Russia sells 21 helicopters to U.S. forces in Afghanistan

Xinhau Net ^ | 2011-05-28 01:51:34 | Editor: Mu Xuequan

[Pan_Yan]

MOSCOW, May 27 (Xinhua) -- Russian arms export corporation Rosoboronexport signed a contract with the U.S. Army Forces Command on supplying 21 Mi-17V5 multipurpose helicopters to Afghanistan, a spokesman for the Russian Federal Service of Military-Technical Cooperation said on Friday.

The United States and Russia have been in talks for more than a year on the deal to provide the much-needed vehicles for the NATO mission in Afghanistan, RIA Novosti reported.

The cost of one helicopter has been agreed earlier at 17.5 million U.S. dollars. The first helicopters will be sent to Afghanistan in October 2011, said the spokesman.

Besides, Russia will also provide the spare parts, ground support equipment and maintenance service.

The Mi-17 is an export version of the Mi-8 Hip helicopter, which can transport up to 37 passengers.

In May 2010, the United States lifted sanctions against Rosoboronexport. The sanctions were imposed in 2006 after the U.S. government accused Rosoboronexport of violating the nuclear nonproliferation regime.

Despite the ban, dozens of Mi-17s have been bought by the United States for Afghanistan and Iraq over the past four years via intermediaries to avoid direct contacts with Rosoboronexport.

[Gum Shoe]

“The US is buying these helos FOR THE AFGHAN MILITARY”

Yeah, my thought as well. We’ll sell them to the Afghans when we walk. In the mean time, I can see them sporting a Paki paint job for our special-ops boys.

[Niuhuru]

Well, it was a ‘cause’ of a spoiled socialite with too much time on her hands. Which is why our politicians should not listen to people with too much time on their hands.

[taildragger]

I’m sure Bell, Boeing and Sikorsky could build an aircraft to accomplish what the Russian aircraft now does. However, as someone else on this thread indicated, the bureacratic red tape that includes stuff like mandatory minority and women owned suppliers, excessive oversight and audits of every stage of development and testing, etc., the US products are extremely costly.

As someone with exposure to a mil-spec aviation supply house, it is all about cost benefit analysis and risk. Because of all this red tape they are really risk adverse.

Add to this one component you forgot, they might want to dual source the design i.e. also get it FAA certified with a Type Certificate and Production Type Certificate. This is brutally expensive and time consuming.

With that said, is their any question why their isn't a plethora of designs for the various market niches?

It was less 50 years ago now, a firm like Mooney Aircraft was willing to try ( and it failed, they only sold something like 22 of them, it was ahead of it's time) a large 6 seater single that was pressurized, "The Mustang". No one has the capital, or quite frankly the b@lls to try something like that today given the regulatory environment. And they wonder why we don't "make" things here anymore...

[wendy1946]

Russian attack helicopters appear to be better than ours at this point.

[RetiredArmy]

Do we get to use it with the neat camo paint job and RED STAR on the side??? Do we?? Do we?? Do we Uncle Obama????

[Colorado Cowgirl]

If it wasn’t for Igor Sikorsky immigrating to the United States from Russia in 1919. We would’n have what we have now.

[dools0007world]

Exactly why do we need this Russian helicopter?

[dools0007world]

So you’re telling me the US Army speced and bought helicopters that did not take into account high altitude missions? As I recall, the Blackhawk was delivered during the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. And why were they in Afghanistan? Two words: Oil and gas. I find it difficult to believe the Blackhawk has no high level capability—or could not be retrofitted as appropriate.

I have also read the Hind is a high maintenance aircraft. How does the Blackhawk stack up?

Just as Onada has made the US dependent on Russian rockets to get into space, it appears to me he is deliberately trying to destroy American helicopter producers. Onada cannot be a traitor because he is not an American citizen. But he can and should be tried for espionage and sabotage.

Talk about outsourcing and killing American jobs—it doesn’t get more blatent than this.

Thoughts anyone?

[Colorado Cowgirl]

If it wasn’t for Igor Sikorsky immigrating to the United States from Russia in 1919. We would’n have what we have now.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Pan_Yan. And to think I used to believe that Central Asia was pretty dull.

Let’s see... India and Russia, which are traditional allies, are now collaborating with the US in the Afghanistan theater.

