Military Review

Debate on price. In the US, authorities are arguing about the price of Russian Mi-17 helicopters

Debate on price. In the US, authorities are arguing about the price of Russian Mi-17 helicopters

The US Department of Defense has been criticized for buying Mi-17 helicopters from Russia for Russia. According to a number of senators and organizations, the American side is heavily overpaying for these cars. But the Pentagon simply has no choice, there is nothing to replace these machines.

Between the American legislators is ready to flare up a heated argument over the Pentagon's deals on the purchase of Mi-17. Some senators oppose the purchase, while the other part views the deal as critically important for the Afghan security forces, The Wall Street Journal writes.

Tension is already high. And it is also caused by the fact that the Pentagon had earlier announced its plans to spend additional 345 million dollars on another 15 aircraft. And some in Congress believe that the military department did not properly convince them of the need for such spending.

A critic of the program to purchase Russian helicopters, Senator from Connecticut Richard Blumenthal said that the new machines would have to replace old Mi-17 helicopters, which the Government of Afghanistan could not save. “This circumstance gives a new meaning to the phrase“ throwing money down the drain is bad, ”he said. “This program should stop.”

Meanwhile, part of the US military and political figures continue to defend this program, arguing that the Mi-17 is cheaper and easier to maintain and operate for Afghans than American-made helicopters.

So, at the repeated hearings on this issue in July, General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States, said that plans to transfer responsibility for security to Afghanistan to the local administration before the end of 2014 would require Mi-17. “I support the continuation of this program. Our plans will require the transfer of Mi-17 to Afghans by the end of 2014, ”Dempsey said.

Procurement Mi-17 Pentagon spent at Rosoboronexport, which is an additional irritating factor because of the scandal around the supply of weapons to Syria. This causes particular outrage among individual members of Congress and human rights defenders.

“Why is the Pentagon ordering new helicopters in the face of opposition in Congress, in the face of the obvious fact that this deal cannot be considered good, and the assumption that weapon, supplied by Rosoboronexport, is used to kill civilians in Syria, ”said Sonya Efron, a representative of the Human Rights First organization.

By the way, this organization cites figures proving, in its opinion, that the deal is really disadvantageous to the Pentagon. She presented information on a series of contracts relating to the purchase of Mi-17 concluded in recent years. She notes an unprecedented increase in the price of cars, concluding that Russia exposes Americans to inflated prices.

In 2008, the price of helicopters was 4,4 million dollars, according to Human Rights First. In 2010, Russia exported cars already for 12,7 – 13,8 million dollars. During the last transaction, the Pentagon paid already 18 million dollars per unit, and future contracts suggest an increase in value to 19 million dollars. Sony Efron calls this price increase "astronomical." The company "Helicopters of Russia" did not name the newspaper VIEW the cost of Mi-17 helicopters, citing closeness of information.

“The Pentagon is vitally interested in purchasing Russian helicopters and transferring them to the Afghan armed forces. Here, purely pragmatic motives come to the fore. Only Mi-17 can fly in Afghanistan with a sufficient level of reliability. All Western helicopters do not withstand operating conditions, given the very difficult climate. And the Mi-17 is like a Kalashnikov assault rifle, ”Igor Korotchenko, director of the Center for Analysis of the World Trade in Arms, told the LOOK at the newspaper.

According to him, the most active US lawmakers who are trying to disrupt this deal are lobbying the interests of American helicopter builders. “We carried out an analysis, which showed that people representing the states where the production of helicopters is deployed are against this deal. They work out the money of their sponsors, it is obvious that these corporations invested money in their election campaign, ”the expert noted.

