Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (2) 1 [2]   ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Budapest Hippodrom Jan. 1945
Florin
Posted: September 14, 2012 01:15 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1867
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



QUOTE (paul panzer @ September 14, 2012 04:49 am)
I am still digging...

Quotes:

“Pentru aceste fapte, Corpul 7 armată citează regimentul în ordinul de zi nr. 10/15 octombrie: “Regimentul 7 artilerie grea a sprijinit atacurile infanteriei, determinând ruperea rezistenţelor şi ocuparea poziţiilor inamicului”; “Divizionul 1 din Regimentul 36 antitanc (comandant: maior Ivanov Alexandru) în toate luptele duse de Corpul 7 armată şi în special la 4 ianuarie 1945, a avut o atitudine dârză în faţa contraatacurilor inamice cu care de luptă, rămânând neclintit pe poziţie şi trăgând continuu contra lor şi a infanteriei inamice a reuşit să oprească contraatacul”

“În ziua de 4 ianuarie 1945, germane-maghiarii au dat un contraatac puternic sprijinit de care de luptă pentru recucerirea Hipodromului şi ajungerea pe calea ferată. Singura artilerie grea (Regimentul 7 artilerie grea şi Regimentul 1 artilerie grea) împreuna cu artileria anticar au oprit acest contraatac cu pierderi grele pentru inamic”

(Source is pages 181-182 of following study http://www.rft.forter.ro/17_bibvirt/pdf/00...artileriei.pdf)

I'm note 100% sure about exact meaning, but assume that message is essentially that Romanian field artillery units were (also) involved in repulsing counterattack aside from AT guns. Help would be appreciated, including in the following issue. I understand that the quotes refer to AFVs. Considering romanian terminology then in force, is it possible or not to identify the type/category of AFVs (eg. tank with turret and/or assault gun and/or tank hunter)?

Paul, this piece of text is focused on citations (official congratulations) toward few Romanian artillery regiments, mentioning also what they did to deserve this. There is no mentioning of AFV's, with the expection of the term "care de lupta" beloging to Axis. "Care de lupta" is a very general Romanian term. Literally, " war chariots" – but the usage if for any kind of AFV, including tanks. Writers are using it mostly for tanks. (Of course, we also other more specific words. :) )
I am sorry, I don't have time to translate.

This post has been edited by Florin on September 14, 2012 01:23 pm
PM
Top
21 inf
Posted: September 14, 2012 02:43 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Retired
Posts: 1512
Member No.: 1232
Joined: January 05, 2007



Here is your translation:

For these deeds, 7th Army Corp is citing the regiment in the Order of the Day nr. 10/15th of October: “7th Heavy Artilery Regiment suported the atacks of the infantry, having as efect the breaking of enemy resistance and the ocupation of enemy positions; ”; “1st (Divizion - I dont know the term in English) from 36th AT Regiment (comander: Major Ivanov Alexandru) in all the fights of 7th Army Corp and especially on 4th of January 1945, had an unflinching atitude against the enemy counterattacks with AFV's, keeping it's position and continuously firing against them and against the enemy infantry he managed to stop the counterattack”.

“On 4th of January 1945, the german-hungarians gave a strong counterattack suported by AFV's in order to conquer the hipodrome and to reach the railway. The only heavy artilery (7th Heavy Artilery Regiment and 1st Heavy Artilery Regiment) together with AT artilery stoped this attack inflicting heavy casualties to the enemy”.

PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
paul panzer
Posted: September 14, 2012 03:32 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Member No.: 1604
Joined: September 23, 2007



Many, many thanks for that. This is very valuable. I think we are moving forward.

I understand that the art. regiments that are referred to (1th, 7th and 36th) are regiments that are organically subordinated to the 7th corps (i.e. they are NOT organically attached to infantry or cavalry divisions).

Further, I understand that the "divizionul" is a subunit of such regiment. The unit the CO of which is Major Alexandru is a "divizionul" of an antitank regiment. Thus the term "divizionul" is probably best translated by batailon (in German : Abteilung).

If someone would know something about the equipment of those units or the unit of Major Alexandru, this would be great. Is it possible that Regimentul 36 antitank could have been equiped with 75mm Resita AT guns?

This post has been edited by paul panzer on September 14, 2012 03:32 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
aidan zea
Posted: September 14, 2012 11:05 pm
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 102
Member No.: 3341
Joined: July 04, 2012



From what I know paul panzer the 36th Antitank Regiment used the romanian produced Resita 75mm at gun, while the 1st and 7th Heavy Artillery Regiments used both the french Schneider 105mm guns and the czech Skoda 149mm howitzers.

This post has been edited by aidan zea on September 14, 2012 11:14 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
Victor
Posted: September 15, 2012 05:18 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4333
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE (paul panzer @ September 14, 2012 05:32 pm)
Many, many thanks for that. This is very valuable. I think we are moving forward.

I understand that the art. regiments that are referred to (1th, 7th and 36th) are regiments that are organically subordinated to the 7th corps (i.e. they are NOT organically attached to infantry or cavalry divisions).

