THIS was the Afghan Air Force!!!!WTF!!!!

[Dayton3]

My friends maintain MiGs here in the States. Simple aircraft to work on.

Maybe they were the ones that supplied the Migs to the Afghans.

And you have friends?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No, they still have them. Inoperable at the moment, but a good A&P can get them flying again. Bidum gave them enough tradeable material to do it.

I have seen no reports they have these aircraft and even the links you have provided show that the aircraft are NOT in their inventory any longer. Where is your source for these lies? Do you keep them with all of your other lies?

 

[Vrenn]

Maybe they were the ones that supplied the Migs to the Afghans.

And you have friends?

The Migs were destroyed in 1992 by the Rebels supporting the old USSR Afghan Goverment. If there are any left, they are just heaps of junk. The Taliban (Maji) didn't inherit one single mig fighter that was even near serviceable. As for fixing the junk piles, nothing has changed. The only real places you an get the spare parts are are somewhat close to Russia.

He thought he had as friend once. But when he learned that westwall considered him a friend, he went out, bought an orange robe, a gallon of gasoline and a bic lighter.

 

[Mushroom]

Ummmm, all the Migs are jet powered you idiot. But, I understand, you have to cover for bidums fuck up.

And the Afghans have not had a MiG in service in 2 decades.

• Mikoyan MiG-15: 4 fighters received in 1951 and remained through 1979
• Mikoyan MiG-15UTI: 38 trainers received from 1957 and served as late as 1998
• Mikoyan MiG-17F/PF: 100 fighters received from 1957
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19: 36 acquired by the Royal Afghan Air Force from 1964
• Mikoyan MiG-21F-13: 40 fighters received from 1965 and serving up to 1999
• Mikoyan MiG-21MF: 70 fighters received from 1980 and serving up to 2001
• Mikoyan MiG-21bis: 50 fighters received from 1980 and serving up to 1999

The last time they had any serviceable was over 20 years ago. You are looking at their historic aircraft. This was their active inventory as of last month:

• 1971 to present: Mil Mi-8
• 1977 to present: Aero L-39 Albatros
• 1987 to present: Mil Mi-17
• ? to present: Mil Mi-35
• 2011 to present: Cessna 208B
• 2011 to present: MD 530F
• 2013 to present C-130
• 2013 to present PC-12
• 2014 to present HAL Cheetah
• 2016 to present Embraer A-29 Super Tucano

And yes, I am more than aware that modern helicopters are almost always "jet powered", but most do not really consider them "jets".

 

[westwall]

And the Afghans have not had a MiG in service in 2 decades.

• Mikoyan MiG-15: 4 fighters received in 1951 and remained through 1979
• Mikoyan MiG-15UTI: 38 trainers received from 1957 and served as late as 1998
• Mikoyan MiG-17F/PF: 100 fighters received from 1957
• Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19: 36 acquired by the Royal Afghan Air Force from 1964
• Mikoyan MiG-21F-13: 40 fighters received from 1965 and serving up to 1999
• Mikoyan MiG-21MF: 70 fighters received from 1980 and serving up to 2001
• Mikoyan MiG-21bis: 50 fighters received from 1980 and serving up to 1999

The last time they had any serviceable was over 20 years ago. You are looking at their historic aircraft. This was their active inventory as of last month:

• 1971 to present: Mil Mi-8
• 1977 to present: Aero L-39 Albatros
• 1987 to present: Mil Mi-17
• ? to present: Mil Mi-35
• 2011 to present: Cessna 208B
• 2011 to present: MD 530F
• 2013 to present C-130
• 2013 to present PC-12
• 2014 to present HAL Cheetah
• 2016 to present Embraer A-29 Super Tucano

And yes, I am more than aware that modern helicopters are almost always "jet powered", but most do not really consider them "jets".

Yeah? So? Most of them are readily brought back into service. My friends brought a MiG-15UTI back into service in two months after it hadn't been flown for 42 years.

Condituon of the airframe is everything.
Those Afghan birds will have virtually no corrosion issues.

 

[Mushroom]

No, they still have them. Inoperable at the moment, but a good A&P can get them flying again. Bidum gave them enough tradeable material to do it.

No, they were scrapped decades ago. Once the new Afghan government came in, they knew they would never use them again, and even by that time most had not flown in over a decade. So they were scrapped. Mostly for spare parts that were then sold to other nations that still used them.

At the absolute latest, they stopped being maintained and used way back in 1996, a quarter of a century ago. And it is not like they were put in the boneyard at Davis-Monthan. Even if they wanted to use them again, it would have been cheaper and faster to just buy some from another country that were already in operable condition.

 

[Mushroom]

Yeah? So? Most of them are readily brought back into service. My friends brought a MiG-15UTI back into service in two months after it hadn't been flown for 42 years.

