Mil Mi-26T2 Halo vs Boeing CH47F Chinook

[Kunal Biswas]

There is nothing call limited war, War continues depend on how quickly you archive your objectives and resources to continue it, IMO there should be unlimited supply from Inside to sustain any war..

These Machine Numbers can be increased as per need..

 

[p2prada]

CH47F is cheaper so what? It is also smaller, with less capacity, and less range. Of course it should be cheaper. How is that even a price advantage?

You need to do some heavy hauling, and you have a Ural Truck and a small Mahindra Pick-up,and you pick the Mahindra Pick-up because it is cheaper?

Yes it is cheaper. But the question is whether the Chinook fulfills the ASQR. It is obvious that the ASQR was fulfilled by both helicopters because both were selected for the L1 bid. So, in this case the added advantages that either helicopter brings may not be a factor. Once ASQR is fulfilled, the cheaper chopper wins.

Now, if IAF is actually happy with this, that we will not know unless they tell it to us. But at the same time, MoD has to be fair to the competitors too.

So, if a pickup works out fine then why buy the truck?

Like I have always said, the services decision is the best decision. Live with it. It does not matter if it is Russian, French or American. They have first hand knowledge on what they need and will buy what best fulfills that need.

 

[p2prada]

12 c130j , 22 Apaches , 15 CH 47 , ....

looks like India doing preps only for a limited war..

12 C-130J + 45 IL-214(HAL/UAC JV) and 22 Apache(+22 options) + ~200 LCH. 1000+ helicopters.

 

[Yusuf]

@pmaitra,

The MRCA deal was expanded to include all kinds of planes.

I think the Chinook is a better all round bird with a lot of flexibility which is why it won. It's not just the total tons it can lift.

I mean the AF will have certain idea of how many tons of cargo and this of cargo that will be hauled by the chopper in this tender. May be the Mi26 is an overkill and not required at all.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I dont think there is anything overkill, MI-26 is used intensively and still does over NE, Its important as MI-17 in that region..

MI-26 surely won if its production facility was open and working..

What Russian offered is old MI-26 with updated Airframe and Avionics comparing with Brand new CH-47 of latest for India..

=============

Though i still think IAF should upgrade its MI-26 as per latest, and take some additional if needed, Its a very important helo..

 

[sathya]

12 C-130J + 45 IL-214(HAL/UAC JV) and 22 Apache(+22 options) + ~200 LCH. 1000+ helicopters.

yeah, even i thought so..
Russian and Indian weapons for large scale war (cheaper & large nos.)
USA weapons for limited war & proxy attacks..(special ops)

but the way things we purchase , preparation is for short term goal that is limited war
i guess possibility of full scale war is very remote.. so we can take time.. (LCH, MRTA ,LCA, ARJUN)

 

[Kunal Biswas]

CH-47 have its role with payload 12,700 kg cargo

 

[Kunal Biswas]

So here it is..

 

[p2prada]

Mi-26 is in production. We already discussed it.

Deliveries of Mi-26T for the VVS is still happening.

Russian Air Force to double Mi-26 fleet by 2015 | Helihub - the Helicopter Industry Data Source

The Mi-26T2 is yet to start serial production from what I know. It is a brand new version.

 

[pmaitra]

^^

Mil-26T2 has had one pre-production model built in 2011 and is undergoing test AFAIK. This is the only version that will reduce the crew size. Older versions will make it significantly unattractive in comparison to CH47F.

 

[asianobserve]

I do not expect you to understand it though.

Hahaha! The refuge of a desperate sales rep...

 

[pmaitra]

Hahaha! The refuge of a desperate sales rep...

Indeed. Next time you need to do some heavy hauling, and you have to chose between two weight carrying animals, an elephant and a donkey, I am certain you will choose the donkey. If I were the sales rep, I wouldn't even have to try, because you would get down on your knees and beg me to sell you the donkey.

 

[mayfair]

^^

Mil-26T2 has had one pre-production model built in 2011 and is undergoing test AFAIK. This is the only version that will reduce the crew size. Older versions will make it significantly unattractive in comparison to CH47F.

I once again reiterate my point. In my opinion, the two machines seem to be complementary than competing for the same roles. If we have decided to go for Chinooks, why not replace our three Mi-26s with at least twice the number of T2s?

I think that would be win win for everyone involved.

 

[pmaitra]

I once again reiterate my point. In my opinion, the two machines seem to be complementary than competing for the same roles. If we have decided to go for Chinooks, why not replace our three Mi-26s with at least twice the number of T2s?

I think that would be win win for everyone involved.

Excellent idea. I would just wait for the Mil-26T2 to enter production, an we could simply trash our existing Mil-26s, ant get a fleet of brand new Mil-26T2s.

