WorldWar2.ro Forum [Powered by Invision Power Board]

Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format

WorldWar2.ro Forum > The post-WW2 and recent military > Romanian tank units 2010

Posted by: Vici August 20, 2010 07:32 am

Ok, there have been a lot of discussions on this forum about TR-85M1, TR-125, etc.
But let's see if we can put together a current order of battle with units, tank types and numbers in service. Here's what I could gather on the subject:

Bat 114 Targoviste T-55
Bat 284 Galati TR-85 M1
Bat 631 Bacau TR-85 M1, TR-85
Bat 814 Turda T-55AM
Pitesti Tank School TR-580

Any additions and corrections to the list above?
What is the nominal strength of a tank Battalion and how is it organized in (tank)companies, platoons, etc.
How many upgraded TR-85M1 are in service after all? I have read conflicting numbers, ranging from 35 to 56.

Posted by: Agarici August 20, 2010 09:35 am

From what I know and remember (having as sources of information various Romanian military magazines and the site of the Ministry of Defence), Romania has 3 operational tank battalions:
- one at Galati, with TR 85 M 1
- one at Bacau, with un-upgraded TR 85, but still the latest version before the M 1 upgrade; this variant is called in the military magazines TR 85 800
- one at Turda, with T 55 AM (if I recall correctly the AM 2 version upgrade, but I’m not sure; also, I don’t know which of the AM variants - Czech, Soviet, Romanian)

Each battalion has around 50 (49-51 tanks). As you see, there are no T 72 operational. I have no data about the tank school units.

So that is the formidable armour force of a UE and NATO member, middle size European state from the South-Eastern border of both the Union and the NA Treaty Organization, 20+ years from a point in time (early 90’s) when Romania had 1000+ front line operational main battle tanks a a few hundreds reserve machines: ~ 150 tanks plus probably another tens (maximum couple of hundreds?) in reserve. Among these, the “state of art” of armoured vehicles are the 50 or so TR 85 M1 with their "formidable" 100 mm main gun designed in 1940's-1950's.

This is yet another undisputable "performance" and peak of incompetence, irresponsibility and stupidity of the Romanian political-military leadership and establishment, which worth being mentioned together with the Lancer upgrade for MIG 21, combined with the lack of use and weapons for the airplane BWR-capable radar. If they cut the force of the armoured units to a midget size, they weren’t even able, in more than 10 years, to endow all three battalions with at least the damn modernized TR 85 M 1. With all the respect indented, and with my apologies for the fellow forumists, I cannot call them otherwise then a bunch of brainless and impassible morons - good at nothing then at dismantling a country, and in this particular case its army… Good work, gentlemen!

Posted by: Agarici August 20, 2010 09:46 am

OFF-TOPIC:

Another well-known and irrefutable example of their incompetence and incapacity would be the repeatedly announced (several times, in public, by several ministries of defense) program of repairing/refurbishing the Kilo class Delfinul submarine - which of course after about 20 years lead to ZERO results. Delfinul’s only function in the present in to participate to the Navy Day, anchored in the harbor, as a sort of floating museum.

Posted by: Vici August 20, 2010 11:16 am

I am quite sure that the 631st Bat from Bacau also has the TR-85M1, I saw an article with pictures in "Observatorul Militar" (can't remember which number) about live fire exercise in the Smardan range.

Posted by: Agarici August 20, 2010 11:46 am

That might be another odd thing (in my opinion), red by me in the same “Observatorul Militar”, I think. The crews from the other units (from Bacau and Turda) are using the TR 85 M 1 when training in the biggest/complex firing range (tankodrome) available in the country - located somewhere in South - while leaving their own tanks “at home”. Now I do not know if this would be “Smârdan” range.

Another explanation might be that the M 1 upgrade program continues, and some more units will be refitted with modernized tanks. If I remember correctly, the initial official figure released for the number of the machines to be upgraded was over 300. What the heck happened with the rest of them, and why the total figure was modified with no explanation - nobody cares, to put it mildly, in the chain of command.

Posted by: Agarici August 20, 2010 11:54 am

I also remember seeing some photos from a parade of the Bacau battalion, on the occasion of a celebration of the unit history, in a local (Bacau) newspaper, early this year. Don’t want to play the wise guy, but I remember seeing only TR 85s. Perhaps the fact that the basic TR 85s are (since some time) using a cammo pattern similar with the newer M 1s might constitute a source of confusion.

