Bharat Rakshak

don't know how to break this to you but they are trying to built an attack helicopter that can fight in the mountains, not trying to impress people.

apparently IR suppressors eat in the power figures so that's an interesting question. we did retrofit them on the hinds though.

is the lancer still used ? I thought they had given up after terrorists started firing at any helos ?
you missed the Mi-17 which too can be fitted with rockets.
truthfully, only LCH and the attack helo RFI one would be pure attack helicopters, rest are utility/transport helicopters with an attack capability.

or because the Mi-24's are long in the tooth and IAF can't afford to wait for LCH.

Really? Did the same with my premier padmini - moved the front passenger seat to the back, right behind the driver. Awesome finish too.. must be the same process, no?

IDK what you were expecting. It looks same as the models that we have been seeing for some time. To each his own, but I am extremely impressed by it looks. IMO, it is the sleekest heli I have ever seen. And though looks do not matter, the sleek looks of LCH do make this jingo very happy. I really want to see LCH is grey camo, man it will be a looker.



I myself fail to see much visual familiarity b/n Dhruv and LCH.

Nice!!

No bhai, that is not a pneumatic lever for pulling it up. Its called a shock strut, and comprises the oleo.

The exposed metal that you see is the length of the oleo stroke..that is how much it can move up (its called a fluid spring), displace hydraulic fluid or both hydraulic fluid and air for a oleo pneumatic system and absorb shock. The length of that oleo stroke (also called vertical axle travel) means that its designed to take real punishment while landing. i.e.absorb plenty of kinetic energy. That is due to the higher crashworthiness requirements for an attack helicopter.

The vertical axle travel required is estimated based on what is the permissible landing load factor (also known as reaction factor). And it should be able to take the limit loads without any permissible deformation..that limit load will be decided based on what is the worst case in which the pilot lands operationally. Multiply it by a factor of 1.5 and you have your ultimate load and that is the load at which the landing gear should still not fail, but if it suffers a permanent set, its considered alright.

What one cannot tell is the oleo's internal construction and whether its a single stage/two stage/mixing type or separator type oleo design. Could well be a single stage to keep it simple and cheap. OTOH, two stage oleos provide varying spring characteristic and are useful for operation if the LCH needs to taxi on rough airfields. If not, and if it only needs to land, the single stage is sufficient.

All in all, a simple robust landing gear design but the length of the stroke made it clear that it was designed to take a really heavy landing.

And its going to be in that position during flight. No retraction is required. Its more complicated to have a retraction mechanism with the actuators, back up system in case it fails to come back out and space is required if its to be pulled into the fuselage, plus you need doors for that which means added hinges and actuators. For weight constrained designs, every kg of weight removed is a performance gain, so its not needed. All that additional effort and you'll get a miniscule reduction in RCS or drag.

These are all mandatory requirements for certification so the performance of the landing gear would've been tested extensively on ground rigs, with drop tests and other tests that certify its usage.

@ Rahul, Martin and Mr Gaur..

Got your point..pardon me for the post..

Looks good... There is a tad resemblance to the Dhruv but seems to be a fresh design from ground up... I pray that the test program faces no hiccups and that these birds get inducted in good quantity...

Added Later..
I know this may sound crazy but, can LCH be operated from naval ships??

Thanks Rahul.

exactly my gripe as well..the canopy is too large and the cockpit is far too exposed. They need to reduce it if possible to make it safer for the pilots..the perspex glass will be bullet-proof on the sides, but still too much surface area. This is the only gripe I have with this design as of now. with all the modern electro-optic systems that gunships have, having excellent visibility is not the most important thing, but from all the designs I've seen coming out of HAL and ADA, the emphasis on visibility for the pilots is very clear (Dhruv, IJT, Tejas twin-seater)..maybe the IAF and IA are very adamant on that..

Guys,

It's still very much a work in progress and it has an extremely long way to go before it arrives somewhere near its final form and shape.

