LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 03 Jul 2011 14:00

Bala Vignesh wrote:
Shrinivasan wrote:I Promise a Treat for the first person to post a picture of this deadly beast in all her glory - TD2 flying during first test flight!!!
That does it.. I am going camping on top of my old joint to see if i can spot this bird pop up for atleast some time.. Can someone here lend me a Canon telephoto zoom lens to capture this bird???

Edited: OT discussion

sawant · Post by **sawant** » 03 Jul 2011 14:56

Not sure if we discussed this... but any plans for ejection seats in LCH... i remember some Russian copter whose blades would come off and the pilots could eject ...

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 03 Jul 2011 15:04

That would be the Kamov Ka-50 Black Shark.. Fitting an ejection system into a chopper makes it more complex, and especially in LCH's case, heavy..

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 03 Jul 2011 20:54

Marten wrote:
Shrinivasan wrote:Thanks Bala...
Edited: Removed the OT part..
Forgive me for asking, but how is this post relevant to the LCH thread?

I had promised anyone a treat if they post a picture of LCH TD2 flying, Bala Volunteered, I wanted to tell that i'll have his treat delivered to his home, order from here in the US... sorry for going OT

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Jul 2011 07:34

In what way is the ALH Druv used by Para Commondos/Garuds different from the rest of the forces. In NDTV Jai-Hind with Rocky and Mayur, the Garud officers says something which I didn;t understand. I know MarkIII has many improvements like better engine, gear box, dampened vibrations etc... would appreciate of some Gurus can help or guide to a place where I can read it up.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 05 Jul 2011 07:45

^^
In addition to rappelling down, Airbourne forces can also para jump from helicopters. Apart from that, I don't see how Special forces will use helicopters differently.
Also, I guess Dhruv will be more helpful for SF operations because Nap of the earth (NOE) flying will be easier...specially during the night. This is very crucial for SF operations. One of the numerous reasons for failure of Operation Eagle claw by US Delta Force was the helicopter pilots incompetency to do night NOE effectively.

Anyway, it is difficult to answer your question without knowing what was said in the show. So it would help if you could either write what was said or give the time of the video portion which you are referring to.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Jul 2011 08:52

Gaur wrote:In addition to rappelling down, Airbourne forces can also para jump from helicopters. Apart from that, I don't see how Special forces will use helicopters differently.
Also, I guess Dhruv will be more helpful for SF operations because Nap of the earth (NOE) flying will be easier...specially during the night.

Could you summarize the enhancements in Mark II over Mark I and Mark III over Mark II. thanks

Gaur wrote: Anyway, it is difficult to answer your question without knowing what was said in the show. So it would help if you could either write what was said or give the time of the video portion which you are referring to.

Will try to reproduce the exact statement shortly.

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 05 Jul 2011 10:14

^^
I don't remember the differences b/n mk1 and mk2. However, mk3 was a vast improvement with Shakti engines, 3D active vibration control system and improved glass cockpit. Also, there is an engine health monitor for emergency purposes when regular displays fail. There are other improvements too but they escape my mind at present.

Anyway, my comment regarding use by SF forces was not variant specific. I was talking in general as to how Dhruv could be more suitable for SF operations as compared to our older helicopters.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 05 Jul 2011 10:21

Gaur wrote:^^
I don't remember the differences b/n mk1 and mk2. However, mk3 was a vast improvement with Shakti engines, 3D active vibration control system and improved glass cockpit. Also, there is an engine health monitor for emergency purposes when regular displays fail. There are other improvements too but they escape my mind at present.

Anyway, my comment regarding use by SF forces was not variant specific. I was talking in general as to how Dhruv could be more suitable for SF operations as compared to our older helicopters.

Thanks... i'll work with CJ to write an article on ALH and its variants and improvements etc

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 05 Jul 2011 10:37

>> Could you summarize the enhancements in Mark II over Mark I and Mark III over Mark II. thanks

although I am not Gaur,

Mk I analog cockpit/TM3332B2/passive vibration control system (ARIS)

Mk II glass cockpit/TM3332B2/ARIS + active vibration control system (FRAHMS)/vibration monitoring system (VMS)

Mk III glass cockpit/ shakti/ ARIS + 2nd gen AVCS/VMS

Mk IV (WSI) glass cockpit/ shakti/ ARIS + 2nd gen AVCS/VMS/ weapons and sensors

p.s. email me I will send you something.