But we should however look for some additional confirmation of these info.

Posted by: Imperialist August 20, 2010 12:26 pm

QUOTE (Agarici @ August 20, 2010 09:35 am)

This is yet another undisputable "performance" and peak of incompetence, irresponsibility and stupidity of the Romanian political-military leadership and establishment, which worth being mentioned together with the Lancer upgrade for MIG 21, combined with the lack of use and weapons for the airplane BWR-capable radar. If they cut the force of the armoured units to a midget size, they weren’t even able, in more than 10 years, to endow all three battalions with at least the damn modernized TR 85 M 1. With all the respect indented, and with my apologies for the fellow forumists, I cannot call them otherwise then a bunch of brainless and impassible morons - good at nothing then at dismantling a country, and in this particular case its army… Good work, gentlemen!

They're only following the script. What options do they have? They can try to fight the script and be put alongside VC Tudor as nutcases, with the prospect of a failed "career" ahead of them or they can play along and insure relative wealth and success for them and their families at the expense of bigger national considerations. It's obvious what they choose. The problem is most of the Romanians currently choose the second option so even if those that really want to do something come to power they'd have little to work with. Their efforts would likely be sabotaged or largely ineffective. Our only hope is for the script to change or for the licurici to need us much stronger in this region.

Posted by: Vici August 20, 2010 02:04 pm

QUOTE (Agarici @ August 20, 2010 11:46 am)

You're right, I checked. it's in Observatorul Militar no. 24/2009, page 12
http://www.presamil.ro/OM/2009/24/Ziar%2024.pdf
It says they came from Bacau and took on charge the Bisons ("au luat in primire")

Posted by: Iamandi August 20, 2010 03:09 pm

QUOTE

Nu ştim cine a avut ideea, să spunem că a luat decizia strategică, de a desfiinţa o unitate de tancuri pentru a o reînfiinţa după cinci ani dar operaţiunea seamănă leit cu operaţia doctorului Ciomu.

Mai precis după ce în urmă cu 5 ani Batalionul 1 Tancuri “Vlad Tepeş” din garnizoana Târgovişte a fost desfiinţat, iată că noii doctori de la conducere au luat decizia reînfiinţării unei noi unităţi de tancuri, Batalionul 114 Tancuri în aceeaşi garnizoană.

Numai că efectul Ciomu s-a produs. Tancurile T-72, cele mai performante pe care le avea Armata, au fost înlocuite cu bătrânele T-55 nemodernizate. Că doar nu era să se păstreze din cele 1.500 de tancuri avute prin anii 90 cele mai bune dintre ele! Bineînţeles că efectul Ciomu a produs efecte şi în planul resursei umane, cei mai mulţi dintre vechii tanchişti căutându-şi alte rosturi.

De unde se deduce că între strategie şi chirurgie nu e o mare diferenţă.

Source: http://resboiu.wordpress.com/2010/08/06/una-buna-dar-trista-de-la-militar-infomondo/

Posted by: Agarici August 20, 2010 04:30 pm

Off-topic, again:

What do you think, will someone, during our lifetime, have to answer for this mess (taking also into account what Iama posted on his blog)? Not necessary judiciary, but at least as a part of a an internal (but public, and non-"politically colored") investigation?

Posted by: Agarici August 20, 2010 04:44 pm

QUOTE (Imperialist @ August 20, 2010 12:26 pm)

QUOTE (Agarici @ August 20, 2010 09:35 am)

Imperalist, I might accept (even if personally not agree with) the idea of a series of strategic, “big picture”-type considerations, or of a set of pre-established options. But ONLY up to the point of transforming all into a sham, into a generalized mockery without even bothering to maintain the appearances.

There’s a cynical question/joke dealing with a comparison between the two generation of thieves and thugs from the Romanian top politics, those belonging to the Iliescu&Năstase era and these of the present regime. The answer to “What’s the difference between them” would be: the former had class in stealing, they knew how to do it with some style, while the latter...

Posted by: Mircea87 September 19, 2010 11:38 am

QUOTE (Agarici @ August 20, 2010 09:46 am)

I agree with you. The Delfinul submarine is now a sitting duck and the shame of the navy and defense minister. The only simillar situation I can think of is that Thai aircraft carrier (Chakri Naruebet) that is being used as a yacht.

I saw a TV show last night about that 18 billion euros Germany has to pay Romania. The man who discovered this debt said that Germany is not obliged to pay cash, it can also deliver machines and stuff like that. I hope maybe they'll lend us some Eurofighters, some upgraded Leopard 2 tanks and a couple of modern submarines...yeah, it's a dream.

