Diviziei AVT

Jeroen, please do not present your assumptions, guesses and mistaken information as facts.
The post war history of the Romanian AF is not well documented, most enthusiasts "know" a lot of mistaken data, rumors, etc and pass them as real.
There is plenty misinformation, let's not add more by guessing.

Ianca never operated MiG-17.

MiG-15/15UTI were replaced at Boboc in the second half of the 60's by L-29. by 1968 they were gone.

Why would the test unit at Craiova use the MiG-15 in the late 80's - early 90's?
To test what on it? They had IAR-93 and 99, those were the ones who needed testing and systems integration.

The factory at Craiova had no need to fly MiG-15s, they had no connection whatsoever with the type. MiG-15/17 were overhauled / repaired at Bacau.

The 15 you saw flying at Craiova in 1990 was definitely from the 67th Regiment, which operated the type (as well as ALL remaining MiG-17). They were progresively replaced by IAR-93s.

The Air Force museum at Otopeni keeping a MiG-15 airworthy? No, sorry, this is not Western Europe we're talking about here. The Aviation museum never had any flyable type. Most aircraft sent there had mishaps (like the Puma and one of the Alouettes), or exhausted their airframe resource.

As I already wrote in another thread here some time ago:

The thread is this one:
http://www.worldwar2.ro/forum/index.php?showtopic=4733
The last flight with MiG-15 and 17 at Craiova took place earlier, don't know when.

This post has been edited by Vici on May 17, 2009 10:06 am

MMM

Do you have a grid on GE of that schoolyard?
thanks

Jeroen

Thanks Vici

I fully agree with you on not mixing facts with un/educated guessing.
Sorry for causing any inconvencience about recordings of Romanian mil history, Fact is that it was/is not all that easy to collect real facts about these histories since I started doing so late 80-ies....
Thanks again for clearing things up a bit.

So what in your opinion is/are the most serious MISINFORMATION enthousiast wrongly continue to believe for real?

sincerely

Jeroen

Don't know if misinformation is the most accurate word to describe it. Rather a lack of information filled in by each one's suppossitions.
I don't think there is one big thing wrong, but a miryad of mistaken details, which all add up to an uncertain, fuzzy and out of focus picture of the air force.

Just for example, in the last few years the usual transport versions of the Puma, plus Puma MEDEVAC, VIP, Puma M are being painted exactly in the same camouflage scheme as Puma SOCAT. The result is that everybody thinks they are Puma SOCAT, even many members of the growing spotter comunity , oblivious to the fact that they lack the gun, EOP and weapons rails...

Sorry Jeroen, but just now I came back home - I guess there is just one "plane" left over there, as I can see on GE: 46''31'48 N 26''54'54 E. There were two other, but I guess they took off in a way or another

Thanks Vici and MMM

Still I am a bit surprised that up til today some or to much facts about the history of the Military aviation are still shrouded in mystery or the fog of the times, or at least unknown or wrongly or misunderstood, since I published one of the first orbats I had primatively collected back in 1990/1991 in Scramble magazine. Wonder how un/accurate it was, compared to the real thing, what we know today.

At least it was probably more accurate than some other publications at that time I believe...
Still curious to look back at what we thought we knew in seventies or eighties
Good example is my old copy of World Air Forces, David W. Wragg, 1971, Osprey, Reading, Berkshire page 126-128
He states first Rumanian jets in service were MiG-15 in 1953, not mentioning Yak23s allthough the defection was known then.
He gave current (1970) AF at 8,000 personel
18 esk with Mig-17,19,21 (9 regiments? my remark)
Two esk Il28
Two transport esk Il12 Il 14 Li2
10 Mi-4

N. Krivinyi in World Military Aviation, 1973, Arms and Armour Press, Lionel Leventhal, London, was a helpfull source
Itself an updated and revised translation from 1972s Taschenbuch der Luftflotten.
Rumania page 42-43
personel 21,000 , 18 esk, 190 aircraft 30 helicopters
Org
3 esk Mig21F/PF, 3 esk MiG19, 6 esk Mig17F/Su7, 1 esk Il28, 2 esk Il12, Il-14, li2, 1 esk Mi-4, 1 esk Mi-8
Provides a list of 20 air bases by name, still including Arad, Calarasi, Galati, Iasi, Mamaia, Turnisor, Leordeni, Oradea, Satu Mare and Zilistea, others are more known.
Most surprisingly it states Rumania has some 30 Su-7 and Su7UTI!

From 1989/1990
The arms control reporter © idds 4-90 page 407.E-0.5 information on Romanian AF from december 1989 Milavnews
35+ IAR93, 0 IAR99, 10 Il28, 20 MiG-15, 85 MiG-17, 200 MiG-21, 45 MiG-23
(This is among others why I (wrongly?) believed Ianca was operating mostly Frescos not Fagots)

Not to promote more confusion, but who found more striking examples of wrong information?

I remember a story about two Italians (tourists) who landend at Constanta and first revealed that Rumania had obtained and operated MiG-23s! Romanian officials were not all that happy about that then.
When was thate exactly?
So I was surprised when landing at Constanta in summer 1990 to spend some days at Mamaia beach, when spotting all those Fulcrums, it had not been reported then, as far as I know, that Rumania had any. Was not Baneasa 1990 the first opportunity for Romanians to learn about its existance?

Jeroen

This post has been edited by Jeroen on May 18, 2009 06:36 pm

About the three MiG-15 from that courtyard in Bacau: there were two single seaters: serials 1927 red and 2199 blue and a single seater serial 253 red.

