Military Review

Romania switches to F-16 fighters from obsolete Soviet MiG-21

30

The Supreme Council of Defense of Romania approved a plan for the acquisition of new multi-purpose aircraft for the air force of the country. This decision was made after the report, which was presented by the Minister of National Defense Cornelio Dobritsa.

Council members, including the president, government members and heads of special services, approved the concept of a gradual increase in air defense, providing for the purchase of new multi-purpose aircraft, including on obligations to NATO, ITAR-TASS reports.

Last week, Dobritsuu told reporters that Romania would buy used F-16 multi-role aircraft, decommissioned from the armed forces of the Netherlands and Portugal. “This will allow us to begin a gradual transition from the outdated MiG-21 to the fighters of a new generation,” the minister said.

He added that the planes to be purchased "comply with the standards of the European Union and can serve the national army for at least another twenty years."

Although the minister did not report on the value of the transaction, Romanian media say that this is about the purchase of X-NUMX X-NUMX million Euro X-NUMX fighter jets.

Romania planned to purchase X-NUMX second-hand American F-2009 fighters from the USA in 24, but the deal did not take place due to lack of money.

American planes were supposed to replace the Soviet MiG-21 fighters, which she acquired as early as the years of her membership in the Warsaw Pact.

Created in the middle of the 1950-ies MiGs now form the basis of the Romanian Air Force.

However, plans to buy fighters from the US have been criticized by the European consortium Eurofighter, whose leadership expressed "deep disappointment that the decision to purchase F-16 was made without an international tender provided for by the EU standard procedure".
Originator:
http://www.newsru.com
30 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. spender
    spender 28 September 2012 10: 55
    +8
    Decommissioned fighters are certainly power ... In the Netherlands and Portugal, it’s probably a holiday now, the Balkans will also have a joy now their skies will be protected by ecologically clean fighters according to EU parameters. Everyone is happy, everyone is happy, Romanian taxpayers may not recognize ... laughing
    1. Antipetian 1
      Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 10: 56
      -1
      Yeah. But the MiG-21 is somehow embarrassing, and so on the F-16, mind you, prestigious!
      1. Beck
        Beck 28 September 2012 12: 15
        +4
        Mig-21 is also not from the store shelf. About 30-40 years served. And why drive the wave. Even the new MiG-21 in its performance characteristics is worse than the new F-16. And the old MiG-21 is worse than the old F-16.

        It’s the same as exchanging an old Lada for a supported Golf. Why sarcasm then?
        1. Konrad
          Konrad 28 September 2012 20: 18
          0
          Quote: Beck

          Mig-21 is also not from the store shelf

          Well, Romanians are not so rich as to buy new fighters, it’s like we once attacked second-hand foreign cars that were better than new VAZs.
          1. crazyrom
            crazyrom 28 September 2012 21: 06
            +1
            Quote: Konrad
            Now, Romanians are not so rich as to buy new fighters

            And we have, there are no second hand for them, why are they buying American?
            1. Yeraz
              Yeraz 29 September 2012 17: 19
              +4
              Quote: crazyrom
              And we have, there are no second hand for them, why are they buying American?

              Maybe because they are members of NATO?
        2. avdkrd
          avdkrd 29 September 2012 01: 47
          0
          I do not know. Not so long ago, at the Hindu-Amer teachings, the Indians for Mig-21 in the Bizon modification rolled out the Yankees with a decent score of f16 and 15. The joke was that for a moment at 29 and drying, the battles were dry or almost dry in favor of the Indians, and at 21 it was just an advantage, which in itself was a sensation. I give a link to the vskidka, but there are more recent sources.
          http://rigatransport.sitecity.ru/stext_0812153913.phtml
    2. Kars
      Kars 28 September 2012 11: 09
      +5
      Not for nothing that Ukraine is modernizing its Su-27 and MiG 29.
      1. Antipetian 1
        Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 11: 18
        -12
        I already told you about ukro-VPK yesterday wink
        1. Kars
          Kars 28 September 2012 11: 39
          +8
          Quote: Antipetyan 1
          I to you

          And who are you? And it’s not worth spending any more of your speech on me, you did not impress me.
          1. Antipetian 1
            Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 11: 47
            -8
            I’ll just leave this link here, put on my helmet and get ready for tactical back-throwing from the side of Nezalezhnaya and wait for a refutation at least one Khlopotov’s conclusion soldier

            http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2011/12/blog-post_305.html
            1. Kars
              Kars 28 September 2012 12: 00
              +1
              Quote: Antipetyan 1
              http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2011/12/blog-post_305.html

              Why in this thread?
              And why should I refute something if all the conclusions of Troubotov are unproven?
              for example
              2. Dates of testing.
              Prove any standards in terms of? Generally accepted, approved by someone? Prove it?