Further, I understand that the "divizionul" is a subunit of such regiment. The unit the CO of which is Major Alexandru is a "divizionul" of an antitank regiment. Thus the term "divizionul" is probably best translated by batailon (in German : Abteilung).

If someone would know something about the equipment of those units or the unit of Major Alexandru, this would be great. Is it possible that Regimentul 36 antitank could have been equiped with 75mm Resita AT guns?

"Divizion" is indeed translated by battalion.

For details on the artillery regiments, read here: http://worldwar2.ro/organizare/?language=en&article=36
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Dénes
Posted: September 15, 2012 11:41 am
Quote Post


Host
Group Icon

Group: Hosts
Posts: 4348
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



QUOTE (Victor @ September 15, 2012 11:18 am)
"Divizion" is indeed translated by battalion.

Was divizion and divizie the same? I don't think so.

Gen. Dénes
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
21 inf
Posted: September 15, 2012 04:47 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Retired
Posts: 1512
Member No.: 1232
Joined: January 05, 2007



Divizie is a great military unit, designation used for different branches: infantry, cavalry and so on. Divizion is a smaller unit, equivalent to a infantry batalion, designation used exclusivly for artilery.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Victor
Posted: September 15, 2012 05:10 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4333
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE (Dénes @ September 15, 2012 01:41 pm)
QUOTE (Victor @ September 15, 2012 11:18 am)
"Divizion" is indeed translated by battalion.

Was divizion and divizie the same? I don't think so.

Gen. Dénes

Divizie and divizion are two different things and I don't see where I might have implied that they weren't.

Divizion was up until recently the designation for artillery battalion in the Romanian Army. It was also used to designate cavalry battalions until this branch of service was disbanded.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
ANDREAS
Posted: September 16, 2012 05:39 pm
Quote Post


Locotenent colonel
*

Group: Members
Posts: 814
Member No.: 2421
Joined: March 15, 2009



In January 1945 the schwere Panzer-Abteilung 503 (heavy tank battalion 503) (from 21 December 1944 called schwere Panzer-Abteilung "Feldherrnhalle" when he was part of the Panzer Division "Feldherrnhalle") had no heavy tanks Tiger II operational anymore. Is therefore presumed that the soviet and romanian troops advancing in Pest in January 1945 could not encounter anything but Panthers equipping the 13th Panzer Division and Panzer Grenadier Division "Feldherrnhalle" (at that time reunited into one single division the "Feldherrnhalle" Panzer Division after heavy losses in the previous battles). So I guess we can assume that the Panthers were the tanks that the soviet antitank gun crews could not destroy in the quoted battle scene.

This post has been edited by ANDREAS on September 16, 2012 05:41 pm
PMEmail PosterYahoo
Top
paul panzer
Posted: September 16, 2012 06:39 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Member No.: 1604
Joined: September 23, 2007



Many thanks for your useful comments.

Another comment from my side: I suspect that Mr Popeanga was watching from the "S-Bahn" line, i.e. urban train line (not strictly speaking a tramway), located North of the race field. It is interesting to note that the axis troops counter-attack supported by AFVs of the afternoon of the 4th January was also reported in the diary of the (romanian) 19th inf. div. which seems to have been affected as well, though to a much lesser extent than the cavalry division. I understand that Mr Popeanga served in a regiment organically belonging to 19th inf. div. I am still a bit puzzled by the reference to soviet soldiers manning the AT guns he saw: Can it be that he refers to romanian soldiers who were veterans of the Eastern front or is the wording clearly indicating that the soldiers were Udssr soldiers/citizens? Regardless of this issue it seems that the merit of repulsing the counter attack was ultimately with Romanian field artillery/AT guns. Would be good to have more witness statements. Does the Dascalescu book of 1974 say something (I do not have a copy)? Is it worth trying to obtain the book?

This post has been edited by paul panzer on September 16, 2012 06:41 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
paul panzer
Posted: September 20, 2012 11:41 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Member No.: 1604
Joined: September 23, 2007



Some further data input:

- I understand that on the left/southern wing of the 9th cav. div., the soviet 297th rifle division (18th sov. corps) reached the area of the horse race field (southern part) in the night of the 4/5 January 1945 which ultimately speeded up the conquest of the race field. Any info about 297th rifle division involvement is welcome.

- The axis resistance in the area of the race field seemed to have been concentrated in the spectators' stands ("tribunes") of the race field. It seems that the last of the two stands was conquered on 7 January by Romanian troops

-I also read a reference to the support of the 7th romanian corps by a 114th (soviet) anti-tank regiment in January 1945 (note: reference does not relate to figths in the race field area).

Question: Is it possible that Mr. Popeanga refers to (soviet) gunners belonging to the latter (soviet) unit?

This post has been edited by paul panzer on September 20, 2012 03:37 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
paul panzer
Posted: September 28, 2012 10:33 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 29
Member No.: 1604
Joined: September 23, 2007



Old film footage of the "hippodrom" in Budapest. Note the tribunes:

http://filmhiradok.nava.hu/watch.php?id=3431

This post has been edited by paul panzer on September 28, 2012 12:39 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (2) 1 [2]  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0240 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]