1927 was taken to the kids camping in Valea Budului and thoroughly vandalized
2199 is still at the school, in a somewhat better shape
253 is somewhere between the buildings of the Bacau airbase - and thus saved.
Pictures of them here:
http://romanian-spotters.forumer.ro/aerona...bes-t379-25.htm
page 2 and 3 of the thread, and here:
http://www.targeta.co.uk/bacau_2006.htm

Back to the issue of wrong info, Bill Gunston's "An Illustrated Guide to Military Helicopters", Salamander Books 1981 lists Romania as a Mi-2 user, which it never was

The same grose misinformation can be (shamefully) found on the official site of the Romanian Air Force, in the history section:
http://www.roaf.ro/ro/istorie4.php
The list Mi-2 and Mi-4 as the first helicopters, whereas we had Mi-4, SM-1 and SM-2. SM-1 was the Polish produced Mi-1 and SM-2 was a SM-1 version with a stretched fuselage. The dumbass who put together the info on the link above must have concluded in his ignorance that there is no such thing as a SM-2, and it "must" be Mi-2. Or perhaps he wrote it consulting crappy internet sources, such as wikipedia

Thanks Vici!

I did have a look at the pictures on the other forum, but I believe serials 1927 and 2199 both to be dual seaters! Though the plexiglass from their canopies has been removed or broken, still from the lay out of the metal framing it seems clear to me they are dubla comanda, don't you think?

Moreover I always thought the AM used four-cypher serials for all their MiG15UTI, to discriminate them from the single fighters, was I wrong to believe that?
Did someone find a single example that falsified my hypothesis?

Jeroen

Yes, 1927 and 2199 are both two seaters, it's my typing error.

Both single and two seaters had 3 and 4 digit serials. Early deliveries had two digit serials.
MiG-15 UTI 134:
http://www.myaviation.net/search/photo_sea...4150&size=large
There's also a single seater serialled 2713 at the Aviation Museum, a single seater 2546 gate-guard at Ianca, etc., so there is no such rule that two seaters would have 4 digits and single seaters three.

This post has been edited by Vici on May 27, 2009 07:05 pm

Thanks Vici

I do believe you, but still wonder if only aircraft at musea are exception to the "rule" (?), they could have modified or adjusted numbering after repainting, even not corresponding with factory frame number!? Did somebody check those?
Any proof of operational aircraft?

Well I saw some MIG21UM with three digits, an exception to the rule?
Only elder MiG21F had three digits? Why were four digits introduced in the first place and when?

German Democrat republik even repainted or retouched MiGs from three to four digit serials to confuse Western observers or readers!

The serials I mentioned are genuine, they were not modified.
In the Romanian Air Force they did not falsify serials to confuse western intel.
I've seen at least another two photos of MiG-15 single seaters in operational service with 4 digit serials, I'll try to get back with pictures to convince you.

We did not have MiG-21F, only MiG-21 F-13. Mind you, there are differences between the two.
F-13 versions had both 2 and 3 digit serials
all PF, most M and late built UMs had 3 digits
all PFM, R, MF, MF-75, U-400, U-600, US and most UM plus a few M have 4 digit serials

So there is no rule as to when, why and on what kind of aircraft were 2, 3 or 4 digit serials.
As you know, the serial on the aircraft consists, in the case of soviet built aircraft, from the last digits in the construction number. The choice to put on the fuselage the last 2,3 or 4 digits from the long cn was not the result of a thorough, fixed rule of the Romanian AF. I believe they came from the USSR with the serials already applied, so it's most likely a factory accountability issue.

This post has been edited by Vici on May 28, 2009 05:29 am

Thanks Vici

Do allow me to make some refinements.

The serial was not always the LAST digits of the c/n, but seems to relate more to the batchnumber and number within that batch, and sometimes its more complicated, look for example the MiG-21US or MiG-21UM. I found this out with MiG-21UM serial 9516. After its display in July 1991 it was parked on the apron of the civil part of Giarmata where I noticed its cn being 516953016!

Still it would be interesting to look for documents concerning allocation of serials, why with most training aircraft serials did not follow from c/n, or the helikopters?

I think its more a client issue, but I might be caught in Western capitalist thinking doctrine, and am not familiair with WP practices on this matter, by the way some of the MIGs were also delivered by CSSR!

This post has been edited by Jeroen on May 30, 2009 10:22 am

Bill was not the only guy.

Just came across Barry C Wheeler his Air Forces of the World, London 1979 somewhere put at the end of my home library.

Page 80
the Helicopter force has 10 Mi4, some Mi-2 and 20 Mi-8.
About 47 Alouette III are armed for the anti tank role....
I had to smile seeing I had corrected that into some Mi-1 a long time ago.

Page 79
Romania has a requirement for some 80 Orao to replace MiG-17s currently in service with TWO fighter bomber regiments.
..., and in addition to the MiG17s there is a further regiment with 50 Sukhoi su-7Bs,
His source even did identify the subtype!

But page 43
Hungary
For pur ground attack work there is a fighter-bomber regiment of three squadrons flying 36 Su-7MBs (BM?).

Well less trained observers mat have misidentified the Su7BMs from the regiment at Kunmadaras as being "Hungarian", but they were soviet all the time..
But In Romania, did Soviet FA Su-7 visit Romania on squadron exchanges or traing deployements?
Or were we western civilians fooled by our own intell and journalists?