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.
Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2594
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Sagar G » 10 Aug 2013 10:47

anjan wrote:This is awesome. It is satire, isn't it? Otherwise this entire spiel about cherry picking data while going on to list the gamut of people you won't listen to (turns out that's a large part of the government, military, media, and legislature) while treating 1 man's word as factual truth is just... sad. BTW this isn't even a commentary on your position. Just the standard of debate on this subject.


Unless you are a Philip wannabe then do you know what does SA to RM means ??? The said person whom you are questioning so easily isn't producing stats from his musharraff but asked a national body to do the calculations for it and when the body gave him the figures that's when he went public with the same. Now maybe in your world like Philip's asking professional bodies to do a job in which they are good at might not be considered kosher but in actual world such actions matter, it's a totally different thing that you want to live in your make belief world about which I have no problem but that doesn't mean that you have a free pass to come and carry out a disinformation campaign on a public forum. All the guys quoted have been using the same old data which god knows is based on which survey carried out at what time ??? Here ex DRDO chief is being quoted from two different interviews where he was asked this specific question about the 70:30 ratio and he has give the same answer to both of them based on analysis done by a professional body. Now if you want to challenge this data being put out by him then you show a better analysis from another national body and people will accept. But quoting old articles who are using the same old data and hence conclusively saying that the ratio is still 70:30 is pretty dumb given that so many indigenous systems have been inducted recently and more are in the process of induction. Even the present SA to RM i.e. DRDO chief has said that the 70% indigenous content is well within reach. Now will you say that he is also wrong and our DDM or some retired army personnel have access to better data to actually gauge the indigenous content in our defence items ???

Also there is a need to understand why having foreign items in indigenous content isn't exactly == doomsday for India. Here I quote Dr. Saraswat again from the link I posted previously

However, the fact is that we would like to aim for 70-80 per cent indigenisation. The need for indigenisation has always been strongly felt. We want it to happen. Imports of defence items are forced due to a gap in our capabilities. You can’t jeopardise the security of our country and hence we have to import in areas where we lack the indigenous capacity. It is not as if the need for indigenisation has been felt only now due to the recent painful episode. It has been in our blood for the last 30 years and more. Indigenisation in fact is the mandate of the DRDO. We have taken a whole range of measures to increase indigenous content in defence items. However it is important for us to define what we mean by indigenisation. 100 per cent indigenous content is not valid in the current global context. Even for commercial firms, producing electronic goods or even textiles, there is a considerable amount of foreign component. Today, there is a large global market with up and downstream linkages, and importing components is the norm.

Defence indigenisation must be considered in respect of capability to make the nation strong. The Geopolitical situation can deny you the much needed equipment and technology in critical situations. We must achieve a critical mass in terms of indigenous technology. This implies that we must be independent of all existing and future controls / restrictions and technology denial regimes. That is why the DRDO does not engage itself in production of easily available products / low cost high volume items, which are available from multiple sources. There is no fear that these supplies will ever get choked. The critical mass for indigenisation therefore focuses on cutting edge technology sectors like missiles, electronic warfare, radars, SONARs, special materials, Life sciences products etc that are specific to our terrain. Technology denial regimes and unwillingness of other countries to sell such items, makes it essential for us to develop our own in-house capacities. The aim is to keep us independent of controls. This implies developing the integrated sum of academic institutions, industrial capacity, national laboratories and DRDO to meet national objectives. There is a gap currently and this must be bridged in a big way.


Here it can be seen that he is being honest in accepting that yes we have achieved this much indigenization but still we have some distance to go and that is being worked upon. So I don't see the need why I have to buy arguments from other people who have lesser knowledge about our defence industry than from persons who have worked there entire life creating the same.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3415
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya G » 10 Aug 2013 15:41

Dear all, please stop calling each other names' and stop further discussion. The thread is no longer making any sense.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16874
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Rahul M » 10 Aug 2013 19:26

seconded.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Austin » 20 Aug 2013 08:01

HAL sold choppers below cost price

In October 2009, Indian aviation industry suffered one of its most embarrassing moments after one of the first indigenous military helicopters ever exported crashed during the national day parade in Ecuador in full public view. Now, adding salt to the wounds of manufacturer Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), an audit report has revealed that not only were the choppers sold below the manufacturing price to Ecuador but also that the Indian firm was heavily fined for late delivery of the machines.