              Typically, state tests are carried out at least during the year, and often longer, in several stages, at different times of the year.


              Usually, how is it? Maybe it’s usually in the Russian Federation because a lot of defects are identified that need to be fixed --- so why should someone focus on you? So you're with a gurkhanchikrm in flight.
              Better prove it so that it would be clear that Khlopotov was not biased against Kharkov
              http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2011/10/blog-post_733.html
              The elements that raged in Thailand indirectly hit the Ukrainian economy. According to confidential information received from trustworthy sources in Kiev, Ukrspetsexport received a notification from the Thai Defense Ministry about the suspension, due to force majeure circumstances, of the contract for the supply of another batch of armored personnel carriers and the complete termination of the contract for the supply of 49 Oplot tanks. According to other sources, Thailand plans to urgently purchase Russian helicopters, PTS-4 floating transporters manufactured by Uralvagonzavod Corporation (the number in both cases is not specified)

              So how is the PTS-4 contract?
              1. Antipetian 1
                Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 12: 08
                0
                How is this "unsubstantiated"? Have you brought me any hint of an explosion-shelling, "forcing"? No. How can you demand proof of absence? If there is no hint of normal Oplotik GIs and there is not one of his "exploded-fired" ones, we can safely assume that the GIs did not go through properly. Or can you bring us your Ukrainian guests?
                Or is it in Nezalezhnaya some special guests who do not impose minimum test requirements on tanks? There you are

                http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2011/12/blog-post_9991.html

                Indeed, why force the river if you can swim in the bath? Why start in the cold? Not in Siberia! Why fire a tank, it’s already good. And Taghilians mess with nonsense and spoil expensive equipment!
                Read it for sure.
                1. Kars
                  Kars 28 September 2012 12: 19
                  +6
                  Quote: Antipetyan 1
                  How is this "unsubstantiated"?

                  Is there any evidence there? If a gurkhan has only a couple of photos, this only proves his incompetence, and being sick like him and running around to cancel contracts is the lot of losers like you and how troubles.
                  Quote: Antipetyan 1
                  http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2011/12/blog-post_9991.html

                  Are you stupid? ABOUT SOVIET, and now the USSR is gone. Can you prove that the USSR is?
                  Quote: Antipetyan 1
                  Or can you bring us your Ukrainian guests?

                  Do you need them? ”The Thais approached.
                  Even the photo in the post of Gurkhan is taken from a regular commercial from factory tests.
                  And I’ll explain to you as a monkey ---- Oplot was brought up for 5 years, if there were dozens of BTT models in the USSR, then there was only one tank in Ukraine. Therefore, if the Ukrainian military is not as stupid as you are with troubles, then they will take into account the whole period, as well Oplot passed comparative INTERNATIONAL trials (Turkey), but I think something to explain to you is a useless waste of time.
                  1. Antipetian 1
                    Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 12: 26
                    -4
                    But do you even admit that the T-84 did not pass the GI properly?
                    The stronghold was completed for 5 years, if in the USSR there were dozens of BTT models, then in Ukraine there was one

                    A stronghold is like a T-80. Already ready with.
                    Thailand approached

                    What is this a gun? Proud of it? Where is Oplot boosting some water, huh? Something I did not see this.
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 28 September 2012 12: 35
                      +3
                      Quote: Antipetyan 1
                      did the gi pass properly?

                      He passed the GI and was adopted by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 2009.
                      You can’t prove the opposite.
                      Quote: Antipetyan 1
                      A stronghold is like a T-80. Already ready with


                      No, Oplot is a tank built on the basis of the T-80UD.
                      Quote: Antipetyan 1
                      Proud of it?

                      A little bit
                      Quote: Antipetyan 1
                      I didn’t see something like this

                      If this worries you so much, then I am sorry for you. In the TTX it is clearly written 5 m with OPVT and the rest is your personal problems.
                      1. Antipetian 1
                        Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 12: 39
                        -4
                        He passed the GI and was adopted by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 2009.

                        I admit it. It is a fact. GI themselves embarrass me

                        . in TTX it is clearly written 5 m with OPVT

                        Even an inexperienced person may think, "why limit yourself to a bath and not cross the river?" Well then. You know better there. On paper, the T-84 "floats" well, it is a pity that it has not been tested in practice. Anyway.
                        How are the guns on the BTR-4? Already doing them normally? Don't you "reject" anymore?
                      2. Kars
                        Kars 28 September 2012 13: 34
                        +2
                        Quote: Antipetyan 1
                        GI themselves embarrass me

                        Your personal problems. Ask for the Oplot test log from Khlopotov, he probably has one)))
                        Quote: Antipetyan 1
                        "why limit yourself to a bath and not force the river"?

