What sort of 9.2" are were acrually at Malta? the info I have, but it's third hand, talks about Mk.X naval guns not field pieces though they were manned by the army. The Mk XI was 50 calibers had a muzzle velocity of 881mps and was reported having excessive dispersal due to the high velocity sacrificing accuracy for range. the Mk X was 47 calibers and muzzle velocity with standard charge was 838mps but with supercharge it rises to 872mps that is very similar to the MK XI. AFAIK There is no single instance in ww2 of naval guns causing more than a temporary setback to a determined attack, Wake and Oslo are probably the biggest successes but the attack nonetheless was successful. IMO their immobility dooms them unless a relieving force arrives. Wake, Corregidor, the Japanese island fotresses, the Atlantic wall all ultimately failed, IIRC one French battleship won a duel against a german battery equippen with guns salvaged by the Germans from one of her sisters duiring the inavsion of southern France. Possibly one success was at Tobruk in 1942 but it was a raid, not a landing, and IIRC while the coastal batteries chased away Zulu and Sikh the actual landing force was repulsed by a group of MZ not shore batteries. I think the definitive source on the Littorios is Bagnasco's book, (that's where that drawing comes from), the bomb damage was apparently minor. The report on the torpedo damage details mostly agrees with you source, flooding was 1950t (including the 250 voluntary) the fllodoed comparments between "ordinate" 181 and 199 contained foodstores, (mostly flour) and the ship's brig, so nothing that needs extensive repairs besides replacing the plates, there were no personnel losses and the repairs, that lasted two months, were condubùcted in a rather leisurely way, they only docked her after Mussolini's visit and could probably have been hurried in case of need.