Hope that they keep it simple and sturdy and not mess it up by attempting to do too much while trying to please too many people.

?? To what end, saar ??

Want them to go after basking submarines?

With no blade fold, no Naval CO will be comfortable with the LCH tied down on the deck. Anything more than sea state three or so will probably cause damage.

No sir, Not after Basking Submarines, sir... I had hoped to deploy them on our naval units that go on anti piracy duties the world over.. The sight of a dedicated attack helicopter should scare the s**t out of the pirates... Also the spin off includes operations off the CG OPV's that can to protect out coastlines from 26/11 style insertion being repeated...

As for the protection from sea, its possible to Marine-ise it... Like we did with Dhruv...

As i have said earlier, i know this sounds completely nuts but just couldn't stop from asking...

not on the destroyers or frigates but on the LPD type ships ? I think that's a distinct possibility.

I seem to remember reading something on BR about some university in India being tasked to determine ways to reduce the IR signature for the LCH. (Will try to google and post references).

However, when looking at the photo of the LCH hovering, there doesn't seem to be any distortion in the picture due to the exhaust gases, i.e. there's no visible trail of hot gases. So perhaps something has been incoporated internally?

thanks for your comments. yes only rear seat inserted baaki all same to same. shown your knowledge ? EDIT.

IR suppressors affect the performance of the helicopter very significantly. If you want a helo to operate at high altitudes its better not to feature major IR suppressors.

Bala Vignesh ji,

Well, at least that was thinking out of the box!!

Never heard of a marinised attack helicopter!!

You could just as easily arm a naval chetak with a multi barrel LMG in the rear cabin, operated by the Aircrew Diver. Complete with a trap to collect the spent shells and also mechanically limited arcs of fire so that the excited ACD does not shoot off his own tail rotor!!

Seriously, it would be too heavy and consequently have very short legs. Also, Naval regulations forbid the embarkation of a non folder.

Kartik, you're a gem. Thank you for the succinct explanations. BR is a virtual university!

aaah !...finally the day has come....those #@$% kept this mujahid waiting since march '08 and just when the time for glory neared, they booted me out of that place..
congratulations to sharma,sheriff & team.

Raja Bose ji,

The entire ( engines + transmission ) is common.

what about US marines' cobra ? I do think we might see such a thing in IN eventually, deployed off amphibs.

well, if naval chetak says naval chetak with LMG is improbable who am I to argue with that ?

Quite correct. My question was more in the context if LCH gets tasked for the plains or deserts - IR suppressors afaik are not permanently attached to the fuselage (atleast the Hind ones). Or perhaps LCH role is for HA areas only.

@chetak - the chin looks the same too. I really hope they maximize the commonality of parts as much as feasible in the chankian SDRE way.

Rahul M ji,

This is entirely possible in some joint Army - Navy sort of ops, but it would be mission specific only, I guess.

Chetak, I have no other gripes with the design as such..there are some that have been cribbing about the landing gear and all that whereas I can see that its fine as is. My only issue is that maybe on the rear seater's side, the glass canopy can be shortened right upto the rear seater's elbow, giving it a stepped look. the essential purpose is simply so that they can put a armoured panel out there, protecting the rear seater more.

right, since we don't have a dedicated combined arms marine force like the USMC. as and when army formations get permanently earmarked for amphib operations along with induction of the required amphibs, it's likely that organic attack helo assets will form a part of it. but yes, you are correct that those won't be operated by the navy.

Rahul M ji,

Not improbable but highly possible and proven too.

In one of the ops, a Seaking Commando version was modified with an in house developed mounting incorporating a LMG, firing out the side doors.

The size and weight of this contraption was eminently suitable for installation on a Chetak and was tried out too as a backup.

The drawings are still around and the job could easily be done in a jiffy.

ah thanks for the info. pardon for the OT but do you have any idea if we are going to replace the 42C anytime soon ? and with what ? the RFI is for ASW choppers only IIRC.

