Talk:Romanian Air Force

message: As part of the history section, it may be worthwhile to add some info about the post cold-war era, basically from the 90s til 2010 (transitioning into current state). This article has a ton of info about failed programs to acquire F16s of various spec, block 25, block 50, etc. https://www.4aviation.nl/reports/article-romanian-air-force-lancers-to-falcons/ In my opinion, we could probably lump the 2007 baltic policing into that era.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MSP Aviator (talk • contribs) 00:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Post coldwar

message: Official site of Romanian Air Force call Romanian MiG-21s Lancer not LanceR. I don't see any reason for entering new name which is not confirmed by official source. --Piotr Mikołajski 14:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Would this be an accepatable solution? The Lancer (sometimes spelled LanceR) - BillCJ 16:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bill's suggestion is a good one. The "LanceR" formulation (the 'R' = 'Romania') is used pretty much only in Romania, and, if I remember correctly, was not an original rendering, but one created later. I believe it is now official, though. Askari Mark (Talk) 14:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lancer not LanceR

message: ...between the world wars. That section mentions the Warsaw Pact - this didn't exist at that time! Actually, the whole section is wrong - it doesn't mention the IAR 11, 12, 14 etc and other planes of the period, but mentions the German planes which entered service AFTER WW2 already started.
I corrected the sentence with Warsaw Pact countries. Regarding those types of aircraft, please feel free to make insertions in the section. --Eurocopter tigre 20:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Golden age" seems POV, it might be better to rephrase it, perhaps to "Interwar years". --Victor12 17:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Golden age

message: I think that Romania has purchased 48 new and upgraded planes, worth as much as $4.5 billion according to Wall Street Journal. . This is stated in the 3rd and 4th to last paragraph. Cheers--EZ1234 (talk) 04:15, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually the Minister of Defense will take final decision within 2-3 weeks. Indeed, there will be a 4.5 billion euros procurement and they have to choose between the F-16, JAS-39 and Eurofighter Typhoon. --Eurocopter (talk) 09:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Check General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon variants#Major modification variants. Also the current Romanian F-16s were referred to as Block 15 MLU: here, here and here (in Romanian). According to the third source, the Block 15 MLU that Romanian currently operates is more equivalent to the Block 40 with some elements from the Block 50/52. The Norwegian F-16s that will be purchased are Block 20 MLU. Alin2808 (talk) 00:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  F-16 orders 

message: Starting with July 1, the air bases of the RoAF have been renamed to Air Flotillas, as seen in this article, http://www.financiarul.ro/2010/07/02/romanias-air-force-staff-to-be-overhauled-starting-july-1-2010/, and also on the official RoAf site.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulttras (talk • contribs) 18:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Air Force Reorganization 

message: Please don't add equipment to the inventory which is not yet purchased and at least one delivered. There were talks of purchasing new f-16s from lockheed and they appeared on the list. that deal fell through. Now the F-16s from Portugal are there, which shouldn't be delivered until 2016. Alex Roșu 17:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  No unconfirmed equipment please 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Romanian Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110613140153/http://www.scramble.nl/mil/2/far/orbat.htm to http://www.scramble.nl/mil/2/far/orbat.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have noticed that the World Air Forces source was brought back for the fighter and helicopter numbers. Now, while I don't think it is an unreliable source, it does get some numbers wrong and it also doesn't mention the methodology used to get those numbers. 
-Number of F-16s: It says that there are 11 F-16A and 3 F-16B (total 14). This is definitely not correct, as the total number of F-16s owned by Romania is 17, namely 14 F-16A (numbers 1601-1609 and 1613-1617) and 3 F-16B (numbers 1610-1612). See the individual aircraft here
-Number of MiG-21s: The official number is not available to the public as it is 'confidential'. So the number from World Air Forces must be an estimate. The first source I replaced it with says that in 2015 there were 26 MiGs (unclear where that number was taken) and since then 3 crashed so the current number is 23. The second source says that there are 28 MiGs currently, number given by counting individual serial numbers seen in recent photographs (taken withing the last 2 years). The IISS from February 2021, gives the number of 24 MiGs. So all these numbers are between 23 and 28, but not lower than 20, as World Air Forces suggests (a number of 17).
-An-26: On to the official site of the RoAF, the An-26 is not listed. It is likely that there is one left (as mentioned in World Air Forces) but in storage, not active service.
-IAR 330L/M and SOCAT: The source gives the number of 58 total, but it does not separate between the two versions, one being transport/utility, the other being attack/gunship. According to IISS 2021 and IISS 2010, the numbers are 24 SOCAT, 35 L/M (total of 58). Interestingly, in IISS 2021, the number of IAR 330 L/M is given as being only 24 (12 L and 12 M) but this would not work with the number given by World Air Forces.
So, to reiterate, this doesn't mean that the World Air Forces is unreliable, but it does get some numbers wrong. Alin2808 (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: An-26 801 is stored and 810 is active according to one of the spotting databases. Also an image available of 810 operating in February 2021 and a radar tracking site has a movement on 25 August 2021 MilborneOne (talk) 18:43, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Alright. I have looked around and I did find recent photos of 810 still in use (here). There a comment also mentioned that the aircraft was reactivated, meaning that it was stored for a period of time. A facebook comment of course isn't a usable source, but just wanted to mention it here because it does answer why the An-26 is missing from the official site. Will be adding it back in the article (where it was removed) and remove the stored note. Alin2808 (talk) 23:43, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

text: I am pretty much agree with you and actually I have some discussion regarding "World of Air Forces" source before on some Air Force pages before, such as here. In short, "World of Air Forces" is generally reliable until proven that it isn't. Ckfasdf (talk) 11:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Air Forces source 

message: As said previously, Romania currently has 14 F-16AM (numbers 1601-1609 and 1613-1617) and 3 F-16BM (numbers 1610-1612) for a total of 17 aircraft. Can everybody stop changing the number of F-16AMs from 14 to 17, without even consulting the cited source or adding one that says Romania has 17 F-16AM? Alin2808 (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, such edit can be considered as vandalism. If the edit is done by new or IP editor, I suggest you to ask for page protection per Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 22:00, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I have thought about that, but I don't think it's necessary yet. If either the same or another IP/new editor will change the number again then I'll go ask. As of right now, I don't think it was vandalism but rather the editors who saw the table didn't think about checking out all the numbers and variants and see that the two F-16 versions are in the table separately. And thank you! Alin2808 (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  F-16 number 

message: This section here claims "The preliminary analysis published on 23 March showed that the crashes occurred due to human and environmental factors." But reading through it, it seems to be a press release not, preliminary report, I mean it reports nothing new that isn't already public knowledge and furthermore the phrase, "showed that", the press release makes claims but it doesn't show any analysis. Are there others that agree that this is a press release stating the official government line and not a report containing technical analyses? Or am I wrong? 83.252.99.126 (talk) 16:08, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Press Release not preliminary report