Member
Posts: 27
(2/26/02 6:08:10 am)
Reply WWII Romanian Armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This topic most likely arose before, but what armament used in WWII was designed in Romania (from engine to chassis and from handle to bullet clip)? And by this I don't just mean the equipment used by the Romanian army or equipment manufactured in Romania, of alteratered/improved foreign designs...
Thank you in advance,
MAster A
Edited by: MAster A1 at: 2/26/02 6:16:56 am
Victor
Member
Posts: 65
(2/28/02 4:38:50 pm)
Reply
Re: WWII Romanian Armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 mm Orita model 1941 submachine-gun
Dt-UDR 26 Resita 75 mm AT-gun
Maresal M-05 tank destroyer
IAR-37/38/39
IAR-80/81 (in all variants)
Costinescu 75 mm shell
MAN grenades and mines (I’m not so sure they were all original)
The list remains opened...
IAR80
Visitor
(3/1/02 9:22:04 pm)
Reply Re:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's not forget the T-60 tank destroyer (kinda looks like the Hetzer, doesn't it?) and it's brother the R-2 TACAM tank destroyer. Also the CKD czech light tank keeps popping up on my list, anyone got a link for its technical specs?
Another interesting vehicle I heard about is the ADKZ ... but no data on it whatsoever just that it was a recon vehicle armed with a couple of Besa machineguns, anyone of you people ever heard of it, also TNSPE is another enigmatic armored car.
IAR80
Visitor
(3/1/02 9:25:58 pm)
Reply Also...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just remembered about the T tank series (how original) which were reverse-engineered copies of the Pz IV series J(s) to N.
Just read that the IAR80 had 6 Browning FN machineguns. FN is a belgian manufacturing camp and Browning is american; what's up with that?
Victor
Member
Posts: 70
(3/1/02 9:34:36 pm)
Reply
Re: Also...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more details on the IAR-80 look on my site http://www.arr.go.ro
Notice that MAsterA1 wanted only Romanian original designs, not redesigned captured weapons (TACAM T-60).
Cheshire Yoemanry
New Member
Posts: 1
(3/3/02 1:25:49 pm)
Reply Re: WWII Romanian Armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may be wrong but wern't the Kogalniceanu class of river monitor unique as well as being highly effective weapons.
Also the minelayer Amiral Murgescu may be a canditate for inclusion in the list?
Ovidius
Old Fighter
Posts: 1418
(3/3/02 2:24:53 pm)
Reply
I'm sorry, but...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea was "Romanian equipment designed entirely in Romania", not alterated foreign designs.
T-series = plain copies
T-60 TACAM = Romanian tank destroyer built on Russian T-60 captured chassis
R-2 TACAM = Romanian tank destroyer built on Czech R-35 chassis
TNSPE = entirely Czech design
Kogalniceanu = former Austrian monitor rebuilt entirely from keel to superstructure in Romania
The FN machineguns used a Browning licensed system, similar to that of the Browning M2 HMG(designed in 1919, still in production).
~Regards,
Ovidius
Ovidius
Old Fighter
Posts: 1419
(3/3/02 2:42:39 pm)
Reply
TNSPE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CKD/Praga TNSPE
7 examples had been produced between 1936-1937, design being based on special requirements from the Romanian Government(Ministry of Internal Affairs).
Used by the Royal Romanian Gendarmerie.
Crew 3
Engine Praga TN, 4cyl water cooled 7800cc 105hp
Performance 50km/hour
Length 7.99m
Width 2.2m
Height 2.65m
Armament 1 x ZB vz.26 MG + 1 x water cannon with 5000 liters of water
Armor 4 - 8mm
Weight 12 tons
Range 250km
Accounts of their deployment appear in Rosie Waldeck's ATHENE PALACE (R.M. McBride, 1942). Waldeck, a Western press correspondent assigned toBucharest during the early war years, witnessed their use against crowds protesting King Carol's regime following Romania's loss of Transylvaniavia the German-imposed Second Vienna Award in the fall of 1940; she calls them "tanks" (an understandable misnomer) while describing them as being sky-blue in colour, an unusual camouflage pattern indeed.