Awesome atlast the D-Day arrived

As for the deployment of LCH, I remember reading an article many moons ago in print media. It spoke about the concentration of heavy gunships with Strike Corps while LCH will be with other holding corps.

I hope we provide at least one Squadron of LCH for each of the Corps on Westerm border(plains), apart from Strike Corps, we'd need 5 Squadron worth of these. Order for 114 roughly translates into 5 Squadrons@22 LCH/Squadron. Let us see how these get distributed.

Kartik ji,

Right now the rear seat is occupied by the second pilot.

CTP Unni Pillai flew from the front and Hari Nair manned the dual controls installed in the rear cockpit. It will continue like this for quite some time until most of the tests flights have been completed and the flight envelope has been investigated to everyones' satisfaction.

Eventually the rear cockpit will make way for the weapons operator.

That is when the real attack helo characteristics will start to appear.

Rahul M ji,

AFAIK, the 42Cs have a fair bit of life left in them yet.

But will anyway check and see.

but the weapons operator occupies the front seat in most cases.

rohit, AAC squadrons are usually smaller aren't they ? @ 10/sqdn IIRC ? even IAF helo sqdns have smaller # of airframes than their fighter counterparts which top it at 16/sqdn.

right now we have only 2 attack helo sqdns to go around for the 3 strike corps. I'm hoping at least the XIV corp gets one sqdn. the holding corps/IBGs will be supplemented by a significant number of the WSI-Dhruvs which will be churned out in the meantime.

Sir, if memory serves right, AAC Squadron has 15 helo/squadron. Basically, 3 Flights of 4+1 helos each. These are alloted at Corp HQ level and flights are detailed for the divisions under the Orbat of Corps.

As for requirment, even if we authorize one Sqn./Corps (apart from Strike Corps), we'd need 10 Squadron worth of these which @ 15 helos/Sqn. means 150 birds. BTW, 114 helos@15 per Sqn. will be 7 Squadrons and some change (may be trg.). But the numbers that I have given are for Cheetah/Chetak Sqn. and may be apply to ALH as well ( I don't see why it should not). Not sure, how the IA spreads out these birds per Squadron wise.

Help Gurus...I have few queries :

1) As per my knowledge HAL has signed a contract with Israel for LCH avionics. Is this an interim measure or are we thinking of equipping the whole fleet with their avionics ?

2) Is This DIRCM indigenous or imported ??

3) http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20091207/nation.htm#14
According to this article HAL is in talks with DRDO for indigenous MAWS for LCH....Any idea where are we currently with this ??

Thanks

looking at this beauty fly today makes me wonder how much this would have helped us 11 years back in Kargil. We could have wrapped up Operation Vijay in half the time and saved the lives of so many Jawans.

I am actually getting addicted to watching these two photos again and again. A jingo's heart is overflowing with pride.

Just to mention from Ajai Shukla's Business Standard article :

159 Dhruvs and 76 WSI Dhruvs on order.

76 WSI dhruv + (114 Army + 65 IAF) LCH = 255 attack heli's on order.

This excludes the 22 heavy attack heli's to be ordered.

Note also I read the 80 Mi -17 IV on order are basically the gunship version

25 upgraded Mi-35's which i expect will run till around 2016.

Thats a LOT of Heli Firepower! (approx 382)

Any ideas on how many WSI dhruvs may be serving already?


http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Aircr ... anshu.html
http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... on/333870/

Not in the Eurocopter Tiger. It too has the pilot in the front seat and the gunner in the rear.

This is pertinent to those in the know. I've been on heli's before but have never been in a (LCH type heli) (2 pilot attack heli in other words..) Might be a retarded question but, are those seats Ejectable?? Can the pilots EJECT from those seats, or they have to go down with their priced possession? Please excuse me if this question seemed a lil out of place in a forum like ours!

PS. I know flying along 18,000 ft, the pilot can eject safely in a jet, don't know if the same can/can't be done in a Heli.. Hope someone can answer this for me and not make me feel stupid! Cheers!