Talk:Black Sea campaigns (1941–1944)

Romanian / Bulgarian mistakes
This main page would make the reader believe Romanian navy played "primary" part in the Black Sea naval warfare, placing it "first" above the German and the Italian Navy. This is simply false (plain hard truth).

First of all the composition of the Navy is particularly inflated/wrong: 4 destroyers =(I should stress 2 vessels very old and of little use). 4 torpedo boats = (technically all re-rated as escort (torpedoes removed) being of little combat value) 3 minelayers = (there were 2(AMIRAL MURGESCU and AURORA), plus 4 auxiliary (DACIA; DUROSTAR; REGELE CAROL I; ROMANIA). REMUS LEPRI was not a minelayer but a gunboat, plus she sunk before the actual conflict. 8 submarines  = (wrong: there were 3. The 5 CB-class midget submarine where only de-jure temporary kept by Romanian Navy for only 1 month (December 1943-January 1944) before being passed to the Navy of the Italian Social Republic. They made no patrol and actually received no maintenance.)

Subsequent repeated mistakes in 1943 section include the almost-hilarious line. "10 anti-submarine frigates (Amiral Murgescu, four Mihail Kogălniceanu-class, one Sava-class and the four M-class minesweepers)"
 * ) There were no 10. *)Amiral Murgescu was not a frigate but a minelayer *)Mihail Kogălniceanu-class and Sava were riverine-monitors! (surely not "frigates" and with zero ASW capability) *) the "four M-class minesweepers" were... minesweepers! And contrary to the mistakenly sources they were never completed during WW2, but completed post-war by the communist government and placed into service as gunboats.

Further repetition of sinking of M-31 by Mărășești (again) is completely false. She went missing since 17 December 1942, care to explain how she could have been possibly sunk on 7 July 1943??

The REAL Primary Axis force in Black Sea naval operation was of course the Kriegsarime. Mounting of course a proper real Submarine U-boat campaign (Georgian waters to attack Soviet tankers), dispatching S-Boats in surface raids (other losses inflicted to Soivets), employing the MAL type gunboat in Azov Sea for ground -shelling, and interdicting Soviet resupply and landing operation in Kerch-Fedosya with MFP armed barges and R-class auxiliary minesweepeers.

The SECOND Axis force in Black Sea was the Regia Marina Italiana. Employing a group of MAS motor torpedo boats (less effective than German S-boats) and operating (for real this time) the CB-midget class midget submarines (keeping apart war claims, Italians can claim 2 direct sinking of Soviet submarines).

Then came as third position the Romanian Navy. Despite the presence of (old) destroyers they were never engaged in offensive actions and the Romanian Navy as overhall was a defensive/passive force. It's only realtively important success was sinking 10-12 Soviet submarines with defensive mine fields. 1 possibly 2 Soviet submarines with direct action, and scoring damage in surface engagement on Soviet units in only 1 occasion (damage after near-miss on monitor "Zheleznakov" on 22 June 1941).

Third and last Axis (or co-belligerant) force was the Croatian Navy. The biggest war action was the friendly fire attack on 1 Romanian sub in 1944.

As someone else stressed before me, Bulgaria was NOT at war with Soviet Union. And the Bulgarian Navy was also 100% under direct German control, playing no real military action against soviet (alleged attack by sub.chasers never occurred).

Lupodimare89 (talk) 12:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Bulgaria
This page claims Bulgaria participated in naval warfare in the Black Sea in World War Two, but does not mention any actual Bulgarian forces or individuals. This is problematic. Additionally, if I recall correctly, Bulgaria did not send troops to the Eastern Front but rather only deployed forces in the Balkans against Greece and Yugoslav partisans. If that is true, why would the Bulgarian Navy engage in naval conflicts in the Black Sea? On the Bulgarian WWII page it is mentioned that the Soviets attacked some Bulgarian coastal merchant shipping and that the Bulgarian navy engaged in some skirmishing as a response to protect its shipping, but that is not cited and nothing more of the Bulgarian navy is mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.206.188 (talk) 14:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I have editted the Bulgarian navy sector. Many of the previous figures were clearly wrong, such as including 1 destroyer and the submarines which were not part of Bulgarian navy during ww2, but rather transferred to them post-war by Soviet Union. The data on light forces were also not precise, such as the combination of torpedo boats and motor torpedo boats, which were two different types of naval vessels.128.250.0.215 (talk) 04:21, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

IP edits
I'm curious if this is one and the same editor
 * User_talk:79.113.133.11 -- Special:Contributions/79.113.133.11
 * User_talk:79.113.133.80 --Special:Contributions/79.113.133.80
 * User_talk:79.113.130.4 -- Special:Contributions/79.113.130.4
 * User talk:82.79.47.192 -- Special:Contributions/82.79.47.192
 * as well as
 * Special:Contributions/79.119.91.223
 * Special:Contributions/79.113.129.156
 * Special:Contributions/82.79.46.80
 * Special:Contributions/82.79.46.173
 * Special:Contributions/86.123.121.21
 * Special:Contributions/86.123.123.74
 * Special:Contributions/79.113.130.255 ?

K.e.coffman (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * And I'm curious why you fail to see reason. Can you please, for a second, stop asking who I am, but what I actually do? What's your beef with Regina Maria? There is no longer excess of Romanian warships, so why you can't let her have her merits? Also, why you cannot understand that Moskva is more notable than Kommuna? She's a battleship, yeah, but did next to nothing! Moskva fought and ended up as the worst csualty of the war. "Rv to prior", yeah, that's the easiest way isn't it? Ok, "Rv to prior", but why? Seriously, why? 79.113.133.11 (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Have you been topic banned from World War II related articles? K.e.coffman (talk) 22:15, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Stay on subject please. We are not talking about me here, we are talking about the article. And you still haven't answer my question. I even wonder if you bothered to read what I just said. Stay. On. subject. 79.113.133.11 (talk) 04:06, 10 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm asking because I would rather not engage with an editor who has been blocked / banned. It seems you are avoiding answering a simple question. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:11, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

User has been blocked for block evasion. Pls see: Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. K.e.coffman (talk) 15:39, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Permalink for future archiving: Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:30, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Black Sea campaigns (1941–44). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101028084906/http://www.historia.ro/exclusiv_web/10-lucruri/articol/submarinele-romanesti to http://www.historia.ro/exclusiv_web/10-lucruri/articol/submarinele-romanesti

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:37, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:58, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sevastopol1947-1948.jpg