Details on the TNSPE's subsequent wartime service are lacking, though in light of their modest armament their use may have been limited to the Bucharest jandarmi. Of course, vehicles equipped with water cannon mayhave been conscripted by the Corps of Military Firemen [Pompieri] for firefighting duties, but this is mere speculation.
Source: http://members.tripod.com/~Sturmvogel/romafv.html#TNSPE
~Regards,
Ovidius
Cheshire Yoemanry
New Member
Posts: 6
(3/3/02 7:47:48 pm)
Reply Re: WWII Romanian Armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for correcting the River Monitor, any news about the minelayer being an entirely Romanian design?
MAster A1
Member
Posts: 28
(3/5/02 6:33:15 am)
Reply Re: WWII Romanian Armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanx a bunch pple. Been real helpful, since i don't even know where to start my "research", nor do i have the time nor resources ( the lazyness factor comes in here too...
).And as Victor said, "the list remains opened..." (btw, nice site...)
Regards,
MAster A
Geppistoly Katona
Veteran Member
Posts: 339
(3/5/02 8:18:16 am)
Reply
Re: WWII Romanian Armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Victor i dont mean to be an ass, but i have to correct you, it just bothers me when i dont correct a mistake about guns [ my problem not yours ] It was the Cugir-Orita M1941 [ really just a decorated Italian SMG with a few minor changes]
Victor
Member
Posts: 88
(3/7/02 5:41:47 pm)
Reply
Re: WWII Romanian Armament
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was the Cugir-Orita M1941 [ really just a decorated Italian SMG with a few minor changes].
I don’t know too much about it, so I asked a friend. He said to tell you that: ”Orita comes from the Beretta SMG just as much as the Dunavia comes from the Orita”.
The majority of WWII SMGs functioned on “blowback”, does that mean that all were inspired from the Beretta? Btw, the Orita looks on the outside more like the MP-41.
Ovidius
Old Fighter
Posts: 1443
(3/7/02 8:16:15 pm)
Reply
Orita
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orita had been designed around the 9x19mm Prabellum cartridge(nowadays 9x19mm NATO-Standard, the same ammo used in the Uzi submachineguns).
The 9x19 Parabellum, although designed in 1902, was an exceptionally powerful cartridge, with a much stronger blow than any other pistol cartridge, including the .45 ACP. For this reason, as well as for ammo availability and political reasons, it became the standard SMG cartridge of all the future Axis countries in the 1930s(Italy, Germany, Finland, Romania) All production submachine guns of those countries(MP-18.I, Beretta, Suomi M1931, MP-40, Orita) used this type of ammo.
~Regards,
Ovidius
Geppistoly Katona
Veteran Member
Posts: 419
(3/8/02 12:41:47 am)
Reply
Re: Orita
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Victor,
No offense to your friend or anything but the Danuvia 35m and 43m [ posted below] are not even blowback guns, he is truly the biggest idiot i have come across if he thinks he knows alot about guns.
First thing, The Danuvia is an OPEN BOLT gun.
Second thing, it is not based on anything like the Berreta, but it is very unique and it's closest "relative" is the design for the SIG.
By the way, your friend knows nothing from what i've heard him say.
Geppistoly Katona
Veteran Member
Posts: 420
(3/8/02 12:46:53 am)
Reply
Re: Orita
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and you have to admit, the Hungarian 43m looks alot nicer than the Cugir Orita, and runs better too, [ more accurate as well, plus its even better made, and accepts a bayonet]
Heres a color pic from my friends collection of your ugly Cugir-Orita m1941
Cezarprimo
Member
Posts: 72
(3/8/02 9:39:09 am)
Reply Orita/Danuvia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Victor posted :
"I don?t know too much about it, so I asked a friend. He said to tell you that: ?Orita comes from the Beretta SMG just as much as the Dunavia comes from the Orita?" etc.
