loading...
16 Russian Rescuers Fly to Katmandu And Back to Moscow

Russian Rescuers Fly to Katmandu And Back to Moscow

Posted on May 12, 2015 by team


Russian rescuers have finished their work in Nepal and came back to Moscow by Il-76 planes. On the way, they stopped in Delhi for refuelling twice.

The planes had delivered relief consignments to Nepal: thirty tons of water, cereals, canned food, toilet paper etc, and performed a complicated mission finding Russian tourists in the highlands of Nepal.

Some photographs of the Il-76 vehicles with their loads are inside the post.

Advertisement



Exchange traffic with English Russia, click here

16 Responses to “Russian Rescuers Fly to Katmandu And Back to Moscow”

  1. Peter Thompson says:

    That was a great thing to do, and very generous of the Russian govt.

  2. oldeafcoot says:

    Good work! Great airplane, the IL-76.

  3. todd says:

    good one comrads.

  4. john says:

    FANTASTIC, AND ALL AWAY AROUND.

  5. Muzzlehatch says:

    Always wondered why Russian transports had those glazed noses. Were they planning to use them as bombers?

    • ed brown says:

      Yes, they were preparing to bomb European cities and kill Europeans

      • Moscow Desire says:

        Ed Brown, you better take your meds and tell that ignorant, immature bullshit to your caring doctor; your comments are ridiculous at best. This plane is a civilian Il-76 from the 1960s that was planned as a commercial freighter and is not supposed to be used as a WW2-like bomber.

        • ed brown says:

          You must take your pills against amnesia.
          Russians wanted then and continue to want now to destroy Europe and America. Very recently Russian ambassador threatened Danish government that Russia would nuke Copenhagen. On Russian government-controlled TV people talk about how wonderful it would be to destroy London or turn American cities into hot radioactive ashes.

          • Moscow Desire says:

            Thanks for proving my thesis, now I know for sure that you have mental issues. There are no nations in the world wanting to destroy “Europe and America”; the Soviet government had war plans involving the use of nuclear weapons only in response to the use of nuclear weapons by another state. “Russian ambassador threatened Danish government that Russia would nuke Copenhagen” – he actually meant that if the Royal Netherlands NAVY (warships, that is) engages in anti-Russian activity and joins NATO coalition against Russia, then it will potentially be a target for Russia’s nuclear forces in case of a large-scale war. The US issued similar nuclear threats against China in the 1950s, even without being threatened by the PRC. “On Russian government-controlled TV people talk about how wonderful it would be to destroy London or turn American cities into hot radioactive ashes”. A plain idiot. I bet you even know the names of these “people”, do you? I’m quite familiar both with the Russian language and media and can tell you that nobody on the Russian TV has ever talked about “how wonderful it would be to destroy London or turn American cities into hot radioactive ashes”. You’re just too young or plain stupid to engage in any debates whatsoever.
            Take your own pills, grow up, educate yourself and stop dropping out of school.

            • ed brown says:

              ” he actually meant that if the Royal Netherlands NAVY (warships, that is)…” Nobody uses nuclear weapons against single ships. It is simply impossible. The only way to use nuclear weapons against ships is to use it when many ships are concentrated in one place in the known location, say in the Harbor of Copenhagen. NATO is a defensive block. Denmark will only use its navy to defend itself or one of its allies. Denmark (small country) does not have intentions to invade Russia. I know that Dmitry Kiselev, the leading propagandist of Putin’s regime boasted on TV in the prime time that Russia can turn America into radioactive ashes. News about developments and successful test of new nuclear missiles are always the prime topic on all official TV channels. Putin admitted that he was ready to press the red button to kill millions of people in the US and Europe if the governments of Western countries had tried to stop him, when he invaded Crimea.

              • Moscow Desire says:

                “The only way to use nuclear weapons against ships is to use it when many ships are concentrated in one place in the known location” – thanks, Captain Obvious, that’s exactly what he was talking about: if an hostile fleet is acting against Russia during a nuclear war, then it becomes a likely target for Russia’s nuclear forces. There is nothing surprising about launching a nuclear attack on warships: during Operation Crossroads, the US conducted 2 nuclear weapon tests at Bikini Atoll to investigate their effect on 95 target ships; both tests were publicly announced and caused public attention. “NATO is a defensive block” – and nuclear warheads are a defensive weapon. However, both defensive blocks and defensive weapons can be used as a tool to expand political influence and increase pressure on non-member countries by weakening their own defensive capability: try to catch Russia or China in a circle of NATO members, surround them with a wall of US air defense systems and they will immediately react by building up their own defense and setting up a barrier against the expansion of your Alliance in their region, because otherwise they will be much weaker than you, lose their military parity and weight in the political arena, and won’t be able to resist your domination. “Denmark (small country) does not have intentions to invade Russia” – just like Russia has no reason to invade Denmark. But even a relatively small country can be dangerous as part of a large coalition, pretty much like Romania and Hungary were during WW2.

