Mil-14 Haze resurrection
Thread Starter
Mil-14 Haze resurrection
Putin wants these to be back in production
http://rt.com/news/258081-anti-submarine-mi14-comeback/
Cheers
http://rt.com/news/258081-anti-submarine-mi14-comeback/
Cheers
Thread Starter
@Skeleton,
I am slightly puzzled by your dismissive statement please expand?
Have you read the article as it also relates to the Russian decision to re-opening the TU-160 Blackjack production line plus why post Cold War,
" In the 1990s, Washington insisted on their decommissioning, along with strategic bombers and ballistic missiles."
The Russians have the KA-31 Helix shipboard ASW , as you know so for them to think about getting back the Haze must be of interest lest our Astute and US Seawolf are a force to be reckoned with.
Or potentially the Russians could also be worried that heaven forbid ISIS takes over Iranian naval base and start to use their subs.
Personally it is an interesting subject and if you happen to be over in the UK in the summer, go to RIAT and have a gander at the Polish Navy Mi-14 they are bringing along and please let your thoughts known. I will be there for sure,
Cheers
I am slightly puzzled by your dismissive statement please expand?
Have you read the article as it also relates to the Russian decision to re-opening the TU-160 Blackjack production line plus why post Cold War,
" In the 1990s, Washington insisted on their decommissioning, along with strategic bombers and ballistic missiles."
The Russians have the KA-31 Helix shipboard ASW , as you know so for them to think about getting back the Haze must be of interest lest our Astute and US Seawolf are a force to be reckoned with.
Or potentially the Russians could also be worried that heaven forbid ISIS takes over Iranian naval base and start to use their subs.
Personally it is an interesting subject and if you happen to be over in the UK in the summer, go to RIAT and have a gander at the Polish Navy Mi-14 they are bringing along and please let your thoughts known. I will be there for sure,
Cheers
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" In the 1990s, Washington insisted on their decommissioning, along with strategic bombers and ballistic missiles."
Chopper2004 posted
The Mi-14 Haze decomissioning would be outside any of the nuclear treaties such as START. START only covers strategic weapons and platforms. The reference to Washington insisting on their decommissioning would be in regards to the side agreement to the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty.
The Russians agreed to cap the holdings of their land-based naval aviation. With other ASW helo types in service the likes of the Mi-14 would have been an easy type to offer up in order to meet the CFE side agreement. The Russians had also considered and tested a variant known as the Mi-14PL Strike equipped to carry AS-7 Kerry air-to-surface missiles. With the Russians withdrawing from the CFE Treaty and the side agreements they are free to re-establish a type such as the Mi-14.
CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS
In the 1990s, Washington insisted on their decommissioning, along with strategic bombers and ballistic missiles."
The Russians agreed to cap the holdings of their land-based naval aviation. With other ASW helo types in service the likes of the Mi-14 would have been an easy type to offer up in order to meet the CFE side agreement. The Russians had also considered and tested a variant known as the Mi-14PL Strike equipped to carry AS-7 Kerry air-to-surface missiles. With the Russians withdrawing from the CFE Treaty and the side agreements they are free to re-establish a type such as the Mi-14.
Declaration of the States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe with Respect to Land-Based Naval Aircraft
The mandate under which the CFE Treaty was negotiated expressly includes all conventional armaments and equipment permanently based on land in the ATTU area. The Soviets adamantly opposed counting their land-based naval aircraft (LBNA) against CFE aircraft ceilings, since US and other Western carrier-based aircraft would not be counted. It was finally agreed that a political commitment would cap LBNA separately outside the Treaty. Under this side agreement, each group of States commits itself to hold no more than 430 LBNA combat aircraft, in the CFE zone, of which no more than 400 may belong to any one State. It also bans the subordination of attack helicopters to land-based naval forces.
The mandate under which the CFE Treaty was negotiated expressly includes all conventional armaments and equipment permanently based on land in the ATTU area. The Soviets adamantly opposed counting their land-based naval aircraft (LBNA) against CFE aircraft ceilings, since US and other Western carrier-based aircraft would not be counted. It was finally agreed that a political commitment would cap LBNA separately outside the Treaty. Under this side agreement, each group of States commits itself to hold no more than 430 LBNA combat aircraft, in the CFE zone, of which no more than 400 may belong to any one State. It also bans the subordination of attack helicopters to land-based naval forces.
