U.S. Nears Deal For Russian Copters
The U.S. military plans to award an exclusive contract to Russia’s state arms exporter Rosoboronexport to supply helicopters for Afghanistan’s military, speeding a deal that was outlined as part of a “reset” of U.S.-Russia relations.
In a Jan. 13 notice, the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command Contracting Center said it would award a “sole-source” contract to Rosoboronexport for the purchase of Mi-17 helicopters, rugged Soviet-era aircraft that are a workhorse of Afghan military forces. “This item is restricted to Rosoboronexport,” the notice said.
Boeing Co. said it plans to cut about 1,100 jobs through the end of next year as it pares production of a line of military-cargo aircraft.
The aerospace and defense giant plans to scale back annual production of its C-17 Globemaster III airlifters to 10 a year from the 13 it will deliver in 2011. Most of the cuts are expected to affect workers at the program’s final-assembly site in Long Beach, Calif., with other reductions likely at facilities in Macon, Ga.; Mesa, Ariz.; and St. Louis.
In addition to cargo aircraft, Boeing makes CH-47 Chinook and AH-64 Apache helicopters.
Ah, but we’d rather they not have the good stuff. We might just have to go back in there some day.
I was just about to say, it’ll make the VID problem so very much easier in a few years.
Actually, I’ve heard the Mi-17s have better hot/high performance.
Still, Lex has a point. If we’re going to spend money, spend it here.
Yes,
Both Kaman and Sikorsky filed court papers saying the DoD was in volation of some law since they didn’t shop from either of their catalogs first. However, some one in the OSD said it was eaiser to get parts of the Mi-17 and the performance band in the Afghan ops were better then either the H-47 or H-53 helos.
In addition to cargo aircraft, Boeing makes CH-47 Chinook and AH-64 Apache helicopters.
Yes, but the Mi-17 can be serviced by semi-illiterate teenage peasants with only a ball-peen hammer and snot.
LOL–so VERY, VERY true! It’s concept behind the way ALL Soviet/Russian aircraft are built.
Cannot feex Russkiy helicopter with hammer? Alexi, get bigger hammer.
Yup – hate to say it but when I flew around AFGHN, it was in Russian MI-8s….you can’t wear them out….and they can be fixed by three drunks with little training…..which should match the Rusky maintenance crew profile perfectly….
What SK1 said. The Russians and their equipment are nothing, if not roughly hewn.
If you can get a copy of John Barron’s “Mig Pilot” it is enlightening how the Soviets built the Mig 25. We were shocked at the materials decisions their Engineers made.
As one of our Technical types said, however, “The Sovs must have an oil refinery built for each plane.” They were just a bit hard on fuel.
Had the occasion to fly in back of a Bulgarian 17 back in the nineties. In Feb. Drafty doesn’t do it justice. Loud is an understatement. Built like a tank tho. We wisely anticipated a little hydraulic leakage and took along large trash bags as protection.
The Mil is a better choice for the Afghans, who’ve been operating them for decades already, and have a mass grave of spare parts left behind by the Soviets after their defeat when trying to pacify the Afghan tribes.
It’s an excellent piece of kit, and if I were the Afghan government I’d prefer it over more complex, more failure prone, more expensive, and harder to maintain and fly (for Afghans) American helicopters.
I did some quick checking, and I found that a used CH-47 can go for between ~$18m and ~25m, an AH-64 might go for around $43m, while a MI-17 can sell for around $9m at a place called asiatradingonline.com.
I’m sure that others can give more precise numbers. These are what I found in a few minutes with Google.
Yeah, but still, in the final analysis American taxpayers are borrowing money from China to buy Russian helicopters for Afghani warlords to transport heroin or Taliban (who do you really think the endusers will end up being?).
Just another example of tax breaks for the rich… the real benefits flow to the US college kids in the form reduced cost H?
Welcome to the global village! For better or for worse … it’s what we’re stuck with.
Why not just tell the Afghani Warlords to trade their opium to the Russians for the required Mi-17′s? This way, you cut out the “middlemen” (US taxpayers/ DoD contracting/ Russian mafia) and start the process that the afghans will need to continue, once Pres. Obama moves all US forces, and provisional reconstruction teams, out of Afghanistan, according to the pre-arranged timetable…(end sarcasm)
If this sort of thing goes on much longer, Boeing will build Mi-17′s too.
“If this sort of thing goes on much longer, Boeing will build Mi-17′s too”
Few years ago they were actually planning to buils Russian anti-ship missiles under license for the US Navy because the US was incapable of designing their own (the initial use would have been without warhead, as drones).
Deal fell through after the Russian government denied the export license for the drawings or something like that.
Guess the alternative would be to bring a bunch of Afghani chopper pilots to South Alabama and teach ‘em to fly Black Hawks. Hmmm, maybe not.
I’d bet they could get BillT to go to Kabul and do it.
they only want to learn how to take off? ;/
So, basically, this was never really a story in the first place. The Russians make stuff third-world countries can maintain, and Afghanistan buys said hardware in recognition of both their culture and their infrastructure.
Dog bites man…
Might as well gripe that said country uses the AK-47 instead of the “superior” M-16, even though the latter requires a culture and a work ethic foreign to much of Asia…