"The Taliban Now Have An Air Force" Topic

"Taliban fighters today seized $6 USDmillion US Blackhawk helicopters alongside tons of American equipment as they took to the skies in captured Russian choppers amid their advance through Afghanistan.

A series of videos being shared on social media show insurgents flying the Kremlin-made mi-17 aircraft around the city of Kandahar, with concerns continuing to grow over the militants' ongoing grab for power.

Even more seismic, however, is the evidence that the Taliban have also seized American-made Blackhawk helicopters, made famous in the 2001 Ridley Scott blockbuster…"

YouTube link

YouTube link

Main page
link

I would not be surprised if the pilots in these helicopters are former Afghan army pilots training in USA…

Armand

If the current Administration and Pentagon leadership have an ounce of common sense between them these helicopters will get taken out quickly.

If they have drugs money, they can buy anything.

If the current Administration and Pentagon leadership have an ounce of common sense

After 20 years of failed strategy why start now. They decided to withdraw in the middle of the Afghan fighting season.

I don't think the UH-60s will make any difference at this time is ever … either way.

No doubt many of the pilots, maint. crews, etc., for all equipment in Taliban etc., hands. Are most likely former ANA military trained by US/NATO. Then some of those Taliban etc., trained by those ANA US/NATO trained maint. crews, pilots, etc. Parts may become a problem as time goes on ? And I don't know how good the Taliban, etc. "training programs" will be for pilots, maint. crews, etc. Maybe just former ANA with AKs pointing at there heads ?

At least we won't see them landing on USN CVNs. Only to be pushed into the sea.

Blackhawk helicopters, made famous in the 2001 Ridley Scott blockbuster…"

Not for me … it was when the 101 traded out UH-1s for UH-60s around '81. When I was a Rifle PL then Bn Air Ops officer in an Inf Bn of the 101. 😁

After 20 years of failed strategy why start now.

Which begs the question that we had any strategy to begin with. Obama did kill bin Laden. That should have been the signal to declare victory and pull out.

I agree with you that the mission should have been: kill terrorists, destroy terrorist training camps, and kill terrorist leader (OBL), then leave. Never should have stayed to nation build. By the way Obama didn't kill OBL, a Navy SEAL did. The mission to kill or capture OBL was ongoing from the previous administration.

And Osama was in Pakistan (a supposed US ally) next to a major Pakistani military base, not Afghanistan.

Whole GWOT was a farce.

All of the aircraft there need to be destroyed immediately, in addition to other military vehicles.

Of course, given the aforementioned premise, that almost ensures that they will NOT be.

Secretary Gates was and is right.

That should have been the signal to declare victory and pull out.

That seems to be the consensus, and I agree but again hindsight is 20/20.

Never should have stayed to nation build.

An error we have continued to make since Vietnam. But it did work in WWII & Korea … Times change …

Osama was in Pakistan (a supposed US ally) next to a major Pakistani military base, not Afghanistan.

A fact well known. And Pakistan is considered a "frienemy" … not an ally. We should not give them any aid, of any kind for their support of ULB and creation of the Taliban …

Whole GWOT was a farce.

Save for fact that terrorist/jihadi/fanatical islamic groups like AQ, ISIS … want a did kill Americans, Brits, etc. You can call it what you want. But we were fighting fanatical islamic terrorists/jihadis. And looks like we still will be.

Save for fact that terrorist/jihadi/fanatical islamic groups like AQ, ISIS … want a did kill Americans, Brits, etc. You can call it what you want. But we were fighting fanatical islamic terrorists/jihadis. And looks like we still will be.

We're not fighting anything.

The US has actively helped or at least empowered jihadis across the world including by destroying or attempting to destroy secular governments in Libya, Iraq and Syria and helping emphasise religious aspects in Mali (what was a Tuareg rebellion) or Yemen (an attempt at religious genocide by incompetent KSA).

In Syria America supplied weapons to actual Islamic terrorists so they could wage war on a secular government.

In Libya the US provided air support to jihadis fighting Gaddafhi's forces.

