The amount of sorties done on 22 VI 41, Exacte number: fighters, bombers, reccon

It is know the losses of ARR on 22.06.41, the amount the planes gathered to this invasion but I wonder if it is know the amount of combat missions, sorties done by Royal Romanian Air Force in the first day of Barbarossa (22.06.41).

Regards
mw

What ARR "invasion" are you talking about ( on 22 june 1941). As far as I know USSR invaded Romania and took Bessarabia a year before. To regain the lost teritories was the main reason for Romania to fight in Barbarosa campaign.

Btw: You can find all the details of ARR in the first day of war in the book of Mr Dan Antoniu and George Cicos (aviatia romana in prima zi de razboi 22 iunie 1941)

http://www.pilotshop.ro/carti___manuale___...orge_cicos.html


(IMG:http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/9214/dantoniu.th.png)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This post has been edited by Cantacuzino on July 15, 2010 08:38 pm

To engage in the nit-picking, it is clear that by invasion he meant the opening stage of Barbarossa. With your interpretation, by invasion of Normandy the Brits and Americans wanted to conquer and keep Normandy for their own :P

I know what he mean. But that correction was necessary because some people could understand that Romania invaded Bessarabia on 22 june 1941.

The term invasion in dictionary :
The act of invading; the act of an army that invades for conquest or plunder.
That was not the case of Romania on 22 june 1941 (mayby for Germany) .

And btw do you agree with the term "invasion" used for Brits and Americans Normandy landings. As far as I know they conquered and plunder only the french wine cellars. :D

This post has been edited by Cantacuzino on July 16, 2010 08:47 am

And French women, perhaps...

Gen. Dénes

Thank you for those comments. Romanian Air Force has implemented a maximum of approximately 140-150 sorties June 22, 1941 (GAL air force - 126 sorties).

In the event of invasion, as I remember from geography lessons, there were not any part of Odessa in Romania's Bessarabia, the Russians had "occupied" it in 1940. So by the way Rumanian had liberated Odessa from Russian occupation.

Similarly, when the Romanian army at Stalingrad, and it was not part of Bessarabia. What did the Romanian troops in Odessa and Stalingardzie? Under such a premise to enlarge their borders in Bessarabia.

If we are not looking at Romania participated in the attack - the invasion of Russia in 1941. If that Romania did not do it to the Russians invaded Romania in July 1941.
The German-Rumanian invasion was an attack on Russia for a few weeks ahead of a Soviet attack.
Rumanian did not stop in Bessarabia but went futher: to Odessa in 1941, and to Stalingrad in 1942.

Yours,
MirekW

PS.
Sorry but it is very, very strange logic Cantacuziono if you are against of Rumanian participation in German invasion on Russian in 1941.

Well, you specifically asked about the first day of Barbarossa. You mentioned a very specific date. On 22 June 1941, Romania did not plan to go as far as Odessa or Stalingrad (at least not officially). On 22 June 1941 Romania crossed River Prut to regain Bessarabia.
So, in actual fact, in the context of your extremely specific and narrow terms of reference, Cantacuzino is right: Romania did not invade Bessarabia, they mereley went back home. ;)
You may find that pedantic and nitpicking, but in actual fact it is of supreme importance. On 22 June 1941, Romania was not an aggressor, they were taking back what was robbed from them. What followed later, such as Odessa, Stalingrad, etc, are separate events.
Radu

Nice but a slight a bit schoolar discution.
In 1939 Russian/Soviet "did not" attack/ invad Poland (17.09.39) but only liberated Ukrainian and Bialorussian from Polish occupation (1918-39) - this was and still partly is Soviet/Russian way interpretation events of IX/X 1939. Their point of view on attack on our countr (I am a Pole). Of course it is very stupid interpretation, it was and act of agression, undeclared war, IV partition of Poland etc.

In 1939 and 1940 there were similar Soviet/Stalin rethoric claims towards part of Finland, Baltic States and Rumuniia (Bessarabia). In this way Soviet never was a force of opression/ an agresor but only liberator of occupieed miniorities and capitalist word. Russian never had done and act of aggression they only liberated miniorities from these countries. I

Sorry but this way you follow Russian/Soviet way of interpretation of hisotry. It is not fair to the true and it is simple escaping from it (white is white and black i black).

After Soviet invasion (or liberation) in 1940 Rumanian had joined German side and took part in German attack on Bessarabia and went futher.
If Rumanian had stoped in Bessarabia, as Finns did on the north, ok, you may call it as no invasion on Russia but recapture /liberation of occupied by Soviet former Rumanians' lands.
But with Bessarabia it is not similar case as Finnish one (for example there were no German troops thre and almost "zero" air LW units in Finland).
Rumanian very tightly supported Hitler/ German during his/their fight agains Stalin/Soviet. German had invaded Soviet, it was their premptive attack, and Rumanian did exactly the same as official German's ally. Finnland never was in such tight connection with Hitler as Antonescu.

