What fighter plane do you think Romania should use?

OK, You better stop now! What F111? They have been out of production for decades.

Romania can't afford new planes. That is the reality, not a nice reality, but the reality nevertheless.

Spending money on upgrading the runways and training the pilots is a good investment. It needs to be done anyway, irrespective of what Romania gets.

Radu

There is one romanian saying: " Suntem prea saraci sa ne permitem lucruri ieftine" [ We are too poor to afford cheep things ]

Romania does not need more money it needs more brains.
I wonder how a country with a gdp smaller than ours manage to have modern army, bordering Russia and not being part of NATO.

Yeah i'm thinking of Finland

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)

you should compare real GDP. you purchase equipment on the international market, paying international prices with real money. there it doesn't really count that one liter milk, a basket of eggs and the entrance ticket to a Florin Salam concert is cheaper than in Luxembourg.
in that list Finland is somewhere else.

I thought of a new one:

Expecting Romania to buy new jets is like expecting a gutted fish to buy a brand new set of sharp teeth. The thought would never pass through its rotting head and even if it did, what would be the use?

I thought of a new one:

Expecting Romania to buy new jets is like expecting a gutted fish to buy a brand new set of sharp teeth. The thought would never pass through its rotting head and even if it did, what would be the use?

On the long run buying second hand fighters cost more than buying new ones.

A pair of chinesse shoes cost less than a pair of italian shoes but since you have to replace your chinesse shoes after the first rain, where is the advantage ?

Anyone looking only for "the latest" is fundamentally doomed to disappointment.
Every "today's latest cry" is tomorrow's "yesterday's old stuff". However, some things just never age. The Bic ballpoint pen is timeless. The MG42 machine gun is timeless. The AK47 is timeless. The Porsche 911 is timeless. The Wolkswagen Golf is timeless. The Boeing 747 is timeless. The Boeing 737 is timeless. The Swiss Army Knife is timeless. The F-16 is timeless.
All of the above had "imitators" and "emulators", but only fools chase "the latest", clever people stick with the classics that work.
Radu

However, Block 25 isn't timeless - as there wouldn't have been Block 40! )

I really recommend that you read this: http://www.f-16.net

"Block numbers" are mostly a bureaucratic exercise - this can be belwildering even to the people "in the know". When talking about "block 25" vs "block 40", the airframe is generally the same, but removable/replaceable details have been changed to improve performance. These include engine, computer, radar, payload controllers, etc. Some areas were changed from metal to composite materials and these can be retrofitted too.
Practically, you can have a "Block 20" retrofitted with the same gear a as a "Block 50/52". It is quite likley that the Romanian "block 25 "will be ugraded as much as possible to the same standards as the aircraft it is intended to co-operate with. It is very unlikely that the Romanian F16 will be "pure" "block 25" F16s anyway, (even if there was such a thing), because they were improved/upgraded many times over during their lives.

Radu

This post has been edited by Radub on March 30, 2010 01:41 pm

I really recommend that you read this: http://www.f-16.net

"Block numbers" are mostly a bureaucratic exercise - this can be belwildering even to the people "in the know". When talking about "block 25" vs "block 40", the airframe is generally the same, but removable/replaceable details have been changed to improve performance. These include engine, computer, radar, payload controllers, etc. Some areas were changed from metal to composite materials and these can be retrofitted too.
Practically, you can have a "Block 20" retrofitted with the same gear a as a "Block 50/52". It is quite likley that the Romanian "block 25 "will be ugraded as much as possible to the same standards as the aircraft it is intended to co-operate with. It is very unlikely that the Romanian F16 will be "pure" "block 25" F16s anyway, (even if there was such a thing), because they were improved/upgraded many times over during their lives.

Radu

Yeah, yeah, yeah...
What I intended to say is that not only do we get an old plane, but an old(er) version of it, as well.
When one says

, one has to think WHO has the capabilities (financially speaking as well as technically) to do such a thing. Does USA have their own "Elbit"?!

Later edit: what's to read from f16.net? That even Pakistan gets a newer version (block 52) than us, Rromanians?!
http://www.f-16.net/news_article4048.html

This post has been edited by MMM on March 30, 2010 03:38 pm

Radu, from a technical standpoint, I can give you right, but practically ...
A relatively recent example - the Raytheon MIM-23 Hawk Batteries who lies useless near Bucharest - on theory they can be improved to the Hawk XXI (Hawk 21) system, but practically ... Radu, this is Romania, don't forget!

MMM,
You can read the website to get an idea what this aircraft is what it can do. 25 nations use it.

I could not care any less about what others have and what their "valuare" is. If one measures one'sworth only what one has, then one is no better than this specimen of the average Romanian voter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk8bb-E1WxA
25 nations use the F16. This is the most popular modern aircraft bar none. The Dutch still fly older aircraft than the ones donated for free to Romania. You can tell them that your "valuare" is better.

Andreas,
I know a train station where the clock has been broken for the last 20 years. That is just as relevant to the F-16 as your Hawk battery.

Radu

The B-747 isn`t timeless. Now there is Airbus A-380...

Donated aircraft that will cost us at least 1.3 billion dollars with no offset and no loan and a short "life expectancy". We should have spent that money on new ones.

The 747 is still flying and will do so for the foreseeable future.
You obvioulsy do not understand the concept of "timeless classic".
Radu

Donated aircraft that will cost us at least 1.3 billion dollars with no offset and no loan and a short "life expectancy". We should have spent that money on new ones.

The planes are still free.
The estimated expense of $900 million will go towards training the pilots ($400 million), upgrading the infrastructure (upgrading runways, maintenance facilities, etc) and spares and ammunition. This is esential expenditure. This money would need to be spent anyway, no matter what aircraft Romania got.
However you look at it, this is the best option for Romania right now.
At a price between $40 to 60 million, 24 Gripens would have cost at elast $960 million to which Romania would need to add the same $900 (if not more) for training the pilots and upgrading the infrastructure.
At a price of £69 million per unit, 24 Eurofighters would have cost at elast £1.65 billion to which Romania would need to add the same $900 (if not more) for training the pilots and upgrading the infrastructure.
So, this is actually a saving. Maybe when Romania will get itself out of the mire and recession, they may be able to purchase these expensive planes. But until then, a free gift is better than nothing.
Radu