The US has allowed fundamentalist Islamic fanatics in UAE, Qatar and KSA spread their wings across the planet including the west (eg KSA funds thousands of mosques and Islamic schools in the west and else where).

And as the low level Islamic insurgency in France shows, the issue is immigration and policing. Playing whack a mole with Islamists in Yemen or Afghanistan or Mali won't change this!

So yes GWOT is a farce.

And we will lose because we're stupid, prefer importing cheap labour to hold down our own living standards and like selling weapons to rich Islamists.

And they have another thing – patience. The Taliban certainly prove this and as the words of many Islamist fundamentalists who view the Islamist mission as extremely long term.

Thus defeat of Taliban in 2001 or ISIS in 2019 isn't viewed as anything but a temporary setback.

West is impatient and also completely oblivious to history. They pretend Fukuyama's "end of history" actually happened and we're all happy little mass consumers.

But it did work in WWII & Korea … Times change .

Time hasn't changed. Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Syria etc are working according to norms established centuries ago. Indeed most of the ethnic, tribal, feudal and religious aspects that drive conflict and opposition to westernism date back to before America was even colonised let alone the establishment of USA a mere 245 years ago!

Germany and Japan were both modern industrialised nations not feudal, tribal pseudo states created by some western politicians in another era.

Germany, Japan and South Korea also had elements that most countries let alone Iraq and Afghanistan do not:

- largely homogenous cultures. This meant no conflict for resources unlike say Pashtuns v Uzbeks or Sunni v Shia v Kurds.

- strong national cultures and sense of identity.

- strong collectivist bents that emphasised group effort and achievement over the individual (even Germany is like this which is why they aren't deindustrialising unlike say UK or Australia with their emphasis on individual over the community).

- cultural emphasis on respect for authority.

- two of those societies were comprehensively beaten by Allies and the third owed its survival to America.

Thus when their governments say "people, do this" they do.* Hence the American occupations of those countries were going to succeed as they could take advantage of what was already there and these societies could be manipulated by a top down approach.

*This can be bad too ie both Germany and Japan in WWII. I remember one German expert saying that what was insane about the Germans following Hitler wasn't that they followed him in the first place but rather that they did as long as they did. In essence any one else would have rebelled long before their capital was a smoking ruin.

So yes GWOT is a farce.

So having the different terrorist, jihadi, etc., factions fighting among themselves was not a good idea ?

America was even colonised let alone the establishment of USA a mere 245 years ago!

Well we can't really be expected to be responsible for somethings that happened before we were a nation. [Regardless what CRT & 1619 Project says]

– two of those societies were comprehensively beaten by Allies and the third owed its survival to America.

Sounds about right to me …

Hence the American occupations of those countries were going to succeed as they could take advantage of what was already there and these societies could be manipulated by a top down approach.

Sounds like a good way of doing things. But we all know why it didn't work in A'stan … Religion & tribalism are the top two.

So having the different terrorist, jihadi, etc., factions fighting among themselves was not a good idea ?

Surely would have been better to having Assad, Gaddafhi and Hussein keeping a lid on Islamists? Much cheaper for the American tax payer!

The American approach destroyed so many countries. It empowered jihadis and fundamentalists.

In many ways GWOT was what is now called "virtue signalling". There was no real commitment to destroying fundamentalism unlike say commitment to destroy Nazis or Communists.

Well we can't really be expected to be responsible for somethings that happened before we were a nation. [Regardless what CRT & 1619 Project says

No the point is USA cannot change anything in these places.

Sounds like a good way of doing things.

Except you can't force cultural change (as Iraq and Afghanistan prove). Germany, Japan and South Korea's historical development over many centuries allowed their modern success. It wasn't about American values being superior.

Surely would have been better to having Assad, Gaddafhi and Hussein keeping a lid on Islamists? Much cheaper for the American tax payer!

Poor decisions are made clear … again in 20/20 hindsight.

USA cannot change anything in these places.

Seems no one from the outside can. Another lessoned relearned … but after the fact.