That is for historical purposes. Not for an actual national military force.

And how many hours were spent in doing that? I bet far more than any nation would be willing to do, other than for a similar museum piece.

 

[westwall]

No, they were scrapped decades ago. Once the new Afghan government came in, they knew they would never use them again, and even by that time most had not flown in over a decade. So they were scrapped. Mostly for spare parts that were then sold to other nations that still used them.

At the absolute latest, they stopped being maintained and used way back in 1996, a quarter of a century ago. And it is not like they were put in the boneyard at Davis-Monthan. Even if they wanted to use them again, it would have been cheaper and faster to just buy some from another country that were already in operable condition.

I can see no evidence they were scrapped. Aerial photos show them scattered around the various airports.

 

[westwall]

That is for historical purposes. Not for an actual national military force.

And how many hours were spent in doing that? I bet far more than any nation would be willing to do, other than for a similar museum piece.

The aircraft is fully functional. Put a gun in it and the thing is active. Take on the US?

Hell no.

But attack rebels from the Northern Alliance?

Yeah, it would do that job just fine

I don't know how many hours they spent on it. It was done over a period of two months while they were doing their normal workload.

 

[Mushroom]

I can see no evidence they were scrapped. Aerial photos show them scattered around the various airports.

Gutted inside. Like the case of "Hangar Queens" and "Motor Pool Queens" all over the US military. Engines, avionics, and all other that has a value already pulled and sold off, all that is left is the frames. About as much value of many of those sitting at the Mojave Airport.

They were never put back into service because they were already maintenance nightmares. Better to sell what they could out of them for money to keep what they did have flying.

And looking at them, for what purpose? Some Korean or Early Vietnam War era interceptors? It is not like they were going after the Taliban Air Force.

Most of those fighters in case you did not notice were the Vietnam era Fishbed. Four air to air missiles, two 500 pound bombs. The freaking Super Tucano was more effective than these ever could have been. And my opinion of the A-29 as the main combat aircraft of any "Air Force" is not much to begin with.

Simply fitting out one of their C-130s as an AC-130 would have been of more value then somehow magically restoring every one of their MiG fighters. Those were not Flogger fighter-bombers (with a capability of 6 tons of bombs and air to ground missiles), These were not the Fulcrum multi-role which could carry 4 tons of air to ground munitions. This was not even the Farmer, which could have two 250 pound bombs, and 64 air to ground rockets. These were freaking Fishbeds. Air to air only, almost no capability of air to mud.

 

[westwall]

Gutted inside. Like the case of "Hangar Queens" and "Motor Pool Queens" all over the US military. Engines, avionics, and all other that has a value already pulled and sold off, all that is left is the frames. About as much value of many of those sitting at the Mojave Airport.

They were never put back into service because they were already maintenance nightmares. Better to sell what they could out of them for money to keep what they did have flying.

And looking at them, for what purpose? Some Korean or Early Vietnam War era interceptors? It is not like they were going after the Taliban Air Force.

Most of those fighters in case you did not notice were the Vietnam era Fishbed. Four air to air missiles, two 500 pound bombs. The freaking Super Tucano was more effective than these ever could have been. And my opinion of the A-29 as the main combat aircraft of any "Air Force" is not much to begin with.

Simply fitting out one of their C-130s as an AC-130 would have been of more value then somehow magically restoring every one of their MiG fighters. Those were not Flogger fighter-bombers (with a capability of 6 tons of bombs and air to ground missiles), These were not the Fulcrum multi-role which could carry 4 tons of air to ground munitions. This was not even the Farmer, which could have two 250 pound bombs, and 64 air to ground rockets. These were freaking Fishbeds. Air to air only, almost no capability of air to mud.

I'm not talking about the 21's, though those ARE fun to fly. I have 7 hours in a MiG21 now, I was talking about the 15's or the 17's.

Very capable CAS against non technical opponents.

 

[Mushroom]

I'm not talking about the 21's, though those ARE fun to fly. I have 7 hours in a MiG21 now, I was talking about the 15's or the 17's.

• Mikoyan MiG-15: 4 fighters received in 1951 and remained through 1979
• Mikoyan MiG-15UTI: 38 trainers received from 1957 and served as late as 1998
• Mikoyan MiG-17F/PF: 100 fighters received from 1957

The Afghan Air Force withdrawn theirs MiG-17 Fresco fighters from inventory in the middle of the eighties. The 366th Fighter Air Regiment disbanded at Kandahar. The veteran MiG-17 Fresco aircrafts were replaced in the in the eighties with the Su-7BMK/BKL Fitter-A (Sindand) and L-39C Albatros (Mazar-i-Shari) types.

