Military Review

Russian helicopters in Afghanistan: to the delight of Karzai, to the envy of Obama

18
Russian helicopters in Afghanistan: to the delight of Karzai, to the envy of Obama



The Russian Federation plans to deliver another batch of Mi-17 helicopters to Afghanistan. Russian aircraft - the most reliable, proven and easy to maintain. Due to such characteristics, they are in great demand among the Afghan military and leave behind the products of the American manufacturer Sikorsky, expert Vadim Kozyulin is sure

Russia will supply an additional batch of multipurpose Mi-17 helicopters to Afghanistan. This was announced by the Special Representative of the President of Russia for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov, ITAR-TASS reports.

In just the past two years, Russia, together with the Americans, has delivered 33 Russian Mi-17 helicopters to Afghanistan. Earlier, Americans have already acquired two dozen such helicopters to strengthen the Afghan armed forces.

The Pentagon planned to continue procurement, but in the US Congress are unhappy that the United States is purchasing military equipment from Russia amid disagreements over the Syrian crisis. In December, Congress demanded that the Ministry of Defense cease cooperation with Rosoboronexport.
Why Afghanistan is seeking to buy Russian helicopters, Vadim Kozyulin, a senior researcher at the Center for Political Studies of Russia, a professor at the Academy of Military Sciences, told Golos Rossii.

- What do you think will be the reaction of the Americans against the background of these events?

- Their reaction is already known. Congress opposes the procurement of Russian weapons. As already mentioned, the reason is Syria. But, I think, Ukraine will also increase. It is also important that the Americans have their own manufacturer, with which Russia competes in Afghanistan - Sikorsky.
Nevertheless, the American side will be forced to return to the Russian deal. Our helicopters are the most reliable, proven vehicles known in Afghanistan.

- There he has no equal?

- Yes, absolutely. It does not require serious maintenance, which requires an American helicopter. He is more hardy. Its carrying capacity allows it to deliver large loads to greater heights. And most importantly, it is easy to use and familiar to Afghan pilots.
- Can there be another friction between the leadership of Afghanistan and the Americans because of this deal?

- The Americans are funding this deal, and in fact it is a gift for Afghans. Afghans may insist that these are Russian helicopters, but the key to resolving this issue lies in American hands. I do not think that they will have serious disagreements on this issue, if they ever arise, especially against the background of those that already exist between Hamid Karzai and Barack Obama.

- While there is only a preliminary agreement on the signing of the contract, the timing of its signing is not reported. What do you think when Kabul gets these helicopters?

- I think that Russia is able to fulfill such a contract within a year.

- When a country, in particular Afghanistan, buys such equipment, should Russian specialists take any part in its maintenance and operation?

- I think it is quite possible. I assume that this is all covered by the contract, namely technical assistance, and, most importantly, the supply of components and spare parts.

- You talked about US financing. It turns out, is not Afghanistan paying?

“Afghanistan is a bankrupt state.” All of his military contracts are paid from the budget of American taxpayers.
- It turns out that Americans can reject this deal. Do they have any leverage?

- Of course. A lot was said about this, there was a big debate in the US Congress. US congressmen are lobbying for the interests of Sikorsky and opposing this deal.

- Do you think it will take place?

- Circumstances dictate that it take place, because the situation in Afghanistan will worsen, and without Russian helicopters it is already difficult for Afghans, and after a while it will be simply impossible. The Afghan military says that the lack of helicopters is the main problem for the Afghan army, besides the lack of armored vehicles. It is numerous, but it is poorly equipped with technology, especially - helicopter.

- Now the Afghan military are undergoing retraining in order to understand how the helicopter works? Or do they know her very well?

- Russia, as is known, is ready to render any assistance to Afghanistan, besides directly military. The Russian Federation warned in advance that it would not send its military specialists to Afghanistan. With regard to the training of military, police, fighters against drug trafficking, and so on, Russia has always stated that it is ready to provide all-round support in these matters.
Author:
Originator:
http://rus.ruvr.ru/2014_02_20/Rossijskie-vertoleti-v-Afganistane-na-radost-Karzaju-na-zavist-Obame-4878/&usd=2&usg=ALhdy2-NpwH5fPrMFScMRUAJYnzfGKN0QA
18 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. valokordin
    valokordin 23 February 2014 07: 15
    +5
    He put a plus to the article, but what does Obama have to do with it, the mattress covers are quite rich, and also the Saudi dollars. If desired, they would have taught the Afghan feudal lords to fly on the Apaches. If they save by buying our turntables, thanks. I do not see delight
    1. PPL
      PPL 23 February 2014 07: 26
      +2
      Quote: valokordin
      ... what does Obama have to do with it, the mattress covers are quite rich, and also the Saudi dollars. If desired, they would have taught the Afghan feudal lords to fly on the Apaches. If they save by buying our turntables, thanks. I do not see delight

      It's all about the share of sales in the arms market.
      Quote: Professor of the Academy of Military Sciences Vadim Kozyulin
      Much has been said about this, there has been great debate in the American Congress. US congressmen are lobbying for Sikorsky's interests and opposing the deal.