It wasn't about American values being superior.

Never said it was. Where did you get that ? It was about keeping Communism out of Europe and economics/Capitalism/military industrial complex. It always comes down to $ 💰💴💵💶 …

Unless you are a religious fanatic bent on genocide of everyone who does not believe as you do. E.g. infidels … most of us here I'd add.

It always comes down to $

No it doesn't. That's an modern western viewpoint and one that is destroying the west as it pursues deindustrialisation, economic dependency on countries like China and destruction of middle classes in pursuit of shareholder return on investment.

As for poor decisions, there was plenty who viewed them as poor at the time they were made.

You are correct Legion 4, EVERYTHING boils down to $, and the bottom line, at least in the West.

It IS also in play in a lot of other cultures too. No doubt the opium poppy crop, and hashish sales will skyrocket even further soon.

I wonder how much the Chines and Russians will pay for our Blackhawks, and other aircraft and military weaponry?

I don't think the Chinese or Russians will care much for the western equipment save maybe some of the communication gear, NVGs, SIGINT gear on PC-12s and targeting systems of the A-29 Super Tucanos.

UH-60As are old tech and in any case the US sold Blackhawks to China in 1980s (that they've now reverse engineered). Russians won't find the Blackhawks of any value as their Mil Mi-8/-17 series is the most successful helicopter on the planet (and in many roles far better than a Blackhawk).

The other main US helicopter type is the MD-530F, a variant of the OH-6 Cayuse that entered service in 1966 and is so widely available even North Korea brought nearly 90 of them for their military in the 1980s.

Afghan military was still relatively low tech. Even the drones supplied to them were smaller and older models.

The US supplied mainly light arms, comms gear and transport vehicles and helicopters. The really heavy stuff was ancient Soviet stuff – T-55/-62/D-30/SPG-9/ZU-23 or other ex-Communist eg Yugoslav M69 82MM mortars etc.

Even the APCs provided by US to Afghanistan were obsolete (M113) as well as light armoured vehicles with little or no combat value (M1117 – itself a derivative of 1960s vintage Cadillac Gage Commando used in Vietnam).

It IS also in play in a lot of other cultures too.

There's a difference in pursuing money at expense of everything and to their own future detriment (eg American companies borrowing money to buy back shares to bolster share price and thus executive remuneration).

For clever countries money is a tool to achieve goals, not the end goal.

We always trained that, if we had to abandon a vehicle in enemy territory, we would pop a thermate grenade on top of the engine block. I'm shocked that these troops didn't do the same.

javelin, most of these guys didn't withdraw in the classic military notion. They either joined the Taliban or put on civilian clothes and blended back into the mass of humanity.

You're not going to impress your new Taliban boss by blowing up that Humvee or M1117

A lot of stuff was caught in bases and probably wasn't even operational. Indeed many of the choppers shown were missing rotor blades and in a couple of cases caked in dust despite being parked in a hangar – clearly non-operational birds either being used as a spares source or awaiting maintenance that would never come.

And again not a purely Afghan phenomenon – remember when the Germans blitzed through Europe and captured whole armies worth of equipment? Same applies here.

And the Taliban did indeed wage a blitzkrieg – first major town fell on 6th of August and by 15th of August Taliban were in Kabul and in control of well over 80-90% of the country.

Guderian would be proud.

I was talking about the US troops, not the Afghans.

javelin,

The Blackhawks, Humvees etc belong to the Afghan military not the US.

The Blackhawks, Humvees etc belong to the Afghan military not the US.

Now they belong to the Taliban. (All paid for by US taxpayers)

No it doesn't. That's an modern western viewpoint and one that is destroying the west as it pursues deindustrialisation, economic dependency on countries like China and destruction of middle classes in pursuit of shareholder return on investment.

Well since I am a modern man from the West. I have that viewpoint … As that is the way I not only see it … but that is the way it is. At least from our POV. But I guess as often as you say I'm wrong, I must not be as intelligent or evolved as you. But have you ever been in the USA. Not just what is read in articles or in the daily news feeds. Of course, my POV may be wrong. But not from where I'm coming from …

You are correct Legion 4, EVERYTHING boils down to $, and the bottom line, at least in the West.

