What fighter plane do you think Romania should use?

On Friday the Minister of National Defence Mihai Stanisoara said a decision to start a purchase of multirole jets will be decided by CSAT the Romanian executive body on security and defense issues and that Thursday's remarks by Socialist Party (PSD) leader Mircea Geoana was purely his own personal opinions.

Geoana had said that due to the financial crisis no purchase would happen this year. Romania is otoh ruled by a coalition so each decision need to be carefully negotiated.

Richard Smith of Gripen International took the chance to play a negotiating card before the upcoming CSAT meeting and is offering new Gripen fighters on a buy-now pay-later arrangement. That also involves industrial investments before Romania even need to make payments on the jets.

http://www.gandul.info/actualitatea/suedez...ml?3927;3969266

So you think this is a factor worth taking into account. Well, you're right - except this is Romania and here the decisions are made politically and financially (self-financially, not nation-wide, of course) biased.
PS: I also wished for Saab, but I really don't think it'll be chosen.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/30/bae

Wo said that SAAB is the White Princess? The czech,hungarian and south african Gripen deals face corruption charges. So all the contenders of the romanian fighter deal, can and will give bribery for this contract, including SAAB( Bae have a minority share in SAAB) . So the question really is not what airplane Romania will chose, but who will give more money for the bribe.

This post has been edited by STI on February 28, 2009 10:08 am

1. I never implied anything about Princesses - it just seems the right plane 4 us!
2. So the westerners have finally learnt good manners (aka bribe) from us? Do you have facts?

Don't get me wrong, i am still a big fan of Gripen , but everyone thinks that only
Lockheed Martin and Boeing use bribes in the selection process of a new fighter. (probable the strong anti-american view play a role in this) The fact is when the big money get involved no matter who is American or German Swedish English, they will use whatever it takes(including bribe) to get the contract.
BAE has been subject to allegations of corruption. On 7 February 2007 the Solicitor General Mike O'Brien announced that BAE contracts in six countries were being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) for "suspected international corruption"; Chile, the Czech Republic, Qatar, Romania, South Africa and Tanzania. In September 2005 The Guardian reported that banking records showed that BAE paid £1 million to Augusto Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator. The Guardian has also reported that "clandestine arms deals" have been under investigation in Chile and the UK since 2003 and that British Aerospace and BAE made a number of payments to Pinochet advisers.
The SFO's Czech Republic investigation relates to alleged bribery as part of the deal to lease BAE/Saab Gripen fighters to that country BAE has been criticised for its role in disposing of surplus Royal Navy warships. HMS Sheffield was sold to the Chilean Navy in 2003 for £27 million, however the government's profit from the sale was £3 million after contracts worth £24 million were placed with BAE for upgrade and refurbishment of the ship. BAE is alleged to have paid "secret offshore commissions" of over £7 million to secure the sale of HMS London and HMS Coventry to the Romanian Navy. BAE received a £116 million contract for the refurbishment of the ships.In January 2007 BBC News highlighted concerns of arms campaigners regarding arms sales to South Africa, primarily in relation to the £2.3 billion deal which saw BAE supply Hawk trainers and Gripen fighters.The Tanzania inquiry relates to the sale of a radar system to that country in 2002.The sale was criticised by then Secretary of State for International Development Clare Short, opposition MPs and the World Bank.Responding to allegations of bribery and corruption, BAE Systems' 2006 Corporate Responsibility Report states "We continue to reject these allegations...We take our obligations under the law extremely seriously and will continue to comply with all legal requirements around the world.
BAE (and British Aerospace previously) has long been the subject of allegations of bribery in relation to its business in Saudi Arabia. The UK National Audit Office (NAO) investigated the Al Yamamah contracts and has so far not published its conclusions, the only NAO report ever to be withheld. The MOD has stated "The report remains sensitive. Disclosure would harm both international relations and the UK's commercial interests." The company has been accused of maintaining a £60 million Saudi slush fund and was the subject of an investigation by the SFO. However, on 14 December 2006 it was announced that the SFO as "discontinuing" its investigation into BAE. It stated that representations to its Director and the Attorney General Lord Goldsmith had led to the conclusion that the wider public interest "to safeguard national and international security" outweighed any potential benefits of further investigation. The termination of the investigation has been controversial. In June 2007, the BBC's Panorama alleged BAE "paid hundreds of millions of pounds to the ex-Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar bin Sultan" in return for his role in the Al Yamamah deals. In late June 2007 the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) began a formal investigation into BAE's compliance with anti-corruption laws. On 19 May 2008 BAE confirmed that its CEO Mike Turner and non-executive director Nigel Rudd had been detained "for about 20 minutes" at two US airports the previous week and that the DOJ had issued "a number of additional subpoenas in the US to employees of BAE Systems plc and BAE Systems Inc as part of its ongoing investigation.The Times suggested that such "humiliating behaviour by the DOJ" is unusual toward a company that is co-operating fully.
A judicial review of the decision by the SFO to drop the investigation was granted on 9 November 2007. On 10 April 2008 the High Court ruled that the SFO "acted unlawfully" by dropping its investigation. The Times described the ruling as "one of the most strongly worded judicial attacks on government action" which condemned how "ministers 'buckled' to 'blatant threats' that Saudi cooperation in the fight against terror would end unless the ...investigation was dropped." On 24 April the SFO was granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords against the ruling.There was a two-day hearing before the Lords on 7 and 8 July 2008. On 30 July the House of Lords unanimously overturned the High Court ruling, stating that the decision to discontinue the investigation was lawful.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6255725.stm about BAe Gripen and Hawk jets sold to South Africa.

