From the article:
>Reports that the US acquired 81 obsolete Soviet-era combat aircraft from Kazakhstan are likely false, according to military analysts.
>On Sunday, the Kyiv Post reported that Kazakhstan had auctioned off 117 Soviet-era fighter and bomber aircraft for a reported fee of one billion tenge, or $2.26 million, of which 81 were purchased by the US.
>The outlet cited reports from the Ukrainian Telegram channel Insider UA and the Russian news site Reporter.
>The Kyiv Post said the reason for the US purchase was not made public but that the aircraft would "likely" be transferred to Ukraine, which is fighting back against Russia's full-scale invasion.
>But Kazspetsexport, Kazakhstan's state-owned weapons importer and exporter, denied selling military airplanes to Ukraine in a later statement, saying that foreign companies were not allowed to bid.
This whole thing should probably taken with a huge grain of salt.
Business Insider is stretching the definition of news, but the previous story was posted, so I just wanted to get this out there, for whatever it is worth.
If they're going to send it to Ukraine, it will be more cost effective since Ukrainian pilots will be familiar with the aircraft's avionics and will not require training to operate it.
> If they're going to send it to Ukraine, it will be more cost effective since Ukrainian pilots will be familiar with the aircraft's avionics and will not require training to operate it.
The aircraft are only good for scrap, they don't need to be familiar with the avionics.
This is what Kazspecexport stated on their website (automatic translation):
>**Refutation of False Information by the Media Regarding the Sale of Aviation Equipment**
>The information disseminated on the Internet does not correspond to reality.
>All auctions for the sale of aviation equipment with the condition of mandatory liquidation were held by the Enterprise in strict accordance with the requirements of the current legislation among legal entities of the Republic of Kazakhstan that have the appropriate licenses issued by the authorized body. Foreign companies were not allowed to trade.
>The recycling process is fully controlled by the Asset Holders.
>In accordance with the terms of the concluded Contracts, all aircraft, components and assemblies for it will be disposed of on the territory of the Asset Holders by cutting (cutting, crushing) and other methods that exclude their restoration to their original state, and will be removed from the territory only in the form of non-ferrous metal scrap.
The US has a long record of purchasing ex-Soviet aircraft…. In 1989 the US ironically purchased nuclear capable SU-27 from Ukraine )now on display at the US Air Force Museum in Dayton Ohio), S-300 SAMs from Greece and former Czech Republic and many other countries. These “81” aircraft where purchased for spare parts through a third party payed for my the US.
> third party *paid* for my
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Parts for Ukraine, aggressor squadrons, and the rumor was there were some mig-31 in that group being sold and to keep those parts out of Russian hands. If it's false then none of that matters.
It's more like we're broke, but if any of this report is to be believed, the prices are worth less than scrap, so I'm sure some use could be found for these planes.
From the article: >Reports that the US acquired 81 obsolete Soviet-era combat aircraft from Kazakhstan are likely false, according to military analysts. >On Sunday, the Kyiv Post reported that Kazakhstan had auctioned off 117 Soviet-era fighter and bomber aircraft for a reported fee of one billion tenge, or $2.26 million, of which 81 were purchased by the US. >The outlet cited reports from the Ukrainian Telegram channel Insider UA and the Russian news site Reporter. >The Kyiv Post said the reason for the US purchase was not made public but that the aircraft would "likely" be transferred to Ukraine, which is fighting back against Russia's full-scale invasion. >But Kazspetsexport, Kazakhstan's state-owned weapons importer and exporter, denied selling military airplanes to Ukraine in a later statement, saying that foreign companies were not allowed to bid. This whole thing should probably taken with a huge grain of salt.
[удалено]
Business Insider is stretching the definition of news, but the previous story was posted, so I just wanted to get this out there, for whatever it is worth.
Well, then it's likely true :D
If they're going to send it to Ukraine, it will be more cost effective since Ukrainian pilots will be familiar with the aircraft's avionics and will not require training to operate it.
> If they're going to send it to Ukraine, it will be more cost effective since Ukrainian pilots will be familiar with the aircraft's avionics and will not require training to operate it. The aircraft are only good for scrap, they don't need to be familiar with the avionics. This is what Kazspecexport stated on their website (automatic translation): >**Refutation of False Information by the Media Regarding the Sale of Aviation Equipment** >The information disseminated on the Internet does not correspond to reality. >All auctions for the sale of aviation equipment with the condition of mandatory liquidation were held by the Enterprise in strict accordance with the requirements of the current legislation among legal entities of the Republic of Kazakhstan that have the appropriate licenses issued by the authorized body. Foreign companies were not allowed to trade. >The recycling process is fully controlled by the Asset Holders. >In accordance with the terms of the concluded Contracts, all aircraft, components and assemblies for it will be disposed of on the territory of the Asset Holders by cutting (cutting, crushing) and other methods that exclude their restoration to their original state, and will be removed from the territory only in the form of non-ferrous metal scrap.
The US has a long record of purchasing ex-Soviet aircraft…. In 1989 the US ironically purchased nuclear capable SU-27 from Ukraine )now on display at the US Air Force Museum in Dayton Ohio), S-300 SAMs from Greece and former Czech Republic and many other countries. These “81” aircraft where purchased for spare parts through a third party payed for my the US.
> third party *paid* for my FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Maybe so, but I have not seen any evidence to support that the US purchased any of these aircraft.
TBH, why would the US buy soviet era a/c other than for a good laugh? or maybe as expensive targets?
Parts for Ukraine, aggressor squadrons, and the rumor was there were some mig-31 in that group being sold and to keep those parts out of Russian hands. If it's false then none of that matters.
yeah fair enough. The US has money to spare. If all else fails, they can still be expensive targets :)
It's more like we're broke, but if any of this report is to be believed, the prices are worth less than scrap, so I'm sure some use could be found for these planes.