It IS also in play in a lot of other cultures too. No doubt the opium poppy crop, and hashish sales will skyrocket even further soon.

I wonder how much the Chines and Russians will pay for our Blackhawks, and other aircraft and military weaponry?

I couldn't say it any better …

Now they belong to the Taliban. (All paid for by US taxpayers)

Bingo !

There's a difference in pursuing money at expense of everything and to their own future detriment (eg American companies borrowing money to buy back shares to bolster share price and thus executive remuneration).

For clever countries money is a tool to achieve goals, not the end goal.

Wait … I thought it was not about $ ?

Afghan military was still relatively low tech.

As is the Taliban, AQ and ISIS …

Even the APCs provided by US to Afghanistan were obsolete (M113) as well as light armoured vehicles with little or no combat value (M1117 – itself a derivative of 1960s vintage Cadillac Gage Commando used in Vietnam).

Better than walking … no one can walk faster than most vehicles. Having commanded an M113 Co., 18 months '87-'89. You have know how to use the M113 or any lightly armored AFV, e.g. the M1117. But again you can move faster in an M113 or any light AFV. Than on foot. It's about mobility. Even in a place like A'stan. As was noted – Blitzkrieg …

Although I doubt Guderian would be proud in this case. Comparing his blitzkrieg to that of a mob of 3d world religious fanatics did. Bent on staying in the 15th Century. He very well could of considered them "untermensh". I know I do … the Taliban, AQ and ISIS are subhuman savages. There is no other way to put it.

Yes the M1117 is a light Armored Car. Based on the V-100. My Bn XO in the 101 told me about the time in Vietnam a V-100 saved his ass.

Again the M1117 is better than not having it. You just have to know how to use it. The ANA/ANP for a number of reasons rarely demonstrate tactically or technical expertise. No matter who much or what types of weapons & equipment they had …

Once they knew the USA was going to leave the country. If any did know … What moral they had probably took a hit. But who really knows… ?

I thought the ARVN near the end fought poorly … IMO the ANA/ANP reached a new high in lows …

If they want an airforce, they should probably stop executing the pilots.

I'm sure they only kill those they have to. Even savages like the Taliban can understand you can't fly an aircraft without a pilot.

As a sidebar, 1000 US Paratroops have been added to the 6000 US troops on the ground in A'stan. Bringing the total to 7000 …

Flights and been stopped out of the Kabul Airport until they can get control over all those Afghanis trying to get on an aircraft trying to fly out. Just like in Vietnam, IIRC …

The Taliban have the airport surrounded and to get to there one has to go through Taliban checkpoints …

They have also occupied the Presidential Place there and are giving interviews …

Legion. Point was Russoans and Chinese would not be interested in M1117s.

In other news Afghan air force is flooding into Uzbekistan and other countries.

46 aircraft flown to Uzbekistan
1 Afghan A-29 collided with an Uzbek MIG-29
1 Afghan aircraft shot down by air defence.

Point was Russoans and Chinese would not be interested in M1117s.

But the Taliban, and maybe AQ or even ISIS will use them … My point …

In other news Afghan air force is flooding into Uzbekistan and other countries.

They didn't have any CVNs to land on. But in Uzbekistan those who flew there are much safer that staying and being killed or working for the Taliban. And it takes away possible aircraft that may have been used in support of the Taliban.

@Legion 4, you would think. Last week the news said they were hunting down Afghan pilots and killing them in their homes to keep them from flying for the government. Maybe they don't feel the need to kill them now and will have them "volunteer" their services to the new regime. Or, perhaps, a lot of them were part of the recent escape.

Well they will need pilots to fly all those a aircraft left behind. Those that are still flyable. Or maybe they just don't care. Kill anyone from the old regime …

After all the are still hard core islamic fanatics …

Confirmed Taliban aircraft captures:

link

1 x Cessna 208
1 x A-29

11 x Mi-17
4 x UH-60
8 x MD530
1 x Mi-35

To be honest by the looks of it and judging by nearly 50 aircraft trying to fly to Uzbekistan and 5 to Tajikistan and confirmed loss of 10 helicopters, most of the operational fleet is gone.

