Italian WoWS Tech Tree Part 9: Battleships – from Caracciolo to UP.41

Author: Daemon93 (WoWS EU Supertester)

Tier VI: Caracciolo


The Caracciolo-class is one of the many designs made by Rear Admiral Ferrati before the start of WWI. Compared to the other designs, characterized by the main armament placed in quad mounts(with either two, three or four mounts each), this class is more conventional and similar to British super dreadnoughts such as the Queen Elisabeth. Compared to the other two pre-WWI designs, Conte di Cavour and Caio Duilio, she is a much more powerful ship. She was faster, better armed, better protected(with poor deck protection as most pre-Jutland designs) and with a good anti aircraft armament(for pre-WWI standards). Four ships of this class were planned: Caracciolo, Colombo, Colonna and Morosini. Of this four only the lead ship was launched but never completed. It was planned to convert Caracciolo to a carrier but that conversion never happened. She was then scrapped in 1921.

Technical data

Standard displacement: 31400 tons

Full load displacement: 34000 tons

Length: 201.6 m(water line), 212 m(overall length)

Beam: 29.6 m

Draught: 9.5 m

Installed power: 105.000 hp

Maximum speed: 28 knots

Protection: 300 mm(belt), 50 mm(deck), 400 mm(turrets), 220 mm(battery), 400 mm(CT)

Armament: 4×2 381/40, 12×1 152/50, 8×1 102/45, 12×1 40/39


Due to the lack of historical refits and modernization some “what-if” elements will be required. The biggest changes should be on deck armor, secondary armament(the primary is fine) and AAA, just like in Conte di Cavour and Caio Duilio with their modernization. I may think about plausible changes but it’s not a priority.

Tier VII: Proto-Littorio(to be updated)

Tier VIII: Littorio


The Littorio-class is the most powerful battleship ever built in Italy. Develop in the early ’30s, around the same time of the reconstruction of Conte di Cavour and Giulio Cesare, as an answer to the Dunkerque-class battlecruisers made by the French. Compared to the contemporary reconstruction of the Conte di Cavour-class was whole new story: better armed, with the newest 381/50, better protected, faster and with a good anti aircraft armament(for an early ’30s project). The trade off was the displacement: the actual standard displacement was over 40000 tons while the value on paper was 35000 tons(to stay within the Washington Treaty limitations). Four ships were planned, in two badges: Littorio, Vittorio Veneto, Roma and Impero. The differences between the two badges are relatively minimal and focused primarily on increasing sea worthiness. Littorio and Vittorio Veneto were built before WWII(they were in training when Italy declared war) and fought in most of the largest engagements with the British. Both were damaged multiple times but both survived and surrendered to the British after the Armistice. They were interned in Egypt and then scrapped after WWII. Roma was built in 1942 and saw little action during WWII. She is most known due to how she sank on 9/9/1943(due to two Fritz-X bombs). Impero was still incomplete during the Armistice. Captured by the Germans, bombed by the Allies and then scrapped after WWII. It was planned a carrier conversion for this ship although it was still in the planning phase.

Technical data

Standard displacement: 40724 tons(Littorio), 40992 tons(Roma)

Full load displacement: 45256 t(Littorio), 45485 tons(Roma)


-Littorio: 224.1 m(water line), 237.8 m(overall length)

-Roma: 224.1 m(water line), 240. 7(overall length)

Beam: 32.8 m

Draught: 9.6 m

Installed power: 128.200 hp

Maximum speed: 30 knots

Protection: 280 mm + 70 mm(belt), (210 – 70) mm(bulkheads), (350 – 280) mm(turrets), (280 – 50) mm(secondary turrets), 260 mm(CT), (162 – 90) mm(main deck), 45 mm(upper deck)


-Littorio: 3×3 381/50, 4×3 152/55, 12×1 90/50, 8×2 37/54, 4×1 37/54, 8×2 20/65

-Roma: 3×3 381/50, 4×3 152/55, 12×1 90/50, 8×2 37/54, 4×1 37/54, 14×2 20/65


-Spring 1942, Vittorio Veneto: +8×2 20/65

-Spring 1942, Littorio: +6×2 20/65

-1943, all: +EC-3/ter radar

Tier IX: UP.41


UP.41 was a project made by Ansaldo, originally for the Soviet Union(which eventually chose to go for Project 23 as their new battleship). This design had supporters also in Italy: one of them was Admiral Pini(which ordered the construction of a dry dock at Taranto specifically design to build and maintain this ship). She was short lived in Italy due to the firm opposition of Admiral Cavagnari(at that time the commander in chief of the Regia Marina) and the project was abandoned.