      Americans want to be the only sellers.
      1. Yuri Y.
        Yuri Y. 23 February 2014 07: 49
        +2
        Quote: valokordin
        If they save by buying our turntables, thanks. I do not see delight

        My delight, cheaper is not worse.
        1. AVV
          AVV 23 February 2014 21: 39
          +1
          Quote: Yuri I.
          Quote: valokordin
          If they save by buying our turntables, thanks. I do not see delight

          My delight, cheaper is not worse.

          A helicopter tested by Afghanistan, that says it all !!! Americans wanted their own, but it doesn’t work !!! Reliability is not the same, in such conditions, not all equipment works !!!
      2. alone
        alone 23 February 2014 12: 58
        +2
        The Americans financed the purchase of the Mi-17 for Afghanistan. Congress forbade this. But all the same, Russia supplies these helicopters to Afghanistan. The question is quite reasonable: And at whose expense the banquet? Is it possible again for loans? I don’t think that the Afghan government has the ability to buy helicopters in cash. This government has nothing at all to do. Besides controlling drug trafficking
    2. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 23 February 2014 09: 16
      +2
      Quote: valokordin
      If they save by buying our turntables, thanks. I do not see delight

      To see the delight, announce a specific model of a state helicopter with comparable characteristics, not forgetting to indicate the ratio of the price of the product and operating costs before the first overhaul.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  2. novobranets
    novobranets 23 February 2014 07: 34
    +10
    FRIENDS, ALL ON THE HOLIDAY OF THE DAY OF THE DEFENSE OF THE FATHERLAND! LET OUR ENEMIES CLAIM!
  3. ya.seliwerstov2013
    ya.seliwerstov2013 23 February 2014 07: 48
    +3
    Give them Yankee Power so that all our contracts would be cut off. But it has long been recognized that our helicopters are the best in the world. The policy here does not roll.
  4. Chemicalin23
    Chemicalin23 23 February 2014 08: 05
    +4
    Friends, with the holiday of all of you, happiness and prosperity to you and your loved ones!
  5. Stinger
    Stinger 23 February 2014 08: 32
    +1
    Normal move. If Congress doesn’t want, and helicopters are needed, give money to Afghanistan, he will buy it.
  6. shelva
    shelva 23 February 2014 08: 36
    +4
    This is a very good trend - the sale of our weapons in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries will allow countries to update their weapons faster and develop new ones.
    AND ALL WITH A HOLIDAY !!!
  7. Basarev
    Basarev 23 February 2014 09: 21
    +1
    Another failure of the Americans. This, however, is to our advantage.
  8. dr.star75
    dr.star75 23 February 2014 09: 31
    +2
    Guys, all a happy holiday! drinks For the most intelligent, kind, beautiful, strong, in short Men for us! wink On the topic: what will happen to our contracts when the Americans leave? In the sense, Karzai will last long against the Taliban?
  9. Democrat
    Democrat 23 February 2014 09: 39
    -5
    The author is naive, the United States is also expanding the purchase of helicopters, Afghans have little mind to study a Sikorsky helicopter, and Russian metal is at least cheap but the helicopter design itself is very old and outdated.
    1. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 23 February 2014 18: 27
      +2
      Quote: Democrat
      not to study the Sikorsky helicopter, and Russian metal is at least new but cheap, and the helicopter design itself is very old and outdated.

      The hero of the dollar, pound, shekel, euro .., in what field of helicopter construction do you position yourself as a "specialist"? Something your comments were not previously observed when discussing helicopter topics.
  10. dosyl
    dosyl 23 February 2014 09: 42
    +1
    I sold it, I got the money, it's good, I paid a salary, also good.
  11. Democrat
    Democrat 23 February 2014 09: 44
    -5
    America buys helicopters for Afghanistan, the question is where does Afghanistan get so much money, probably taxes from the sale of heroin. Afghans cannot master Sikorsky helicopter
    modern and crammed with modern electronics. And Russian scrap metal, though new
    but the design is morally obsolete and there is no need for a special mind to master it.
    1. stroporez
      stroporez 23 February 2014 09: 56
      +1
      og ...... fl definitely coughed the trade union of makodov of Afghanistan ........
    2. avt
      avt 23 February 2014 10: 32
      +4
      Quote: Democrat
      Afghans cannot master Sikorsky helicopter
      modern and crammed with modern electronics

      laughing Another "pilot" from the computer to the sofa.
      Quote: Democrat
      But Russian scrap, though new
      but the design is morally obsolete and there is no need for a special mind to master it.

