Mi17"比較耐操" simply because it has much less electronics and composite materials (or you can say it is much low tech) so many poor nations can afford to operate.............even when the system is not fully operational.
小貓不會作模型，小貓只愛玩模型；看似小貓玩模型，其實模型玩小貓： A B 補土白膠條，樹脂改套蝕刻片；凹線凸線凹凸線，乾磨水磨銼刀磨； 水性油性消光漆，乾掃手掃噴槍掃；模型一盒三百幾，零件一堆三千幾； 多買多作進步多，買了不作口水多；花錢耗時傷精神，小貓是隻敗家喵。
Also life span of Russia made weapons and platforms is much less than Western counterparts. Mi-17 might have life span of 5-10 years and will become junks, while how long has those UH-1Hs in ROC Army service already.......
quote:Originally posted by rockitten Just have a look how African do to their new cars: Take away anything that beeps (no electronic parts) as they won't survive long in Africa.....
這讓我想起《Top Gear》的橫越波茲瓦那特集，三位主持人在當地買車橫越波茲瓦那。三輛車中唯一正常運作的是Richard Mark Hammond買的1963年份的Opel Kadett，因為這輛車的車內只有兩個東西會動。
關於Mi17 vs UH60
Posted - 06/26/2011 : 20:26:33
