They been doing it since the 1st serialy produced helos appeared in the USSR.
Abandoning properties in those locations &/ the lives lost would be even more expensive...
To put it in context a helicopter is a useful transport item for medical and emergency services. They are enormously expensive to buy and to operate, but then the average fully equipped ambulance is not cheaper and is very much disadvantaged in many big cities because of issues with traffic and accessing where the patient happens to be.
Even with modern road and rail infrastructure a helicopter makes sense.
If however you are talking about the far north of Russia it would take longer but you could make long trips via ground vehicles... they have a very wide range of types including wheeled and tracked vehicles. No roads, but no need for roads because these are rugged cross country vehicles designed for arctic conditions. They can travel thousands of kms in relative safety with little chance of a crash... though they might get stuck they generally operate in groups that can help each other out of problem situations. But why do they bother if helicopters are so perfect and other aircraft impossible?
true, but only where airstrips r present & if they can be safely used.
An-2s are designed to operate from rough air strips... which means unprepared flat areas of ground... if fitted with skis that includes frozen rivers and lakes or areas of packed down snow.
An-2 Minimum SL Take-Off Run: 560 feet. [170.688 Meters]
Typical SL Landing distance over 50 foot obstacle: 1400 feet.[426.72 Meters]
No helo needs that much space for VTO& Ls, even a tilt-rotor doing rolling TOs.
The stall speed of the new An-2 means that if there is a strong head wind they can actually fly backwards. In a place the size of Siberia finding 250m of flat snow to land on is not a huge problem... a small HE charge will drop a 50 foot obstacle easily enough.
I never implied "Using only helos or tilt rotors" where fixed wings could be used for le$$. But even there, with more forest fires & flooding, helos r essential for delivering/extracting firefighters, medics & conduct evacuations from boats, hilltops & rooftops.
They don't have a shortage of helos for that, what they need more of are fire fighting aircraft like Be-200 and A-42s.
And the leadership of the country considered that it was short-sighted to depend on a single arms supplier. Therefore, sometimes in tenders for the supply of various types of military equipment, even if Russian offers compare favorably with competitors’ products in terms of cost-effectiveness, the choice is not in our favor. ..
Which is fucking stupid. Such a policy is ridiculous. You should buy the best for the job at hand... except when the provider has a history of unreliability... that would be France and Britain and the US, but not Russia ironically.
Such a policy led to years using INSAS rifles...
So, they may not get as many Mi-17V-5s, if at all! 15 ordered CH-47Fs=~30 Mi-17s, so that leaves 48-30=18 Mi-17V-5s if they absolutely need them.
Based on their retarded logic they should not buy any... Russia can find some other customer who is not deranged.
Thus, its take-off weight will be close to 30 tons. It will replace the Soviet "Mi-6", as derived from service in 2004. The crew of the aircraft will consist of two people. "Ka-102" will be able to fly at a speed of 500 km/h at distances up to 1100 km; flight altitude may exceed 4 kilometers.
Replacing the Mi-6 is more likely the new Chinese and Russian joint venture helo in the 10-15 ton payload range... Kamov have already said they have designs able to fly faster than 500km/h using turbofans and wings, so even if it gets the title fastest helo, it wont hold it long.