A good day's catch … But will they have the pilots to fly them ? Or maint. crews & parts to keep them flying ?

If you look at photos on link, a lot of those aircraft are inoperable.

As for pilots, Taliban have started operating Mi-17s out of Herat so clearly some ANA pilots have been retained.

I suspect the western stuff won't last long but the Mi-17s will. Russian helos are more rugged, easier to maintain, its easier to obtain spares from a wide variety of sources and there's plenty of mercs who would be happy to work on them.

I will wait & see if the Taliban have a working air force. 6 months from now …

Legion, they managed to maintain and fly a handful of Soviet aircraft including combat jets like Su-22s and Mig-21s as well as armed L-39 jet trainers into 2001 despite 12 years of lacking any real kind of support.

In 6 months I guess they will have a handful of Mi-17s operable as well as handful of Cessna 208s which are also rugged, simple aircraft built to civilian standards.

In the future it will probably be only the Mi-17s and possibly Mi-25/-35s if they can get them up and running (very similar mechanically to a Mi-17 as Mi-24/25/35 was developed from Mi-8/17).

Pakistan Army operates Mi-17s so they're a potential source of support.

I suspect that like in Libya attrition rate will be heavy.

Thank you for the intel … but again … I'll wait & see if the TAF is a real threat.

A threat to who?

The Afghan Air Force was not a threat let alone a gamechanger as described by some US generals despite having around 200 aircraft including a large transport helo fleet and 26 COIN aircraft with LGBs.

The 1980s Afghan Air Force wasn't a serious threat despite having taken delivery of several hundred aircraft including 100s of MiG-21, Su-7 and Su-22s and who knows how many Mi-24s. Hell the whole Soviet air force wasn't much of a threat!

So the new Taliban air force with a small handful of operational helicopters and light bush planes is not going to be a threat.

The real threat in Afghanistan is having the most dedicated ground troops who can use the terrain to their favour.

Like 90+% of airforces out there including smaller NATO states the TAF will provide a useful albeit spasmodic and unreliable capability.

There is only one military force on the planet whose air forces are capable of being a sustainable threat/game changer in a long term insurgency and that is the US military.

And indeed for 20 years it was the key ingredient in keeping the Taliban down.

A threat to who?

"I'll wait & see if the TAF is a real threat." …

My comment was meant to be hyperbole … They are probably be a threat to themselves …

There is only one military force on the planet whose air forces are capable of being a sustainable threat/game changer in a long term insurgency and that is the US military.

And indeed for 20 years it was the key ingredient in keeping the Taliban down.

Yep … at least for now …

Yep … at least for now …

To be honest I think the current US air forces will probably be the last force in history to be such a potent air arm.

Russia never had such an all encompassing and capable force even at the peak of Soviet power or even in 1943-45 (air force was tactical like the Luftwaffe). Even at it its peak in 1980s Soviet air arm had very limited global conventional strike (other than antishipping), logistics capability and was still primarily a tactical air force designed to fight in Europe.

China's airforces will never get there as it's ISTAR, tanking, expeditionary warfare, logistics and global strike capabilities are extremely limited and aren't developing that fast, especially relative to the behemoth the US forces are.

Both the Russian and Chinese air forces are still essentially defensive (Russia's deployment to Syria was not a major commitment).

The biggest threat to US global air capability is atrophy due to years of poor procurement management, costly yet flawed investment (eg F-35 or KC-46 or RAH-66), neglect in key areas (from trainers to ICBMs to anti shipping weapons) and increasing budget pressures due to a whole heap of issues.

To be honest I think the current US air forces will probably be the last force in history to be such a potent air arm.

