U.S. military criticized for purchase of Russian copters

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Jun 19, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/18/AR2010061805630.html

    So maybe the copters would be usefull for the RAF? Moreover that

  2. Two different issues. The deal to buy them was botched, but the decision to buy the M-17 was in itself sound.
  3. The Hip(MI 17) is not a bad aircraft,and dare I say it,I suspect there are lots of spare parts lying around Afghanistan!!!!!!!!! :rofl:
  4. The RAF/MOd donated the two MI-17s that they haad for Project Curium to the Afghan Army Air Corps in March, when they were flown out of Boscombe in an An 124

    The US Army has a whole Aviation Company of them in in the US
  5. Few of these would put the wind up Terry.
  6. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    The Senator is just on a typical isolationist Buy American whinge. But he may have a point about procurement issues.
  7. The Yanks are now useing so many non American aircraft to make that Senator throw a fit, Eurocopter, PZL,De Haviland CASSA,Pilatus and many others , are all being used by US forces
  8. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    Nobody to fly them anyway

    Afghan pilots go missing from US air force base

    Seventeen Afghan pilots training at a US military base have gone missing over the past two years, prompting fears of a potential terror threat.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1287766/Afghan-pilots-missing-U-S-air-force-base.html#ixzz0rIBfeKC3

    The officers went AWOL from an English language course.

    Security officials said several had been arrested and deported but others remain at large.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1287766/Afghan-pilots-missing-U-S-air-force-base.html#ixzz0rIBRKjxU
  9. Flight International quotes the Thai army’s rationale: “We are buying three Mi-17 helicopters for the price of one Black Hawk. The Mi-17 can also carry more than 30 troops, while the Black Hawk could carry only 13 soldiers. These were the key factors behind the decision."
  10. Can't argue with that logic. How much is a Sukhoi 37 compared to a Typhoon?
  11. Never mind giving Mil-17s to the Afghans, why in feck's name don't we get some Mil-24 Hinds into the Army Air Corps? There must be a few of them kicking around up Russia way that aren't being used to smash the Chechens.
    If it wasn't for us giving Blowpipe, Redeye, Javelin and Stinger missiles to the Mujahideen in the Eighties, the Russians would have smashed them using the Hinds and we wouldn't be in this sodding mess just now.

  12. probably training issues came into the decision - I read somewhere Afghan pilots are familiar with Russian helicopters - so quite pragmatic really
  13. I was wondering when this issue was going to come up.

    This program has over acheaved in regards to sales and is cutting into both US and European helicopter sales.

    It was only a matter of time before someone complained about it.
  14. The way i see it, it would be easiest for us to buy from the biggest manufacturer, as they produce in bulk which is cheaper, and the production tests money wont even come into it. Whether it be America or Russia, both are conflict proven nations, if we want to save money, then having our own procurement system is only going to waste it, not save it.

    But thailand isnt smashing anyones granny in, except for the redshirts and a few muslim rebels from the malaysian border that have been there since forever.
  15. By the time a Su-37 had been "Britishised" probably a lot more than a Typhoon - plus I know which one I'd rather be sat in

    Seems sensible for Afghan's to fly Mi-17s though