yup...hoping they buy another one to replace this

More ... like another 12
OHP so tempting.

Dunno why our govt want to splurge on expensive european helicopters.

They should buy the russian Mil-Mi helicopters, they are lot more cheaper, built tough and easier to maintain.

if u google a bit, u can see Mil helicopters have more crash case than any European heli,
cheaper yes,
tough no,
easier to maintain, idk bout that, they say russian spare parts are very hard to get

Military spare parts which one can get easily? I thought all should be hard to get their hands on it regardless which nations.

russia parts from what I heard is very difficult to get when u are not nearby to each other. The nearest oem we can get is from india. They dont keep surplus and they only made it when requested or ordered.

military have their own market, of course civilian will have difficulties in getting military parts

american often salvage from their bone yard and keep a stock inventory. Russian is cheap but after service quite bad.

This post has been edited by thpace: Feb 1 2014, 04:22 PM

Boleh repair lagi nih..

>russian
>easier to maintain
>EASIER TO MAINTAIN

uhh no. sparepart macam setan nak carik. nanti nak sparepart, 1001 alasan diorang bagi. sparepart tak ready la, suruh bagi minyak sawit dulu la, itu la, ini la.

I cannot brain why cannot get russian parts. Vietnam and cambodia are our closest neighbors to use those helicopters.

Also there would be transfer of technology, the russians are willing to do so. We can even opt to pay via commodities like what we did with our MiG-29s last time.

It is normal for helicopters to crash. Ya think the blackhawk got very good service record ah? In Afganistan, several blackhawks crashed and they were not even shot at.

so is Mi-17, crashed mainly bcoz of technical issues..
i dun like blackhawk anyway

a quote from Georgia's Mindef which decided to change all russian helos in their arsenals to American utility helos
>>Defence Minister explained the reason for replacement of the Soviet helicopter fleet by the U.S. ones. "It is very expensive to maintain the Soviet helicopters. Procurement of the spare parts is problematic and in most cases it is practically impossible to get this service without corruption deals. Considering all the above-mentioned facts we took a hard but right and logical decision," declared Irakli Alasania."
sos

do Vietnam and Cambodia produce the spare parts? no

our air force will pick M-17V if there is no issue, but they didn't..and i believe there are strong reasons for why they didn't pick Mi-17..and choose more expensive Eurocopter..
it is normal for helicopter to crash, but would u pick a car that have more bad safety records than pick another car that's a bit expensive but rather better safety record?

Haiz.. Any spare parts malaysia needs to get seems only can come from >1000km...


I doubt a country would still prefer to obtain spare parts from a potential enemy country after all.

RMAF had a bad time with getting spare parts for our Migs, even parts for our Suks is from China.

Russian stuff might be cheaper up front, but very poor after sales service support which makes it expensive in the long run.
At least with the americans/europeans service level is there even though up-front it's expensive.

btw eurocopter have their repair/overhaul facility here in malaysia. sounds like no brainer to buy russian helo when they don't even have anything in malaysia

It much better to buy Russian non-moving or self-reliant system that does not requires frequent maintenance something like the surface to air missile or SAM

This is why russian main weapon exports are all missiles rather than vehicles. If Malaysia get S400 system one at kelantan and another at sabah, i think china wont even dare to fly into South china sea

problem with US is to get parts is alot of paperworks even though the parts is available
Alot of background check and alot of WHY WHAT HOW etc?

europian? Nak kasi duit, here you go

SAM no need maintenance kaa?? Every hardware ade maintenance bro... scheduled preventive maintenance.

sure need la but the part replacement like in a vehicles should be less in a mostly stationary sam system

Missile dgn torpedo pun every week kena bukak buat voltage check... pengalaman aku la....x sure yg lain

SAM alot cost to maintenance specially super expensive batteries pack cost USD 150 million per-set for each S300 missile system. have to charge every week.
S400 not allow export yet， event allow to export, our cant afford it, cost each set S300 missile system around usd 500 million with maintenance, and buy 1 ~2 set S300/400 with 12~16 missile each set not really help much. just small matter for china missile power.

Anyway our gov also looking on china missile defense system, from KS-1 event now HQ-16 missile system. cost is main factor.

This post has been edited by waja2000: Feb 1 2014, 11:40 PM

demmm~ straight away with long-range SAM..take it slow man..lets start with BUK-M1E first..
i'm actually more interested in China's missiles..heard their missiles have more range than US and Russian missiles..but cost is still a concern..
will it be cheaper if we provide the chassis for the missiles (like ACV-300 or K200 IFV)?

This post has been edited by kerolzarmyfanboy: Feb 2 2014, 12:51 AM