Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Romania - US military relations

    Share

    Russian Patriot
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1168
    Points : 2062
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 25
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Romania - US military relations

    Post  Russian Patriot on Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:34 am

    Romania To Host US Missile Interceptors  


    BUCHAREST, Romania (AP) - Romania's top defense body on Thursday approved a U.S. proposal to place anti-ballistic missile interceptors in the country as part of a revamped American missile shield, the president said.

    Romania will host "ground capabilities to intercept missiles" that will increase its national security and go into operation starting in 2015, President Traian Basescu said.

    "Romania will not host a system directed against Russia, but against other threats," Basescu said, adding that the measure was not directed against Russia.

    The U.S. State Department confirmed the plan.

    "Romania has agreed to host a Standard Missile 3 interceptor as part of the administration's new missile defense plan ... to protect U.S. forward-deployed troops and our NATO allies against current and emerging ballistic missile threats from Iran," State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters in Washington.

    Crowley also tried to assuage Russian fears, saying "as we have made clear over and over again, this is not a capability that is directed at Russia."

    U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden visited Romania in October as part of his tour of Central Europe, where he presented a revamped U.S. missile shield plan to replace a scrapped Bush-era plan to install interceptors in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic.

    Basescu said the old U.S. plan only protected a small part of Romania but the new one "guarantees full coverage of Romanian territory" in case of a hostile ballistic or mid-range missile attack.

    The decision by Romania's Supreme Defense Council came after a meeting between Basescu and U.S. Under Secretary of state for arms control Ellen Tauscher.

    Basescu said bilateral negotiations will start soon with the U.S. on this issue and the accord must be approved by parliament.

    ___


    Associated Press Writer Matt Lee contributed to this report from Washington.


    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/04/ap/world/main6173321.shtml?tag=mncol;lst;1


    Last edited by Russian Patriot on Wed Jul 14, 2010 10:58 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Russian Patriot
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1168
    Points : 2062
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 25
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Romania - US military relations

    Post  Russian Patriot on Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:00 am

    Romania plans to replace obsolete Soviet fighters with U.S. F-16s

    RIA Novosti

    24/03/201015:54

    MOSCOW, March 24 (RIA Novosti) - Romania's top national security body has approved a plan to replace Soviet-made MiG-21 LanceR fighters with second-hand U.S. F-16 Falcon jets, the president's office said on its website on Wednesday.

    The Romanian government will send a proposal to acquire 24 used F-16 fighters to parliament for a vote after the Supreme Defense Council, headed by President Traian Basescu, approved the plan late on Tuesday.

    "Because Romania does not have the financial resources needed to acquire new multi-role planes, the Supreme Defense Council approved the request of the Defense Ministry to acquire 24 F-16 fighters," the president's website said.

    The service life of several dozen MiG-21 fighter jets, developed by the Mikoyan-Gurevich design bureau in the mid-1950s and upgraded for the Romanian Air Force by Elbit of Israel and Aerostar S.A. of Romania in the 1990's, expires in 2013.

    According to open sources, only 48 MiG-21s are still in service with the Romanian Air Force.

    Unofficial media reports earlier said that the U.S. government was ready to give the F-16s for free, if Romania would take responsibility for modernizing them, training the pilots and upgrading flight strips to accommodate the jets.

    Romania, a former Warsaw Pact member which joined NATO in 2004, has been seeking closer ties with its more powerful Western allies, especially the United States, to recover from the current deep economic crisis.

    In February, Bucharest offered the United States to host U.S. medium-range interceptor missiles as part of revamped shield after U.S. President Barack Obama scrapped the Bush administration plans for a radar and interceptor missiles in the Czech Republic and Poland last year.

    Romania's move has irked Russia, which considers the placement of U.S. missile defenses near its borders as a threat to national security.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2010/03/mil-100324-rianovosti01.htm

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Vladimir79 on Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:29 am

    The F-16s they are getting are just as obsolete as Soviet MiG-29s.

