Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Discussion of the LCA is a little bit OT, but given that is is supposed to be a MiG-21 replacement aircraft, some comments are needed. I would not consider it harping, the issue LCA has in terms of an engine. If the LCA was to be fitted with a licensed-production engine, or a imported engine, the situation would be different. As I understand it however, some early production LCA are currently/will be fitted with a foreign engine (which is somewhat underpowered IIRC) while an indigenous with more power finishes development and testing. What this means to me, and likely others as well, is that the LCA is still in the SDD phase and not really ready or appropriate for ordering as an aircraft replacement by other countries when there are alternative aircraft which are already in production and have service records. The LCA situation for India is a bit different as part of the reason for the program was to develop a domestic aircraft design and development capability. For other countries which still operate the MiG-21 like Romania, the best they will likely do is either local assembly or some subcomponent manufacture of whatever replaces the MiG-21. That is quite a different situation than in India.I don't understand why people keep harping on the fact that LCA doesn't have its own engine yet. Other than the xp options like rafael and typhoon or russian planes neither the Gripen nor FC-1 have their own indegenous engines. This is not such a big drawback as it seems, well it is a drawback . but if you compare it with FC-1or gripen its not a point for the other planes since neither planes have a indegenous engine.
I wouldn't comment on the not sophisticated comment since a generic comment saying some plane is not good enough, not sophisticated turns out into a pointless discussion. But I guess you can explain that further if you want.
As for suitable replacements for the MiG-21, I have no suggestions to offer currently because ~38 countries operate different variants of the MiG-21/F-7/J-7. With that many different operators, the capabilities needed in the replacement aircraft are going to vary widely depending on the specific user.
In the case of Romania specifically, it would seem that they would be interested in a cheap/inexpensive air defence fighter than can integrate with NATO/EU allies, provide exposure to NATO conops, and have multi-role upgrade paths available utilizing advanced munitions. In this case, 2nd hand F-16s should do nicely, assuming there is a reasonable amount of airframe life remaining and any needed MLU is not overly expensive. If the F-16s had not been ordered, I would have suggested JAS-39C/D Gripens as being a good overall choice. Other current production aircraft like the Rafale, Typhoon or current production F-15/F-16/F-18 SHornets IMO would be too expensive and/or complicated to have been good candidates. Now, once Romania builds up familiarity with their 2nd hand F-16s, then a replacement order of F-16 Block 52s may well be in order.
For other MiG-21 operators, the situation is quite different, as there is less (or no) advantage in being able to interoperate with NATO forces. In such cases, the aircraft appropriate for these operators is dependent on the different air forces respective conops.
-Cheers