                        The fact that Khlopotov does not have this photo does not mean that it did not happen. In addition, it is a banality that few people really care about.
                        Quote: Antipetyan 1
                        How are the guns on the BTR-4?

                        Iraqis accepted))))))

                        But I didn’t see the Shot Terminator, only blown up on a mine. How did its module show itself under 14.5 mm bullets?
    3. 53-Sciborskiy
      53-Sciborskiy 28 September 2012 19: 12
      0
      Quote: spender
      Decommissioned fighters is certainly power ...
      Used, maybe they won’t fly, the main thing is that NATO standards are respected.
  2. Grenader
    Grenader 28 September 2012 11: 01
    +1
    "This will allow starting a gradual transition from the outdated MiG-21 to new generation fighters," the minister said. The F-16 is just the latest generation of fighters.
    "Although the minister did not say anything about the cost of the transaction, the Romanian media note that it is about the purchase of 12 F-16 fighters worth 600 million euros."
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 28 September 2012 11: 43
      +2
      Quote: Grenader

      "This will allow starting a gradual transition from the outdated MiG-21 to new generation fighters," the minister said. The F-16 is just the latest generation of fighters.

      Well, yes, what, you need to raise the rating for him, that’s a thrill and buys planes, the Romanians did not fly, they won’t fly hi
    2. Windbreak
      Windbreak 28 September 2012 12: 05
      +1
      well, compared with the Mig-21 F-16 is still a new generation
  3. Imperial
    Imperial 28 September 2012 11: 07
    0
    Sleep of reason about "Great Romania" does not let the Romanians sleep. And so just show-off.
    1. Antipetian 1
      Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 11: 19
      +2
      No, they just have Migi-21, and that’s kind of completely
  4. gregor6549
    gregor6549 28 September 2012 11: 11
    +3
    Speaking of birds, the Romanians at one time modernized their MIG21 by putting avionics on them, developed by Israeli companies to modernize their F4 Phantom, as well as Israeli rockets. A similar modernization was planned for the Cambodian MIG21, but the deal fell through due to the poverty of the Cambodians. But any, even modernized equipment has its own life span and now it has apparently come to an end. There is no money for a new one and they are buying a control unit which, most likely, was already intended for decommissioning, which is also not the case in the States. And so at least some dibs in the Romanians have earned and will earn even more because this junk will have to be reanimated from time to time.
    1. Antipetian 1
      Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 11: 24
      +1
      Properly said, I agree 100%
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 September 2012 11: 52
      +4
      Quote: gregor6549
      There is no money for a new buy here.

      Dear gregor6549 this deal is complete crap
      Bought 12 aircraft, the contract value - 600 million euros. Or by 50 million euros (65 million. Dollars) per plane. This money is paid for the WRITED aircraft. This is more expensive than the price for the brand new F-16 SuperWiper (50 million) or F / A-18 / F SuperHornet (55 million) The price of the new Mig-29 of modern versions - does not reach the 45 million dollars.
      1. Antipetian 1
        Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 11: 54
        -2
        Where are the numbers from? From wikipedia?
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 28 September 2012 12: 22
          +3
          Yes, from the wiki, but I checked them whenever possible. There was an analyst at TSAMTO, but I, alas, lost it - so now I can only offer this http://www.armstrade.org/files/analytics/99.pdf
  5. volcano
    volcano 28 September 2012 11: 14
    0
    Romania, in my opinion, are there plans for EuroPro?
    So this is a payment for the fact that the most democratic democrats with the most peaceful missiles will come to them ....

    Romanians grease the United States, which is not surprising, but on the other hand it can be assumed that Romania likes the EU less and less ...... and such a small flawed little country needs a big dad. (And the EU does not inspire confidence in them ..) ..and then suddenly the evil and drunk Russians will want to deprive GREAT ROMANIA of ma-a-scarlet sovereignty ...
  6. Buxx
    Buxx 28 September 2012 11: 14
    -3
    as for me, for such countries, Luggi should not buy airplanes - but to organize a couple of special forces battalions and a couple of ground regiments and plus air defense is good and it will be good and beneficial for the defense of the country and airplanes for them is a waste of money
    1. Su24
      Su24 28 September 2012 11: 27
      0
      Ha, they also need airplanes to patrol the airspace. How special forces will help them is interesting.
  7. Su24
    Su24 28 September 2012 11: 26
    0
    "we are talking about the purchase of 12 F-16 fighters in the amount of 600 million euros."