Recall 17 June Russia and the United States signed a contract for the supply of Mi-17 in Afghanistan. Rosoboronexport Deputy Head Alexander Mikheev said that the contract will be supplied 30 helicopters. We also note that in 2010, Russia and NATO agreed to purchase an 21 modernized Russian Mi-17 helicopter for Afghanistan by the alliance, which were designed specifically for operations in the country. The deliveries of these helicopters have now been completed. In April of this year, following the meeting of the Russia-NATO Council, the second phase of the implementation of the “helicopter package” for Afghanistan was launched.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

    PISTOL 31 July 2013 08: 36
    The Afghans set the terms for either MI-17, or nothing, and agreements already exist, so this is just a spray of saliva from those whom the toad strangles that amers buy military equipment from Russia, no more, the delivery will be completed!
    1. Turik
      Turik 31 July 2013 10: 16
      Why don't we itch then? Send 2-3 "tourists" from the Foreign Ministry there, let them hand out kickbacks to the bearded men, and it will be good for us and the Americans to put a pig on it.
    2. AVV
      AVV 31 July 2013 10: 57
      Then we will supply spare parts to Afghanistan, which is good !!!
      1. tronin.maxim
        tronin.maxim 31 July 2013 12: 13
        I'm bullshit from these Americans! Not only do we sell them high-quality, low-cost helicopters, they want to suck out the profit here too! On the head with a screw to these congregations, and business with the end!
  2. Edward72
    Edward72 31 July 2013 08: 37
    That's just the point, that pure lobbyism
    1. APASUS
      APASUS 31 July 2013 08: 45
      Quote: Edward72
      That's just the point, that pure lobbyism

      In the USA, it’s just not patriotic to buy equipment from Russia, for them we are all the same enemies.
      How much noise was there around the delivery of crews by the Unions to the ISS
      1. Edward72
        Edward72 31 July 2013 08: 51
        Well, if the amers themselves recognize (read above), well, their counterparts cannot fly through the mountains of Afghanistan.
      2. Yves762
        Yves762 31 July 2013 09: 05
        Quote: APASUS
        In the USA, it’s just not patriotic to buy equipment from Russia, for them we are all the same enemies.
        How much noise was there around the delivery of crews by the Unions to the ISS

        IMHO, patriotism - the second thing here. Senators in the bastard that money does not go to their industry. Especially in light of cuts in defense spending.
        On the other hand, some would like to stick to the allocated money, but when purchasing Mi-17 this is problematic ...
  3. maxbrov74
    maxbrov74 31 July 2013 08: 42
    Everything is wonderful, these helicopters are excellent. But just how many MI 17 will be purchased in the Russian army this year? Or, as usual, we are proud of export capacities, we are conquering foreign markets, ourselves flying on junk.
    1. ansons
      ansons 1 August 2013 00: 34
      Yandex (or Google) to help. Wash and on this resource there were supply tables, ours does more.
  4. darksoul
    darksoul 31 July 2013 08: 46
    The price is normal Afghans said Mi-17 and the point is true if China with some kind of copy of Mi-17 does not crawl laughing
  5. rugor
    rugor 31 July 2013 08: 58
    I can imagine how this deal costs across the throat to Ovsky hawks! laughing
  6. Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 31 July 2013 09: 02
    ... an unprecedented increase in the price of cars, concluding that Russia is setting the Americans high prices.
    - so let them walk around the market, bargain ... laughing That's just to sell, it would not be for dollars ... although they have no gold, poor people ..
    1. Fire
      Fire 31 July 2013 10: 46
      They have plenty of gold, only the Americans are not paying them. It really hurt with great difficulty it got ... and they stamped dollars again.
  7. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 31 July 2013 09: 18
    Soviet military equipment has always been famous for its reliability and ease of operation, what more could you want? True, when the Americans flee Afghanistan, all this will go to the Taliban.
  8. Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 31 July 2013 11: 15
    Quote: feuer
    They have plenty of gold
    . In 2009, only 1971 cents were left of the 18 American dollar, as the Inflation Calculator shows. Thus, over the past 39 years, the dollar has lost more than 80% of its purchasing power.

    Yesterday was the 39th anniversary of the day the US government filed for bankruptcy. Oh, then it was called differently. But on August 15, 1971, this was exactly what happened - the United States broke its promise to pay gold for dollars.

    Until this day, gold has been the legitimate core of the global monetary system. hi
    The only gold test at Fort Knox was conducted a few days after Dwight Eisenhower became president in January 1953.

    see http: //
    - some show off ...
  9. KononAV
    KononAV 2 August 2013 10: 27
    Let them buy and they will be happy)))