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5630
    Points : 6283
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Viktor on Fri Apr 02, 2010 7:27 pm

    Well both of them have modernization program witch will keep them alive for long time.

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Vladimir79 on Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:21 pm

    Viktor wrote:Well both of them have modernization program witch will keep them alive for long time.

    Maybe F-16s, but MiG-29 upgrade is history in the VVS. MiG-29s won't be upgraded, especially after the poor condition they are left in. US won't be buying any new F-16s.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:22 am

    The real problem has been that unupgraded Mig-29s can do the job they were designed for.
    Why spend money upgrading them to make them multirole when you just want to use them as interceptors anyway?

    I think it is a shame the in service RuAF Mig-29s didn't get an SMT upgrade as part of the upgrade includes self testing components that reduce maintainence costs by a reported 40% yet cost only about $6 million per aircraft.

    Over the life of the aircraft operational costs are often similar to the overall purchase cost so a 40% saving is significant.

    BTW the change from Mig-29 to F-16 has very little to performance and everything to do with Politics.

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Apr 10, 2010 11:56 am

    Well about political stuff...

    I remembered a word from british aircraft maker...

    "An Aircraft has four dimensions, Length, Wingspan, Height and Politics"

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    yupeeeeeeeeeee

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 am

    more junk
    i wonder how long until they start crashing all over the place.
    Next romanian air force will acquire Me 262

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Sun May 16, 2010 11:16 pm

    Stupid politician look what they did with the Mig 29 and mig 23

    http://www.panoramio.com/photo/2666386

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD1Vg4Ib994

    Is a lot cooler to get fat for bribes modernizing then to maintain a competent air force

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Sun May 30, 2010 6:54 pm

    We might not buy the f-16 now or ever.Political unrest might block the decision in parlament.We need money now.
    Who the fuck wants f-16/block 25 anyway?
    The romanian people oppose buying the f-16 they would like grippens or even the more expensive eurofighter.The romanian pilots are not allowed to speak their mind anyway.
    Some would rather buy russian sukhoi but politics are complicated....(Allot of romanian say the su35 if very beautiful)
    And if we buy the f-16 they are not free the politicians have not yet reveal all the costs so being free is bullshit.

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Vladimir79 on Sun May 30, 2010 8:29 pm

    I don't understand Romanian politicians. Saab was willing to sell new Gripens for the same price as used USAF F-16s but they still don't want it. Romania doesn't need Eurofighters, Gripens are good enough.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 31, 2010 3:36 am

    I don't understand Romanian politicians. Saab was willing to sell new Gripens for the same price as used USAF F-16s but they still don't want it. Romania doesn't need Eurofighters, Gripens are good enough.

    Can only be two things in my opinion.

    Either the bribes are larger from the US offer, or they are actually buying power and influence. In the latter case buying good will from the US results in more potential power than Saab could ever offer.

    ...and lets face it Romania doesn't need real fighters anyway, Hawks or Yak-130 type LIFT (Lead in Fighter Trainers) jet trainers are really all they actually need for air policing duties over their airspace.

    Without politics the best fighter for most of eastern europe would have been upgraded Mig-21-93s with helmet mounted sights and R-77 and R-73 missiles, with perhaps a new engine fitted that was a bit more fuel efficient and with a slightly larger internal fuel fraction.

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Vladimir79 on Mon May 31, 2010 5:22 am

    How much influence can you buy with a handful of used F-16s? It isn't enough to buy one B-2 bomber.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 31, 2010 7:27 am

    It creates a relationship with the US armed forces.

    The US will not invade Russia to help Romania, but now it might favour Romania over another european country that doesn't buy old out of date US products, like France or Germany.

    Romania has become part of New europe as opposed to old europe... the part of europe that thinks for itself and is not led around but the US hunting commies... whoops terrorists.

    It is basically a declaration of How many bodies do you need in Afghanistan for your war to provide drugs to Russia by Romania.