http://www.radio.cz/en/article/88566 Czech Gripen deal

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/c...icle3022314.ece
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/feb/21/arms.uknews

1. WOW! It's very much like Romania...
2. I'm not anti-american; not at all, but I just don't want any second-hand planes, be it MiG's, be it F-16's or any other flying kites )
3. Still, no convictions, as in the frigates' case - so, nobody is guilty of anything!

From us? Politically and financially biased decisions are widespread. Ever heard of robber barons? They didn't make a name for themselves in the Kingdom of Romania.

About nr1.:before we are romanian, german, english etc we all are humans. GREED is common to humans.

About nr2. in your list: the SH planes will be necessary because of short flying resource of Mig 21 fleet, we need the planes as as soon as possible. If we choose F16 will have 24 Blk 25 SH and 24 block 52, Gripen will be the first phase old planes of Swedish airforce and Eurofigher 24 SH from Italian airforce. Only if we select F18 SuperHornet or Rafale all the planes will be brand new. (nobody has these types of aircraft in surplus)


About nr.3 in your list: Adrian Nastase&Co still have no conviction, but we all know how corrupt are they.Read more in my links about BAe and Saudi Arabia deal to see the true face of BAe Systems and british goverment.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6182137.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/ju...ons.saudiarabia
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/poli...icle3724411.ece

This post has been edited by STI on February 28, 2009 03:58 pm

Have you looked at a survey recently? Many romanians still trust him...
I know about the others' affairs - I just wanted to point out that in THEIR countries, these things are no regarded as every-day-business, but as penal as possible and (THIS is important) once a politician has been suspected with enough evidence/proof, he retires from the public life! But this is off-topic...
From what I understood, the Gripen should have been new. They're SH as well? How does that help SAAB?

If we sign the contract today with SAAB, we will receive our first new aircraft in a about 18 months, so until then we will have to use Gripen D (Two-seat version) from Swedish Air Force. (about 5 airplanes) I have a strong fealing that these airplanes will stay in RoAF,because this will give opportunity to Swedish Air force to order 5 new airplanes from SAAB, to replace the old ones. Gripen D have more flight hours and high degree of wear than Gripen C, giving a reason to replace them.

Why?

Cheep, performant, easy to mantain (cost of fuel, spares and maintenance are greater than buying costs for planes), robust, we get 100% offset so money come back to create jobs...

"The cheapest", from what I've read - plus, I'm entitled to personal oppinions, am I not? I like it, from the early nineties, the third issue of "Top Gun" (the one about European Airforces)! Seems better than all alternatives (to me, of course).

BINGO! Top Gun International, also known as "Saab Grippen International". That magazine never missed one single issue without a mention of the Saab Grippen and that got the nation to a point where they believe that they cannot breathe without the Grippen.

Performant? Compared to what? Cheaper? Compared to what? Robust? Compared to what? Easy to maintain? Compared to what?

Radu

You make me search that issue and have a better look at it! You say it's mostly propaganda?