| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| WorldWar2.ro Forum > Romanian Army > Recruit Training in the Romanian Army |
| Posted by: drillsgt January 06, 2004 01:27 am |
| What was the length of time that a Romanian Army recruit could expect to be trained prior to joining his unit? Was there specialized training prior to joining a permanent unit, or was this training received with the permanent unit? Thanks! Garry Owen!!! |
| Posted by: Indrid January 06, 2004 06:25 am |
| to what period are you reffering to? because a lot has changed in 50 years. ..
:keep: |
| Posted by: Victor January 06, 2004 12:19 pm | ||
This is in the WWII section of the forum |
| Posted by: drillsgt January 06, 2004 01:11 pm |
| I am asking about WW2,and it can be broken down into A. Early War, 1941 to mid 1942.B. mid-war , mid1942-late 43,C. Late War, 44 through the change over. I hope that is specific enough. As a former U.S.Army Drill Sgt , I firmly believe the old addage that more sweat in training means less blood on the battlefield. Garry Owen!!!!!!!! |
| Posted by: Indrid January 06, 2004 02:00 pm |
| this is me :drunk: !! i wasn`t paying attention. sorry :oops: |
| Posted by: dragos January 06, 2004 04:19 pm |
| The official plan for training in 1942 was:
15 February - 14 June : individual and section training 15 June - 31 August : platoon and company maneuvers after 1 September: large scale maneuvers (battalion, regiment, division) After 1 September, units could be sent to front. |
| Posted by: drillsgt January 06, 2004 04:47 pm |
| Thanks Dragos, according to the 1942 training schedule, there was an initial training period of approximately 26 weeks ,or 6 months of training prior to shipment to the front. This seems to be pretty standard in all armies, however , as need increases , length of training decreases. Did the Romanian Army send individuals to the front as replacements, or send entire battalions regiments, brigades,etc to the front? There are advantages and disadvantages to both. |
| Posted by: dragos January 06, 2004 06:05 pm | ||
Both. After the 1941 campaign, Romanian Army confronted with a severe deficiency of 2nd lieutenants and lieutenants, lost due to inadequate tactics. For example, on 4 February 1942, the deficiency in 2nd lieutenants and lieutenants was 1745 men for infantry, 389 men for cavalry, 101 men for artilery, 381 men for combat engineers. |
| Posted by: dragos January 06, 2004 06:54 pm |
| Off-topic: What means "Garry Owen!!!" ? You forgot to put it at the end of your last post :nope: . I've heard it in "We were soldiers". |
| Posted by: petru January 06, 2004 07:07 pm |
| In Guderian's memorial book he mentions very heavy losses among the junior officers, in the Polish campaign. This was because they charged in front of their men. Probably it was the same problem in the Romanian Army. |
| Posted by: Indrid January 06, 2004 07:20 pm |
| :shock: what does gary owen mean? i never saw the film!!! curious emoticon needed |
| Posted by: drillsgt January 06, 2004 08:02 pm |
| I will be happy to explain about "Garry Owen". It is both a song and a salutation. Just as U.S. Marines say "Semper Fie", Troopers in the !st Cavalry Division say "Garry Owen". During the Indian Wars it was the Marching song of Custers 7th Cavalry that was decimated at the Little Big Horn. The 7th Cavalry became one of the Regiments in the First Cavalry Division, and its marching song became "Garry Owen". Prior to being trained as a Drill Sgt, I had the honor of serving in the First Cav. and consider that time to be one of the most important in my life. Garry Owen!!! |
| Posted by: dragos January 06, 2004 09:21 pm | ||
Yes, it was the same problem. Only that the battle of Odessa consumed more Romanian lives than of Germans, Poland. |
| Posted by: drillsgt January 06, 2004 09:35 pm |
| Heavy losses among junior officers and NCOs is a familar pattern. These men are expected to lead , especially at the squad, platoon, and company levels.These are the men ,who do a lions share of the fighting and the dying, . They serve as teachers,and examples to others, and in doing so often pay the cost. Garry Owen!!!! |
| Posted by: mabadesc January 07, 2004 01:25 am |
| Hi Drill Sgt. and welcome to the forum.
Do you hail from Fort Bragg, by any chance? Are you sporting a "tower of power" -you know, the 3 tabs? I think the supposed under-training of Romanian troops during WWII is exaggerated by German officers in their memoirs (ex: Manstein's Lost Victories). If you look at the population of Romania during the war and compare it to the large number of troops they contributed, you'll be impressed with the logistics of training such a large number of soldiers in the chaos of the war. Dragos, do you have the number of romanian troops who participated in the war? Also, Dragos, what was the training schedule for the Mountain Corps units? Was it longer or structured differently than it was for regular infantry? Were the selection criteria more stringent? Finally, Drill Sgt., one question for you (sorry if it sounds silly). I've always wanted to know, what is the structural/organizational difference between a brigade and a regiment in the US Army? The reason I'm asking is because for European countries in WWII the basic major military unit were regiments. The US, however, seems to use brigades as their major intervention units. Thanks. |
| Posted by: dragos January 07, 2004 11:29 am | ||||
The training was not too short, but rudimentary and out-of-date. However, several mixed Romanian-German training centers were established in late 1940, at Fagaras, Roman (infantry), Sibiu (cavalry), Ramnicu Valcea (armor), Bucharest (mechanics), Brasov, Campina, Buzau, Bacau (drivers), Brasov (services), Chitila (pioneers and railroad troops). In these centers, each Romanian instructor was assited by a German counsellor in tactics.
In the East: 911,193 men In the West: 538,536 men I have no figures for mountain troops, but here is what I have found on paratroopers. The company was formed on 10 June 1941. Recruits were volunteers of maximum age of 28. They had to know one foregin language, had at least 4 years of primary school, and signed on a 3 years contract. |
| Posted by: drillsgt January 07, 2004 02:21 pm |
| Mabadesc, not from Bragg, no triple tabs, just 3 college degrees.Have been out of the Army for years. The US Army during WW2 was called a triangle Division because of it being organized around three Infantry, or Armor regiments. The only exception was and may still be the 1st Cavalry Division which still has the old square organization of the horse Cav. In an Infantry Division for example there are basically 3 brigades each organized around one of the three Infantry Regiments. A brigade is an Infantry ,or Armor Regt. with all its supporting units that make it self supporting It is like a Division in miniture, and is why it is used so much as an intervention tool. Garry Owen!!!! |
| Posted by: mabadesc January 07, 2004 04:33 pm | ||
Thanks for your answers, gentlemen.
So, approximately 1 million troops from a country whose general population was, what- about 13-14 million people? My opinion is, under these circumstances, the training was fairly efficient - far from perfect, but ok. |
| Posted by: Victor January 08, 2004 02:44 pm |
| Actually there were more men mobilized, than indicated here. In 1944 there were over 1 milion. |
| Posted by: dragos January 08, 2004 02:48 pm |
| You are right, the figures I mentioned are men involved in operations during the entire war. |