Independence War 1877-1878, Military campaign

Well, according to T.C. Vacarescu a Whitehead torpedo was used in the attack. And also according to him, besides Xenia and Randunica, Alaftchik and Ghighit (both russian) also took part in that attack.

take care

The sources I‘ve used put a different light on the things. And both sources use multiple references. Indeed, three Russian and one Romanian torpedo boats were involved in the attack against three Turkish monitors (retreated on the Măcin channel), which took place in the night of 13/25 towards 14/26 May 1877. Among these, two (“Csarievici”/”Rândunica” and “Xenia”) launched an attack on “Duba-Seifi” (“Hivizi Rahman”), which was sunk by “Csarievici”/”Rândunica” with two torpedoes.

Now if I tell you that I know for sure that “Rândunica” used spar torpedoes, I guess this won’t be good enough for you.

In Constantin Bacalbaşa, Bucureştii de altadată, edited by Aristiţa and Tiberiu Avramescu, Bucharest, Editura Eminescu, 1987, vol. 1, at page 245 there is a footnote (no. 75) saying that “rezultatul expediţiei nocturne a fost scufundarea - cu ajutorul a două torpile de şcondru - a canonierei cuirasate ”Duba-Seifi” (“Hivizi Rahman”), construită în anul 1868 la Bordeaux…” [“the result of the night expedition was the sinking - with two spar torpedoes - of the armored gunboat ”Duba-Seifi” (“Hivizi Rahman”), built at Bordeaux…”]. The references for this footnote are:
- Locotenent-comandor C. Ciuchi, Istoria marinei române în curs de 18 secole, Constanţa, 1906, pp. 173-175.
- Căpitan de rangul I Nicolae Petrescu, Marinari prin ploi de foc, 1877-1878, Editura Militară, Bucureşti, 1978, pp. 32-35, 44-45, 80-82.

At page 520, in Milea, Pascu, Ceauşescu (ed.) Istoria militară a poporului Român, Bucharest, Editura Militară, 1987, vol. IV, there's a list with the ships of the Romanian Danube flotilla and their armament, around 1877 (only some of the ships, those which entered in service after 1866). I will post this list here for reasons of general interests: “iahtul “Ştefan cel Mare” era înarmat cu 4 tunuri Krupp, din oţel, de calibru 78 mm, canoniera cuirasată “Fulgerul” cu un tun “Krupp” de 87 mm iar şalupele “Rândunica” şi “Lebăda” cu torpile cu şcondru” [“the yacht “Ştefan cel Mare” was armed with 4 78 mm Krupp steel cannons, the armored gunboat “Fulgerul” had one 87 mm Krupp cannon and “Rândunica” and “Lebăda” (motor?)boats were armed with spar torpedoes”]. Corroborating this information with that from the page 656, “… ”Rândunica” a lovit decisiv cu o torpilă monitorul ottoman “Hivizi-Rahman”…” [“... ”Rândunica” has decisively hit, with a torpedo, the Ottoman monitor “Hivizi-Rahman”…”] we can conclude that the Turkish vessel was not sunk by a Whitehead torpedo. Also, in my opinion, it is unlikely that any of the boats involved in the action used/were armed with Whitehead torpedoes, these being more suitable for an open sea action than for an attack on a (rather narrow) Danube channel.

The references for the information from Istoria militară a poporului Român, concerning the attack on “Hivizi-Rahman”, are:
- Nicolae Bârladeanu, Dan Nicolaescu, Contribuţii la istoria marinei române, vol. I. Din cele mai vechi timpuri până în 1918, Bucureşti, 1979, pp. 180-181
- Eugeniu Botez, Nicolae Kirtiţescu, Războiul pe Dunăre, vol. I. Operaţiunile fluviale şi maritime ale războiului din 1877-78, Bucureşti, 1904, pp. 60-63
- Ovidiu Mureşan, Un erou al războiului de independenţă: maiorul Murgescu. Ecouri în presa din Transilvania, în Ştefan Meteş la 85 de ani, Cluj-Napoca, 1977, pp. 351-352

This post has been edited by Agarici on December 06, 2005 03:22 pm

Well, then mr. Vacarescu, writing in 1887 about the 1877-78 war got the wrong info about that.

But I think that the Whitehead torpedo at that time was better suited for the narrowness of the channel rather than for open sea performance.

Well, then mr. Vacarescu, writing in 1887 about the 1877-78 war got the wrong info about that.

But I think that the Whitehead torpedo at that time was better suited for the narrowness of the channel rather than for open sea performance.

A strange contradiction indeed. Well, I think we have al least one uncontested conclusion: since ”Rândunica” was armed with spar torpedoes and ”Hivizi-Rahman” was sunk by ”Rândunica”, the Turkish vessel was sunk by a spar torpedo. If I’m not mistaking, there’s a replica of ”Rândunica” either at the National Military Museum in Bucharest or at the Navy Museum in Constanţa. Now for the ”Văcărescu version” to be accurate, I see only two possibilities:
- the first, if any of the three Russian torpedo boats (”Xenia” and the other two you mentioned) were armed with Whitehead torpedoes and used them (unsuccessfully) against the Ottoman ship
- the second (highly unlikely, in my opinion) is if the spar torpedoes used in the attack were manufactured under a Whitehead license. As I know so far, the name of the British engineer Robert Whitehead and the patent for his invention (purchased by the Trieste naval yard) were connected to the “Whitehead torpedo”, the first self-propelled torpedo to be mass-produced.

