Comments by "sandgrownun66" (@sandgrownun66) on "The IAR-80/81; Romanian Rumbler" video.

  1. Romania never created the industrial capacity of the other powers. It doesn't help when your country changes side mid-war.
    7
  2. Even though it copied or bought most of its parts from foreign companies.
    3
  3.  @benlaskowski357  My point is that the Romania had little to do with their own development of the aircraft. It was a parts bin special, cobbled together using foreign designs and parts.
    3
  4.  @jamesmmusic5806  You forgot about the Netherlands and Sweden. In 1939, the population of the relevant countries (not including occupied land), were as follows: Germany 70 million, Italy 43 million, UK 48 million, France 42 million, Romania 20 million, Netherlands 8 million and Sweden 6 million. Fokker in the Netherlands and Saab in Sweden, were both producing various indigenous types of military aircraft at the start of WWII.
    2
  5.  @solomonarbc  The colonies of the Netherlands had no industrial capacity. Aircraft production, was solely in the home country, with it's small population. As for Sweden, it had no colonies at all. Only the industrial within its borders. Romania was not occupied during or after WWI, and its industrial base remained intact. "Your expectations for smaller nations are extremely high." No. Just the opposite. I demonstrated that Romania was not special in creating a home-built aircraft during WWII. Nations with much smaller populations and industrial capacity, were just as capable of doing so themselves. "You can't develop an indigenous industrial capacity in a few years,". And why was that the case? Especially as most other European countries had well-established aircraft industries, stretching as far back as the introduction of powered aircraft. Why the need to suddenly build a parts bin aircraft mid-WWII?
    2
  6.  @jamesmmusic5806  No it wasn't.
    1
  7.  @jamesmmusic5806  So you couldn't name one WW2 plane from the Netherlands? In 1940, the Dutch had eight different homebuilt types. Seven from Fokker, and one from Koolhoven. Neither the Netherlands nor Sweden were, as you call it "famous" for producing aircraft during WWII. Firstly, the Dutch aircraft industry was effectively shutdown by the German invasion in 1940. However, they produced several types of advance military aircraft in the run up to the war. As for Sweden, they were nominally neutral. So they continued to build several models of indigenous aircraft during the conflict. Romania was allied to Germany through most of WWII. So they were not occupied, and therefore free to build aircraft, using parts aquired from other Axis states. Although not a large number. Overall, Romania was much larger country than either of the two countries mentioned, and yet both were still were able to produce their own aircraft. You should also look at Poland. A country with a similar population to Romania, which also produced a range of aircraft in the run up to WWII. Also, Finland and Australia, with only a fraction of the Romanian population. Yet were still able to produce homemade fighter aircraft during the war.
    1
  8.  @vladleustean1638  Maybe you such read my in depth replies in this thread? It took quite some time to do the research needed. "they were forced to surrender with only a fraction of the country unoccupied. A good part of it was due to General Rommel himself getting involved." What are you talking about? "General" Rommel was only a lieutenant in WWI, and therefore irrelevant in the scheme of things.
    1
  9.  @Ah01  Yes, and the IAR-80/81, were parts-bin specials too, as I wrote originally.
    1
  10.  @Ah01  Influences are different to copying and using parts from other aircraft.
    1
  11.  @ppn194  Not at all what, F00L?
    1
  12.  @cosmincasuta486  I have no idea what parts. Maybe, you can remind me about what I wrote two years ago?
    1