Bessarabia in 1941 was formaly a part of official Soviet territory. There were no Bessarabina "state", which was excluded from Soviet land.

BTW, there were no military action made by Romanina forces towards Hungarian and Bulgarian, who also took part in Romanian partition, as Soviet did, in 1940.

Regards,
mw

You see, you keep coming back to what happened AFTER 22 June 1941.
Your question was specifically about 22 June 1944. On 22 June 1944, Romanis did not cross River Prut with the intention to go beyond Bessarabia. On 22 June 1944, Romania was just going to take back Bessarabia. That was not an "invasion". The decision to go beyond the borders of Bessarabia was taken on 22 August 1944. Only then, you can say that Romania invaded Russia. Up to then, they only took back what belonged to Romania - (the rapt of Moldova is wound that has not healed yet)

The only reason why Romania entered the war was because they suffered territorial losses. Before the losses of territories, Romania was neutral. As a Pole you should know that Romania was the only neighbour friendly to Poland when Poland fell, and that was only because it was neutral. Romania had no reason or need to leave its position of neutrality until it was chopped and raped.

Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on July 28, 2010 08:57 pm

That's not correct. Thousands of Polish soldiers and civilians found safe haven in Hungary in Sept. 1939. Some sought refuge in Lithuania, too.

Also, had Bessarabia not been overtaken by the USSR in 1940, Rumania would have most probably still enter the 'anti-Bolshevik crusade' anyhow. All it needed was a 'casus belli'...

Gen. Dénes

Yes, you are right, but I was refering to the fact that the Polish Government, the Polish Treassury and most of the Polish Army were allowed to pass though Romania because it was neutral. On balance, Romania was friendlier to Poland than any other country. Imagine only the Battle of Britain without the whole Polish squadrons that passed through Romania on their way to Britain. ;)

The territorial losses suffered by Romania were the main reason why King Carol II abdicated which allowed the right-wing Iron Guard to get a solid foothold in Romanian politics allied with Ion Antonescu. Romania began to lean heavily towards Germany only after the right-wing came to power. Before the territorial losses, Romania was openly friendly to France (the guarantor of Romania's neutrality) and Great Britain (where they purchased Hurricanes, Blehneims, Vospers). In actual fact, it is no coincidence that Bessarabia was taken by Russia a couple of days after the fall of France.
It is hard to predict what would have happened to Romanian politics, standing, strength and intentions in the war without the territorial losses and I doubt that "going to war" could be "sold" to Romanians if "Great Romania" remained untouched. Also, it is interesting to consider how powerful a "Great Romania" Army would have been. When Romania went to war with Russia, it was much smaller (hence the reduced population, resources and industry) than it was in 1939. How much bigger an impact would a "Great Romania" Army have made in Russia? We will never know. ;)

Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on July 29, 2010 08:17 am

Our topic has steered quite away from the main subjct. It is pity, politic is more interesting?

It is strange but it is tight connection of taking Bessarabia plus Baltic States in summer 1940 r. by Soviet. Without fall of France and defet of GB on continent there were not anection of Baltic States and partition of Rumania. Stalin very smartly used political situation to push forward own frontier. There were political agreements between Hitler and Stalin about this terrory.
Polish soldiers in 1939-1940 had escapted not only to Rumunia (most Polish aviators came across Rumunia to get to France and GB - about 10.000 peoples), Hungary but also to more friendly then Lithuania, Latvia (where landed about 80-90 Polish civil and training planes: RWD-8, PWS-26, ect.) and a few poles get as far as to Estonia.

When some people will say it was not invasion but liberation (22 VI 41 - Bessarabia), and Rumanian only thoughts about reqonquest of own territory in 1940 and nothing more This man is similar to such who strong belive, that a woman can be in 50% virgin and 50% pregnant. On man can belive any thing he/she wants, but facts are evident. No one who began the war as someone ally could exept to be outside of whole conflict.

Rumanian had great amount of German soldiers of own teriroty, and Russian tread it as a big enemy. For this reasn Russians had made premptive air attack on Finland despite of this Finland was not an Germann's ally and there were much more less German in Finland in VI 1941 then in Romania. It had no matter for Stalin.

Stalin Antonescu plus other leadres strong belive, that if they do not fight Stalin, Stalin would qonquer them.
No one could be only 50% involved in war (winners is one) and there are not 50% pregnant and 50% virgin woman.

Regards,
mw

No, not at all. I am trying really hard to keep it on topic, i.e. 22 June 1944, when Romania crossed River Prut to regain Bessarabia taken by Russia. The reasons why Romania became involved in the war are very complex and loss of territory was a major factor that you seem to dismiss too easily. :blink:

What happened after Romania crossed River Dnestr has no bearing on the topic.

You are trying really hard to throw this in every possible direction, Odessa, Stalingrad, Baltic states, politics. :D Let us stick with 22 June 1944 and what led to it.

Radu