Russia’s helping Iran build its nuke programs (both for energy and weapons) and Obama’s not doing anything significant about either.

China wants close ties with the pseudostate of Pakistan, realizing perhaps too late that they’re at risk.

The Taliban wants to seize Pakistan and its nukes, and Islamofascists are already operating in western China.

[Pan_Yan]

And you didn’t even mention the former Soviet Union -stan states.

[Grzegorz 246]

“Russia sells 21 helicopters to U.S. forces in Afghanistan”

They are ordered for Afghan forces, In my opinion It's a very good decision. Afghan army used to operate similar equipment, they are also easier to maintain, which is particularly important in a country, where anyone able to write and read is regarded as educated, also It is a good PR move making them look independent... Additionally, there's a risk that sooner or later some of this equipment will be taken over by the enemy. Iraqi and Afghan armies should generally be equipped with AK-47s, T-72s, Mi-17s etc. (although a lot of that doesn't have to be bought in Russia) . I rather find sales of Abrams tanks to Irag to be more controversial.

[Chode]

cost/repair costs, man-hrs to flight-hrs, the HIP-8 is hard to beat...

[PotatoHeadMick]

“Russian maintenance is as good as any when they are getting paid.”

You need to keep ‘em sober too which can be tricky when they like drinking the fuel.

http://rt.com/news/russian-engineers-died-methanol/

[Kenny Bunk]

Russia will also provide the spare parts, ground support equipment and maintenance service.

http://www.hark.com/clips/tdssxdzmwr-woody-laughing

There is no word in Russian for "Maintenance." However, they have invented a universal, all purpose repair fluid for their maintenance personnel to use on a minute-to-minute basis. It is called "Vodka." Some of those personnel have completed a shift without an accident, but not many. Just check out their scars, teeth, and missing digits.

Parts? No problem, comrade! That is what wrecks are for. Besides, comrades, if you really need spares, buy two helicopters.

The really interesting Russki helos to me are the Kamev Twin rotor jobs. Awesome performance. We got Sikorsky and Piasecki, we could have traded for Kamev.

[Carry_Okie]

Charlie Wilson’s War......now that was a mistake.

Charlie Wilson = Laurence of Arabia?

[Carry_Okie]

But the number one reason in my mind for the wide cost difference is the out of touch with reality of UNION CONTRACTS eagerly agreed to by the manufacturers to reduce the possibility of strikes (simple extortion) and a Labor Department that has historically protected and promoted unions over non-union shops along with the states with no right to work laws that tilt the playing field in favor of unions.

Nonsense. I was a manufacturing engineer in military procurement. The number one reason for the cost of MIL-SPEC products is paperwork, whether traceability, safety, documentation, qualification testing, backward revision capability... It's an absolutely insane system. Actual production are NOTHING by comparison, which is why it really does cost hundreds of dollars to sell them a hammer.

Oh, and by the way, we were non-union.

[MinorityRepublican]

Just 3 a month? That’s it? That’s nothing for the population of former Soviet Union back in the ‘80s which numbered over 300 million.

[Zhang Fei]

Just 3 a month? That’s it? That’s nothing for the population of former Soviet Union back in the ‘80s which numbered over 300 million.

Afghanistan was to Vietnam was Vietnam was to WWII. Relative to Afghanistan, the amount of fighting was an order of magnitude higher in Vietnam. The fact that the Soviets could only deploy 100K men in Afghanistan vs our 500K in Vietnam says that the Soviet economy was staggering like a punch-drunk boxer. Whether this was the weight of subsidizing basket case client states like Cuba, South Yemen and Angola or the accumulated rot of 60 years of Bolshevik rule, the Soviet economy was not up to task of supporting even a small scale war like Afghanistan. My guess is that if they had launched a conventional war against the West, Soviet units would have been annihilated.

[Zhang Fei]

The part that’s truly incredible is that the San Diego is 8000 miles away from Saigon, whereas Afghanistan is right across the border from what was the Soviet Union. And yet we were able to put 500K men in Vietnam and feed them ice cream and turkey, whereas the Soviets had difficulty providing their Afghan-deployed force basic medical care. Disease rates for Afghan-deployed Red Army units soared to the extent that the units actually available for combat were a fraction of the deployed force.