Warzone/The Drive: Pentagon Admits Afghanistan's New Black Hawks Can't Match Its Older Russian Choppers
A new official report raises serious concerns about whether the new helicopters will actually hurt the Afghan military's ability to operate.
A report from a top U.S. military watchdog has finally acknowledged that the UH-60A+ Black Hawks that the United States is supplying to the Afghan Air Force are less capable and harder to maintain than the Russian-made Mi-17 Hip helicopters they have now. The review raises concerns that this could limit Afghanistan’s ability to conduct operations across the country unless steps are taking to mitigate the loss of capability, something we at The War Zone have long warned could easily be the case.
The Pentagon’s own Office of the Inspector General included these frank admissions in a routine, periodic update on U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, nicknamed Operation Freedom’s Sentinel, and assistance to the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF), which it released in May 2018. The Department of Defense leads this oversight effort, which also includes representatives from the U.S. State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: If you cannot transport your military and/or supply re-reinforcements to a battle .... you will lose the war.
6 comments:
Frankly, that they had choppers that they could operate and maintain and that perform better is not a surprise. Now they have the eye-popping American model and the last paragraph of the review tells me why. Look at the American entities behind this misallocation of defense funding; defense, usaid, and of course, that crowning glory of American let's-all-be-friends-together-in-the-sandbox thinking, the state department. Having experienced their overpaid incompetence in an Asian country once upon a time, I know why the Afghans get something so inadequate for their needs.
What's that old saying about ignoring the lessons of history?
Roger
Roger,
"...misallocation of defense funding..." This pretty much says it all. As I've pointed out here and elsewhere many, many times how much money a country spends on its military is the least important bit of informatiin when we try to analyze how they stack up against each other.
Roger,
It's seems like watching the same movie again. Unless there is a drastic change in US strategy and it's application, this war as I told WNU over a year ago is lost. In conflicts unless there is obvious loss, perception will rule the day, as it did so long ago.
JH
The maintenance, complexity and proper care and feeding requirements of US made mil gear puts it at a practical disadvantage in Afghan military use. An off-comparison would be the advantages of an AK-47 over an M-4 in the hands of an Afghan soldier. Simple, rugged and able to deal with dirt with minimal maintenance.
Anon, the US is not in Afghanistan to win and never has been. It was never about Osama bin Laden the disgruntled ex American military employee either. It is about Oil, Russia, perhaps a bit about restoration of the opium trade and presence.
"UH-60A+ Black Hawks that the United States is supplying to the Afghan Air Force are less capable and harder to maintain than the Russian-made Mi-17 Hip helicopters"
It could be laughable if it was not that sad...........
Post a Comment