Romanian ammo boxes labels


#1

Hello guys,

I was trying to find out what of each label from Romanian ammo boxes mean. Until now I couldn’t decipher the ones expressing the metal used in case production even though I find out there are two possibilities (I hope), GJ and GS, and the source production of the powder, like U. What those letters mean and are there more? The rest regarding box labels I know.

Two examples below:

image

image

Thanks,
Bogdan


#2

#3

Ok. If GS stands for steel case then GJ stands for what (maybe brass)?
And how about that “U” from the propellant manufacturer.


#4

#5

Thank you for the intel, but do you happen to know what does the letter ”U” from the propellant means?


#6

No, but I suspect Fede or EOD may know. Just wait until they see your post.

Brian


#7

“U” is “Viromet S.A.” of Victoria.


#8

Thanks Alex! Do you know any more of these Romanian propellants manufacturers?


#9

Viromet see here:
http://www.viromet.ro/

Sincerely
P.P.
Strada General Vartejan , Limanu, Jud.CT


#10

Hi Alex,

There is a confusion about Viromet, because this chemical factory never produced propellant for ammunition and did not existed until 1991, when it emerged from the reorganization of the Combinatul Chimic Victoria, that is the manufacturer of the propellant for the cartridges shown above. After 1990, the latter factory went through several designation changes until 2001, when it became a subsidiary of Romarm named S. C. Pirochim Victoria S.A.

Regards,

Fede


#11

Fede, maybe I should have started from the beginning as in my database I am always using the last known name of a company/factory.

Here what I have:
Founded in 1939 as a German business named “Fabricile Ucea”, in 1944 captured and dismantled by Soviet troops, in 1949 relaunched as Soviet-Romanian business “Uzinele Sovromchim Ucea”, in 1951 renamed to “Combinatul Chimic Victoria”, in 1953 renamed to “Combinatul Chimic I.V. Stalin Victoria” and plant became operational, in 1990 renamed to “Viromet S.A.”, in 1991 the military Branch was disembodied from “Viromet S.A.” and named “Uzinele Chimice Victoria” which then together with “Nitramonia” of Fagaras formed “Rompiro Fagaras RA.”, in 1997 renamed to “Rompiro R.A. Victoria”, in 2000 subsidized by “S.C. Arsenal S.A.” (Arsenalul Armatei RA.) holding, in 2001 renamed to “S.C. Pirochim Victoria S.A.” and became part of “C.N.Romarm S.A.” holding, later renamed to “Viromet S.A.”, since 2002 inactive.


#12

Alex, that is not correct, Viromet is not the last know name of Combinatul Chimic Victoria; it is a chemical company emerged from this group that never manufactured propellant for ammunition. The last and current name of the propellant factory at Victoria (Orașul Victoria) is S. C. Pirochim Victoria S.A.


#13

I forgot to ask you guys, do any of you know what does the number 2 on top the box refer to? I know it has to do something with cargo classification or it indicates the danger level, but what exactly?


#14

I wonder how many visitors of this thread discovered only on a closer look that the two boxes contain cartridges of very different calibers.


#15

Well, one box with cartridges 7.62Х54R equipped with a bullet LPS, and the second with cartridges 7.92Х57 Mauser equipped “adapted” to the cartridge LPS?


#16

Yes, differences being with the case metal. For 7.62x54R steel clad with gilding metal is used, while for the 7.92x57 Mauser just steel.


#17

Well, I had in mind the similarity of 7.62 LPS and 7.92 LPS as stencilled on the box and how easy one can be taken for the other by inexperienced or stressed personnel when supplying troops. I for my part had to look twice, although I owned a specimen of the bottom box and still have cartridges from it.


#18

Jochem, noone cared for the calibers as the question was about case materials and propellant manufacturers.

Fede,
I guess this happens when factories do split up.
Here the entry on Viromet S.A., Victoria:
Founded in 1939 as a German business named “Fabricile Ucea”, in 1944 captured and dismantled by Soviet troops, in 1949 relaunched as Soviet-Romanian business “Uzinele Sovromchim Ucea”, in 1951 renamed to “Combinatul Chimic Victoria”, in 1953 renamed to “Combinatul Chimic I.V. Stalin Victoria” and plant became operational, in 1990 renamed to “Viromet S.A.”, in 1991 the military Branch was disembodied from “Viromet S.A.” and named “Uzinele Chimice Victoria” which then together with “Nitramonia” of Fagaras formed “Rompiro Fagaras RA.”, in 1997 renamed to “Rompiro R.A. Victoria”, in 2000 subsidized by “S.C. Arsenal S.A.” (Arsenalul Armatei RA.) holding, in 2001 renamed to “S.C. Pirochim Victoria S.A.” and became part of “C.N.Romarm S.A.” holding, later renamed to “Viromet S.A.”, since 2002 inactive.

The 2 companies just have common roots and cross overs. I should have listed both of course.
Given histories are from Romanian sources.

As per this "Combinatul Chimic I.V. Stalin Victoria” (CCIVS) is factory “U” and made propellants:


#19

Alex, I read your entry on Viromet, but my point is that, although it has a common origin, this factory is not part of the designation changes of Ucea; it is a different company that have never manufactured propellants. The confusion in your chronology starts after 1990, first because the "Combinatul Chimic Victoria” was never renamed Viromet, it was a separated company that emerged from it. Second because Pirochim Victoria was never renamed Viromet in 2002, since the current name started in 2001 as “S.C. Pirochim Victoria S.A.” and is fully operational as 2018. Also, you are confusing two different factories that operated under the name of R.A. “Rompiro” Făgăraş, that are Orașul Făgăraş and Orașul Victoria.

For clarity, here is a chronology of the names used between 1991 and 2018:

1991 = R.A. “Rompiro” Făgăraş, Orașul Victoria (often listed as “R.A. Rompiro, Orașul Victoria” or “R.A. Rompiro Victoria”).
1997 = Uzina Chimică Victoria, subdidiary of R.A. Arsenalul Armatei.
2000 = Uzina Chimică Victoria, subdidiary of S.C. Arsenal S.A.
2001 = S.C. Pirochim Victoria S.A., subsidiary of C.N.Romarm S.A.

Regards,

Fede


#20

Fede, thanks, this will take me now a while to work through one more time.
My problem is (as often) contradicting sources.