                “Dmitry Kiselev, the leading propagandist of Putin’s regime boasted on TV in the prime time that Russia can turn America into radioactive ashes” – most newsreels and newspapers in Russia are as “biased” as their US counterparts. Most of them are just Russia-centric and neutral or positively neutral towards the government, whereas the rest are critical and sometimes even anti-Russian. Kiselev is an over-emotional right-wing journalist who often makes controversial statements, but even he didn’t “talk about how wonderful it would be to destroy London or turn American cities into hot radioactive ashes”. He said that Russia “is realistically capable” to nuke the US in response and therefore should be treated with respect. Even though he was correct – both countries are capable of destroying each other and should avoid confrontation, – his statement was regarded as controversial and “too harsh” in Russia.

                “News about developments and successful test of new nuclear missiles are always the prime topic on all official TV channels” – I’ve been watching these channels for 15 years and have seen only one or two mentions of “developments of new nuclear missiles” for all this time.

                “Putin admitted that he was ready to press the red button to kill millions of people in the US and Europe if the governments of Western countries had tried to stop him, when he invaded Crimea” – wrong again. He admitted only that he considered it possible to declare a “state of alert” for the Russian nuclear forces if there would be a risk of a “global conflict”. China did the same in 2005, pointing out that the PRC was ready to use nuclear weapons in response. Crimea was “invaded” by the Russian troops stationed there; they just joined the local rebels and secured the area.

                • ed brown says:

                  Russia has no reason to invade Denmark …
                  Yes, I know, a little bit earlier Russia did not have reason to invade Ukraine.

                  “are as “biased” as their US counterparts …”
                  “biased” is not a proper word describe Goebbels-like
                  propaganda on main Russian TV channels. US media
                  are not even close. Saying that Russian TV are
                  “biased” is like saying that North Korean TV is
                  “biased”. Well, formally it is correct, but bias
                  can differ drastically in magnitude.
                  There are no opposition TV channels in Russia.
                  All TV channels are either under direct control
                  of the government and glorify Putin every two hours
                  or afraid to criticize Putin’s regime, avoiding
                  political discussions.

                  I will not comment on the rest, since there are too
                  many false statements. Disproving each of your lies
                  would take too much time.

                  • Moscow Desire says:

                    “Yes, I know, a little bit earlier Russia did not have reason to invade Ukraine” – unlike Ukraine, Denmark has no significant Russian population and doesn’t even have a common border with Russia, let alone any border disputes and conflicts. “Goebbels-likepropaganda on main Russian TV channels” is equal to propaganda on main US channels. Like I said, most TV channels in Russia are just “positively neutral” towards Putin and don’t glorify him “every two hours” – there is no glorification except for short mentions of what he did, i.e. “today President Vladimir Putin had a working meeting with Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev visited the memorial of ” (I can back up this claim with thousands of video examples). The only impression left after watching them is that “President Vladimir Putin” and his colleagues have eventful lives. As has been said, most channels are Russia-centric and are vying for their country’s national interests, but it’s not surprising in comparison with their Western analogues. “There are no opposition TV channels in Russia” – watch the Dozhd TV channel if you want one; also, opposition members voice their opinions on Russian talk shows like “Spisok Norkina”. I don’t even mention countless opposition websites, opposition newspapers and “Goebbels-like Western propaganda” like the CNN that is available in Russia. While there, you can watch any Western TV channels you want, buy and read Western newspapers and visit Western websites as long as you want. All in all, the country has more freedom of word than Belarus or Ukraine.

                    “I will not comment on the rest, since there are toomany false statements” – your own false statements that I have quoted. Frankly, you shouldn’t comment on ANYTHING as long as you are an ignorant, childish and stupid kid with the most absurd fantasies about the world around you. The Russia you’ve been talking about doesn’t even exist in reality, so take the pills and don’t make a mockery out of yourself.

                    • Moscow Desire says:

                      PS. Some symbols in my message seem to be missing: “today President Vladimir Putin had a working meeting with (…), Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev visited the memorial of (…)”

  6. khairi says:

    great work! I have such a dream to be involve in these rescuer mission.

    having been enjoying this page since last year. keep a good work :-)

  7. Peter Thompson says:

    To Moscow Desire ………. your comment May 16 absolutely appropriate.
    It is essential for us all to think before we speak, and not cause mischief.

Leave a Reply