If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Rian.Ru)   One for the "WTF" file: American helicopters can no longer perform, so we're now buying Russian helicopters   (en.rian.ru) divider line 72
    More: Interesting, Russian Helicopters, W.T.F.?, Russians, Americans, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, ndaa, Russian army, Afghan National Security Forces  
•       •       •

3482 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Apr 2013 at 4:48 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-05 03:14:21 PM
Last June? How current.
 
2013-04-05 03:18:29 PM
Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?
 
2013-04-05 03:19:31 PM
FTFA: "Many of the Afghan forces have already been trained to operate the Russian aircraft. Switching to a new platform would delay the readiness of their rotary wing division by at least three years..."

Jeez, subby.
 
2013-04-05 03:30:15 PM

Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?


Parts and upgrades and etc. You don't want to be that dependent upon a foreign power.
 
2013-04-05 03:39:13 PM

This About That: FTFA: "Many of the Afghan forces have already been trained to operate the Russian aircraft. Switching to a new platform would delay the readiness of their rotary wing division by at least three years..."

Jeez, subby.


^^^This^^^

US Forces (and pretty much all the coalition forces as far as I can tell) are still using US helos.  The Russian ones are for the Afghans.
 
2013-04-05 04:23:45 PM

Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia?


According to the Romney campaign, we're still enemies with the Soviet Union.

And Obama is bad for not standing by Czechoslovakia.
 
2013-04-05 04:51:04 PM
Subby doesn't read very well.
 
2013-04-05 04:52:30 PM
If only the USA could make  a cheaper, reliable helicopter better suited to the task.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-04-05 04:53:10 PM

2wolves: Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?

Parts and upgrades and etc. You don't want to be that dependent upon a foreign power.


Cause lord knows we couldnt reverse engineer ANY of their '60's era bullcrap.

Besides, the helicopters arent for US use.
 
2013-04-05 04:53:33 PM
В Советском Союзе, вертолет летит ВАС.
 
2013-04-05 04:54:21 PM

2wolves: Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?

Parts and upgrades and etc. You don't want to be that dependent upon a foreign power.


http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/22/probe-finds-flood-of-fake-m il itary-parts-from-china-in-u-s-equipment/
 
2013-04-05 04:54:36 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-04-05 04:54:44 PM
Huh, as a Canadian I'm kind of surprised that it's possible at all to replace helicopters without biatching and moaning about it for 30 years.

Go figure.
 
2013-04-05 04:56:40 PM
Rode in a Russian helicopter that Air Malta bought from Aeroflot (sp?). Don't ever do that. Scariest ride of my life.
 
2013-04-05 04:58:14 PM

Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?


Any nation that must import its military hardware is severely limited in who it can go to war against.  The current regime in the former Soviet Union is no nicer than the previous one; I can see us going to, uh, undeclared police action against them in the near future.
 
2013-04-05 04:58:59 PM

Subtle_Canary: Besides, the helicopters arent for US use.


Besides, the helicopters arent for US use
Besides, the helicopters arent for US use.
Besides, the helicopters arent for US use.
 
2013-04-05 05:00:48 PM
If it's not a KA-50, I don't see the need for it.

www.military-today.com

Ok in reality the Apache is the better aircraft, but, coaxial rotors!
 
2013-04-05 05:02:14 PM
I thought the only upside to runaway military spending was that it WAS SPENT HERE. This is almost a billion dollars that we are borrowing from China, and sending in Russia, in order to equip Afghanistan.
 
2013-04-05 05:03:50 PM

madgonad: I thought the only upside to runaway military spending was that it WAS SPENT HERE. This is almost a billion dollars that we are borrowing from China, and sending in Russia, in order to equip Afghanistan.


You break it, you buy it.
 
2013-04-05 05:04:20 PM
We are buying Russian helicopters to provide to Afghanistan and the counterpoint is that Syrians use them?

Head asplode.
 
2013-04-05 05:05:34 PM
l.wigflip.com
 
2013-04-05 05:06:08 PM

madgonad: I thought the only upside to runaway military spending was that it WAS SPENT HERE. This is almost a billion dollars that we are borrowing from China, and sending in Russia, in order to equip Afghanistan.


Would you rather we give the Afghani's our top of the line shiat?

Maybe they would like our predator drones and some F-22's.....

Oh wait, they couldn't maintain the shiat we make, even if we were allowed to sell it to them.

It's much better to let them have some cold war era design.
 
