and 2 more FIAT's. The FIAT cars are captioned FIAT Tipo Tripoli all through the book, though at some point (early 20's?) they were renamed "FIAT Tipo Libia". They were built at Terni judging from the Construction photograph from the Terni archives in part II of the book. By this time they have the final turret:


 


These vehicles, of which some photo's of tests and in active service are included as well, are consistently called FIAT's, and nowhere could I find any reference to Bianchi whatsoever...


This book is as close as it gets to an ' Official History', so if they - on the basis of archival research - call this vehicle a Fiat, please explain why I should call it a Bianchi!


Mario



__________________


Lieutenant

Status: Offline
Posts: 67
Date:
Permalink Closed

Centurion wrote:


 Icks (and Crow) list a number of different Bianchi  armoured cars as having been sent to Tripoli Circa 1913-1915 and then list the same as having been modernised by the addition of Spa 38r chassis in the early 30s.


See my post above: this cannot be correct, as the Bianchi's produced in WW1 were not the vehicle in the picture, and the vehicle in the picture was not sent during the war but after 1919, so cannot be the vehicles Icks & Crow refer to! And if I'm not mistaken, the WW1 Bianchi's never were sent to Libya either, but that would be added insult to injury I guess.


So please go ahead and call them Bianchi's, as this seems to be very important to you for some reason


Just do not expect me to follow suit!


Mario



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard