LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 30 Jan 2013 07:56

Misraji wrote:
shiv wrote:I presume you have heard of Longewala?

Yes I have. Its not exactly what I thought I would get to learn.
But thanks. Appreciate the response.

--Ashish


If you have heard about Longewala, I presume you know of how just six Hunter aircraft and a handful of pilots managed to stop a Pakistani armored column in the absence of any significant Indian army assets to prevent that advance. Admittedly those Hunters had the advantage of lack of opposition by the Pakistan air force, but the action is an illustration of how air power acts as a force multiplier even when the absolute numbers of aircraft are small. Local air dominance of course would be desirable.

The army has complained (all armies complain about this) and Air Cmdre Jasjit Singh has also noted that men on a battlefront appreciate air power back up, but the Air Force is unable to provide that back up every time. India got lucky in Longewala. The Air Force feel that they do not have enough assets for every inch of battle front and that they are better off cutting C&C and logistics inside enemy territory rather than cherry picking on the battlefront. This makes a difference in the medium tern, but the frontline soldier is looking for more immediate assistance. The jawan on the front wants, and needs close air support. The army has taken it upon itself to provide that close air support. Even two helicopters can make a difference if applied exactly where they are needed and exactly when they are needed.

keshavchandra
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 22:23

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby keshavchandra » 30 Jan 2013 09:48

Certified and ready:Rudra

Ithe first Dhruv (Weapon Systems Integrated)—Dhruv-WSI or Rudra as it has been christened—will be certified and ready for handing over to its primary customer, the Indian Army, during Aero India 2013. The platform is all set to be officially certified by certification agencies this week. While a modified version of the Dhruv airframe—tandem seats—goes into the Light Combat Helicopter that is currently in flight trials, the Army was of the opinion that an armed Dhruv without major modifications to the primary airframe would also be a potent platform, and be available to the customer naturally much sooner. TheRudra is a result of that.
According to HAL, a Rudra can carry 48 70mm rockets.”Different warheads such as high explosive, darts, flechettes or cargo warheads provide adequate flexibility to address any type of target. These rockets can be safely delivered at stand-off ranges of more than 8 km. The turret mounted 20 mm cannons can be cued to the electro optical pod or the pilot’s helmet. This provides Rudra immediate and accurate firepower against ground and aerial targets. Pilot only has to look at the target and fire. With an advanced ballistic computer, the guns are very accurate even at extreme angles.
Fire and forget anti-tank guided missiles with 7-km range make Rudra an ideal platform for ground support roles. Rudra can carry four air to air missiles. These are infra red guided fire and forget missiles with off axis boresight capability. Pilot can engage the target using the helmet mounted sight or with the electro optical pod, while manoeuvering.” The HAL brochure on the Rudra also adds, “State of the art sensors complement this tremendous firepower.
Gyrostabilised electro optical sensors work on both visual and IR spectrum. Any type of target will be picked up and tracked at large distances, whether by day or by night. These targets can be handed over to the guided missiles or attacked with rockets and gun. The laser designator can designate the target for any compatible weapon. A comprehensive self protection suite would empower the pilot with essential situational awareness of the elctromagnetic and laser environment. Any missile launched on the helicopter would be picked up by the self protection suite and effective countermeasures dispensed automatically. This makes Rudra practically unassailable.” The delivery comes at a time when there remain unresolved issues between the

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Prem Kumar » 30 Jan 2013 09:59

What ATGM will go on the 2 Rudras being handed over to the Army? We heard about Pars, Spike etc being considered, in addition to Helina. But I havent seen any orders being placed

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4506
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby putnanja » 30 Jan 2013 11:19

Looks like the Army will end up as the biggest user of Dhruv variants. Not a surprise, and God knows they need as many as they can get their hands on! There was an article sometime back on how the induction of Dhruvs in J&K has led to decreased response time to terrorist movements.

Is the supply flights to Siachen still supported by IAF choppers or has IA taken over that role now? Is the Shakti powered Dhruvs bein used on ferry flights to Siachen regularly?

[Thanks PratikDas - Edited to correct the typo]
Last edited by putnanja on 30 Jan 2013 11:31, edited 1 time in total.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1927
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby PratikDas » 30 Jan 2013 11:27

Increased response time? Surely you mean decreased response time. :oops:

SivaVijay
BRFite
Posts: 136
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 19:23

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby SivaVijay » 30 Jan 2013 11:44

Misraji wrote:
shiv wrote:I presume you have heard of Longewala?

Yes I have. Its not exactly what I thought I would get to learn.
But thanks. Appreciate the response.

--Ashish



Well it is not just pure firepower but the mobility and the ability to concentrate the firepower quickly, so that the rate of loss sustained by the adversary is higher than that he can replenish.

Breakthroughs in battle occur at singular points and not across the entire FEBA. An IA commander might muse "Bah..! if I can just put some more fire on that position immediately.." and from the clouds will descend the RUDRA answering his call.... :)


abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3090
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby abhik » 30 Jan 2013 22:17

indranilroy wrote:Cross posting from missiles page:

indranilroy wrote:Is stage separation on NAG class of ATGM missile possible?

Image

I ask this, because it will allow placing the Nag's booster behind the sustainer. This will increase the range/speed, by:
1. Allowing straight exhaust from the booster instead of the oblique ones now
2. The booster can be discarded after the burnout (actually within a second of launch)

1)Most modern ATGM like the Hellfire and Spike have "straight exhaust", the "oblique" design is more common in older generation missiles like the TOW et al. which need a "clean" back end because they are wire guided/ beam riding. Not sure why the NAG uses this configuration though.
2)Having a discarding(?) stage will have an undesirable effect on cost and reliability. Also note that the motor makes up a smaller portion of the entire missile in an ATGM as compared to SAM, AAM or BMs. So the pay-off will not be much when compared to say a ballistic missile.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8227
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 30 Jan 2013 23:12

abhik wrote:1)Most modern ATGM like the Hellfire and Spike have "straight exhaust", the "oblique" design is more common in older generation missiles like the TOW et al. which need a "clean" back end because they are wire guided/ beam riding. Not sure why the NAG uses this configuration though.

If your propulsion is based on a booster and sustainer philosophy (for low visibility), and you don't discard any of the stages; then at least one of them has to be oblique. Also your assertion that modern ATGMs don't have oblique exhaust, is also not true. Spike ER has oblique exhausts.

abhik wrote:2)Having a discarding(?) stage will have an undesirable effect on cost and reliability. Also note that the motor makes up a smaller portion of the entire missile in an ATGM as compared to SAM, AAM or BMs. So the pay-off will not be much when compared to say a ballistic missile.

Fair point

Sancho
BRFite
Posts: 152
Joined: 18 Nov 2010 21:03
Location: Germany

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Sancho » 31 Jan 2013 20:44

indranilroy wrote:So I don't know if LCH will be able to carry 12-16 ATGMs. Nobody will be more happy than me to see that happen. Probably a good question for AI'13 visitors to ask.


Got this on another forum:

Image

http://www.aeroindiaseminar.com/images/ ... 202011.pdf


As you can see, a quad launcher was aimed for the inner hardpoints, a twin launcher for the outer = 12 x Hellfire / Helina class ATGMs. However, that are estimates for the early LCH prototypes, while the latest stubwing changes might add a higher weight limit to the outer stations.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8227
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 31 Jan 2013 22:13

Thank you. You made me happy. I hope they create a 4 tube launch system for Helina too.

Can we find the talk by Dr. Prasad Sampath at AI'11?

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2033
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby srin » 31 Jan 2013 23:20

indranilroy wrote:Thank you. You made me happy. I hope they create a 4 tube launch system for Helina too.

Can we find the talk by Dr. Prasad Sampath at AI'11?


This one ?


Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8227
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 31 Jan 2013 23:21

yes, thanks a lot ... I tried searching for half an hour and failed!!!

srin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2033
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby srin » 31 Jan 2013 23:28

indranilroy wrote:yes, thanks a lot ... I tried searching for half an hour and failed!!!


In the spirit of AeroIndia, I was going over all the Aero India 2011 talks here - http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3C4A914E4FB1CB19

Two speakers are outstanding - Dr. Prasad Sampath (the one I linked above) and Capt Maolonkar (LCA Navy). Worth watching every minute of it.

Sancho
BRFite
Posts: 152
Joined: 18 Nov 2010 21:03
Location: Germany

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Sancho » 01 Feb 2013 04:36

indranilroy wrote:Thank you. You made me happy. I hope they create a 4 tube launch system for Helina too.


I think it will be only a quad launcher, just armed with 2 or 4 missiles, depending on hardpoint limits.

And here is my prefered weapon load config:

http://s7.directupload.net/images/130201/xfu2orql.jpg


Consider a mixed load of 2 x 4 Helina + 2 x rocketpods with up to 9 x CLGM. Completely Indian, up to 26 x guided missiles, for CAS, against armored vehicles, air or even sea targets and not to forget the most cost-effective choice.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8227
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 01 Feb 2013 04:38

Is there a place in BR where such videos can be cataloged?

I wish the guys at Aero India seminars make a simple videocast. Dr. Sampath is not Mallika Sherawat. We would like to see his slides rather than him. I am pretty sure, he would like the same thing. If Sancho had not unearthed that paper, we would have no clue of that Dr. Samoath showed in his earlier slides including payloads.

Videocast of presentations is easy. Break the screen into 1:3 ratio. The slides occupy 3/4 part of the screen and the presenter occupies 1/4th of the screen. And I am pretty sure that they have free software to do the same. Showing the slides sometimes and the presenter sometimes, and sometimes a moving inset of the presenter of various shapes on the slides is really unprofessional.

Image

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8227
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Indranil » 01 Feb 2013 04:49

Sancho wrote:
indranilroy wrote:Thank you. You made me happy. I hope they create a 4 tube launch system for Helina too.


I think it will be only a quad launcher, just armed with 2 or 4 missiles, depending on hardpoint limits.

And here is my prefered weapon load config:

http://s7.directupload.net/images/130201/xfu2orql.jpg


Consider a mixed load of 2 x 4 Helina + 2 x rocketpods with up to 9 x CLGM. Completely Indian, up to 26 x guided missiles, for CAS, against armored vehicles, air or even sea targets and not to forget the most cost-effective choice.

Godspeed.

But I have never seen more than 4-CLGM-launcher. I guess you would never have enough sortie time to fire 26 guided missiles. Also, I don't think taking everything out with a CLGM will be cost effective. The most TFTA launcher that I have seen till now is

Image

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 01 Feb 2013 05:32

indranilroy wrote:Is there a place in BR where such videos can be cataloged?


Luptonga is the name of the YouTube channel which catalogued 2011 aero India seminar videos. Hopefull it will happen again.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 01 Feb 2013 08:02

what on earth is that thing in the pic? some kind of octal launcher ?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 01 Feb 2013 08:49

indranilroy wrote:The most TFTA launcher that I have seen till now is

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_C-jRcFb4occ/S ... oto2_h.jpg

I think that is a photoshopped image. I cannot believe that the sensitive transparent nose cones of those missiles can be left exposed in close proximity to the hot exhaust of the rockets in the pod.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 01 Feb 2013 09:20

it real it seems. LM builds this M229 launcher which can take 4 weapons - a mix of hellfires or DAGR (guided rockets) or some JCM (joint common missile). in the pic, one pylon has the DAGR, rest 3 have hellfire IIR version.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/produc ... ncher.html

http://defenceforumindia.com/jh4cz/asse ... rocket.png

http://defenceforumindia.com/hydra-70-rocket-1573

as usual khan does some amazing things in compact pkging, precision guidance etc. btw we have ordered the basic Hydra rockets with the Apache deal.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 01 Feb 2013 10:22

The CLGM type of missile is a non-starter for LCH or any combat helicopter for today's battlefield. For a simple reason that you want your chopper to fire and get the hell out of there. With the proliferation of MANPADS like bird-seeds, a helicopter required to maintain lock on his target till the point of impact is a non-starter. Nor can you rely on ground based lasing of the target. Further, one would ideally want a helicopter to pick couple of targets during each engagement period, fire missiles and get away.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 01 Feb 2013 11:17

I think people were proposing a CLGM type thing but with fire n forget ability (IIR, MMW).

but we already have it - the Helina !! and the helicopter cannot mount the arjun cannot in a ventral pod to give CLGM style energy and range.

you are right that rambo style standing too and firing 16 ATGMs one by one at a mass offensive is not on, helis will sneak in, loose off a missile or two and then relocate behind cover or out of range to next firing position.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 01 Feb 2013 13:10

Singha wrote:<SNIP>you are right that rambo style standing too and firing 16 ATGMs one by one at a mass offensive is not on, helis will sneak in, loose off a missile or two and then relocate behind cover or out of range to next firing position.


The entire thing about having armed helicopters with nimble controls is to permit Nap-of-Earth flying and enable a helicopter to sneak up to its target - undetected. It will use whatever cover is available - like treeline to hide/conceal itself. At the opportune time, the choppers will pop-out and send their cargo towards the target.

Check this excellent video of Cobra Gunships in action in European theater.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV2hADH9TBo

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Prem Kumar » 01 Feb 2013 15:54

Sancho wrote:
indranilroy wrote:Thank you. You made me happy. I hope they create a 4 tube launch system for Helina too.


I think it will be only a quad launcher, just armed with 2 or 4 missiles, depending on hardpoint limits.

And here is my prefered weapon load config:

http://s7.directupload.net/images/130201/xfu2orql.jpg


Consider a mixed load of 2 x 4 Helina + 2 x rocketpods with up to 9 x CLGM. Completely Indian, up to 26 x guided missiles, for CAS, against armored vehicles, air or even sea targets and not to forget the most cost-effective choice.


Nice graphic. But if the outer pylon can handle only 2 Helinas, it can be replaced by 4 CLGMs/Lahats, not 8. The CLGM weighs nearly half that of Nag. Still, a 16 missile load out is nothing to sneeze at!

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Singha » 01 Feb 2013 16:11

you know BR, people wont rest until the LCH can carry a quad pack of Klub-3M14 below the belly!
and some die hards will still want a couple brahmos on the wings and a arjun turrent bolted at the front end to pour some devastating fire.

member_22539
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2022
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby member_22539 » 01 Feb 2013 16:46

rohitvats wrote:The CLGM type of missile is a non-starter for LCH or any combat helicopter for today's battlefield. For a simple reason that you want your chopper to fire and get the hell out of there. With the proliferation of MANPADS like bird-seeds, a helicopter required to maintain lock on his target till the point of impact is a non-starter. Nor can you rely on ground based lasing of the target. Further, one would ideally want a helicopter to pick couple of targets during each engagement period, fire missiles and get away.



What about Hellfire missiles, don't they still use laser guidance or have all newer ones shifted to MMW guidance?

krishnan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7342
Joined: 07 Oct 2005 12:58
Location: 13° 04' N , 80° 17' E

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby krishnan » 01 Feb 2013 16:50

The AGM-114L, or Longbow Hellfire, is a fire-and-forget weapon: equipped with a millimeter wave (MMW) radar seeker, it requires no further guidance after launch—even being able to lock-on to its target after launch[7]—and can hit its target without the launcher or other friendly unit being in line of sight of the target. It also provides capability in adverse weather and battlefield obscurants (obscurants such as smoke and fog being able to mask the position of the target or to prevent the designating laser from producing a detectable reflection). Each Hellfire weighs 47 kg / 106 pounds, including the 9 kg / 20 pound warhead, and has a range of 8,000 meters. The AGM-114R "Romeo" Hellfire II entered service in late 2012. It uses a semi-active laser homing guidance system and an integrated blast fragmentation sleeve warhead to engage targets that previously needed multiple Hellfire variants. It will replace AGM-114K, M, N, and P variants in U.S. service.[8] In October of 2012, the U.S. ordered 24,000 Hellfire II missiles, for both the U.S. armed forces and foreign customers.[9]

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Prem Kumar » 01 Feb 2013 17:37

Rohit: I dont agree that CLGM is a non starter for LCH. Not everyone walks around with a MANPAD. As I mentioned earlier, the air launched version will likely have a higher range (my speculation, of course). Plus there are self defence & stealth mechanisms in LCH/Rudra etc. They are expected to provide close support to infantry. So, some level of MANPAD risk tolerance is built into the design.

Hellfire semi active laser homing version was used extensively by Apaches. Only the latest versions use MMW

Agreed, we are not expecting an LCH to launch a frontal attack on a tank squadron with laser guided missiles - its supposed to be a sneaky bird. And no doubt, a fire & forget or LOAL MMW based CLGM or Helina is more risk-free.

But I definitely see an LCH with a laser guided CLGM as a distinct possibility.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 01 Feb 2013 18:37

Prem Kumar wrote:Rohit: I dont agree that CLGM is a non starter for LCH. Not everyone walks around with a MANPAD. As I mentioned earlier, the air launched version will likely have a higher range (my speculation, of course). Plus there are self defence & stealth mechanisms in LCH/Rudra etc. They are expected to provide close support to infantry. So, some level of MANPAD risk tolerance is built into the design.

Well, the IA/IAF have already shown what they prefer. The reason Spike ER and PARS L is being tested in the interim till HELINA comes on line is because like proposed HELINA, these two missiles are also fire and forget. As for not everyone walks around with MANPADS, PA has scattered it like bird-seed in their inventory across the arms. Just like the massive proliferation of ATGM by PA to counter Indian superiority in Tanks.

And defensive measures are the last ditch option - they are not akin to a shield which can be held up front to safeguard a chopper.


Hellfire semi active laser homing version was used extensively by Apaches. Only the latest versions use MMW

What the US does hardly matters in our case. As it is, they are not going to fight any armored force anytime soon. We are. And IA has already started making the transition to 3rd Gen F&F ATGM - Javelin for the Infantry and HELINA for Choppers.

Agreed, we are not expecting an LCH to launch a frontal attack on a tank squadron with laser guided missiles - its supposed to be a sneaky bird. And no doubt, a fire & forget or LOAL MMW based CLGM or Helina is more risk-free.

Well, that is what the thinking is. And that is how the new missile systems are being inducted.

But I definitely see an LCH with a laser guided CLGM as a distinct possibility.As I said, IA/IAF have already made their choice abundantly clear. PARS L/Spike ER in short-term and HELINA in long term.

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3994
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby hnair » 02 Feb 2013 03:31

shiv wrote:
indranilroy wrote:The most TFTA launcher that I have seen till now is

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_C-jRcFb4occ/S ... oto2_h.jpg

I think that is a photoshopped image. I cannot believe that the sensitive transparent nose cones of those missiles can be left exposed in close proximity to the hot exhaust of the rockets in the pod.


Could be real. Because that is just a quad-pack Hydra launcher being added to the generic Hellfire quad-missile launcher system(M299) carried by their helicopters and nothing special. As for the exposure issues due to exhaust, if the normal Hellfire launch plume doesnt hurt the other three currently, so would the less sizable plumes of these hydras.

Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 516
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Nick_S » 02 Feb 2013 15:04

:shock: :eek: :shock:


Image

:oops:

More here - http://tarmak007.blogspot.com.au/2013/0 ... orian.html

(Sorry Mods, I dont know how to make the pic smaller. Please feel free to adjust/delete my post)

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 02 Feb 2013 15:26

Nick_S wrote::shock: :eek: :shock:


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6hqc9TNhXd8/U ... Ladies.jpg


(Sorry Mods, I dont know how to make the pic smaller. Please feel free to adjust/delete my post)


What for? Mods please delete all posts except this one. In fact delete other threads as well. 8)

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby member_23694 » 02 Feb 2013 15:53

shiv wrote:Nick_S wrote:
:shock:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6hqc9TNhXd8/U ... Ladies.jpg
(Sorry Mods, I dont know how to make the pic smaller. Please feel free to adjust/delete my post)
What for? Mods please delete all posts except this one. In fact delete other threads as well.


+1000
shows the true capability of dhruv, brilliant 8)

lakshmikanth
BRFite
Posts: 723
Joined: 27 Oct 2008 10:07
Location: Bee for Baakistan

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby lakshmikanth » 02 Feb 2013 16:02

What Dhruv? I dont see it at all, is this the right thread for this kind of post?

Edit: Removed trash talk

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby shiv » 02 Feb 2013 19:41

lakshmikanth wrote:What Dhruv? I dont see it at all, is this the right thread for this kind of post?

Edit: Removed trash talk


Speaking of trash talk and Dhruv, which means Pole Star.. this image should make your pole stir eh? :wink:

Sancho
BRFite
Posts: 152
Joined: 18 Nov 2010 21:03
Location: Germany

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Sancho » 02 Feb 2013 22:06

indranilroy wrote:But I have never seen more than 4-CLGM-launcher.


That are normal rockets in a mixed config with ATGMs, but LAHAT and CLGMs are bigger and more powerful than normal laser guided rockets. That's why I said, capabilitywhise they fall between rockets and Helina.


rohitvats wrote:The CLGM type of missile is a non-starter for LCH or any combat helicopter for today's battlefield. For a simple reason that you want your chopper to fire and get the hell out of there. With the proliferation of MANPADS like bird-seeds, a helicopter required to maintain lock on his target till the point of impact is a non-starter. Nor can you rely on ground based lasing of the target. Further, one would ideally want a helicopter to pick couple of targets during each engagement period, fire missiles and get away.


You are missing some points here, my point was mainly to use LAHAT/CLGM with Rudra, since it will be used more in the fire support roles jointly with our ground forces, or strike corps. In a netcentric enviroment, even with UAVs, so carrying up to 16 x LAHAT would be defenitely the better choice, be it self guided, or with assistance from different sources.

Secondly, for LCH it would be an addition at the outer hardpoints, where LCH might only carry twin combos of Helina or normal rocket pods, while you can at least carry 4 LAHAT (with dedicated rocket pod even way more). That multiplies the attack capability of LCH by far, not to mention that LAHAT offers even longer ranges than Helina (8 to 13Km vs 5 to 7Km), so even if Helina will be used, you might have to get closer to the target to use it.

Thirdly, my general point about this kind of missile is, to have a type of missile for combat helicopters as well as fighters in CAS. A rocket pod with LAHAT on LCA + Litening pod would offer credible CAS capabilities, in many situations where LGBs are simply too heavy and can be carried only in limited numbers. So this would not only increase the attack capabilities of our combat helicopters, but also of our fighters.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7734
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 02 Feb 2013 23:36

Sancho wrote:<SNIP>

You are missing some points here, my point was mainly to use LAHAT/CLGM with Rudra, since it will be used more in the fire support roles jointly with our ground forces, or strike corps. In a netcentric enviroment, even with UAVs, so carrying up to 16 x LAHAT would be definitely the better choice, be it self guided, or with assistance from different sources.

I think we are using some concepts and words a bit loosely here. How is employment of Apache and LCH against PA armor or other ground targets not same as 'fire support' role that you allude for Rudra? What are those ATGMs (LAHAT/HELINA/XYZ) going to be used for?

As for net-centric warfare and use of Rudra - how is net-centric warfare going to allow for targeting of targets on the ground for Rudra?

Fact of the matter is that ability of an attack chopper to survive in today's battlefield through minimum exposure and shoot-and-scoot is of paramount importance. If Rudra carries 4 x ATGM of F&F type with corresponding targeting system, it can ensure that these 4 x ATGM can hit their targets.

Relying on ground based lasing of targets ('close to ground forces') is limiting the scope and agility of deployment. How many such teams or equipment do you think you deploy in the entire army? And don't you think this becomes a limiting factor in itself going against the very fundamentals of deployment of air-power? The biggest benefit systems like Rudra confer on formation commanders is that these can be deployed in time and space of their choosing in very short notice


Secondly, for LCH it would be an addition at the outer hardpoints, where LCH might only carry twin combos of Helina or normal rocket pods, while you can at least carry 4 LAHAT (with dedicated rocket pod even way more). That multiplies the attack capability of LCH by far, not to mention that LAHAT offers even longer ranges than Helina (8 to 13Km vs 5 to 7Km), so even if Helina will be used, you might have to get closer to the target to use it.

I would take an ability of LCH/Rudra to effectively employ limited number of ATGMs with-out exposing themsleves to too much danger over larger number of 2nd gen SACLOS missiles

Thirdly, my general point about this kind of missile is, to have a type of missile for combat helicopters as well as fighters in CAS. A rocket pod with LAHAT on LCA + Litening pod would offer credible CAS capabilities, in many situations where LGBs are simply too heavy and can be carried only in limited numbers. So this would not only increase the attack capabilities of our combat helicopters, but also of our fighters.

I think we're moving into the realms of fantasy here. How much loiter time do you think a combat aircraft will have over a battlefield to keep on targeting and launching LAHAT type of missile? As for LCH with LDP - what is the penalty in terms of equipment (and its associated weight) required to integrate LDP with the chopper? Litening LDP itself weighs 200 KG - add to it weight of equipment to haul this plus to interface with the FCS of the chopper? How many more missiles can you carry after that?

SagarAg
BRFite
Posts: 1164
Joined: 12 May 2011 15:51

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby SagarAg » 03 Feb 2013 00:32

Nick_S wrote::shock: :eek: :shock:

More here - http://tarmak007.blogspot.com.au/2013/0 ... orian.html

(Sorry Mods, I dont know how to make the pic smaller. Please feel free to adjust/delete my post)

:oops: :twisted: DHRUV :twisted: The Charmer
Image

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7007
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Anujan » 03 Feb 2013 00:42

Where is the helicopter? I didnt see any helicopters :mrgreen:


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests