Romanian airfields

Cantacuzino, I did not question at all that the depicted I.A.R.'s were part of Grupul 6 vânatoare. They apparently were.
What I've questioned was the firm note:

As for

as you know, after July 5, 1944 the I.A.R. 80/81s were ordered no to intercept incoming USAAF warplanes any more, but instead to disperse to various airfields in the vicinity. The photo could very well be taken at any of these locations, having also grassy runways and Ford fuel trucks for refuelling.

My alternative scenario was solely mentioned to show that another plausible explanation can be given to an anonymous picture, unless a visual or written proof is available.

As for the triangles (or inverted 'Vees') seen on some I.A.R. 80/81's, I was told by a prominent Rumanian researcher, D.A., that the upward 'V' represents an air victory, while a downward 'V' a ground victory. Did you find any proof of this?

There are so many uncertainties surrounding the history of Rumanian aviation, due to lack of complete documentation, improper and superficial research and various myths perpetuated throughout the years, that we have to be extra careful when stating facts.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on October 18, 2004 03:41 pm

Are you sure Dan Antoniu was talking about the full triangles as of air/ground victories ? or was he talking about a \/ or /\ ?

He was talking about '\/'s and '/\'s.

Some arrow-like Luftwaffe kill marks also represented an air victory, when the arrow points upward and ground (or probable) victory, when it points downward.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on October 18, 2004 05:06 pm

what I can see on the IAR from that photo is a full triangle and not the /\ , \/ - those signs you can also see at Luftwaffe and they were not marking victories.

IIRC, we were talking with D.A. several years about exactly about these fuselage markings seen on I.A.R. 80/81s, which sometimes appear as '\/'s, sometimes as triangles.
I have to check at home a better copy of this very photograph to see the shape of those symbols.

As for the Luftwaffe, I know of no \/ markings that represent anything other than victories.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on October 18, 2004 06:04 pm

I never said anything about \/ used by luftwaffe I said about full triangles - it's a big difference I wanted to point out between \/ or \/ and a full triangle.If you have a better copy of that picture it would solve some mistery here as what those 2 markings are: /\ or full triangles.

I checked the photo I have (printed inverted to what was posted here) - which I can confirm was originally made by a German PK photographer - and indeed those fuselage markings appear to be triangles.

Gen. Dénes

I work for long time to indentified the meaning of this White and yellow triangles and white angles for the IAR 81C in '44.
I have most of these markings on clear pictures and related to published document i discover that :
1. All are from 6th fighter group( IAR 81C).
2. 100% sure are not victory markings ( pilots with only 2 or 3 air vic. and ground vic. in '44 and to be proud with them )
3. Most probably sense are leader markings for flight( patrula), squadron( escadrila) or Group, based by the fact that most of this planes were flown by leaders like Lt.Limburg patrula a-3-a leader ( third yellow triangles on his IAR 81C),
Lt.Ianculescu Eugen squadron leader ( white angle on his IAR 81C), Lt.Theodor Nicolaescu squadron leader ( white angle) and many more exemple like this.
4. Even the 1st Group ( grupul 1 vanatoare) used leader markings on planes.
Photo with Lt.Barladeanu with three white bars on his IAR 80 M and after his death Lt. Gulan Ghe. took his place in leading the third squadron of the gruop and painted on his IAR 80M the three white bars.
I've seen picture with IAR 81C with two white circle under the cockpit ( probably from 1st FG ) and sure are not victory marks.
Probably this marks were found necesary by 6th FG and 1st FG to easy indentified and follows the leaders in combat .
If anyone had better explanation for this marks please argument.

Talking about airfields, yes most of them look the same ( grass, fuel trucks, tents,airplanes) but the only thing made the differrence is location, the dimension and the buildings ( hangars etc). What Mitzy wants is how a romanian IAR 80-81 airfield around Bucharest and Ploesti look. So if he want to represent Popesti-Leordeni airfield that picture is quite good ( he can't make big mistakes). The Hangars (not seen in this picture) were made from wood material and the roof was semisferical.

This is indeed what I needed :] to know how to recreate romanian airfields.Can you tell me more about those hangars please ? (do you have any photos of them ?)
Also, as I understand the fighters were kept out in the open over night while in hangars there were only the planes that needed repairs - is this right ? (sounds logical enough - specially considering june ).

You can find pictures with the hangars on Popesti-Leordeni in "Aeromagazin" collection. Articles about 10 june '44 fight ( IAR-38 in front of hangar) and in articles about Bazu Cantacuzino ( picture of P-51Mustang nr 71 in front of Popesti-Leordeni hangar). If you don't have it, i can scan for you and sent to your e-mail adress.

Yes. I repet this is my opinion. Planes were kept in open area ( some time camouflaged if it's possible) at least in summer times. In hangars during the night the planes were repaired ( mechanics had all the advantage in hangars : Light source, tools and special equipment to delivery next day airworthy planes).

I do not have those numbers from Aeromagazin (still planing to buy all of them.. before that hoping for a paycheck increase ) if possible pls send them to mytzuATd13-th.com , thank you very much !

Thank you, Cantacuzino, for sharing with us the results of your research. Your theories are very interesting and plausible indeed. It would be nice to see some documentary back up, though. Maybe Antoniu & Cicos could assist you here...

We certainly know more today than a couple of years ago, when no publication dealing extensively with ARR existed yet and all these topics were undiscussed.

I would add to your list the followings:
1, not all I.A.R. 80/81s sporting various triangles, bars and circles are from Gr. 6 vân. For example, the highly interesting row of '80s with coloured rudder (green?) featured No. 112, which has -- | > painted on it side, was not part of Gr. 6 vân.
2, there were vertical bars painted on '80/81s used certainly as victory symbols, see for ex. C-tin Balta's No. 372 - although the vertical bars were painted on the rudder.
3, I am interested to know how can you determine which aircraft was assigned to a certain pilot? Usually, there were more pilots than available aircraft and they flew each other's planes.
4, You did not mention the horizontally painted large white triangle seen on at least one '81: <|
5, I agree. I, too, have photos with Gr. 1 vân. showing various markings.

I am also interested in reading others' educated opinion on this highly interesting matter.

Gen. Dénes

Mytzu's original question was the name of the airfield depicted in that German PK photo. That's why I answered that it cannot be determined, unless a visible and recognizable feature can be seen on the print, or there is some text connected to the picture.

Of course, if he is looking for a picture to depict a wartime Rumanian airfield in general , the enclosed photo is perfect.

Gen. Dénes

That IAR 80 planes were from 53sq and for a perioad were part of german group JG4 as " The vierte staffel ". So they made "copy past" german marks. About the colored rudder sure it's not green ( why should someone paint over rudder national simbol a simply green camo ? ) My theory is that the color could be red ( or dark blue) perhaps this unit was used in mockup combat to represent the enemy ( soviet red colors ?) in TOP GUN school or simply they used german style color rudders (stafell indentification) .