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



  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Romanian Mobilization 1939 and Cavalry Divisions
ioncore
Posted: January 08, 2023 09:01 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4
Member No.: 3730
Joined: February 19, 2016



Hi guys,

Could you please help me with the very obscure topic of Romanian Cavalry Divisions that were raised in 1939 and then disbanded/converted into Brigades in late 1940?

From Axworthy we know that by 1940 there were three Cavalry Divisions (D1C, D2C, D3C, D4CR) and one independent Cavalry Brigade (B7C).

Every Division seems to consist of two brigades and a Horse Artillery Regiment:
- D1C (B4C until 10.39, B1C?, ? Bde since 10.39?, R1AC) was mobilized at Timi?oara - Arad area and then deployed
- D2C (B5C?, ? Bde, R2AC) was mobilized at R?d?uti - Balti and then deployed in Northern Basarabia against USSR;
- D3C (B9C?, ? Bde, R3AC) was mobilized Focsani and then deployed at Southern Basarabia against USSR;
- D4C (B4C since 10.39, B8C, ? Bde before 10.39?, R4AC) was mobilized in/near Br?ila.
- B7C an independent Bde subordinated to C2A and deployed at Constanta - Mangalia coastal area against Bulgaria.

Or, the other way around:
- B1C (Arad?) likely was in D1C;
- B4C was in D1C until 10.39, then in D4C;
- B5C was in D2C;
- B7C - independent;
- B8C was in D4C;
- B9C (Chi?in?u) likely was in D3C.

Could you please review and complement my lists?
PMEmail Poster
Top
ioncore
Posted: January 08, 2023 09:04 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4
Member No.: 3730
Joined: February 19, 2016



Typo: "From Axworthy we know that by 1940 there were three Cavalry Divisions (D1C, D2C, D3C, D4CR)" - shall read "four", of course.
PMEmail Poster
Top
Agarici
Posted: July 13, 2023 11:11 am
Quote Post


Maior
*

Group: Members
Posts: 745
Member No.: 522
Joined: February 24, 2005



Hello, and sorry for my late reply, which actually adds another question.

Before their reformation into brigades (late 1940), were there only a horse artillery REGIMENT per division (aka per two cavalry brigades, meaning if I'm not mistaking 4 cavalry regiments in total)? And not an (horse) artillery brigade (two regiments, one of 75 mm canons and one of 100mm howitzers), like in the "normal" (infantry) divisions?

And if so, were there any (doctrinary, organizatoric) reason for that? For from what we know, after WW 1 and especially in the Eastern Europe and Eurasia (Poland, USSR, Romania), the (large) cavalry formation were relegated, or rather designed and organized to function like MOBILE INFANTRY, fighting (as a general rule) on foot (even in tranches, and with adequate artillery support - like the Romanian or Soviet cavalry units actually DID during the WW 2), while ADDING A SUPERIOR MOBILITY TO THAT ON THE "REGULAR" INFANTRY OR ROUGH TERRAIN, especially IN THE ABSENCE OF A PROPER/DEVELOPED ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE.

In this paradigm, one regiment with cannons per for regiment on men seems dangerously close to... (near) nothing. I suppose the regular cannons used by the cavalry units in the Interbellum were Romanian Krupp mod. 1903 or (the fewer) German (cavalry canons?) Krupp mod. 1908, both of 75 mm caliber. But what about HOWITZERS (100 mm)?

Now we are all aware that during 1939-1940 the Romanian Royal Army was confronted with multiple shortages of all sorts. But somehow paradoxically, I think that one of the best supplied "shelves" was that of WW 1 era field artillery, which also could be (ar could have been, and at least partially was) modernized inside the country. For the (cavalry) howitzer regiments I am pointing at various Skoda 100 mm models (1914 but also 1916, if I am not mistaking), either captured during WW 1 (until 1919) either received as compensation after it, or bought from Czechoslovakia. I cannot think that in the interwar years the army depots missed exactly the several dozens of such guns (or was not able to purchase them, be it from the Germans after March 1939) in order to PROPERLY equip the artillery af what was consider some crack divisions (in the end, 4 and 1/3 in number).

That is why I tend to think that the absence of a horse howitzer regiment (and of a whole artillery brigade) per cavalry division is either a mistake in the data we have access to, or (less likely) that behind it stays some sort of "doctrinaire motivation" (but what can that one be?). The simple lack
of material as a reason for the absence of a brigade size artillery unit as a part of that divisions seems rather implausible to me.

Thank you in advance for any possible feedback!

PMEmail Poster
Top
Agarici
Posted: August 17, 2023 06:42 pm
Quote Post


Maior
*

Group: Members
Posts: 745
Member No.: 522
Joined: February 24, 2005



No feed-back as yet?

I choose to refresh the topic by re-posting in order to (re-)arange a bit the order of the last posts after it have been disturbed in the last "informatic assault" on the Forum.
PMEmail Poster
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0089 ]   [ 15 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]