RSS
Digg | 
Del.icio.us
The other week I warned that the Darfur mission may not (forgive the pun) get off the ground for lack of 24 helicopters to support the mission. According to Reuters, it seems that shortages of helicopter capacity is not limited to Darfur, but part of a distressing global phenomenon.
A shortage of top-end machines needed for tropical conditions plus a reluctance of countries to bear the costs of deploying them are being exacerbated by a procurement logjam that means a major renewal of Western fleets is years off.[snip]
[A] mixture of tight purse-strings at defence ministries and a genuine lack of capability afflicts even big European military powers such as Britain and France.
Tim Ripley, defence analyst at Jane's Defence Weekly, said the real cost of helicopters was in maintaining and operating them -- especially in the hot and dusty conditions where many conflicts are played out.
"Every 500 hours of flying time you have to take them apart, and put them together again. It is an open-ended cheque book issue and most countries have finite money to spend on this."
[snip]
Asked by reporters this month whether the United States could help plug the shortfall in Darfur, Pentagon chief Robert Gates said there had been no formal request but that the U.S. fleet was "pretty pushed" between Iraq and Afghanistan.
Given this shortfall, where to deploy the limited number of helicopters in circulation seems to become a question of priorities. Among member states with excess capacity, I shudder to think where Darfur fits on this hierarchy.