And than Geppistoly Katona replied :
"No offense to your friend or anything but the Danuvia 35m and 43m [ posted below] are not even blowback guns, he is truly the biggest idiot i have come across if he thinks he knows alot about guns." etc.
Supposing that Geppistoly Katona read Victor's post can somebody also implie that Geppistoly Katona understood it ? : ))
Geppistoly Katona
Veteran Member
Posts: 432
(3/8/02 7:59:43 pm)
Reply i tried my best
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried my best to understand
Victor
Member
Posts: 90
(3/8/02 8:58:35 pm)
Reply
Re: i tried my best
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although you say you live in the States and that you would like to teach English literature in Hungary, you really have problems understanding this language, from what I see. Maybe I didn’t express myself correctly, but Cezarprimo understood. I will explain you my post, so that you UNDERSTAND it.
”Orita comes from the Beretta SMG just as much as the Dunavia comes from the Orita”.
This means to emphasize the fact that Orita was very different weapon from the Berretta, just like the Dunavia models were different from any other WWII SMGs (Orita was just an example; I could as well said the PPSh-41).
The majority of WWII SMGs functioned on “blowback”, does that mean that all were inspired from the Beretta?
This means that many WWII SMGs were “blowbacks” (like the Orita), but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they were inspired from Beretta SMG.
No offense to your friend or anything but the Danuvia 35m and 43m [ posted below] are not even blowback guns
Please tell me where did I say that the Danuvia was a “blowback” ?
he is truly the biggest idiot i have come across if he thinks he knows alot about guns.
By the way, your friend knows nothing from what i've heard him say.
It seems that you do not read carefully my posts and you are very quick to start calling names people you don’t even know. I suggest you think before posting stuff like that from now on.
Ovidius
Old Fighter
Posts: 1453
(3/8/02 9:46:51 pm)
Reply
Re: i tried my best
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This means that many WWII SMGs were “blowbacks” (like the Orita), but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they were inspired from Beretta SMG.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The vast majority of the "blowback" SMGs from WWII and before trace their origin to the Bergmann MP-18.I of WWI.
~Ovidius
Geppistoly Katona
Veteran Member
Posts: 437
(3/8/02 10:45:28 pm)
Reply h
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
your dead on Ovidius, and sorry i didnt understand Victor
Victor
Member
Posts: 95
(3/10/02 2:17:46 pm)
Reply
Re: Orita
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and you have to admit, the Hungarian 43m looks alot nicer than the Cugir Orita, and runs better too, [ more accurate as well, plus its even better made, and accepts a bayonet]
Heres a color pic from my friends collection of your ugly Cugir-Orita m1941
Here is what my friend asked me to tell you after I sent him your replies:
History tells us that the Hungarian Danuvia submachine-gun (smg) was a piece of junk, an ugly weapon, much too heavy, a delayed-blowback weapon. In the year 1939 a Hungarian named Pal Kiraly did all his best to sell a submachine-gun patent (Danuvia) in England. In 1939 the British Army desperately needed a submachine-gun (the 'Sten' smg came later). Kiraly was refused by the British Army because his submachine-gun WAS NOT GOOD. The only one country to accept Kiraly's weapon was of course Hungary and only 8,000 models Danuvia M39 were made. The model Danuvia M43 had some modifications but it was junk too. The conclusion is very simple: If the British Army refused Kiraly's weapon (Danuvia smg) and decided to make the 'Sten' smg, it was 100 % clear that the Danuvia smg was worse than the Sten smg. We all know that the British are not idiots and they refused to manufacture Kiraly's
submachine-gun (Danuvia) because this weapon was nothing but A PIECE OF JUNK. These are all facts and history has always said the truth.
I would also like to add that the Orita remained in service in the army 12-13 years after the war and then in the “patriotic guards” units. How long were the Danuvia’s used after the war?