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Sun Jun 27, 2010 7:40 pm

    "I don't understand Romanian politicians. Saab was willing to sell new Gripens for the same price as used USAF F-16s but they still don't want it. Romania doesn't need Eurofighters, Gripens are good enough."

    Romanian politicians are incoherent and incompetent.

    "Either the bribes are larger from the US offer, or they are actually buying power and influence. In the latter case buying good will from the US results in more potential power than Saab could ever offer."

    Romanian politicians just want to kiss some ass.US offer no power and influence.

    "Romania doesn't need real fighters anyway, Hawks or Yak-130 type LIFT (Lead in Fighter Trainers) jet trainers are really all they actually need for air policing duties over their airspace."

    Actually some helicopters would be nice.

    "How much influence can you buy with a handful of used F-16s? It isn't enough to buy one B-2 bomber."

    Buying them would give us nothing.The B-2 bomber is a fail project.

    "The US will not invade Russia to help Romania, but now it might favour Romania over another european country that doesn't buy old out of date US products, like France or Germany."

    It will favor nothing and junk is junk

    "It is basically a declaration of How many bodies do you need in Afghanistan for your war to provide drugs to Russia by Romania."

    Drugs to Russia get there throw Kazakhstan not Romania

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jun 29, 2010 4:39 am

    Sorry, I was not clear.

    I said
    "It is basically a declaration of How many bodies do you need in Afghanistan for your war to provide drugs to Russia by Romania."

    you said:

    Drugs to Russia get there throw Kazakhstan not Romania

    What I meant to say was that the choice of worn out old model F-16s instead of nice near new Gripens is a case of Romanian politicians saying to the US we are part of the coalition of the willing, so how many of our soldiers can we send to fight in the various wars you (US) are involved in. I singled out the war in Afghanistan as the one they seem to currently want to focus on with the result that Afghans can now grow drugs with impunity to kill Europeans in general and Russians especially and earn money doing so.

    Lots of Jamacians killed recently because the US wanted a drug dealer sent to America. It seems it is a different standard for people who create drugs for different markets.

    Romanian politicians are incoherent and incompetent.

    Smile Good to know they have embraced democracy and capitalism so quickly.

    Romanian politicians just want to kiss some ass.US offer no power and influence.

    The ass kissing is noticed in the US. I can't deny an F-16 purchase will certainly gain Romania much more in terms of power and influence than a purchase of Gripens even though it is a much better aircraft in this particular case.
    Down the line you will find closer ties with the US, and joint training exercises etc etc which would not occur if you bought Gripens.

    Regarding real fighters vs LIFTs, I think national interests and pride get in the way too much in Europe.
    You would think that Europe would have sorted its sht out and been much more pragmatic than it has but the power of the MIC is too much.
    The result is the Gripen, Rafale, and Eurofighter and purchases of F-18 and F-16 and F-35 in the fighter aircraft category yet there is no decent medium transport aircraft in Europe yet. They are working on the A400M, but there is no European equivelent of the An-124, or Il-76.
    You'd think they'd get together and instead of everyone buying fighters that some could just get LIFTs and spend limited defence budgets on something NATO needs.
    Right now there is only the US which has all the pieces of the chess set.
    The rest of NATO combined comes up short in lots of crucial areas.
    Look at Kosovo, everyone turns up with fighters yet there are only American long range bombers, jammer aircraft, etc etc.
    One of the main reasons that my country (New Zealand) got rid of their LIFTs and Skyhawks was the realisation that they were costing us money and against any threat that could attack us down here they would not last long. We are very active in international peacekeeping operations, but we know the last thing any international coalition wants from New Zealand are subsonic Skyhawks that have been upgraded to 90% the capability of an F-16... especially when everyone else brings fighters too.
    So we cut the fighters that we never use and spent some real money on our navy an army, both of which we use a lot.
    Somebody hijacks an airliner here and threatens to crash it into something and our airforce probably couldn't do much about it now.
    When we had two dozen Skyhawks and a similar number of Airmacchis we would probably not be able to do anything about it either, because more than half were based permanantly in Australia and the other half were in Ohakea which is quite a long way from our main cities and international airports and both aircraft are subsonic.
    So nothing is changed except our Army and Navy are better funded.