2013-04-05 05:07:12 PM
And where was Congress when Bush snubbed Sikorsky and bought Brit helicopters so the UK would join us in Iraq?

[crickets chirping]
 
2013-04-05 05:17:56 PM
Also, the monster radar that we just parked off North Korea is built on an old Russian oil rig.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea-based_X-band_Radar
 
2013-04-05 05:18:03 PM
Let's get this shiat straight.

We are buying RUSSIAN equipment for the AFGHAN ARMY.

We're not giving them American equipment, we're giving them more of the Russian equipment they pretty much already had, know how to use, and will have better luck maintaining, paying for parts and getting new stuff after we leave.
 
2013-04-05 05:18:15 PM
why is it necessary to lie in headlines
 
2013-04-05 05:19:20 PM

Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?


You've never driven a Lada, have you?
 
2013-04-05 05:21:12 PM
But Moran's spokeswoman, Anne Hughes, described any implication that the lawmakers' concern is more about campaign contributions than arms for Syria as "laughable."

Not even a 12 year-old is gullible enough to read that sentence with a straight face.
 
2013-04-05 05:21:22 PM

fluffy2097: madgonad: I thought the only upside to runaway military spending was that it WAS SPENT HERE. This is almost a billion dollars that we are borrowing from China, and sending in Russia, in order to equip Afghanistan.

Would you rather we give the Afghani's our top of the line shiat?

Maybe they would like our predator drones and some F-22's.....

Oh wait, they couldn't maintain the shiat we make, even if we were allowed to sell it to them.

It's much better to let them have some cold war era design.


Then have an American company de-enginer the d@mn thing and sell them parts, It can't be that hard, Holder for gods sakes take your head out of your a$$.
 
2013-04-05 05:25:57 PM

fluffy2097: madgonad: I thought the only upside to runaway military spending was that it WAS SPENT HERE. This is almost a billion dollars that we are borrowing from China, and sending in Russia, in order to equip Afghanistan.

Would you rather we give the Afghani's our top of the line shiat?

Maybe they would like our predator drones and some F-22's.....

Oh wait, they couldn't maintain the shiat we make, even if we were allowed to sell it to them.

It's much better to let them have some cold war era design.


How about selling them some farking basic Blackhawks. No fancy electronics - just a basic helicopter?
 
2013-04-05 05:28:05 PM

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: Let's get this shiat straight.

We are buying RUSSIAN equipment for the AFGHAN ARMY.

We're not giving them American equipment, we're giving them more of the Russian equipment they pretty much already had, know how to use, and will have better luck maintaining, paying for parts and getting new stuff after we leave.


Yes.  Are you outraged yet?

/non-story
 
2013-04-05 05:29:14 PM
How about the Afghans buy their own helicopters? Don't have the money? Tough shiat, no helicopters.

I'm sorry, I'm just so far beyond the point of caring about what happens to anyone in that country. 10 god damn years and so many lives and SO.MUCH.MONEY. spent for nation building and to "git the turrurists 'for dey git us"

It has to end sometime.
 
2013-04-05 05:30:23 PM

madgonad: How about selling them some farking basic Blackhawks. No fancy electronics - just a basic helicopter?


Because it's a good helicopter?

The avionics is all probably very integrated I bet you can't pull out all the OPSEC parts without making the thing un-flyable.
 
2013-04-05 05:34:30 PM

Uisce Beatha: This About That: FTFA: "Many of the Afghan forces have already been trained to operate the Russian aircraft. Switching to a new platform would delay the readiness of their rotary wing division by at least three years..."

Jeez, subby.

^^^This^^^

US Forces (and pretty much all the coalition forces as far as I can tell) are still using US helos.  The Russian ones are for the Afghans.


Ayup. Just giving them what they're used to.

No outrage here. Move along.
 
2013-04-05 05:34:50 PM
American components, Russian Components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!!

//Bruce Willis was our savior
 
2013-04-05 05:49:35 PM

ecmoRandomNumbers: Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?

You've never driven a Lada, have you?


Just have to think in Russian, is all.

stagevu.com
 
2013-04-05 05:53:28 PM
How about the Afghans buy their own helicopters? Don't have the money? Tough shiat, no helicopters.

Yes. So let's completely shiat away any good that's been done. You are a genious.
 
2013-04-05 06:00:57 PM

beta_plus: FTFA: "Many of the Afghan forces have already been trained to operate the Russian aircraft. Switching to a new platform would delay the readiness of their rotary wing division by at least three years while crews get training and experience on a new system, Gregory said."