In a strong report on the handling of the Ecuador deal, the CAG has revealed that HAL quoted a price of Rs 204 crore for the supply of seven Advanced Light Helicopters (HAL) in 2008 that was Rs 52 crore below the manufacturing cost of the choppers. Not only that, the delivery of the last two choppers was delayed, which resulted in the imposition of a penalty on HAL to the tune of Rs 6 crore.

Indicting the top management of HAL, the CAG report says that the chairman took the call to reduce the offer price of the choppers even though as per the rules, he did not have the authority to offer any sale price that would be less than the cost of manufacturing.

“By affecting an unviable price and failure to meet the contractual obligation for timely supply, HAL has incurred a loss of Rs 58.80 crore from the contract as of March 2013,” the CAG report notes. It adds that while HAL says the aim was to offer a low price so that the choppers would get their first export order that could lead to more contracts, the CAG has noted that no additional export order have been bagged by the helicopters yet.

In its defence, HAL has also said it expected to recover the loss incurred in selling the choppers for a low price by bagging contracts for after sales service and support.

However, the CAG has also demolished this argument by saying that after the contract, the total value of spares and services sold to Ecuador remains at Rs 23 crore and “considering the low magnitude of orders received for spares, the expectation to recover cost in the operating life of 20 years seems unrealistic”.

While the first five ALH were supplied to Ecuador in March 2009 and the order was touted as a rare successful military export, HAL faced international embarrassment after one of the choppers crashed at the national day parade of the nation in October of the same year. The crash took place as one of the three choppers on flying display was banking after passing in front of the VIP stands. It was caught on tape and the two pilots were seriously injured. In a later report, the CAG had said the crash occurred due to a design deficiency in the ALH.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 20 Aug 2013 11:39

There seems to be little strategy in exporting Indian arms.There is enormous scope.Helicopters,light aircraft,plus spares and maintenance for Soviet era MIGs,etc. Interest is lacklustre.The "F" mag reported that we did not take part-other than the Brahmos JV at the Maritime Def. Expo at St.Petersburg,as the "budget" for participating in expos was over! That too when it is the naval sphere that we have had the greatest of success.Many countries have asked us to build their navies for them,but with our PSU shipyards full of work and delays galore,we cannot perform let alone compete! The Min. for Def. Production should also be tasked with looking after the exports.

However,for exports of Dhruv and Rudra,a first time effort,which is being ordered in huge qty. by the armed forces,we must sell a few of them at "friendship" prices. The goodwill generated by this gesture,also to old friends like Mauritius,Maldives,Nepal,The Seychelles,Sri Lanka,Burma even,will help counter the efforts of the Chinese who will sell at any price to maintain leverage with those nations.Spares and support is another matter however,beyond the guarantee period.

DO-228s are another worthy export,apart from the Lancer lt-weight armed helo.Once the LCH arrives,efforts must be made not only to spedily execute the IAF's needs but also enough for exports to friendly nations.If HAL is so confident about its basic trainer,let it build it at its own cost,with no money from the MOD,and market it and export it to "shame" the IAF,that is if it can!

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 05 Sep 2013 08:12

The cash crunch should help HAL sell more of its wares to the armed forces.One poster has recommended scrapping the Apache deal-we could buy more LCHs and armed Dhruv's instead.The MI-35s could soldier on for some more time,there are upgrade packages too .The MI-28 which lost out to the Apache is being modified.AWST reports that Russian helicopters have been doing very well in exports and local orders.Apparently,the key drawback with the MI-28 has been the lack of stick and controls for the second crewman,unlike most western attack helos,so that workload can be shared by both crew members.Local production in Brazil for one model is on the cards.

One wonders what follow up on the Ecuador export order has happened.S.America is a promising market,ASEAN too.Surely we could've explored a JV with Brazil,or exports for the ALH since we are buying their EMBs as platforms for our AEW birds. The heli division of HAL must get more aggressive with exports,all international shows display their wares at all international shows as the armed forces are buying their wares in large numbers.The outstanding performance of the ALH during the U'Khand floods is a case in point.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 06 Sep 2013 19:34

IN the context of the IN's search for new ASW/MR helos for the IN,about 100 required,the fol. news is worth imbibing.