Anuj A · Post by **Anuj A** » 06 Jul 2011 02:30

Jubilee south to Waterloo
District line going East from Waterloo to bermondsey

I believe Mark III was also meant to have an EO pod (yes the non-WSI version):

The Mk. 3 variants are powered by Shakti turboshaft engines developed by HAL and
Turbomeca. The helicopter underwent high-altitude trials in 2009. “The Mk. 3 sports a new electronic warfare suite, advanced laser warning systems, missile warning systems and electro-optical pods. It has a new-generation vibration-control system in place along with the glass cockpit. It also has an automatic chaff-and-flare dispenser,” the official

Although I haven't seen any pics to confirm this. Is it true that Mark III has an EO pod as standard like it say^^^??

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 06 Jul 2011 05:27

IAF Dhruv pilots begin training at HATSOFF; Ecuador pilots with presidential fleet complete session
Courtesy Tarmak007!

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 06 Jul 2011 08:08

Indian Air Force conducting trials for attack helicopters

Trials are underway for an Indian Air Force (IAF) order for 22 attack helicopters with two contenders in the fray - the US' Boeing AH-64D Apache and Russia's Mi-28.

According to IAF sources, the trials began in the hot deserts of Jaisalmer in Rajasthan last week and will be followed by similar gruelling tests in the icy Himalayan heights of Ladakh in Jammu and Kashmir.
:
The sources said test field trials to select a heavy lift helicopter for the IAF will begin next month and the same US and Russian companies will be in race. Boeing's Chinook, which operates for NATO forces in Afghanistan, will compete with Russian Mi-26 for the deal for 15 heavy-lift choppers.

The IAF is looking to replace the ageing lot of the previous generation Mi-26s inducted in the mid 1980's.

The Chinook, which has contra-rotating twin-rotors to withstand rough weather, is being used extensively in Afghanistan to maintain steady supplies to the troops. It can also carry artillery guns slung under its belly to be dropped off at inaccessible locations.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 06 Jul 2011 08:20

VinodTK wrote:Indian Air Force conducting trials for attack helicopters
Trials are underway for an Indian Air Force (IAF) order for 22 attack helicopters with two contenders in the fray - the US' Boeing AH-64D Apache and Russia's Mi-28.

According to IAF sources, the trials began in the hot deserts of Jaisalmer in Rajasthan last week and will be followed by similar gruelling tests in the icy Himalayan heights of Ladakh in Jammu and Kashmir.
:
The sources said test field trials to select a heavy lift helicopter for the IAF will begin next month and the same US and Russian companies will be in race. Boeing's Chinook, which operates for NATO forces in Afghanistan, will compete with Russian Mi-26 for the deal for 15 heavy-lift choppers.

The IAF is looking to replace the ageing lot of the previous generation Mi-26s inducted in the mid 1980's.

The Chinook, which has contra-rotating twin-rotors to withstand rough weather, is being used extensively in Afghanistan to maintain steady supplies to the troops. It can also carry artillery guns slung under its belly to be dropped off at inaccessible locations.

What with the problems we are facing with Ru, which are perplexing, Admiral G, Frigates, SU30, spares, T90s, wouldn't the Apache be a shoo in?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Jul 2011 09:06

in interest of a open tender , everyone was invited. tiger and rooivalk could not make the specs and didnt choose to join I think. the mangusta was likely eliminated in earlier stages.

yes if cost is not a deterrent, the AH64D should win hands down ....

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 06 Jul 2011 10:21

Singha wrote:in interest of a open tender , everyone was invited. tiger and rooivalk could not make the specs and didnt choose to join I think. the mangusta was likely eliminated in earlier stages. yes if cost is not a deterrent, the AH64D should win hands down ....

Din't ACM Naik, say a decision on Attack Helicopter would be take soon. He sounded as it all tests were over... now we are talking about Summer trials... god know how many more trials they would conduct? is this DDMIties or a faithful reproduction of a 1 year old news?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 06 Jul 2011 10:24

VinodTK wrote:Indian Air Force conducting trials for attack helicopters

There is something wrong with this article... see the date... i think they have just recycled an old news? what do you guys think? (see the title from the article)

Indian Air Force conducting trials for attack helicopters
New Delhi, July 22 (IANS)

Trials are underway for an Indian Air Force (IAF) order for 22 attack helicopters with two contenders in the fray - the US' Boeing AH-64D Apache and Russia's Mi-28.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 07:59

I think ACM Naik is far more reliable source (!) the decision should be coming soon...

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Jul 2011 08:16

I have not been clear on the need for this attack helo tender for 22 machines from day one. Now that the LCH is progressing neatly I am even more confused by it.

A delay of 2 or 3 years will not adversely effect the defense preparedness of the nation. IOW its not like the the Mi 24/35 will start falling out of the skies.

With careful planning & husbanding they can be kept in the air for another 2 to 3 extra years while the LCH matures and can enter service with the IA/F. So why go ahead and add an extra airframe with unique logistical and weapon types that can only be used in a geography limited way.