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Wed Jul 07, 2010 1:07 pm

    Romanians don't want romanian soldiers in Afganistan.We don't care about Afganistan.
    Russia's drug problem is also because the corruption that exists in Russia.
    America will not favor us no mater what.We can't even get visas for America.So much for friendship and collaboration.
    Grippen and Eurofither would have invested money in my country and that mens new jobs.America offers no offset.



    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Sun Aug 08, 2010 12:06 pm

    We may not buy the planes or there pources may be delayed because the Romanian prime minister sayed that the first payment of 750 million $ has not been done.

    chenchen21621
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 1
    Points : 1
    Join date : 2010-11-26

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  chenchen21621 on Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:13 am

    Well both of them have modernization program witch will keep them alive for long time.


    Razz Razz Razz Razz Razz




    Hoof
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 81
    Points : 83
    Join date : 2011-01-06
    Age : 26
    Location : HAFB, UT

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Hoof on Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:38 pm

    I don't know what year f16s they are getting, but our oldest f16 (1988) breaks all the time... pretty much, everytime it lifts off in the air, something breaks... I think US wants Romania to buy those old jets, because then they will need replacement parts for them, which is how US will get rid of phased out F16s and make money on it too... oh yeah, and forget about anything advanced on those, unless its been in service for 10 or more years and/or US have something 1.5 generations better, they wont export it...

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:51 pm

    Unofficial media reports earlier said that the U.S. government was ready to give the F-16s for free, if Romania would take responsibility for modernizing them, training the pilots and upgrading flight strips to accommodate the jets.
    We get 24 F-16 for 1.3 billion dollars. Theoretical they are free but 400 million dollars for pilot training an the rest for upgrading the planes.The planes are F-16 C/D block 25.
    I think it is a shame the in service RuAF Mig-29s didn't get an SMT upgrade as part of the upgrade includes self testing components that reduce maintainence costs by a reported 40% yet cost only about $6 million per aircraft.
    RoAF had an upgrade for the Mig-29 in colaboratin with Elbit Systems and DaimlerCrysler Aerospace called Mig-29 sniper.
    ...and lets face it Romania doesn't need real fighters anyway, Hawks or Yak-130 type LIFT (Lead in Fighter Trainers) jet trainers are really all they actually need for air policing duties over their airspace.

    We have a subsonic plain build in our country with similar capabilities IAR 99 Soim.

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Fri Jun 17, 2011 2:00 pm

    Without politics the best fighter for most of eastern europe would have been upgraded Mig-21-93s with helmet mounted sights and R-77 and R-73 missiles, with perhaps a new engine fitted that was a bit more fuel efficient and with a slightly larger internal fuel fraction.
    We have it already is called Mig-21 Lancer.
    Good to know they have embraced democracy and capitalism so quickly.
    Is not a problem of democracy or capitalism is a problem of low quality politicians.
    Regarding real fighters vs LIFTs, I think national interests and pride get in the way too much in Europe.
    Then you don't understand Europe and national interests are very important.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:00 am

    Then you don't understand Europe and national interests are very important.

    I know that personal self national interests is what makes NATO incredibly inefficient.

    If it was a group having picnic everyone brings chocolate cake and only one or two countries bring the rest of the food.

    Within NATO how many different fighters were there?

    How many different JSTARS aircraft or AWACS aircraft?

    Everyone bought material to support their own industries instead of what the collective organisation could make use of so in the end on any mission to invade xyz country each NATO country will bring their own fighter aircraft... few of which will have much in common apart from fuel types and it will be up to the US to pay for the expensive bits that are called force multipliers like AWACS and tankers and jammers et al.

    The new Eastern European additions haven't improved the situation because they are busy retiring their old Soviet fighters and replacing them... largely with old NATO fighters.

    The new entrants should be buying stuff NATO needs like transport aircraft or tankers... the former they could use commercially to offset their cost and actually be useful to the countries economy as well as being useful to NATO... but no... in the East of Europe they need fighter planes... Rolling Eyes

    The irony is that the economies within the EU are different enough to warrant different currencies, because export oriented economies benefit from a lower currency value, but in the Euro zone the Euro is kept with a high value to suit countries like Germany.

    If they could unify the currency you'd think unifying the military purchases would be easy in comparison.

    solo.13mmfmj
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 118
    Points : 141
    Join date : 2010-04-16

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  solo.13mmfmj on Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:36 pm

    I know that personal self national interests is what makes NATO incredibly inefficient.
    NATO should have been dissolved in the 1992
    How many different JSTARS aircraft or AWACS aircraft?
    How many countries need them?

    Everyone bought material to support their own industries instead of what the collective organisation could make use of so in the end on any mission to invade xyz country each NATO country will bring their own fighter aircraft... few of which will have much in common apart from fuel types and it will be up to the US to pay for the expensive bits that are called force multipliers like AWACS and tankers and jammers et al.
    Because it creates jobs in their on countries an gives the countrie some independence to producing is own weapons.

    The new Eastern European additions haven't improved the situation because they are busy retiring their old Soviet fighters and replacing them... largely with old NATO fighters.
    The new Eastern European additions are to poor to buy or are not interested in buying super toys.

    The irony is that the economies within the EU are different enough to warrant different currencies, because export oriented economies benefit from a lower currency value, but in the Euro zone the Euro is kept with a high value to suit countries like Germany.
    This is because the EU is led by countries like Germany ,France ,Great Britain sometimes to the detriment of other countries members of EU.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15490
    Points : 16197
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:38 am

    NATO should have been dissolved in the 1992

    Agree, but with every bureaucracy there is power, and few give up power so easily.

    How many countries need them?

    Every country that goes to war in another country should have them.

    They are essential force multipliers that greatly increase the chance of success.

    Because it creates jobs in their on countries an gives the countrie some independence to producing is own weapons.

    The high moral Europe/West should not be creating jobs and economies with weapons of war, the purpose of such technology should be for defence... as dictated by their defence departments. Countries should be allowed to produce what they want but such products should not be forced upon their own country just to create jobs... it would make rather more sense to spend that money on products your citizens actually want, and being a small cog in a military machine their defence spending should not be to create local jobs, but to provide collective security.

    Sadly the reality is that NATO turns up to a fight with a dozen different types of fighter aircraft and all the gaps have to be filled by the few... US, France, UK... but of course with every deployment it is tradition for the UK government to cut military funding to the bone.

    The new Eastern European additions are to poor to buy or are not interested in buying super toys.

    That is why I am suggesting specialisation. The poorer countries don't need to waste money on hundreds of fighters... NATO forces already have plenty of those. Buy tanker aircraft. Transport aircraft. Jammer aircraft. Find a gap in European forces and fill it.

    But no everyone needs flash shiny fighters they may never use except at airshows... the New Zealand Air Force was the same... money wasted on things we never used.
    We could have spent money on long range transport aircraft which could have been useful. Maritime Patrol aircraft are useful. Even two or three AWACs aircraft would have been more useful than our two dozen Skyhawks.

    When assisting the Australians in East Timor would they be glad to see two AWACS aircraft arrive? Or would a dozen A-4 Skyhawks be more useful?


    This is because the EU is led by countries like Germany ,France ,Great Britain sometimes to the detriment of other countries members of EU.

    Exactly... one or other side will win... High Euro vs low Euro. What the EU needs is two currencies, one that is high and one that is low and the countries can join one or the other depending on their economies.

    Instead it is one size fits all... which is never true.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Romania - US military relations

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:35 pm


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 5:35 pm