| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| WorldWar2.ro Forum > The post-WW2 and recent military > News about Delfinul |
| Posted by: Iamandi August 16, 2005 06:49 am |
| Acording to Adevarul, http://www.adevarulonline.ro/index.jsp?page=articol§ion_id=16&article_id=146931 Teodor Atanasiu, defense minister, declared - it is possible to Delfinul to have from next year his battery changed and some repairs, to be prepared for missions. |
| Posted by: Victor August 17, 2005 07:14 am |
| That's good news. The Navy seems to be getting more lately. |
| Posted by: C-2 October 06, 2005 03:48 pm |
| I have news.. The Delfinu is not going to have his batt. repaired. |
| Posted by: Dani October 06, 2005 07:18 pm | ||
Which should be the reason? |
| Posted by: C-2 October 06, 2005 07:19 pm |
| Money... |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 06, 2005 08:34 pm | ||||
October 7th 2005 http://www.jurnalul.ro/articol.php?id=4219 edit -- according to the news quoted, Delfinul will be repaired, and its batteries replaced |
| Posted by: C-2 October 06, 2005 08:51 pm |
| Imperialist with his usual military experience,didn't learned not t belive in everything he reads in newspapers. The info I wrote was from an navy oficer,not from a cook. |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 06, 2005 09:29 pm | ||
What I gave you was an article quoting the minister of defense on his plans for Delfinul. Anonymous navy officer and hearsay vs. minister of defense and public statement. Really, who should I believe? For now and until proven otherwise, I'll choose the minister, thank you. |
| Posted by: C-2 October 07, 2005 05:03 pm |
| Then explain us all where would the minister find spare parts for an outdated Soviet subm.? Because making them will cost almost as a brand ne3w one. |
| Posted by: Victor October 07, 2005 05:12 pm |
| Spare parts could be found in the same place Russia, India, China, Algeria and Iran find for their Kilo-class submarines. Or do you suppose India would have ordered 10 of these ships without the possibility of reparing them in the future? |
| Posted by: C-2 October 07, 2005 05:51 pm |
| Again , MONEY |
| Posted by: Victor October 08, 2005 06:15 am | ||
You said "where will he find tehspare parts for an outdated Soviet sub", not where will he find the money for the spare parts. If the minister said that the batteries will be changed he probably already made a study on how much that would cost and can find the money neccessary. But we will wait and see. Personally I don't put much trust into gossip. |
| Posted by: C-2 October 08, 2005 06:30 am |
| Victor, To BUY new bat. for it from the Russians,it's a lot of money,since they know there's no other sourse,and they charging many times more the real value. To BUILD new batteries,it's a lot of money ,since you have to create a new tehnological proces (and who needs it?) .Again a lot of money. ANd for what? |
| Posted by: Agarici October 08, 2005 08:11 am |
| For the purpose of the Romanian navy having a serviceable submarine, a “ship in being” which would force any possible opponent to invest in AS technical means and/or vessels and to consider AS task for any naval action. I think the costs to attain that (for the Romanian navy, by repairing “Delfinul”) worth 10 times their amount because of their effects (even cost effects) on the possible opponents. And after all a Kilo-class sub it's not so outdated by the Black Sea standards, and if you consider the average age of the Romanian army/navy equipment it's not outdated at all. My father served a lifetime in the army and was no cook either, but he never pretends to have all the answers concerning the subject, not even for the period when he was an officer. So I wouldn’t put to much price on rumors, even if they are gossip among fellow officers. Let’s give at least some credit to the official press releases. |
| Posted by: cipiamon October 08, 2005 08:40 am |
| Can i ask you a naive question? What sub is this, the ww2 sub? |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 08, 2005 08:43 am | ||
No, it was bought in 1986. |
| Posted by: C-2 October 08, 2005 09:32 am |
| And when he was actualy built? |
| Posted by: Imperialist October 08, 2005 09:50 am | ||
According to public data, the first Kilo Class subs were built in the early 1980s; ours was contracted in 1985, and received in 1986. |
| Posted by: Victor October 08, 2005 11:05 am | ||
