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



Pages: (4) [1] 2 3 ... Last »  ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Romanian Pocket Battleships
toniyona
Posted: October 27, 2003 10:35 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 58
Joined: July 25, 2003



Gentlemen:
From another website a comment was made that during the 1930's Italy's Ansaldo offered a pocket battleship design to Romania, among other countries.
Obviously this was never pursued.
Might anyone on this forum have any further information?
I was going to paste a picture here but all my attempts failed, my apologies.
If any interest, I can note the websites the comment was made on and another that has a picture of the vessel.
Thank-you.
PM
Top
Cristian Craciunoiu
Posted: October 29, 2003 07:03 am
Quote Post


Fruntas
*

Group: Members
Posts: 69
Member No.: 102
Joined: September 09, 2003



In the early '20 ies, Romanian Royal Navy was offered by the British Royal Navy a pocket batlleship of the HMS GORGON class among other ships. Even if talkings went very far they were not finalized.
In the '30 ies a reach Romanian merchant, of Greek origin who made his huge fortune in Romania offered the Romanian Navy a cruiser under the condition that the ship will have his name. The order was given in Italy and in the end the offer was rejected. That is a part of the story of the cruiser GIORGIOS AVEROFF of the Greek Navy and that was the name of the rich merchant.
PM
Top
Tiornu
Posted: October 29, 2003 08:27 am
Quote Post


Fruntas
*

Group: Members
Posts: 83
Member No.: 75
Joined: August 08, 2003



If Gorgon was no better built than her sistership, the Romanians did well not to buy her.
PM
Top
toniyona
Posted: October 31, 2003 12:14 am
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 58
Joined: July 25, 2003



Gentlemen:
When I tried to research this further, Conway's was the only source I could find.
The purchase of Gorgon was mentioned but not pursued.
Conways also mentions a cruiser proposal for Romania. Might anyone have any information on this if to purchase or build a British "D" class perhaps?
Cuisers like Italy built for Argentina and was building for Siam would also seem to fit Romania's needs.
There appears to be very little out there on the Romanian Navy.
Thank-you for your time and assistance.
PM
Top
Andreas von Mach
Posted: October 31, 2003 10:58 am
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 138
Member No.: 84
Joined: August 19, 2003



P.Brook
"Warships for Export. Armstrong Warships 1867-1927"
p.213 GORGON

After the war she was offered byck to Norway, but she was now too beamy to use the Horten dock, and was rejected. She was put on the sales list, and enquiries were received from South American countries and what at one time seamed a firm offer form Romania, but no sale took place. In 1921 her armament was removed, and she was used for tests to study the effects of bombs or heavy charges bursting under water. These and other experiments continued until 1928, when she was sold for scrapping on 28 August to Wards, Pembroke Dock.
PM
Top
Cristian Craciunoiu
Posted: November 01, 2003 10:09 am
Quote Post


Fruntas
*

Group: Members
Posts: 69
Member No.: 102
Joined: September 09, 2003



Romanian magazine Revista Aerului si Marinei din 1928 no 4 has a study about Romania opening a naval base ( two suggeswted sted Mangalia and Mamaia ) and the warships to be ordered for it. There are several options: British or American at second hand, new French or Italian. There were at least two battleships and 6 cruisers, plus destroyers and submarines. This naval programe was never applied.
PM
Top
toniyona
Posted: November 01, 2003 04:05 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 58
Joined: July 25, 2003



Mr. Craciunoiu:
Thank-you for the note.
Most interesting and this is information hither to unknown!!
Due to language and the age of the publication you mention, I doubt I'll be able to find a copy here in the U.S. but I'll defenitely give it a shot. (If I do find a copy and a Romanian-English dictionary, I'll have my winter entertainment set for a while.)
At your convenience, might you be able to add some deatils such as what second-hand ships were considered, size & armament of the battleships / cruisers considered if built new?
Thank-you.
PM
Top
Andreas von Mach
Posted: November 01, 2003 11:01 pm
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 138
Member No.: 84
Joined: August 19, 2003



Les Flottes de combat 1929 listed the following program:
3 cruisers 6000-7000t
16 torpedo boats 1850t
18 submarines 600t
1 submarine base
1 minelayer

Another source (from notices) 1926 naval program (12,000,000.-englisjh Pound)
a) 4 years program
1) new cnstructions: 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers, 4 MTBs
2) refits and rearmament: MARASTI, MARASETI
3) New naval base on the Black Sea
B) 10 years program (to follow the above)3 cruisers
10 destroyeers
18 submarines

Cornel I.Scares "100 jahre rumänische Kriegsmarine"
Marine Rundschau 9/1977 p493s

