Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

Discussions on all aspects of the smaller Axis nations in Europe and Asia. Hosted by G. Trifkovic.
dragos03
Member
Posts: 422
Joined: 24 Jan 2004, 21:29
Location: Bucuresti

#31

Post by dragos03 » 13 Jan 2008, 13:04

alecu wrote:I dunno what survival ratio the Romanian tank crews had, but it must have been horrible to face the Tiger or the IS in a Renault R 35.
Romanian Renault R35s faced the latest panzer models in 1945, with the expected results. If I remember right, R35s attacked an Austrian village where German Panthers were entrenched and a single shell fired by a Panther destroyed 2 or 3 R35s in a row. But these old tanks were sent there only because the Soviets demanded for all Romanian tanks, no matter how obsolete, to be sent to the front. Even FT 17s were sent, even if they weren't eventually employed in operations.

During the Iasi-Chisinau operation, Romanian Panzer IVs from the 1st Armoured Division destroyed several IS 2 tanks, using special AP shells. In the tank engagement near Scobalteni on 20 August 1944, the 1st Armoured lost 34 tanks and assault guns, while around 60 Soviet tanks (including IS 2s) were destroyed. According to the account of Cpt. Ion S. Dumitru, it was the destruction of the IS 2s that made the Soviets change tactics, and try to encircle the Romanian unit, instead of trying another head-on assault.

User avatar
CB1
Member
Posts: 249
Joined: 14 Apr 2005, 12:18
Location: Budapest, Hungary

Sounds odd

#32

Post by CB1 » 14 Jan 2008, 09:59

Hi,
The licence to build the BF 109 was bought by the Romanian War Ministry as early as 1939 to be built at IAR Brasov, at least. There were a few other factories that could have been able to later integrate the Meserschmitt. But as told above the Germans were reluctant to stick with their promise and the Ro forced them by ordering 15 G2's in 1942 and about 50 kits, they only delivered the 15 aircraft.
Eventually they handed over the licence documentation in late 1943 when it was really too late
Now, that sounds funny. I can understand that the Germans were reluctant to ship the goods until Barbarossa (perhaps fear of Romania being overrun by the Red Army and valuable technology falling into Soviet hands) but why is the delay afterwards?
Even FT 17s were sent, even if they weren't eventually employed in operations.
:-) During the siege of Budapest some Hungarian Ansaldo CV35 tankettes were deployed. I do not think they lasted for more than a couple of seconds.

Ah, and during that APR43 visit the Hungarian delegation pressed for licensing the Pz.V. First Germans told that it was not a mature model yet, then that Hungarian industry was not mature yet. Finally they set the price at 120,000,000 pengoes (approximately 24 million dollars) and as it turned out Hungary was financially not mature for the Panther :-) So what happened was that Hungarian engineers tried their best to copy it and their efforts gave birth to the Tas.

Bye,
Krisz

PS: on a second thought: I seem to remember that after Mol-Rib pact was signed, Bf 109s were sold to the Soviet Union.


dragos03
Member
Posts: 422
Joined: 24 Jan 2004, 21:29
Location: Bucuresti

#33

Post by dragos03 » 14 Jan 2008, 15:29

Already in 1939 the Romanian Staff considered the FT 17s and completely obsolete and useless in operations. But the Soviets were trying to send all Romanian tanks to the frost because they felt that any tank unit left in Romania could oppose the local communists who were seizing power, backed by the Red Army. I guess the mighty FT 17s still seemed threatening to them :).

User avatar
Franzl Rider
Member
Posts: 1126
Joined: 21 May 2005, 10:46
Location: Netherlands

Romanian R-2

#34

Post by Franzl Rider » 23 Mar 2008, 11:52

From expired ebay a column of Romanian R2's on the Eastern Front.
Attachments
Romanian R2 - ebay.jpg
Romanian R2 - ebay.jpg (23.9 KiB) Viewed 4347 times

User avatar
Franzl Rider
Member
Posts: 1126
Joined: 21 May 2005, 10:46
Location: Netherlands

Romanian R2

#35

Post by Franzl Rider » 23 Mar 2008, 11:54

Another Romnian R2 on the Eastern Front. Behond it a German ambulance. From exp. ebay.
Attachments
Romanian R2 - ebay.jpg
Romanian R2 - ebay.jpg (55.55 KiB) Viewed 4351 times

User avatar
Franzl Rider
Member
Posts: 1126
Joined: 21 May 2005, 10:46
Location: Netherlands

Romanian R1

#36

Post by Franzl Rider » 23 Mar 2008, 11:56

Here a column of Romanian R1 tankettes. From ebay.
Attachments
Romanian R1 - ebay.jpg
Romanian R1 - ebay.jpg (98.43 KiB) Viewed 4346 times

User avatar
Franzl Rider
Member
Posts: 1126
Joined: 21 May 2005, 10:46
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#37

Post by Franzl Rider » 05 Sep 2009, 12:29

Here picture of Rumanian Renault R35. From ebay
Attachments
Rumanian Renault R35 - ebay.jpg
Rumanian Renault R35 - ebay.jpg (44.62 KiB) Viewed 3475 times