    Pay attention to the current price, even for used military equipment. I also read that the Romanians themselves wanted to sell their MiG-21s to Moldova for $ 18 million! At the same time, Moldova itself can’t sell its unhealthy MiG-29s at all, it seems, 10 million per unit.

    Yes, of course, F-16s of the late 80s are modern technology)) Poor Romanians, it would be better if they joined the Collective Security Treaty Organization for the same money and would receive the latest MiG-35 or Su-30.
    1. Antipetian 1
      Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 11: 31
      0
      And who received the Mig-35 and Su-30 in the Collective Security Treaty Organization?
      1. Tjumenec72
        Tjumenec72 28 September 2012 11: 47
        -1
        hypothetically)
        1. Antipetian 1
          Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 11: 52
          -1
          I get it. Recently, the news was about new aircraft for Belarus. Let's see something interesting
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 28 September 2012 11: 45
      +5
      Quote: Su24
      Poor Romanians, it would be better to join the CSTO

      But we still didn’t have enough of them. fool
      1. Su24
        Su24 3 October 2012 13: 24
        -1
        This is why, can you argue?
  8. Wedmak
    Wedmak 28 September 2012 11: 30
    0
    Doooo ... buy something to buy, and then how to maintain this flying stuff in flight condition?
    It was already similar - the United States simply wanted to give its old fighters to someone, with one condition: the buyer would be responsible for their repair, modernization and maintenance costs ... for an American loan!! From this well done ..... The transaction did not take place.
  9. Darck
    Darck 28 September 2012 11: 43
    -2
    Yes, of course, F-16s of the late 80s are modern technology)) Poor Romanians, it would be better if they joined the Collective Security Treaty Organization for the same money and would receive the latest MiG-35 or Su-30.
    They wouldn’t get it, because this is the price not only of fighters, but also of components along with armaments, repairs for the entire term (modernization is possible), I won’t be surprised if simulators are also given to them. Mig 35 is more expensive than F-16. look at how many man hours you need, for 1 hour of flight, how much this hour of flight will cost, etc. For such a poor country like Romania, this is important. And the F-16 itself is an excellent fighter, even if it is 80 years old, it can be upgraded, I think the Romanians have already agreed on this.
  10. anfreezer
    anfreezer 28 September 2012 12: 05
    +2
    Yes, and do not forget to put the emblems on the sides: laughing
  11. King
    King 28 September 2012 12: 15
    -1
    Romanians are going to change the obsolete Mig-21 to frankly collapse
    1. Antipetian 1
      Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 12: 16
      0
      That is better than Migi? wink
      1. klimpopov
        klimpopov 28 September 2012 12: 51
        +1
        Already as be, something is something ... To put it mildly a bit old ...
        Although the F-16 is the same as the 29, and yet the 4 generation, so shi ...
  12. baltika-18
    baltika-18 28 September 2012 12: 15
    -3
    Interesting information about the valiant lovers of mamalyga.
  13. Nuclear_eagle
    Nuclear_eagle 28 September 2012 12: 23
    -5
    So essentially, for the modern war, the F-16 is also outdated.
    1. Antipetian 1
      Antipetian 1 28 September 2012 12: 27
      -4
      Well this is generally 152-mm
    2. Common sense
      Common sense 28 September 2012 13: 34
      +1
      How old?)
      1. Nuclear_eagle
        Nuclear_eagle 29 September 2012 22: 08
        0
        f-18 and raptor, I think these are more interesting planes from Sshasovskys. And f-16 is as old as the world. This is not even interesting.
  14. sanyabasik
    sanyabasik 28 September 2012 12: 40
    +1
    -Romanian borscht recipe: 1) -stole the pan ..

    if without details, then Romania is a poor country, they are replacing 3rd generation airplanes with 4th airplanes. F-16 aircraft are analogues of our MiG-29. This is not junk. No new money. The bottom line is who will keep the Romanians on a short leash: parts, maintenance, etc.
    The Netherlands should get 85 F-35s, which is why everyone flies their F-16s. Once upon a time, all the auto-trash of the former German Democratic Republic was thrust at us, and these machines served many people for a long time.
  15. Senzey
    Senzey 28 September 2012 12: 46
    0
    There would be enough money for the F-16.
  16. davoks
    davoks 28 September 2012 12: 58
    0
    It is strange that Romania, a NATO member, an ally of the United States, should buy an F-16, and Indonesia, to which NATO received a total of 24 F-16s from the USA for free, as Indonesia did not have enough money for the remaining batch of Su-30s.
    1. bamboo
      bamboo 28 September 2012 15: 18
      +1
      fighters for free, yes received, but with the condition ..)))
      that service, weapons, training, in general, everything related to this aircraft is done and delivered, and it’s costing them a pretty penny)))
      infa about these aircraft was already on our site))) hi