Ok, so your fighter planes are good, but....

[PanzerKing]

What will Romania do about the tanks the military currently operates?

The Mig 21 Lancers are now modern and capable of defending Romania, but can the same be said about the T-55AM? I know they have been modernized as well, but do they really stand a chance in this day and age? Have there been any talks of buying newer tanks? Maybe German, American, British or Russian again?

I really don't have a lot of knowledge on your current armored forces so I decided to start this topic. Enlighten me please!

Thanks

[Indrid]

if only we needed these tanks for anything more that 1december parades.....we are nato members, we have big, strong brothers, who needs guns?

[PanzerKing]

Well everyone made such a big deal about the Mig 21's so I figured you might be concerned about your tanks as well.

But if you have that mindset then why have Mig 21's at all if your brothers have F-16's? :roll:

[Indrid]

don`t be angry. i was in a bad mood. i am totally disapointed to what romanian army stands for. so my outburst was perhaps useless here

[PanzerKing]

I'm not angry, I was just confused by your message, that's all. 8)

[inahurry]

PK, some of us are really concerned with the equipment, training, numbers, pay, etc. of our military. I know you’re not a big fan of your government or, for that matter, big government. Try imagine there are far worse governments than yours and I’m not talking about incompetence here but of far graver things. Then and in connection with what I wrote try to understand that a powerful country interests are often divergent with those of a weaker country, even when they are allies (though is more like a senior- vassal relation). The efficiency of a weapon system doesn’t consist only in its technical performance. A country that wants to be its own master has to be able to produce its own weapons (even if not the entire array).
The Romanian battle tank (TR) will probably survive, modernized, and it is going to be produced here. Is not the best tank but will do. No tank in the world has any chance if the enemy controls the skies or, if it can’t be used for its main purpose which is an offensive weapon then it is wasted money.
I think the focus on Mig-21 has to do with a serious concern that we might be left with no military airforce. The modernized Migs are a stop-gap solution, apparently efficient in term of cost/results. But the clock is ticking, we’re just a few years from withdrawing the entire fleet because it lived its life. Tanks are cheaper and easier to build, crews easier to train and replace than jet pilots. And, imo, the glorious era of tanks is at the sunset, they won’t disappear but their role and design will change.
All previous considerations aside, if we will be in the front line of a major confrontation (with a Russian –Ukrainian alliance for instance) the costs we will pay could be terrible. But is better to be prepared and as much as possible rely on ourselves. I think Florin pointed somewhere else that we should better try to have a formidable anti-aircraft defense than try to have a much costly and fragile air fleet. Maybe the same goes for tanks, as we are by nature a country that is on defense we should concentrate on anti-tank weapons.
What I know is we are making new turrets for the TR with the French and there were contacts with the Germans for building (at least partly here) a new tank. The electronics, guiding, fire control and communications systems are already modernized and they weren’t bad in the past either. If I’m not mistaken we’re producing in cooperation with the French anti-tank missiles and also the attack helicopters (too few for now) have also an anti-tank purpose so the whole matter, as with any other army, needs to consider the integrated response all these systems can or should provide on the battlefield. Also, most of the Mig21 fleet is destined for ground attack which I suppose means anti-armor also. As you can see, looks pretty clear that we are envisioning an adversary that could use massive armored attack – your guess who could that be.
And, of course, we expect you move your asses here and provide us air protection (or bomb us, you can never tell).

[Victor]

Just to remind you an older topic of yours:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=27208

[PanzerKing]

Hehe, yeah I remember that topic.

Good post Inahurry, I understand the situation, kinda sucks. I guess AA defense and air forces would probably do more good than a fleet of tanks as of now, but who knows really.

[DevanG]

so that tank is really not that bad ...
does anyone know how the tr-85 acted abroad ... how goo was it ...
did it had any encouters with t-72 - t-64 or even more modern vehicles ?

[Dan Po]

QUOTE

if only we needed these tanks for anything more that 1december parades.....we are nato members, we have big, strong brothers, who needs guns?

If the romanian government will agree with you Nato will kik us out in 5 minutes I think that is a gipsy way of life (no offence) ... My brother is a tank officer and his career dream is to lead a leopard II regiment ... :keep:

[Indrid]

i was being sarcastic. and believe me, nato gives a F$#@ about our arsenal. or most valuable posession is our land, sea, air.....ocasionally people because it looks good for everybody.

and about your brother, GOOD LUCK to him.