User avatar
Franzl Rider
Member
Posts: 1126
Joined: 21 May 2005, 10:46
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#38

Post by Franzl Rider » 05 Sep 2009, 12:30

and a second from ebay
Attachments
Rumanian Renault R35 - ebay (1).jpg
Rumanian Renault R35 - ebay (1).jpg (38.46 KiB) Viewed 3475 times

User avatar
Franzl Rider
Member
Posts: 1126
Joined: 21 May 2005, 10:46
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#39

Post by Franzl Rider » 29 Dec 2009, 20:46

From ebay Rumanian Renault R35. Probably the same vihicle and situation as I posted on 5th September. This time there was more info on ebay. Text said "Hermannstadt Oktober/November 1941".
Attachments
Rumanian Renault R35 1941 Hermannstadt- ebay.jpg
Rumanian Renault R35 1941 Hermannstadt- ebay.jpg (41.13 KiB) Viewed 3324 times

Paul_Atreides
Member
Posts: 606
Joined: 09 Sep 2008, 09:05
Location: Russia, St. Petersburg

Re:

#40

Post by Paul_Atreides » 02 Jan 2010, 23:25

dragos03 wrote:During the Iasi-Chisinau operation, Romanian Panzer IVs from the 1st Armoured Division destroyed several IS 2 tanks, using special AP shells. In the tank engagement near Scobalteni on 20 August 1944, the 1st Armoured lost 34 tanks and assault guns, while around 60 Soviet tanks (including IS 2s) were destroyed.
Hm, from 75 lost during whole operation?
There is no waste, there are reserves (Slogan of German Army in World Wars)

User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3904
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#41

Post by Victor » 06 Jan 2010, 21:34

Since the Red Army was on the offensive, it could recover and repair a part of its knocked out tanks in the field. The 75 figure reported in Krivosheev's work and then repated by Glantz and others would most likely only include the written off machines, not also the ones that were only temporarily taken out of action by a shot in the track for example.

Anyway, from memolry, the 60 tanks figure quoted by dragos03 is actually refering to the entire number of Soviet tanks claimed as knocked out by the 1st Tank Division during the fighting between 20-23 August, not just during the engagement on 20 August. I will look through my sources and get back on this subject.

Paul_Atreides
Member
Posts: 606
Joined: 09 Sep 2008, 09:05
Location: Russia, St. Petersburg

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#42

Post by Paul_Atreides » 08 Jan 2010, 21:02

I think the key word is "claimed", which often means exaggeration in n times.
Victor wrote:not also the ones that were only temporarily taken out of action by a shot in the track for example.
But we are reading "destroyed" that = "written off".
There is no waste, there are reserves (Slogan of German Army in World Wars)

Michate
Member
Posts: 1433
Joined: 02 Feb 2004, 11:50
Location: Germany

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#43

Post by Michate » 09 Jan 2010, 12:37

What about another idea, namely that Krivosheev's numbers are simply off in this case (as they seem to be in a number of other cases), e.g. that the Red Army count of tank write offs during the time of the operation (which by Soviet account lasted only, IIRC, from 20 to 29 August, thus not including fighting at the beginning of September) was incomplete and Krivosheev's numbers do not include later (upwards) corrections?

User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3904
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#44

Post by Victor » 12 Jan 2010, 11:22

Paul_Atreides wrote:But we are reading "destroyed" that = "written off".
In the heat of battle, while retreating and fighting delaying actions, do you actually think that someone would have the time to check if the shot-up enemy tank in front of the AT ditch is repairable or not? If the Soviet tank was hit, its advance was stopped and/or its gun/machine-guns silenced, then it was considered "destroyed", which in most cases it probably wasn't. After all, the immediate scope of the defenders had been accomplished: the tank was unusable on the short term and could not threaten the position.

Also, the tanks lost by the 1st Tank Regiment in the engagement at Scobalteni were not all destroyed. Most were just knocked out, but because the Regiment had been bypassed, it had to retreat and abandon them. They were not all classified as written off.

I suppose the Soviet claims on destroyed Romanian tanks during the 1941 campaign in Bessarabia, after which only a small number of tanks were actually written off, were also high. The number of tanks that were knocked out temporarily was high in some actions, but because the Axis was on the advance, they were recovered, repaired and fielded again. Thus, the final "destroyed" number is much smaller. Do you see what I am trying to explain?

Of course over claiming is something usual in the battle reports, especially in the air war, but in the case of land warfare I suppose it is closer to the truth.

User avatar
Franzl Rider
Member
Posts: 1126
Joined: 21 May 2005, 10:46
Location: Netherlands

Re: Hungarian, Romanian & Slovak armour!??

#45

Post by Franzl Rider » 23 Oct 2010, 16:21

Romanian Renault R35's from ebay.
Attachments
Romanian Renault R35 - ebay.jpg
Romanian Renault R35 - ebay.jpg (34.76 KiB) Viewed 2807 times

Post Reply

Return to “Minor Axis Nations”