bhramos
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2009
- Messages
- 25,625
- Likes
- 37,233
Dhruv.Now what is desi copters sounds like a porn clip ,,, hahahahahahahahaha desi copter hahahahahahaahaa
EC225 is the civilian version. EC725 Caracal has seen combat in Afghanistan, Mali and done SAR with the Navy off Libya. It is the evolution of the SA330 Puma and Super Puma which has seen combat with France in every conflict we are ever in and various forces across the globe.Mil-17 is more rugged. You cannot go to war with dainty damsels. What is Caracal? The EC225? Has it seen so many wars over so many generations and geographies and modifications like the Mil-17? If I were to be rescued from a city under a seize, and I had to choose between the two, I'd pick the Mil-17. EC225 is an unproven platform.
In other words, Mil-17 has seen extensive use, while EC225 minimal. You really do not understand percentages, do you?No helicopter has caused the death of more soldiers than the Mi-17. It is a proven death trap.
It has seen extensive use in deveopling countries yet it can't achieve FAA or EASA safety certs. :herp:In other words, Mil-17 has seen extensive use, while EC225 minimal. You really do not understand percentages, do you?
I do not really care about safety certificates. With the amount of use Mil-17 has seen, all over the world, including by the US Army in Afghanistan, it really does not need a safety certificate. Safety certificate is required for a sales pitch for unproven platforms.It has seen extensive use in deveopling countries yet it can't achieve FAA or EASA safety certs. :herp:
The US Army doesn't use the Mi-17. It is on order for the Afghans so the US can stay on good terms with Russkies to keep open supply lines. It really does need certification if it ever wants to be sold to the West. It is a budget helo designed for developing countries that don't care about safety. It is perfect for Indian VIPs you want dead.I do not really care about safety certificates. With the amount of use Mil-17 has seen, all over the world, including by the US Army in Afghanistan, it really does not need a safety certificate. Safety certificate is required for a sales pitch for unproven platforms.
The US Army uses Mil-17 (on various missions), Mil-24/35 (for training), and Mil-26 (on lease/rent). It's just that they don't paint "USAF" on these helos. That is the only difference.The US Army doesn't use the Mi-17. It is on order for the Afghans so the US can stay on good terms with Russkies to keep open supply lines. It really does need certification if it ever wants to be sold to the West. It is a budget helo designed for developing countries that don't care about safety. It is perfect for Indian VIPs you want dead.
ALH itself is quite an top notch, One of the best machines in its class..Interior design based on customer choice..
Indian VIP don't deserve top notch helicopter an ALH is more than enough.
The only use the US Army gets out of it is Red Force training, and those have been heavily modified to meet safety requirements. It is a modification the Russians are unable to give. That is the difference.The US Army uses Mil-17 (on various missions), Mil-24/35 (for training), and Mil-26 (on lease/rent). It's just that they don't paint "USAF" on these helos. That is the only difference.
You mentioned noise. If you want a less noisy and safe airplane, then you need to go back to the Il-62 over many other modern airplanes, which are supposedly certified and better, on paper i.e.. As I said, I don't give more importance to certification over real life use.
There will be no kick backs .. through that channel....why not buy S-92 through FMS :killme:
Now our govt is in dubious situation in dropping the Augusta wetland deal,,, Khurshid is Against dropping the deal and says he does not want to let this issue mar our defense preparedness ,,,,,There will be no kick backs .. through that channel....
Indian PM's primary Transport Heli