Usual knee jerk anti americanism from Fark


Lolwut? I'm really curious to know how your brain went there.
 
2013-04-05 06:01:30 PM

Jackson Herring: why is it necessary to lie in headlines


fatdog.jpg!

/got nothin'
 
2013-04-05 06:02:27 PM

beta_plus: FTFA: "Many of the Afghan forces have already been trained to operate the Russian aircraft. Switching to a new platform would delay the readiness of their rotary wing division by at least three years while crews get training and experience on a new system, Gregory said."


Usual knee jerk anti americanism from Fark


Your reading skills appear to be as good as Subby's.
 
2013-04-05 06:03:10 PM

fluffy2097: Ok in reality the Apache is the better aircraft, but, coaxial rotors!


s15.postimg.org 

I prefer HDMI.
 
2013-04-05 06:40:15 PM

dinch: Rode in a Russian helicopter that Air Malta bought from Aeroflot (sp?). Don't ever do that. Scariest ride of my life.


Yeah, went by Czech MI-17 from our BG base to Sarajevo in '97.  Scary POS.
 
2013-04-05 06:43:23 PM
I didn't get the headline out of the article.

Seems to me that the purchase is for Afghan forces and to sidestep cutbacks as the Russian helicopters are less expensive and the Afghan pilots are familiar with them...nothing to do with out-performing the U.S. choppers.  It isn't like they were going to get Apaches anyway.
 
2013-04-05 08:58:43 PM

Nadie_AZ: ecmoRandomNumbers: Nadie_AZ: Are we still enemies with Russia? They make a good product. Who cares?

You've never driven a Lada, have you?

Just have to think in Russian, is all.

[stagevu.com image 850x357]


That was our Bond!
/thank you, Reagan
//our Bond showed he will be joining you soon by way of an empty chair
 
2013-04-05 09:04:32 PM

HMS_Blinkin: Subtle_Canary: Besides, the helicopters arent for US use.

Besides, the helicopters arent for US use
Besides, the helicopters arent for US use.
Besides, the helicopters arent for US use.


Oh, and the helicopters aren't going to be used by US soldiers.
 
2013-04-05 09:15:14 PM

Jackson Herring: why is it necessary to lie in headlines


It's not lying ...think of it like a magician using misdirection.  That headline is nearly guaranteed to get people to click the link. (potential gold for the keepers of out little play space) And in this unique case, not incorrect.
 
2013-04-05 09:42:20 PM
What do you mean we aren't giving Apaches to "former" Jihadists?!
 
2013-04-05 10:43:22 PM

fusillade762: beta_plus: FTFA: "Many of the Afghan forces have already been trained to operate the Russian aircraft. Switching to a new platform would delay the readiness of their rotary wing division by at least three years while crews get training and experience on a new system, Gregory said."

Usual knee jerk anti americanism from Fark

Lolwut? I'm really curious to know how your brain went there.


It's easy.

A) Libs are anti-American
B) Libs are on Fark
C) Fark is anti-American

Logic!
 
2013-04-05 10:50:24 PM
Many of the Afghan forces have already been trained to operate the Russian aircraft

I do wonder though -- are there really that many Afghan helicopter pilots out there? I mean, the Soviets left over twenty years ago, and I doubt the Taliban or the Northern Alliance were that sophisticated as to use helicopters as a regular part of their operations.  Would they even have been able to afford the fuel? It makes a lot of sense to buy Afghans AK's, because they have a lot of experience with that, but I'm extremely skeptical that they are so attached to Mil's* that it's much more expensive to train them on UH-60's or the like.

// I trust Russian news outlets as far as I can throw them

*Attached at the Hip, you might say
 
2013-04-05 11:50:03 PM
We had a soviet era russian transport parked at my airport (KGYI) for the longest time. They made little repairs here and there, and right before it was going to be seized for non-payment of tarmac fees they flew out after dark (tower hours 7am-7pm). Word is they were going to fly it to Pakistan or Afghanistan and use it there.

First thing we had to do the morning after was a FOD check. Heard through the grapevine their altimeter failed over Oklahoma and pretty much caused clenched sphincters in centers all the way to Minnesota where it touched down. Local police types (sheriffs or customs, not sure) checked the airplane and found reason to arrest the flight crew.

That being said, I bet it's easier to get RUSSIAN parts if you're in the same hemisphere. It's like why Unimogs are a cool idea but a biatch to take care of in the Americas, never really caught on here so no parts closer than a FedEx delivery at through the nose prices.
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report