I hope you are right …

Aircraft flown to Uzbekistan:

link

Fixed Wing

6 x A-29B Super Tucano (another 2 lost – 1 due to collision with an Uzbek MiG-29 and another due to unspecified cause, possible loss of fuel)

5 X Cessna 208

11 x PC-12 (these belonged to Special Forces)

No news regarding C-130Hs (2 out of 4 were last listed as operational prior to fall).

Helicopter

19 x Mi-17 (mostly Special Forces as the Air Force had retired most of theirs)

7 x UH-60

No MD530F Little Birds were present.

Two other facts stand out:

1. Afghan aircrews were already prone to desertion well before the Taliban offensive eg half of all pilots trained in the US deserted between 2005 and 2019 whilst training in the US.

2. Without foreign maintainers aircraft serviceability collapsed. Eg UH-60S went from 77% in April-May to 39% in June and Cessna 208s went from 93% in April-May to 63% in June. And the Cessna is actually a rugged easy to maintain bush aircraft!

Only type the Afghans could maintain was the Mi-17 (hence probably more of them sitting on an Uzbek airfield than UH-60s). Taliban are already flying at least one Mi-17 out of Herat.

It seems whatever Taliban ended up with is mainly only good for scrap metal, especially the western aircraft.

Yes, I agree … but it is still more tax payer $ wasted. But that appears to be the norm there.

Around Afghan 10-12 Cessna 208s and at least 1 PC-12 flown to Tajikistan.

link

Coupled with 5 in Uzbekistan and that's around half the 34 delivered to Afghanistan including 10 AC208 attack versions.

Photos confirm 1 captured by Taliban.

Also Taliban confirmed as having at least 2 Mi-17s operational.

I understand one of the UH-60s have already crashed. Guess the pilot training didn't take. I'm sure this won't be the last.

Someone posted the Taliban are already trying to sell off some of the MRAPs, pick up trucks, etc. on line …

I guess they want to get rid of some of their inventory as well …

$ talks …

Seems they have more than a new Airforce…

The Taliban Now Controls The World's Largest Lithium Deposits

link

Armand

Confirmed ANA/US aircraft captured by Taliban – most rendered inoperable by US forces or non-serviceable/withdrawn for several years:

link

Fixed Wing – attack
3 x L-39 Albatross jet trainer (withdrawn and in open air storage)
10 x A-29 Super Tucano (remaining 12-13 appear to have flown to Uzbekistan)
2 x Cessna AC-208 (some/all of other 8 appear to have flown to Uzbekistan/Tajikistan)
1 x PC-12

Fixed Wing – transport
1 x C-130H
8 X An-26/32 (withdrawn and in open air storage)
5 x Cessna 208 (most of fleet flew to Uzbekistan/Tajikistan)
1 x PC-12 – (some/all of other 17 appear to have flown to Uzbekistan/Tajikistan)

Rotary – Attack
13 x Mi-25/35 (withdrawn and in open air storage)
19 x MD530F – status of anywhere up to 30-40 others is unknown.

Rotary – transport
16 x UH-60 – several others flown to Uzbekistan. At least 1 confirmed operational with Taliban.
21 x Mi-17 – several others flown to Uzbekistan. – At least 2 confirmed operational with Taliban
5 x CH-46 – ex State Department – rendered inoperable. 2 more reported to be in country.

Footage confirms at least 2 operational UH-60s and 1 MD530F captured in Panjshir Valley. These were used to evaluate vice president and others out of Kabul before it fell.

No real surprise … But as you noted and reports are coming in, much of the equipment left behind was disabled, destroyed, etc. However much is still usable and being used by the Taliban, etc. E.g. MRAPs, HWWMVs, SUVs, Pick up trucks, etc.

I, like many others, don't see that the Taliban are a threat outside of A'stan or even the region in some cases. But AQ, ISIS, etc., we know that is another story.

If reports are correct, the Taliban are holding 6 civilian aircraft. With Americans, SIVs, etc. Until the US recognizes them as the leadership of A'stan ? I want to hear more about this now a "Hostage" situation. Need more intel again …

Who said the evac was totally successful ?

Didn't this happen before in Iran ?