The LCH OTOH, will share most of the major automotive components with the ALH and can be serviced using the ALHs support infrastructure.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 09:48

Pratyush wrote:I have not been clear on the need for this attack helo tender for 22 machines from day one. Now that the LCH is progressing neatly I am even more confused by it.

A delay of 2 or 3 years will not adversely effect the defense preparedness of the nation. IOW its not like the the Mi 24/35 will start falling out of the skies.

IAF is looking for these attack helos in sort of a hi-lo combination. LCH might take another 24 months for FOC, in the meantime we will be inducting Druv WSI in good numbers primarily to Army, to a lesser extent IAF. when the tenders were floated PROBABLY the IAF was hedging its bets now knowing how successful LCH would be, still they funded the project. They showed more support for LCH than LCA!!!

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 09:49

Anybody has an update on the LOH? Paanwaalas, Chaiwaalas news!!!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 09:52

the LCH has its limitations of payload. very useful and essential in large numbers, but not a flying destroyer of the AH64D armed with 16 x hellfires.

I suspect IAF might want to retain a fleet of AH64/Mi28 under its control and increase the purchased nums once the Mi35s retire while agreeing that Army take up most of WSI and LCH (which IA is keen to do anyways)

it will be hi-lo mix probably in 1:5 ratio. imo all the heavy gunships should operate in the mountain strike corps theaters and not bother at all with tooling over the thar.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jul 2011 10:33

IMHO the heavy hitters would be used in support of SF/CSAR and SEAD. and as a HQ reserve so to speak.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 11:03

Singha wrote:the LCH has its limitations of payload. very useful and essential in large numbers, but not a flying destroyer of the AH64D armed with 16 x hellfires.

Spot on, LCH in its current avatar has a limited payload, but few years down the line with Mark-II and Mark-III it will grow in stamina like th ALH Druv (which has been impressive IMHO)

Singha wrote:I suspect IAF might want to retain a fleet of AH64/Mi28 under its control and increase the purchased nums once the Mi35s retire while agreeing that Army take up most of WSI and LCH

A health compromise if seen through, IA retains a tactical strike air-wing and IAF retains the heavy babies to support special projects?

Singha wrote:it will be hi-lo mix probably in 1:5 ratio. imo all the heavy gunships should operate in the mountain strike corps theaters and not bother at all with tooling over the thar.

Irrespective of terrain, the heavies are for special missions and LCH/ALH Druv WSI can do the tactical tasks. In addition to this older Mi-17s can be rigged as attack helos too for the plains to accompany tank columns.

What is missing in this mix is a nimble scout helo...

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 11:06

Singha wrote:...yes if cost is not a deterrent, the AH64D should win hands down ....

Singha... the current spat with the bear about spares should be a good indicator of things to come. Apache and Chinook might both win their respective categories. I wonder how Offsets for these deals are going to be factored.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 07 Jul 2011 12:39

<cut>

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 12:49

the idea of a few gunship helis doing a deep strike raid (abbotabad, iraqi rada stn in GW1) on logisitical nodes or armour concentration in tibet is intriguing...

if SF is to accompany needs a Dhruv-SF version kitted up for a squad of 6-8 operators + demolitions/rockets and with WSI avionics and fuel tanks instead of ordnance. should do better than a lumbering Mi17v. being our own baby we can play around with Silent-Dhruv mods and add the cool looks from LCH.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 07 Jul 2011 12:51

Somehow I don't buy the high-low concept for helicopters especially since the LCH is not THAT much different in capabilities from an Apache.

Hope its not like the T-90 which was used to kill the Arjun project.

I echo the sentiments of the guy who asked why can't the existing fleet of Hinds just be kept for a couple more years while the LCH bares fruit.

Waste of money if you ask me especially considering 8 attack choppers had been deployed in Africa under the UN all these years , yet now they need it urgently? I note the choppers have only recently been hastily withdrawn from Africa.

Perhaps thats because the question of why new attack choppers are needed urgently now when the military was comfortable deploying 8 existing choppers to Africa all this while could not be answered.

Sure sounds like arms lobbyists @ work to me.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 14:01

Singha wrote:if SF is to accompany needs a Dhruv-SF version kitted up for a squad of 6-8 operators + demolitions/rockets and with WSI avionics and fuel tanks instead of ordnance. should do better than a lumbering Mi17v. being our own baby we can play around with Silent-Dhruv mods and add the cool looks from LCH.

Druv-SF + Druv-WSI part of the insertion package. Apache/Mi-28 giving top cover.
Current Hinds and Super hinds soldiering on for plains Strike Corps.
LCH + Druv-WSI for Mountains + lizard (defense + pivot)
Apache/Mi-28 attack helos for Strike missions with Strike Corps - mountains.

