Frigate "Marasesti", Ex-destroyer

I don't want to sound weird, but what do we have to buy destroyers from abroad? In the 80's we made them ourselves! (And even a light cruiser?...)
Why do we have to raise the foreign debt of Romania, while the Romanian workers in shipyards, steel industry and electrotechnics do not have what to do and they get laid off because of that?

This post has been edited by Florin on October 17, 2004 01:20 am

It is true that we built the Marasesti destroyer ourselves, but we didn't do a very good job with it. Presently it has been relegated as frigate. The same for the Tetal class frigates. Btw, the naval yards are going pretty well, building civilian transport ships for foreign costumers.

Victor,
What makes you say that Romania did a poor job on the Maraseti and Tetal I & II class. They were built in 1980's when Romania was still part of the Warsaw Pact. The construction of these ships was single most ambitious and successful; naval expansion plan ever implamented by any of former Warsaw Pact nations, outside of the USSR. Given the small number of countrys which can even build a Destroyer, simply building a the size and complexitiy of Maraseti is quite the national accomplishment. Also at the time in which they were built Romania did not have access to modern western systems and naval weapons. So the ships were fitted with Soviet equivalents, now the Romania Navy can refit the ships with far better equipment if it wants to and has the funds. Upgrade the ships and they will still be useful naval vessels, capable of contributing to NATO deployments and UN peace missions around the world!

Thank You

I am saying that we should not be carried off by blind patriotism and think that everything we built was good. True it was remarkable that small country like Romania built jets, tanks, ships, but not everything was of top quality. The Marasesti frigate has been plagued by problems during its whole operational career and lately I believe spent more time under repairs/modernization than at sea. It had initially a lot of stability problems, which were corrected later I believe. The SSM and SAM missile systems are outdated.

The Tetal I&II class light frigates can be modernized, but they are still limited to ASW roles. The idea would be to have 3 large frigates (the Marasesti and two Type 42s) equipped with modern SSM and SAM missile systems that can take on large surface ships.

To respond to Florin, Romania has built after 1990 the Tetal II class light frigate Contraamiral Horia Macellariu. The Danube fleet was especially strengthened in the 90s with 3 Mihail Kogalniceanu river monitors (Mihail Kogalniceanu, Ion C. Bratianu, Lascar Catargiu – baptized like the WWI and WWII monitors), 3 Brutar II and one Brutar I light monitors. It is presently one of the largest river fleets in Europe.

I did not mention that everything we built was good.
But Romania at least has to try to manufacture inside as many things possible.
Doesn't matter how good an engineer is, how much attention he pays to details, many things pop-up just after the project become a prototype.
The only way to get technological knowledge is by trying to build yourself, and then to try what you did and see what's wrong, if anything is wrong.

The same path was followed by all other countries we regard today as advanced.
Even world famous products like V-2 and the Me-262 were not quite satisfactory as the very first prototype.

A funny story: At the end of the XIXth century, Japan received its first destroyer from Great Britain (United Kingdom). The emperor order to the Japanese craftsmen to build an identical copy. Well, the guys followed the order and built an identical ship, copying even the symbols of the British Navy and the British royal family printed on various equipment!

To end, I am glad to read that: "Romania has built after 1990 the Tetal II class light frigate Contraamiral Horia Macellariu" and "the naval yards are going pretty well, building civilian transport ships for foreign costumers."

This post has been edited by Florin on October 17, 2004 03:43 pm

I also remember that they were corrected, but the corrections meant that some other specifications could not be met (e.g., max speed or weapon load etc.). Hence the correction of the stability issue resulted in some other losses.

Victor,
Yes not everything Romania has built has been good, but the same can be said of all other nations trying to establish or expand large military industrys. It is important to maintain and build on what Romania has accomplished. The next step for Romania should catching up more advanced Industies of Western Europe and the US. Modern Eurocopter designs including the EC-135, AS-550 and AS-365 are already being produced at IAR Basov, and soon another type of Helicopter will be added, hopefully the NH-90. A modern APC the RN-94 has been developed, though I am not sure when or if it will be acquired.

Some intelligent next steps would be the development of a modern Battle Tank; the TR-2000 design by Germany and Romania would be based upon the Leopard 2 Improved. It if put into production would be amongst the best tanks in the world, and Romania could sussessfully export them. A dedicated attack such as the Tiger, AH-64D Longbow, RO-1 Dracula, Mil-28 or AH-2 Rooivalk should be acquired and built under License by IAR. Getting the JAS-39 Gripen licence production should be a National priority; as it modernize not only are Aviation industies but many other related industirys as well. Developing a more potent version of the IAR-99 would also be a great idea.

This post has been edited by Stephen on October 17, 2004 06:55 pm

Stephen, you gave such a great ideas, maybe its a good decision to write a letter to the romanian parliament or to the Ministery of Defence !

Well, Its a joke but also was a compliment to you.

But we have a historical tradition : we are always unprepared for war, for earth shakes, for any calamity or catastrophic situation. Our political class is just a buch of gangsters .... you know that.

To build a new destroyer of frigate and even to buy a licence from UK or another country its too complicate .... it was somehow a political decission to buy a second hand ship.

Dan Po,

Thank you, it is good to know that their are other people who think like me.

I Do not think that it is unrealistic for Romania obtain license production rights.
Romania has long history getting license production some examples being BF-109G and JRS-79 in WW-2 and the IAR-330 Puma more recently. Romania needs to make a condition of any purchase of new weapons systems. Given Romanias good relationship the British; who actully market JAS-39 Gripen, I can not see why Romania would be deneid License rights.

By making the right decision now Romania will be prepared for any conflict that it will find itself in. Given Romania's comitment to both NATO and UN, as well as it close relationship with Britian and America. You can count on Romania getting caught up sometime, in fact it already is in both Iraq and Afganistan.

The two second hand frigates were purchased because, it was the quickest and cheapest way to aquire modern NATO standard Frigates. They are good ships, and they will fitted out in Romania ship yards.

Thank you again

Regardless its problems, Marasesti seem pretty well armed - the Styx anti-ship missiles included. And whatever problems it had, I think they were already overcome.

On the other hand, this is true - commissioned as a (light) cruiser, Marasesti was downgraded to a destroyer and then to a frigate. I wonder why...

This post has been edited by Agarici on July 25, 2005 06:18 pm

Compare the specifications of an average US destroyer with the Marasesti ex-destroyer.

Well, Agarici, Styx is an old outdated SSM. She's not only old, is big and old! Only good use for Styx is to be used as coastal defense batteryes (mobile ground launchers), eventually a variant with some up grades.

And...

Source sinodefence.

Also, here: http://www.sinodefence.com/missile/antiship/c201.asp , the second picture from the bottom side of the page presents "A new self-propelled 8X8 launch vehicle for the HY-2 missile". Something like a scene from a sci-fi movie.

Unfortunatelly, "Marasesti" will not suffer changes at his rocket systems, at least not an improved variant of his older Styx...


Iama

Unfortunatelly, "Marasesti" will not suffer changes at his rocket systems, at least not an improved variant of his older Styx...


Iama

I know they are big, I saw them on TV . By the way, as I know the Romanian Navy uses the C-201 or the C-401 version, is it right?

And don’t tell me that our Bulgarian or Ukrainian seashores neighbors are using Harpoons or Tomahawks. In the end we are a Black Sea, not a Northern Atlantic country… The only aspect which, in my opinion, is somehow frustrating about the weapon systems installed on Marasesti is its AA defense system (no long or even medium range missiles - in fact no missiles at all).

The ship has been classified according to the Nato standard. It is logical once we are part of the alliance, and the area of operations is not restricted to the Black Sea, but wherever the alliance needs it.