Rumunija zadržava u upotrebi lovce MiG-21 LanceR, poslednji F-16 naručen u prvom krugu stiže sledeće godine

Da li se zna kakvo ako je ikakvo naoružanje kupljeno uz te beloruske MiGove?

Voleo bih da vidim svih 14 29tki sa oilotima ispred svakog ove godine. Nema jos puno vremena, znam, al moglo bi da se desi.

Da li se zna kakvo ako je ikakvo naoružanje kupljeno uz te beloruske MiGove?

Dead1,
First, I do not say croatian defence force is a joke and I do not believe it is.
Second. We have a fairly modern radar coverage. The Fps-117s, which by the way are following an upgrade stage,
https://newsweek.ro/actualitate/ministerul-apararii-plateste-30-milioane-euro-pentru-modernizarea-radarelor-fps-117
The Tps-77s and so on.
We have a squadron of F-16s, soon to be modernize to M6, with highly trained pilots and we are aming for another squadron quite soon. A M6 tape, 1983 old, F-16 with new avionics, new engines and reinforce structure, with 4500 hours lifespan and maintained locally, that can lounch an Amraam D, fully linked with our radar system, can not be a negligeable threat. Our air bases are huge and very modern and they can accomodate very modern fighters like the F22. So, we are not alone.
Our aim is the F-35, so it will not worth investing in a new F-16. We have the Patriot and soon, probably, the Nasams. We are stronger than before and will be even stronger in the future.
Using the Lancer is a rational choice as long it still has life in it and we can maintain it. The Lancer flys a lot and do not hit the ground lately…
A medium size country can hardly face a large enemy alone.
As I said before, we do not have tanks, but we have a lot of very modern atgm. More than 3000 Spike atgm. Our special forces are top notch. They will receive the Jtlv very soon. So, we are not very good, but not bad either. By the way the Piranha 5 was received at troops and a new Piranha 4 is in prospects…
Best regards,

Romania is investing in defense wisely and rationally. They are significantly upgrading their capabilities while staying within their means. They are building a modern military which is sustainable for them. Is it the latest and the greatest? Most often it is not, but that’s just fine, as it is a huge improvement on the equipment being replaced. So there is a lot of used equipment, donations, etc. It all makes sense. We should always be aware that transitioning from Soviet and Soviet-style equipment to Western and Western-style equipment is often long and difficult and expensive. So it makes sense to perform the transition using older, tried, tested and true equipment. If you screw up something (inevitable) you destroy or damage something worth less. It also allows you to balance the cost of the equipment and the transition (training, infrastructure and standards adjustment, etc.). Also with older equipment there are lots of people out there who can train you properly for it, which is not always the case for brand new things.

Romania with this wise and measured defense spending maintains a good standing with allies because it’s clear that its „doing its share“. So this makes it easier for Romania to „lean“ on its allies for capabilities it does not itself posses.

I think Romania is much better organized in this respect than, for example, Bulgaria. Bulgaria will torch a lot of money on a few brand new F-16s with minimal equipment. What about all the other stuff they need to buy?

In 10-20 years, Romania will have phased out all of their Cold War era equipment and have a fully NATO standards military. Their economy will be bigger and they will have more money to spend, and then they can think about shiny new things like F-35s and whatever else comes at that point.

Andrija,

„In 10-20 years, Romania will have phased out all of their Cold War era equipment and have a fully NATO standards military.“

Well it will be impossible to maintain that equipment within the next 10-20 years as it will be anywhere from 50 to nearly 100 years old!

And replacements won’t be 1:1 as the Romanians won’t have the cash to enable this. For example there is still several hundred thoroughly obsolete T-55/TR-85s in service with 5 battalions. To replace these on a 1:1 would require the acquisition of 250+ tanks.

The Navy needs to replace just about every ship in its inventory. There’s still old 2K12s, SA316s etc that need to be replaced. The C-130 fleet is in bad condition (only 2 operational). Etc etc.

Basically the Romanians would need to be spending money like the Arabs to be able to keep numbers up.

In reality I can see Eastern European forces shrinking even further as the old 1980s Soviet equipment is discarded.

Not just Romania or Bulgaria but Slovakia, Czech Republic and Poland too.

@Dead1
If there was no nuclear deterrent, there’s not that much NATO European countries could have done in a conventional war scenario, even with Cold War-era forces, including all US assistance. The numbers just didn’t add up.

I guess if today most countries were actually afraid of Russia(like for real), things would be different in defense. When you look at major security conference reports from Europe, it’s usually Islamic terrorism, migration, global events. The conflict in Ukraine is barely mentioned.

Even countries that traditionally had a harsh stance on Russia, like the UK, are shifting their focus on naval activities in the Indo-Pacific region because of US-China tensions. France has the most powerful military in Europe, and yet they are focused almost exclusively on Africa and as of late the Mediterranean due to tensions with Turkey.

Also, consider that Russia’s military, albeit very modern and well equipped is nowhere near the Red Army, and unlike the Cold War era, Russia is heavily invested in economic cooperation with the EU, predominantly Germany.

Bulgaria and Romania have to invest a lot in economic development first, you can’t expect them to pay ten or more billion for 50 F-35s each and then pay for the upkeep? They could do the cold war era thing with massive military forces and poor living standards, but that good did that bring?