John · Post by **John** » 07 Jul 2011 17:29

Shrinivasan wrote:
Singha wrote:if SF is to accompany needs a Dhruv-SF version kitted up for a squad of 6-8 operators + demolitions/rockets and with WSI avionics and fuel tanks instead of ordnance. should do better than a lumbering Mi17v. being our own baby we can play around with Silent-Dhruv mods and add the cool looks from LCH.
Druv-SF + Druv-WSI part of the insertion package. Apache/Mi-28 giving top cover.
Apache/Mi-28 attack helos for Strike missions with Strike Corps - mountains.

Strike and fire support roles can be performed by UAVs.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 17:35

India is 20 yrs behind usa in unmanned craft, so fancy uav's and ucavs are not there for us.

John · Post by **John** » 07 Jul 2011 17:43

Singha wrote:India is 20 yrs behind usa in unmanned craft, so fancy uav's and ucavs are not there for us.

We have one of largest UAV fleet and god knows when this competition is over and order is fulfilled you are looking at 2020+ by that time should have multiple UCAVs operational (Rustom,Aura etc).

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 07 Jul 2011 17:45

^^There is no info on Rustom being a UCAV and the Aura project is still only on paper, no?

John · Post by **John** » 07 Jul 2011 17:50

nachiket wrote:^^There is no info on Rustom being a UCAV and the Aura project is still only on paper, no?

Supposed to be a armed version of Rustom IIRC, Aura hopefully something comes out. Either way can always grab used Predators' from Unkil as it starts drawing down from Afghanistan.

jai · Post by **jai** » 07 Jul 2011 19:01

Apaches are awesome machines that can take a lot of punishment and still go on causing mayhem. It's good for India to get them in good numbers - they can be the benchmarks for lch and be the flagship flying tanks for IAF.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Jul 2011 19:15

wasn't an apache shot down by a farmer with a hunting rifle in iraq ? we seem to drink too much natgeo kool-aid.
sure it's good but we do not need it in large numbers(in fact one can argue whether we need them at all) and helo fleets do not need flagships.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Jul 2011 21:22

What is the mission that the IAF seeks to fulfill with the Attack Helo. Will they be subordinated to the IA or will they be used by the IAF as it sees fit. Moreover, what can these helos do that cannot be done more effectively with the current and projected fixed wing assets and with greater efficiency.

What I wish to understand is where will these machines make a difference. That the LCH will not be able to, and why cant the LCH over come that weakness, if it indeed has a weakness that requires the use of a heavy machines. Secondly, if the LCH is so weak then why are the IA/F spending time and resources for it. Why not simply acquire the license to make the winner of the tender at home and build the numbers needed to do the job.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Jul 2011 21:32

like any new platform, LCH will take its time to mature. even its atgm helina not even flight tested, so looks like we might be going the pars route there if helina doesnt come up soon. the Eurocopter tiger has been in "service" for years and even exported to australia but was not complete enough to even enter the flyoff for India. same for Mi28N - I have been hearing of the night havoc for a decade now...took time to enter service.

whatever be its demerits the AH64D is ready now, with a complete family of weapons and combat proven even at high altitudes ... so its a ready-to-go soln vs LCH which will likely take another 5-7 yrs to reach its full potential. given its cost I dont think we will afford more than 50 ever. most munna's have a bare dozen to show off each.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 07 Jul 2011 22:53

Singha wrote:LCH which will likely take another 5-7 yrs to reach its full potential. given its cost I dont think we will afford more than 50 ever. most munna's have a bare dozen to show off each.

LCH would take a minimum of 2 years to get inducted and another year or two to mature to an optimum platform.
AH64D is expensive, eventhough 22 attack helos look puny, it would cost a bomb along with the ordnance and avionics suite. Desh would ens up to be one of the largest users outside of Khanland. our order of 22 helos would definitely grow. WE probably would have 2 Squadrons of this heavy Attack Helos.

prithvi · Post by **prithvi** » 07 Jul 2011 23:54

Shrinivasan wrote:
Singha wrote:LCH which will likely take another 5-7 yrs to reach its full potential. given its cost I dont think we will afford more than 50 ever. most munna's have a bare dozen to show off each.
LCH would take a minimum of 2 years to get inducted and another year or two to mature to an optimum platform.
AH64D is expensive, eventhough 22 attack helos look puny, it would cost a bomb along with the ordnance and avionics suite. Desh would ens up to be one of the largest users outside of Khanland. our order of 22 helos would definitely grow. WE probably would have 2 Squadrons of this heavy Attack Helos.

Relevancy of attack helicopters in conventional war is debatable.. the whole terrain profile of eastern and western theater is quite different .... they are good for assymteric war fare.like Kargil.... or urban fights .. in an all out war.. not sure 22 or even 50 attack helo will be of relevance under constant threat of nuclear weapons...