Posted by: Vici September 20, 2010 01:06 pm

Gentlemen, I understand and share your frustrations, but please let's keep this on topic.

Apart from the tanks themselves, the tank units should have specialized vehicles, such as ARV (armoured recovery vehicles) and assault bridges. Let's try and see what versions are in service. Anyone know how many of each per tank battalion?

We have the VT-55, Cechoslovak made ARV on the basis of the T-55:

http://www.cartula.ro/forum/post-a13357-.html

and the TCZ-580 ARV, Romanian made on the basis of the TR-580, very similar to the VT-55.

There's also the new DMT-85M1, an ARV and demining vehicle based on the TR-85M1. I've read on another forum that 2 were acquired before 2008, when a contract for another 3 was signed. Plenty of pictures exist for this variant:

http://www.rft.forter.ro/15_galerie/20080519_dragor/galerie/dragor.htm

What about assault bridges? I've only seen a prototype based on the TR-85 (old, not M1 upgraded) and that's it. I suppose we have some based on T-55 - can anybody confirm? Any photos around?

Posted by: Hadrian September 21, 2010 04:58 pm

http://www.rft.forter.ro/2010_2_t/06-arm/04.htm

It seems we only made this prototype PMA-50. Attached the presentation.

http://www.umbucuresti.ro/index.php?id=4

On the site of UMB there is no other product described. I heard about another older project (still only as prototype), PMA-25.

Posted by: Vici September 22, 2010 01:55 pm

Yes, that's the prototype assault bridge based on the TR-85 I mentioned in my previous post. Thanks.

We do have the MT-55 assault bridge in service, see second photo here:
http://www.rft.forter.ro/2010_1_i/10-stiri/00.htm
unfortunatly I can't ID the exact version.

It is interesting to note that the PMA-50 uses a sytem similar to the german "Biber" with horizontally sliding sections, whereas the MT-55 uses the scissors system. Also the MT-55 has a span of 18m, while PMA-50 is 22 m long.

Posted by: osutacincizecisidoi September 22, 2010 02:56 pm

QUOTE (Vici @ August 20, 2010 07:32 am)

On the romanian land forces page there is another batalion listed: 912th of the 9th mechanised brigade.

http://www.curierul.forter.ro/03viata/01.htm

on a side note the former 9th mechanised division ( Constanta ) had the 18th Tank Regiment (Basarabi )

Posted by: Vici September 24, 2010 09:44 am

Indeed, just like the one at Targoviste, this unit was recently (re)activated.
Here:
http://www.presamil.ro/OM/2010/15/Ziar%20pt%20internet%20bun%20no%2015.pdf
it is said on page 5, column 4 that their equipment is T-55

This also corresponds with the info I read somewhere that we have 5 tank units.
In summary these are:

Bat 114 Targoviste T-55 (some AM)
Bat 284 Galati TR-85 M1 Bison
Bat 631 Bacau TR-85 (non upgraded)
Bat 814 Turda T-55 AM2
Bat 912 Murfatlar (=Basarabi) T-55

with the first and last in the list not operational yet

So roughly 250 tanks, of which 150 (60%) are T-55, plus 20% each TR-85 and TR-85M1. This - coupled with the fact that the two recently reactivated units got T-55 - speaks volumes about the total lack of reliability of the Romanian made tanks - except for the upgraded Bison - and a silent confirmation of the fact that TR-580 is out of service and most non upgraded TR-85 are stored.

Posted by: Agarici September 24, 2010 06:38 pm

So the "new" unit from Murfatlar uses non-upgraded T 55 (T 55 A)?

If so, I bet we're the only ones in Europe in this condition, NATO or non-NATO. Excepting of course the armies which does not use tanks at all - Licthenstein, Andorra and the Vatican among them.

Posted by: Vici September 28, 2010 09:18 am

Don't know what kind of T-55 they use, it wasn't mentioned in the article I've previously linked and there is no other source - pictorial or written.

The 114th uses both non upgraded T-55 and upgraded T-55AMs

Posted by: osutacincizecisidoi October 06, 2010 06:49 pm

QUOTE (Vici @ September 24, 2010 09:44 am)

It also states that the 9th mechanised Bde has the batle honors of the former 9th inf division ( that part i allready suspected but it's nice to see the oficial confirmation ) .