I have the technical data of the Soviet variant so i’ll post that one:

Technical data reported to the project sent to the Russian Navy. from: “British, Soviet, French and Dutch Battleships of WWII”

Date: 14 July 1936


  • standard: 42,000 (42,674)
  • normal: 45,470 (46,200)


  • length overall:  826.572′ (252.000)
  • length between perpendiculars:  774.275’ (236.00)
  • maximum beam:  116.469’ (35.500)
  • normal draft:  30.840’ (9.400)
  • hull depth amidships:  54.462‘ (161500)


  • main-battery arrangement: x9 16″/’50 (406) 3-.3-A-3
  • secondary (tripled):  x12  7.1″/60 (I80)
  • antiaircraft (paired): x24  3.9″ (100)
  • machine gun (quad): x48  1.77″/45 (45)
  • machine guns (paired): x24 0.52“ (l3.2)
  • float planes  4
  • catapults  1


  • main side belt:  14.57″ @ 6° [370]
  • lower side belt:  none
  • upper side belt:  5.91″ [150]
  • turret face plates:” [400]
  • turret sides:  5.91″ [150]
  • turret roof:  7.87″ [200]
  • barbettes:  13.78″ max. [350]
  • secondary face plates:  13.78″ [180]
  • secondary sides:  2.36“ [60]
  • secondary roof:  3.54“ [90]
  • antiaircraft face plates:  3.94“ [100]
  • antiaircraft sides:  1.57″ [40]
  • antiaircraft roof:  1.97″ [50]
  • conning tower sides:  14.57″ [370]
  • conning tower roof:  7.37″ [200]
  • main deck:  2.16″ [55]
  • second deck:  0.39″’ [10]
  • third deck:  0.98“ [25]
  • fourth deck-inboard:  2.56“ + 1.38″ [65 + 35]
  • fourth deck -outboard:  2.56“ [65]
  • fourth deck -slopes:  1.33″ [35]


  • boilers:  8
  • shafts: 4
  • shaft horsepower:  177,538 [180,000]
  • maximum speed:  32 knotsThe Italian variant will of course have Italian armament: the 152/55 mm instead of the 180 mm, the 90/50 instead of the 100 mm the 37/54 mm instead of the 45 mm and the 20/65 instead of the 13.2 mm. Since it’s a project which was discontinued it will require some what-if upgrades, just like in case of Caracciolo(although UP.41 doesn’t require that much what-if compared to the older BB).Tier X: //(currently missing)

7 thoughts on “Italian WoWS Tech Tree Part 9: Battleships – from Caracciolo to UP.41

  1. The UP41 was sold to Soviet Union (along with an elusive BC design, possibly a old 1933 one and other designs) only after Admiral Cavagnari in 1936 decided for two more Vittorio Veneto units (RN Roma and RN Impero) in place of more powerful but also more difficult to get in line units (the 406mm for example would had been a entirely new challenge). Works for a new drydock in Taranto able to host UP41 type units were halted only in 1941.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. They Buyed It, But Instead Using U.P. 41 For The Basis of Project 23 Battleship, They Used The KB-4 and TsKBS-1 Linkor type A


      1. Yes, I have Vasiliev’s book. The amazing thing is that the Pugliese system was NOT included in the UP41 design, but the Soviets managed to get it anyway :D.


  2. Caracciolo would be overpowered at Tier 6, makes little sense to me.
    I see the tree going exactly like this:

    T3: Vittorio Cuniberti 12 x 12” Guns, 20 Knots
    T4: Dante Alighieri 12 x 12” Guns, 552 FT, 22 Knots
    T5 Conte Di Cavour 10 x 12.6” Guns, 612 FT, 27 Knots
    T6: Andrea Doria 10 x 13” Guns, 613 FT, 26 Knots
    T7: Francesco Caracciolo 8 x 15” Guns. 689 FT, 28 Knots
    T8: Littorio 9 x 15” Guns, 780 FT, 30 Knots
    T9: UP 41 9 x 16” Guns, 827 FT, 32 Knots
    T10: (Missing) Possibly the Soviet version of the UP 41 with either 12 x 16” Guns or the more popular 9 x 18” guns. Whichever is not picked would go to the Soviet BB tree as a T10 probably.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.