Program 1899 (for memory)
6 coast battleships 3500t (not built)
4 destroyers 300t (not built)
12 torpedoboats 80t (not built)
8 river monitors (4 built)
12 riverine TBs (8 built)

Pogram 1912/1915
6 cruisers 3500t
12 destroyers 1500t (4 ordered in Italy)
1 submarine (ordered in Italy)
1 Danube tug (MACIN)
2 Danube patrolships (built, - I think there were 3 ships)

Program 1926/28
4 destroyers (2 built)
2 submarines (1 built)
1 submarine base (built)
9 Danube patrol boats (built)
3 Dnestr patrol boats (built)

Program 1937/39
1 cruiser 4-5000t (not built)
4 destroyers 1300-1500t (not built)
3 submarines S1-S3 (S3 not built)
4 mine laysers (1 built,1 laid down, 2 not built)
9 MTB (3 built)
1 training ship
1 royal yacht
PM
Top
toniyona
Posted: November 01, 2003 11:17 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 58
Joined: July 25, 2003



Mr. von Mach:
Thank-you for the additional information.
This tends to show that there were no plans for any battleships, either as coast defense ships or pocket battleships.
Pity.
Thanks again for the input.
PM
Top
Andreas von Mach
Posted: November 01, 2003 11:30 pm
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 138
Member No.: 84
Joined: August 19, 2003



In every small fleet are admirals which like to sail battleships, not MTBs or submarines.
PM
Top
tjk
Posted: November 02, 2003 02:27 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 27
Member No.: 80
Joined: August 15, 2003



Why would Romania want such a large fleet mentioned in all these plans other than an ego boost ? I doubt that Romania could afford and maintain such a large fleet and due to a lack of resources could not win an arms race with the Soviets, who would be the natural opponents.
PM
Top
toniyona
Posted: November 02, 2003 03:33 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 21
Member No.: 58
Joined: July 25, 2003



Gentlemen:
If someone can get a copy of the article Mr. Craciunoiu was kind enough to mention, then we might get a better feel if the plan was fact or fancy.
I would like to thank Mr. Craciunoiu once again for the information.

That is what I like best about these boards, individuals working together to preserve pieces of history that would otherwise be lost forever.

The "battleships", I am guessing, would have been more along the lines of small coast defense ships as Finland had in her Ilmarinen class who also shared water with Russia.

Here is the comment from

http://warshipprojects.board.dk3.com/2/vie...topic.php?t=436

that got me going on this topic.

“…….
Another component of the ocean going navy was the pocket BB design:
10550 tons,
6/254/55 (2*3)
Fiat diesel propulsion, 4 shafts, 80.000 HP
32 knots
The same design, but with a conventional power plant (the trials with the Fiat solutions wasn't successful), was offered, without success, by Ansaldo to the Romanian, Chilean and Swedish Navies between 1936 and 1939.
………….”

So this more of an armored cruiser than a battleship.

If anyone has any more information, it would be welcomed.
PM
Top
Tiornu
Posted: November 02, 2003 07:39 pm
Quote Post


Fruntas
*

Group: Members
Posts: 83
Member No.: 75
Joined: August 08, 2003



We would need to know exactly what scenarios the Romanians were planning for. We would also want to know the status of the Soviet Black Sea Fleet. It never had more than a single battleship in service.
PM
Top
Andreas von Mach
Posted: November 03, 2003 03:42 am
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 138
Member No.: 84
Joined: August 19, 2003



The scenario is really important.
I have read many boks about theSoviet scanario, ie war planning,of course most interesting those lice icebreaker, but i have never found any strategy ageinst Poland (invided 1939), Finnland (attacked 1940 Winter War), Romania, etc. It seems these countries were not an enemies for Soviets like Germany, England, etc.
As is already mentioned by Suvurov "Icebreaker" and his following books. even in the Danube area, the Danube flotilla after war was broken opened the only "emergency" envelope they posess , and stared to invade Riomania, it was the only plann of them.
You have also no planns to by everyday bread for you family, only some planns ti buy a home, car, ranche, so the Soviets prepared only big plans for the big wars.
PM
Top
Andreas von Mach
Posted: November 03, 2003 08:44 pm
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 138
Member No.: 84
Joined: August 19, 2003



I have something interesting found in my notices.
Source ???
Accoprdigly to Romania Miltara in 1914
Cpt. Mihuutsu designed a battleships for the lack Sea:
13000t 117x22x8m
10600-11000ihp=16-17kts
800t coal
4x305 (2xII)
4x203mm (casamates)
12x150
5TT
Armour:
sides 250mm (ends 178mm)
casametes 152mm (1st) 127mm (2nd)
CT 250mm
PM
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (4) [1] 2 3 ... Last » Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0370 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]