      My dear, when once again you want to moan in ecstasy from delight in front of a new model of technology and remember about the "obsolete scoop", look at which turntable, for example, Barak Huseynovich flies, how many years has been in service with the "Cobra" participating in Afghanistan "Chinooku", well, take an interest in what was on the 8k at the time of creation at Mila and what it is now equipped with, although I think it’s not a horse feed. Well, try at least on the website, poking buttons, to see that the same Americans too ,, morally obsolete "rather old Si Stallion is being modernized for special forces. Probably dull too?
    3. from punk
      from punk 23 February 2014 13: 40
      +2
      yes old man apache in comparison with mi-28 and ka-52
    4. from punk
      from punk 23 February 2014 13: 48
      0
      UN troops are also not far away on our metal fly everywhere
    5. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 23 February 2014 18: 31
      0
      Quote: Democrat
      Sikorsky helicopter
      modern and crammed with modern electronics.

      In what systems is the helicopter "stuffed with modern electronics"?
  12. muhomor
    muhomor 23 February 2014 10: 17
    +1
    How to go to the army, so no, but to eat 23 vodka, that's all ...
  13. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 23 February 2014 10: 26
    +2
    First, all a happy holiday. Secondly, comrade Boris, but he himself served in the army, more precisely in the BB. Thirdly, in Afghanistan, in addition to the Mi-17, there is also the 9 Mi-35 in general, and the Afghans managed to fix GS-23 on it, but the Czechs (not Chechens) planned to transfer 6 Mi-24 from their own Air Force to them.
    http://www.militaryparitet.com/teletype/data/ic_teletype/2939/


    And what am I leading to ... The Taliban will have rich trophies after the mattresses leave.
  14. innei
    innei 23 February 2014 10: 46
    +3
    Quote: Democrat
    America buys helicopters for Afghanistan, the question is where does Afghanistan get so much money, probably taxes from the sale of heroin. Afghans cannot master Sikorsky helicopter
    modern and crammed with modern electronics. And Russian scrap metal, though new
    but the design is morally obsolete and there is no need for a special mind to master it.

    Is this a new longbow? Yes you are my friend in kind de (ry) mokrat. Read a little books, everything is written there))) this piece of iron since the 80s of the last century, so much for general development.
  15. sergeant
    sergeant 23 February 2014 11: 25
    +1
    why even at the Sochi Olympics, damned by the Americans, we bow before the Americans spitting at us! at the opening of the Sochi Olympics, why was Sikorsky's helicopter named with the letter "B"? and not a Kamov or Mil helicopter, but a Sikorsky? well, fuck that Sikorsky is Russian, well, your own shirt (helicopters) is closer to the body (RUSSIA)
    1. samoletil18
      samoletil18 23 February 2014 12: 06
      0
      Quote: sergeant sergeant
      at the opening of the Sochi Olympics, why was Sikorsky's helicopter named with the letter "B"?

      Everything is correct, and the letter "T" should have been designated Zvorykin's television. Let the whole world know that Russia is intelligence and decency, and the United States is willingness to destroy the whole world for its own benefit.
  16. samoletil18
    samoletil18 23 February 2014 11: 57
    0
    Everyone who wore wears and will wear shoulder straps on the holiday! It would be nice if Karzai could resist. He is a positive figure for Russia. Americans can eliminate it for reluctance to acquire American equipment, participation in the work of the SCO, and the fight against US-sponsored Al-Qaeda.
  17. Democrat
    Democrat 23 February 2014 12: 21
    0
    And what kind of joy does Karzai have? A worthless pawn posed by the United States. The coalition will withdraw from Afghanistan and it will be overthrown.
  18. Arh
    Arh 23 February 2014 13: 35
    0
    Mi-17 helicopter !!!
  19. Platov
    Platov 23 February 2014 13: 55
    +1
    How much not to organize barter, we give them a helicopter with full weapons by weight, and they are the same amount of heroin in the USA.
  20. Prapor-527
    Prapor-527 23 February 2014 16: 53
    0
    But the Americans themselves are not averse to using our MI-17. But...
  21. PValery53
    PValery53 23 February 2014 19: 32
    +1
    Our helicopters, although modest in price, are more thoughtful and functional in operation. - They are simply better than the US ones. Hooray ! - The flow of profits, please, to our helicopter pilots (helicopter manufacturers)!
  22. Rubon
    Rubon 24 February 2014 05: 51
    0
    Shaw, it’s doubtful to me that Afghanistan, as a state, doesn’t have any money to buy, the states for Karzai’s decisions, if any, lay down with the appliance .... there remains a loan purchase, but you know how they give loans. Russian helicopters are certainly cheaper than American ones, but often the decision is made for political reasons and not for price-quality reasons.