MiG-17 Fresco fighter at Afghan Air Force

www.easternorbat.com

You are literally talking about aircraft that dated back to before the Soviet Intervention and Invasion. And you somehow think those even exist anymore?

It would have been a better idea to pull out some of our old F-4 and F-5 fighters from Davis-Monthan and send them over there. At least those were actually stored in a state that they could have been reactivated if needed.

And really, the Fagot? It has 2 hard points, each of which can handle a 200 pound bomb. Even worse than the Fishbed for air to mud. And I could not care less how "fun to fly" they were, interceptors are almost worthless unless there is another air force to use them against.

In case you are not aware, there is only a single country on the planet that still uses the Fagot. They have a whopping 30 of them in North Korea, and only use them for training purposes.

 

[Mushroom]

But attack rebels from the Northern Alliance?

And in case you did not know this, the Northern Alliance were our allies!

I can't even believe I had to say that. Do you need a score card to keep straight who is who in Afghanistan?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yeah? So? Most of them are readily brought back into service. My friends brought a MiG-15UTI back into service in two months after it hadn't been flown for 42 years.

Condituon of the airframe is everything.
Those Afghan birds will have virtually no corrosion issues.

You are dumber than a box of rocks! What is a MiG-15 going to outside of shooting down a Cessna?

Why are there no corrosion issues?

 

[westwall]

You are dumber than a box of rocks! What is a MiG-15 going to outside of shooting down a Cessna?

Why are there no corrosion issues?

I said CLOSE AIR SUPPORT, dumbshit. There are no corrosion issues because the air is dry. The Hawker Hart and Hind airframes that were pulled out of the Kabul dump were in incredible shape after 80 years sitting outdoors. It only took a few years to get them flyable again. THAT was a hard job. There are MiG-15's all over the place. Easy to get operational again. Hell we have five of them up at Stead.



Here is the Hind flying at Old Warden

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I said CLOSE AIR SUPPORT, dumbshit. There are no corrosion issues because the air is dry. The Hawker Hart and Hind airframes that were pulled out of the Kabul dump were in incredible shape after 80 years sitting outdoors. It only took a few years to get them flyable again. THAT was a hard job. There are MiG-15's all over the place. Easy to get operational again. Hell we have five of them up at Stead.



Here is the Hind flying at Old Warden

You are hilarious! Kabul's climate is not that different than where I live. Leave a hammer outside and it will be covered in rust.

BTW, I love the picture! Close air support from that? Isn't that about 100 years old?

My Dad was Army Air Force in WWII. He's been dead for 25 years. Maybe we should have just put him in a dump somewhere so he could be rebuilt one day!

 

[westwall]

You are hilarious! Kabul's climate is not that different than where I live. Leave a hammer outside and it will be covered in rust.

BTW, I love the picture! Close air support from that? Isn't that about 100 years old?

My Dad was Army Air Force in WWII. He's been dead for 25 years. Maybe we should have just put him in a dump somewhere so he could be rebuilt one day!

The near 100 year old Hawker Hind says you are mistaken. And that is the aircraft that was rebuilt from the ground up that had lain in the Kabul dump for 80 years.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The near 100 year old Hawker Hind says you are mistaken. And that is the aircraft that was rebuilt from the ground up that had lain in the Kabul dump for 80 years.

Did the Taliban rebuild it? Those goat herders are great at doing that kind of work, I'm sure!

 

[westwall]

Did the Taliban rebuild it? Those goat herders are great at doing that kind of work, I'm sure!

No, but apparently you are unfamiliar with mercenaries. Saudi Arabia, for decades employed mercs to fly and maintain their airforce.

Have you always been this uninformed?

And do pay attention these goat herders just beat us.

Maybe you aren't as clever as you think you are.

You certainly are not conversant with history.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No, but apparently you are unfamiliar with mercenaries. Saudi Arabia, for decades employed mercs to fly and maintain their airforce.

Have you always been this uninformed?

And do pay attention these goat herders just beat us.

Maybe you aren't as clever as you think you are.

You certainly are not conversant with history.

You know nothing about me apparently or you might show a little respect. Mercs can't rebuild 60 year old aircraft and fly them, what are they going to pay them with? Goat cheese? Where will they find the spare parts? We have all of their funds locked up. Until they get their drug trade back in operation, they are paupers.

Study the Taliban a bit before you criticize your own apparent lack of knowledge.

Also, my money is on the fact that these aircraft will not exist as soon as we get our people out of the country, or what's left of them. I think even senile Joe will approve carpet bombing of their aircraft, and all of the other weapons we left to the Afghanis that wound up in the Taliban's hands.

You are an ignorant pussy if you think those goat herders beat us. Now, toddle off, beat your meat, and learn how truly stupid you come across in your posts. You think everything will be so easy! That's really pathetic, and makes you sound like the liberal you are at heart.