| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| WorldWar2.ro Forum > Romanian Royal Navy > Romanian subs |
| Posted by: Geto-Dacul October 18, 2003 04:29 pm |
| I know that during WW2, Romania had 3 submarines :
- Delfinul - Rechinul - Marsuinul What was their fate during and after the war? Did the Soviet sank or capture some of them? I heard that Delfinul is still alive... Getu' |
| Posted by: Victor October 18, 2003 04:40 pm |
| Have you visited the http://www.worldwar2.ro website recently? |
| Posted by: Andreas von Mach October 18, 2003 05:03 pm |
| Some date from Soviet sources:
- Delfinul :arrow: Soviet TS-3 - Rechinul :arrow: Soviet TS-1 - Marsuinul :arrow: Soviet TS-2 all seized on 29.04.1944 enlisted into Soviet Red Sea Navy 14.09.1944 renamed as above on 20.10.44 DELFINUL deleted from Soviet Navy lists on 6.11.1945 returned 12.10.1945 RECHINUL 4.08.1948 renamed N-39 16.06.1949 renamed S-39 3.07.1951 deleted from Navy list and returned to Romania MARSUINUL 4.08.1948 renamed N-40 16.06.1949 renamed S-40 20.02.1945 sunk in poti after torpedo explosion 20.02.1945 refloated repaired 28.11.50 deleted from the Navy lists 8.12.1950 transferred for scapping |
| Posted by: Geto-Dacul October 18, 2003 05:11 pm | ||||
Victor wrote :
No! :oops: 
So the Soviets just returned it to us after the war! Their very good afterall!  |
| Posted by: Dénes October 18, 2003 06:12 pm | ||
Shouldn't the month be August, rather than April? Dénes |
| Posted by: zarull October 18, 2003 08:35 pm |
| The Marsuinul engine is not the one that is in the Romanian Navy Museum in Constanta????? |
| Posted by: Andreas von Mach October 18, 2003 08:45 pm |
Of course they were seized on 29th August 1944 
Sorry |
| Posted by: Tiornu October 19, 2003 06:50 am |
| Why were Rechinul and Marsuinul not built to an identical design? Or did their differences result from problems in the yard? What was the official name of the Galati yard at the time these boats were built?
Does anyone have the exact date when they were laid down? Exactly when was Marsuinul completed, and when declared ready for operations? How about Delfinul? I see that Victor has said one of the Italian CB subs was sunk in August 1944--which one? Was it returned to service? Did these boats keep their original names all during their careers? What was their ultimate fate? Does the word "pescaj" refer to the ship's beam at its maximum point? I have many questions--don't I? |
| Posted by: Victor October 19, 2003 08:44 am |
| The answers to some of your questions are in the Equipment/Ships/Subamarines section of the http://www.worldwar2.ro site.
Why do people seem to forget that the forum belongs to a site anddonot try look there first? |
| Posted by: dragos October 19, 2003 11:19 am |
| I put a link to the main site in the logo in the upper left corner. |
| Posted by: Tiornu October 19, 2003 11:32 am |
| I posted my questions after looking through the Weapons/Ships/Submarines pages. If I missed something, I will blame it on my aging eyes. |
| Posted by: Andreas von Mach October 19, 2003 04:07 pm | ||||||||
| There was a serie of articles on Romanaian Navy in WW II in WARSHIP (Conway) . In 1992 issue C:craciunoiu & M.Axworthy "Romanian Submarine Operations in the Second World War" p.142 gives following fates.
DELFINUL Handed back with other unserviceable units to the Romanian Nany i Galati on 12 October 1945... She retained a technical crew abroad until 1954 when was towed to Mangalia naval base for a training purposes. Seh made a few local dives there but by now she had numerous leaks and was thereafter kept within the base, In 1959 she was decomissioned and sent to the breakers. (Note she was not operationel from 1942). RECHINUL In August 1951 returned to Romania navy at Galati. However , the Peace Treaty of 1947 (in Paris) prohibited Romania from posessing operational submarines and she could not be recommissioned. Broken uop in 1959. In this article were : RECHINUL known originaly as construction No.929 MARSUINUL known originaly as construction No.930 Were these numbers a yard numbers of Galati ?????? Is such list existing ? Posted by: Victor October 19, 2003 07:10 pm |
|
In the Marsuinul profile it is explained that it was first intended to be a mine-laying sub and from this resulted the differences with Rechinul.