There is also a third possibility, that T. C. Văcărescu was using the Whitehead word generically, refering to any type of torpedo (as, for example, the word ”Brandt” was used during WW 2 in the Romanian army for mortar).

By the way, Imperialist, C. Bacalbaşa was from Brăila and lived there during the first stages of the 1877-1878 war, when the Danube naval engagements took place, eye-whitnessing some of them. Nevertheless, you would be surprised how many corrections to his accounts the editor footnotes from his memoirs contains.

If you have time, I think you could follow the path of the first posibility. Unfortunatelly I don’t, and as I’ve said before I think it is hardly plausible that if the details from Văcărescu’s book had been exact all the succeeding naval historians failed to take them into consideration. So, since I've allready presented all the arguments I have, I don't think that any more time invested in this dispute would be a good investment from my part, unless you manage to find out something about the Russian boats.

This post has been edited by Agarici on December 06, 2005 06:27 pm

Most likely, since his exact words are "Acesti bravi oficieri, cu tot focul cuirasatului turcesc care-i zarise, reusira a se apropia de dansul si a-l isbi in coasta cu o torpila "Whitehead" care-l sparse si afunda cu totul". This can be interpreted as a spar torpedo attack description.
Anyway, I think the proper name for the participating boats is spar torpedo boats, in that case. Much clearer.
But further research in the case would be interesting. Maybe someone did sell a whitehead torpedo to Romania.

take care

this storry was told to me in class of history of the romanian navy that i had in my years in the naval academy. we had a replica of the the randunica in the laboratory of history as well so from what the lt.cmd. Preda told us and the replica i see the Randunica had "torpile cu şcondru" and with them she sunk the turkish monitor Hivizi-Rahman.

I re-read recently a fragment of one book about russian navy, published in romanian language in '50, and there it say about the first successfull attack with torpedo to be in russo-ottoman war but there was used also a "torpila de scondru" and not an selfpropeled torpedo. Also, it is writte about Makarov experiments with one launcher-tube who was under the ship.
About that attack is it on the Danube, but are not mentioned the names of the small-ships.

The crew under Murgescu were named after the romanian succ. attack "the heroes from Macin".

Iama

Yesterday was the National feast of my country Bulgaria -128 years from the liberation of Bulgaria from Ottoman domination.

Honour to the Romanian soldiers, who died for our liberation!

According to Magazin istoric, a note of September 1936 of the Romanian Minister in Bulgaria, Vasile Stoica, mentioned that the Romanian monument and cemetery in Rahova (Oryahovo) had been destroyed 20 years earlier (the minister observed that the cemetery had even been ploughed in order to remove any trace of it). Have they ever been reconstructed afterwards?

This monument was built in 1907. It was destroyed in 1916, because Oriahovo was part of the frontline (the Flamanda operation) or just some bulgarians were very angry because of the Romanian invasion in 1913. As I know the monument is reconstruckted now. Unfortunately I do not have any info about the cemetry.

This monument was built in 1907. It was destroyed in 1916, because Oriahovo was part of the frontline (the Flamanda operation) or just some bulgarians were very angry because of the Romanian invasion in 1913. As I know the monument is reconstruckted now. Unfortunately I do not have any info about the cemetry.

I am not certain that we speak about the same location. The 'Rahova' liberated by the Romanian troops in 1877 is mentioned as 'Oryahovo', in the north-west of Bulgaria. The Flămânda operation was around 'Ryakhovo' in the north-east of Bulgaria.

Yes I made a mistake. I mind the battle of Rahova in november 1877 too, but the name of the village, where the Flamanda operation took place sounds just similar. Nevermind. Do you want to put here my list of the Romanian monuments in Bulgaria, devoted to the 1877-1878 war, I have ?

That would be interesting. Thanks.

Related to the 1877-1878 war, what is the English equivalent of "chesoane"?

Gen. Dénes

'Ammunition carts' or 'ammunition caissons'

List of of the monuments in Bulgaria, devotet to the Romanian soldiers in 1877-1878 war.

Pleven
Mausoleum of the Russian and Romanian soldiers
Monument of general Cerkez
Monument of captain Valter Marichianu

Grivita
Romanian mausoleum (1897)
Park of the battle friendship
Monument of the fallen Romanian soldiers
Brother mound of the fallen Russian and Romanian soldiers

Pordim
Museum of the Romanian army (1907)
Park and monment of major Goerge Shoncu

Opanez
Monument of the Romanian soldiers (1907)

Oriahovo
Monument of the Romanian soldiers (1907)

Ariar
Monument of the Romanian soldiers (1907)

Inovo
3 monuments of the Romanian soldiers (1879)

Thanks to Denes and Carol І for the tranlation.

This post has been edited by Sturmpionier on July 17, 2006 05:34 pm