Then tell us how much it costs to buy new batteries for the Delfinul. The price of a new diesel submarine of this size and capabilities is 250 million USD. If it would be so, then nobody would buy this ship model. Batteries have to be changed from time to time whatever submarine type you have in your Navy. And you are wrong. Russia isn't the only source for batteries. India has installed its own batteries (Gerrman designed) that have a lifespan of 5 years. See here: http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Sindhugosh.html Agarici already answered why the overhauling of the Delfinul is neccessary. |
| Posted by: Iamandi October 11, 2005 05:38 am |
| Kilo and Scorpene... nice team! Iama |
| Posted by: crolick December 18, 2005 07:12 pm |
| Hello! Recently I was looking at the Romanian Navy web site and to my surprise I haven't find any information regarding only Romanian submarine Delfinul. What happened to the sub?! Was it put out of the service due to the lack of the batteries?! Regards, crolick |
| Posted by: Carol I December 18, 2005 07:28 pm | ||
The sub is listed among the other vessels of the Navy in the section presenting http://www.fortele-navale.ro/despre/navefm.htm. http://www.fortele-navale.ro/despre/nave/navy05.jpg |
| Posted by: crolick December 18, 2005 07:36 pm | ||
Hmm thank you Carol I for the link. I was searching for the sub in the organisation, and she's ain't there. Also used search and didn't reseive any results for 'Delfinul' - strange  OK - so two questions: (1) Do you know Soviet number of your Kilo [and shipyard number, etc]?! (2) What is currently happening with the sub?! Is it all the time moored in the harbour?! Best wishes, crolick |
| Posted by: Carol I December 18, 2005 08:25 pm | ||
Sorry, I do not have answers for any of your questions. Maybe others have more information. |
| Posted by: lancer25k December 19, 2005 05:42 pm |
| What about modernizing the Delfinul? Western Electronics, Sub-Harpons, new running gear and a modern passive sonar. The cost could be moderate to expensive, However, it could worth the cost; becuase it would make Romania's only submarine a far more potent and useful weapons system. Thank You |
| Posted by: crolick November 18, 2006 05:02 pm | ||
| Hello friends, again I have 2 questions on Delfinul: 1) Did sub laready received its new batteries?! Or this plan was cancelled?! 2) According to the Treaty of Peace [signed February 10, 1947 in Paris], Article 14:
If so, why Romanian Navy received in 1985 new Kilo type submarine?!  Cheers, Andrzej |
| Posted by: Victor November 18, 2006 05:26 pm |
| Then you might as well ask why did the Romanian Army possess guided missles and MTBs after the war. |
| Posted by: crolick November 18, 2006 05:53 pm | ||
Yes, I might but I was not aware of that fact Anyway - any idea why is it so?! In case of Finland similar harsh conditions are kept until today!! |
| Posted by: AGC April 02, 2007 07:13 pm |
| Romania does not need a submarine. Today the only possible enemy is Russia and Ukraina. Both countries have a bigger fleet. “Delfinul” could play the decoy during the training exercises of the Romanian antisubmarine ships. Even for that the maintain costs are to big. In modern warfare the priority in defending your territory is to have a strong Airforce and a modern AA defence. The last wars and even the last part of WW2 in France (when German army could not move properly during day) have proved it. AGC |
| Posted by: Iamandi May 12, 2007 07:37 am |
| http://www.jurnalul.ro/articol_79066/_delfinul__zace_la_mal_de_12_ani.html A new article about Delfinul. Only in romanian language. Some words from his actual commander. Iama |
| Posted by: Agarici May 10, 2009 09:43 pm |
| Unlike the vast majority of the materials about national defence from the Romanian media, the article indicated by Iama is well documented, entirelly profesional and very well written. So, it can be done that way too... http://www.jurnalul.ro/stire-special/delfinul-cu-submarinul-la-reparat-105005.html |
| Posted by: BALLY December 24, 2009 07:28 am |
| I know that Delfinul's number was (is) 521. In MARINA ROMANA Magzine, no. 8(138)/2009 page 53, in an article about December 1989 there are some informations about "submarinul 609". As I know, in 1989 Romania had only one submarine... The Delfinul. |
| Posted by: Petre December 24, 2009 01:44 pm |
| It is right. Somewhere in 1990, the "609" has been changed to "521" and, like for the majority of romanian navy ships, a name was given, "Delfinul". |
| Posted by: Iamandi January 04, 2010 10:35 pm |
| So... Nothing!? No Sturgeon... (  ), no other SNA, no... nothing! What if in 1990 Iraq had some Kilos? |