I believe the official name was: Santierul Naval Galati. The Resita Works also took part in the project.
Look in their profiles and you will notice: Delfinul 5 May 1936 Rechinul 5 May 1941 Marsuinul 25 May 1941, ready for operations, after tests, in April 1944 |
| Posted by: Tiornu October 19, 2003 07:19 pm |
| Thanks, Victor. The construction of a ship is usually assigned three dates: when it is laid down, when it is launched, and when it is completed. (The definitions of theses three terms varied from navy to navy, which can cause a lot of confusion.) Getting a fourth date of when the ship was declared ready for service--that is a bonus.
The dates you listed on the submarine page were for launching. That is why I asked about when the boats were laid down. Thanks for the minelayer-sub information. So the two boats began very different and became a bit more alike. |
| Posted by: Victor October 19, 2003 07:36 pm |
| The flag was officially raised on Rechinul (is this"laid down"?) on9 May 1943, 7 years after Delfinul |
| Posted by: Dénes October 19, 2003 07:45 pm | ||
"Laid down" could have several meanings. One is - how can I say it neutrally? - "copulation" :oops: Are you familiar with the poems of Jim Morrison from "The Doors"? There the topic is reoccurring. Dénes |
| Posted by: Victor October 19, 2003 07:53 pm |
| I really doubt Jim Morrison was thinking at submarines when using the "laid" term. Maybe torpedoes? |
| Posted by: Dénes October 19, 2003 08:27 pm |
| One never knows. "Submarine" could have several meanings, too...
Dénes |
| Posted by: Andreas von Mach October 19, 2003 09:02 pm |
| Laid Down
Launching etc are not important terms in live of one ships. They are very important for shipyard, as they are usually one of two most important , that aftre them shipyard received parts of payment. On this way they are cleary defined as these should be some responsible persons on the side of the purchasers, who accepted the terms. Even when the ships was built for the Romanian Navy at Navy Shipyard, and they both belongs to Marine Ministerium. |
| Posted by: Tiornu October 19, 2003 09:44 pm |
| I must admit, I was never much of a fan of The Doors or of Jim Morrison. However, there are many shades of meaning to the term "laid down" that do not involve an exchange of bodily fluids. It is supposed to denote the very beginning of construction, when assembled materials are first joined together. Sometimes there would be a ceremony involved, hardly as grand as a launching.
Launching would seem to be the event least liable to confusion, but it seems there was some "wiggle room" in this concept as well. Sometimes the date of completion was made equal to the date of commissioning. Or it might be the date when the ship was handed over for trials, or the date when trials were completed, or...whatever. Each navy had its own definition, and that definition could change over time. |
| Posted by: Andreas von Mach October 20, 2003 12:28 am |
| It it always a problem of money :!: :!: :!: |
| Posted by: Andreas von Mach October 23, 2003 11:29 pm |
| Soviet submarine:
TS-2 ex MARSUINUL sunk 29 Feb 1945 at Poti due to torpedo explosion 28 Feb 1945 refloated and put again into service. |
| Posted by: Tiornu October 24, 2003 12:43 am |
| That's interesting. Does anyone have any further details? |
| Posted by: Wings_of_wrath February 18, 2007 04:23 pm |
| By the way, on the WW2 website, the picture displayed in the profile of the NMS Marsuinul in in fact that of German U-boat U-26, of the Type I A. For comparison, here is the picture from the site and a model of the U-25, the only other boat in the class:   (second picture is from http://www.kartonmodellbau.net/) |