 

[asianobserve]

Indeed. Next time you need to do some heavy hauling, and you have to chose between two weight carrying animals, an elephant and a donkey, I am certain you will choose the donkey. If I were the sales rep, I wouldn't even have to try, because you would get down on your knees and beg me to sell you the donkey.

Whatever you say substance seems to be on my side since even the IAF is in agreement with me. Just ditch the emotional Soviet baggage will you?

 

[pmaitra]

Whatever you say substance seems to be on my side since even the IAF is in agreement with me. Just ditch the emotional Soviet baggage will you?

The Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1991, and the first Mil-26T2 was tested in 2011. Educate yourself instead of spouting drivel. Even for a moment let's assume the Soviet Union still exists, or alternatively, Mil-26T2 was made in the US, would it change the fact that it has a bigger capacity and longer range?

 

[pmaitra]

Yes it is cheaper. But the question is whether the Chinook fulfills the ASQR. It is obvious that the ASQR was fulfilled by both helicopters because both were selected for the L1 bid. So, in this case the added advantages that either helicopter brings may not be a factor. Once ASQR is fulfilled, the cheaper chopper wins.

Now, if IAF is actually happy with this, that we will not know unless they tell it to us. But at the same time, MoD has to be fair to the competitors too.

So, if a pickup works out fine then why buy the truck?

Like I have always said, the services decision is the best decision. Live with it. It does not matter if it is Russian, French or American. They have first hand knowledge on what they need and will buy what best fulfills that need.

I acknowledge I have not read the ASQR, but it was well known India was looking for a heavy-lift helicopter. You believe that it was purely an IAF decision? You might as well be correct, but I don't expect you to be naïve in believing that there couldn't have been "other" considerations. Surely you are no stranger to India's politically motivated flirtations with Boeing and Airbus?

"India has made the United States happy with the Air-India contract after it pleased the European Union last year with the Indian Airlines order," professor Brahma Chellaney of the Center for Policy Research has been quoted as saying. "The deal is part of a strategy to present a picture of healthy India-US relations, which have been growing in the last few years. Such huge contracts are decided at the political level and that's what has happened this time too."

Link: Asia Times Online :: South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan

@pmaitra,

The MRCA deal was expanded to include all kinds of planes.

I think the Chinook is a better all round bird with a lot of flexibility which is why it won. It's not just the total tons it can lift.

I mean the AF will have certain idea of how many tons of cargo and this of cargo that will be hauled by the chopper in this tender. May be the Mi26 is an overkill and not required at all.

Perfectly valid argument, i.e., if we are discussing multi-role helicopters; but not quite when we are discussing heavy-lift helicopters.

The concern is Mil-26T2 (my preference) is not yet in production, and the older Mil-26 is simply not good enough due to the fact its crew size is huge (5 AFAIK) compared to CH47F.

 

[asianobserve]

The Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1991, and the first Mil-26T2 was tested in 2011. Educate yourself instead of spouting drivel. Even for a moment let's assume the Soviet Union still exists, or alternatively, Mil-26T2 was made in the US, would it change the fact that it has a bigger capacity and longer range?

Mi26 is the root word. That's the helicopter that has so personified the USSR: huge, impressive, but totally inefficient, bad quality and destined to be doomed.

The T2 that you're so fond of is just a simple brush up of the old Mi26, like how Russia is a brush up of the old USSR.

 

[pmaitra]

Mi26 is the root word. That's the helicopter that has so personified the USSR: huge, impressive, but totally inefficient, bad quality and destined to be doomed.

The T2 that you're so fond of is just a simple brush up of the old Mi26, like how Russia is a brush up of the old USSR.

How did you come to the conclusion that it is inefficient and bad quality? Have you seen the technical comparison? And the reduction of crew size is a simple brush up? New avionics is a simple brush up? More powerful engines is a simple brush up?

Small wonder the downed Chinooks had to rely on a doomed inefficient and bad quality helo for rescue.

The only way you can convince me is with numbers, if you are capable of comparing the numbers, i.e..

 

[asianobserve]

How did you come to the conclusion that it is inefficient and bad quality? Have you seen the technical comparison? And the reduction of crew size is a simple brush up? New avionics is a simple brush up? More powerful engines is a simple brush up?

Small wonder the downed Chinooks had to rely on a doomed inefficient and bad quality helo for rescue.

The only way you can convince me is with numbers, if you are capable of comparing the numbers, i.e..

Quality? Just ask the IAF... It seems they're not as teary eyed as you when the topic comes to Mi26.

Anyway, the strong points of the Chinook is not on numbers (ie. lifting capability as against the Mi26, there's no argument there) it is on cost, its flexibility, reliability and lifting abilities, "everyday use" in civilian parlance. If your strongest claim to Mi26 is that it can lift downed Chinooks then I'm positive this is not going to be a regular occurence. And when it does occur the IAF is better off leasing private Mi26s for that purpose or better yet they can modernise their existing Mi26 fleet for that rare need (they can delay this activity if they wish to).