Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (61) « First ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... Last »  ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> What fighter plane do you think Romania should use?
 
What fighter plane do you think Romania should use?
MIG 29 [ 19 ]  [14.84%]
F 16 [ 28 ]  [21.88%]
a new IAR design, built here [ 36 ]  [28.12%]
JAS-39 [ 59 ]  [46.09%]
Su-27 [ 17 ]  [13.28%]
Mirage 2000 [ 4 ]  [3.12%]
Total Votes: 163
Guests cannot vote 
contras
Posted on January 15, 2010 10:00 pm
Quote Post


Maior
*

Group: Members
Posts: 732
Member No.: 2693
Joined: December 28, 2009



QUOTE
Yes. Thank you. Now i know more about F-16. They win when they fire rockets after running away enemy planes.


I don't want to take a side or other, but, IMO, for many reasons, this choice is strategically, the best. Not you or I will decide what plane we will buy.

About your statement quotted above, tell me what other plane, from our possibilities, or other modern plane, was tested in battle against enemies who don't "running away".
PMEmail Poster
Top
Iamandi
Posted on January 15, 2010 10:34 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1386
Member No.: 319
Joined: August 04, 2004



That was only a joke, not a statement. smile.gif
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Agarici
Posted on January 16, 2010 09:51 am
Quote Post


Maior
*

Group: Members
Posts: 745
Member No.: 522
Joined: February 24, 2005



As a side aspect to this discussion, does anybody has some precise data about the Elta Israeli radar of the Mig Lancer? More specifically, some sources states that in has the ability to scan up to 10 (8) targets, with the optional function to track/engage 2 simultaneously. Also, and more important - as the radar was considered similar in capacities with that used for the Russian Mig upgrade package (put to work for the Indian Mig 21 Bison variant) and was subsequently used for the Mig 21-2000 upgrade project - is it capable in tracking and engaging BWR/medium range targets, using medium range BWR AA missiles?

The presence of that latter ability would surely give the Lancer a + 1 generation status from that of the original MF.

This post has been edited by Agarici on January 16, 2010 09:55 am
PMEmail Poster
Top
Vici
Posted on January 16, 2010 10:16 am
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 138
Member No.: 2455
Joined: April 18, 2009



The Elta EL/M-2032 multimode radar on the Lancer C has BVR capability
QUOTE
Typical Performance
- Detection range of fighter aircraft.
- Lookup: 35-55 NM
- Look-down: 30-45 NM

But since the Romanian AF did not buy any BVR missile, it doesn't really matter that the radar is BVR capable.
PM
Top
Agarici
Posted on January 16, 2010 10:35 am
Quote Post


Maior
*

Group: Members
Posts: 745
Member No.: 522
Joined: February 24, 2005



QUOTE (Vici @ January 16, 2010 10:16 am)
The Elta EL/M-2032 multimode radar on the Lancer C has BVR capability
QUOTE
Typical Performance
- Detection range of fighter aircraft.
- Lookup: 35-55 NM
- Look-down: 30-45 NM

But since the Romanian AF did not buy any BVR missile, it doesn't really matter that the radar is BVR capable.


That might be true for a particular moment in time, but I think having this ability is a very important aspect; it actually means having (with or without ammo) a newer generation of plane then the older MF's, able to play with far better chances in the major league.
PMEmail Poster
Top
Vici
Posted on January 16, 2010 01:14 pm
Quote Post


Caporal
*

Group: Members
Posts: 138
Member No.: 2455
Joined: April 18, 2009



Agarici, what I said is valid not for just one particular moment in time, it is valid for all the life service of the Lacer C so far (10+ years). And very likely its remaining life until the end, a few years from now.

Without BVR missiles (live and training ones) and without the crucial software needed to make them work installed in the weapons contol system's computer there is no way for our pilots to realistically train in any kind of BVR engagement. And there is no way for developing BVR doctrine and tactics.

Having a radar which could support BVR engagements means really nothing as long as they don't have the whole system to train with it.

This post has been edited by Vici on January 16, 2010 01:19 pm
PM
Top
Imperialist
Posted on March 23, 2010 05:09 pm
Quote Post


General de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2399
Member No.: 499
Joined: February 09, 2005



It's official now, Romania will buy 24 second-hand F-16s.


--------------------
I
PM
Top
Hadrian
Posted on March 23, 2010 05:20 pm
Quote Post


Sergent major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 245
Member No.: 875
Joined: April 09, 2006



No.....
I just heard at the news... This is terible...

My Gripens??!!! mad.gif
PMEmail Poster
Top
guina
Posted on March 23, 2010 06:57 pm
Quote Post


Plutonier major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 339
Member No.: 1393
Joined: April 16, 2007



Any idea what Block they are suposed to be ?What price,if any ?Modernisations ?
PMEmail Poster
Top
SiG
Posted on March 23, 2010 07:23 pm
Quote Post


Fruntas
*

Group: Members
Posts: 86
Member No.: 616
Joined: June 29, 2005



Here is the news article:
http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-esential-70621...ogramul-f35.htm

It appears that we could recieve the planes for free!?
We say that "Calul de dar nu se cauta la dinti". Let's see how apropriate this saying will be in the case of F16...
PMEmail Poster
Top
guina
Posted on March 23, 2010 08:00 pm
Quote Post


Plutonier major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 339
Member No.: 1393
Joined: April 16, 2007



Still,we need to know some details until we can judge the deal.What we know now is like" Romania decided to buy Ford cars "
Maybe the planes are free,but the training of the pilots costs $ 1 billion and the upgrading another $ 2 billions !
So,until we know some details the discution is pointless.
PMEmail Poster
Top
Romanul
Posted on March 23, 2010 08:53 pm
Quote Post


Soldat
*

Group: Members
Posts: 6
Member No.: 2223
Joined: August 19, 2008



"Avioanele F-16 A/B din lotul 15, pentru care MApN a optat, au o vechime de 29 de ani. "

http://ziuaveche.ro/007/armata/1910-a-doua...hi-de-29-de-ani
PMEmail Poster
Top
Hadrian
Posted on March 23, 2010 09:26 pm
Quote Post


Sergent major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 245
Member No.: 875
Joined: April 09, 2006



Almost as our MiG`s

This post has been edited by Hadrian on March 23, 2010 09:27 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
Imperialist
  Posted on March 23, 2010 09:50 pm
Quote Post


General de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2399
Member No.: 499
Joined: February 09, 2005



29 years old, so that makes it a F-16A? A second-hand F-16A?

6 years of "negotiations" for that? We need a "puke" smiley. sad.gif


--------------------
I
PM
Top
Stephen Dabapuscu
Posted on March 24, 2010 06:58 am
Quote Post


Sergent
*

Group: Members
Posts: 154
Member No.: 440
Joined: January 05, 2005



I think that, I recall that the F-16 blocks in this deal are used block 25/32 C/D! If this deal goes though, I can't believe that this the deal waited for 6 years. sad.gif mad.gif I could have happy if Romania got the same deal as Poland did; 48 new F-16 Block 52 C/D's plus many offsets! Instead 24 battle worn, high hour worn-out F-16's. I can't understand how Romania can defended by 24 worn out fighters. mad.gif The only air to air they will carry is likey a 20mm canon and 2 or 4 Python 3's AAM's. Some please explain to me; why Romania and most of Europe don't seem care about there own defense? huh.gif

This post has been edited by Stephen Dabapuscu on March 24, 2010 07:01 am
PMEmail Poster
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (61) « First ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... Last » Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0226 ]   [ 17 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]