Naval helicopter purchases may be Canada's worst program ever

By Dawn Denmar
Sep 5, 2013 -
Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/3 ... z2e7ga8EMC

+
CBC News reported yesterday that Canada's procurement of 28 CH-148 Cyclone helicopters was "doomed from the start." A confidential report urges the government to "sacrifice less important requirements" and give "relevant capability" to the RCAF.
The information was obtained from a confidential report obtained by CBC News on Sept. 4 and presented by Power and Politics host Evan Solomon.
A time line for the program published by Defense Industry Daily highlights all the delays to the program that have occurred and how costs have increased since 2000.
The report from Hitachi Consulting concludes " "the government can get the problem-plagued program back on track by negotiating with primary supplier Sikorsky to "re-scope" the project's structure, specifications and delivery approach.""
Whether this report impacts upon the $86 million fines already accrued by Sikorsky in penalties for failing to deliver the helicopters remains to be seen.
The report goes on to conclude the "project could be viable and operationally relevant with a new structure and governance model" as recommended.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/3 ... z2e7h6Skmx

VinodTK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2272
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby VinodTK » 11 Sep 2013 04:40

India shops for 6 Chinooks
India wants to ink a deal for six Chinook heavy-duty helicopters by the time Prime Minister Manmohan Singh meets US President Barack Obama on September 27 in Washington.

A half-dozen CH-47 Chinooks, a twin-engined helicopter capable of carrying 50 troops or 6.5 metric tonnes of cargo, will carry a price tag of about $500 million (`3,200 crore).

Introduced in 1962, the Chinook played a major role in the Vietnam war and has been the mainstay of the American forces in Afghanistan.

The Boeing-made helicopters will be bought through the foreign military sales route in which arms are sold in a government-to-government deal on a fixed price basis — ruling out haggling that often invites bribery charge.

The Chinook deal is being fast-tracked, say Indian government sources, and New Delhi hopes to have it finalised by December.
This is partly being driven by a desire to flesh out the thin agenda at the Washington summit. The proposal will be added to the schedule of US deputy secretary of defence Ashton Carter when he comes to New Delhi September 16-18.

The Indian side wants some major defence purchases readied for the summit, but other Indo-US weapons deals are caught in red tape. For example, the M777 howitzer deal has been in the works for two years and now, in part because of rupee devaluation, the price tag is bigger.

The Chinooks also face barriers. Boeing recently tried to add limited liability clauses to its military purchases and the Indian government is not happy about it. US sources say they have yet to receive any notification from the ministry of defence about the Chinooks.

The induction of the Chinooks will confirm the Stars and Stripes look of the Indian Air Force’s airlift capabilities. India has already bought C-130 Hercules and C-17 Globemaster heavy-lift airplanes.

Military sources say the US aircraft have proven better at functioning at high-altitudes then the Russian planes they are replacing.
India has been mulling buying Chinooks to replace the Russian-made Mi-26 transport helicopters that were transformational when they were introduced a quarter-century ago but have a record of chronic maintenance problems.

India will be the 17th air force in the world to use Chinooks.

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby member_26622 » 11 Sep 2013 05:18

Six chinooks for 500 million :eek:

Even Wiki says its average 35 million a piece @ 2008 ?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook

Why doesn't the US ask for direct access to Indian treasury, Just drive in and empty the poor man's house. Rich stealing from Poor has a new meaning altogether.

Is this for transporting the 154 M-777 guns? Is six enough for doing the job? Seems like we need at least 100 ~ 10 billion USD

At this point, I am ready to handover India's defense to US Army. We might be able cut a better deal in one go and send the Chinese rats to Mongolia (my weak attempt of humor).

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby svinayak » 11 Sep 2013 05:24

nik wrote:
At this point, I am ready to handover India's defense to US Army. We might be able cut a better deal in one go and send the Chinese rats to Mongolia (my weak attempt of humor).

It will also cost less. We have well trained DIE, sickular and deracinated people already to take over.

member_26622
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby member_26622 » 11 Sep 2013 05:29

1 billion for 150 M777 and 0.5 billion for SIX sexy Chinooks helicopters. Total is 1.5 billion USD, will easily grow to 2~3 billion by the time the deal is signed and lifetime costs considered.

Boys, pushing again for 3000 FH-77, they will be far more cheaper, employ indians and look muscular shooting and scooting around.

Anyone game for planning a heist on Indian reserves, need to do it before the Import lobby gets all of it.

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 » 11 Sep 2013 07:43

highway robbery.

I think even 6 x 737 will not cost that much. and its gains over the Mi17v is marginal at best. its not as if our SF units heavily use or need such assets because under a sikular govt we dare not invade even the maldives.

we already have 100+ Mi17v on order and deliveries have already started. some were seen in uttaranchal ops and they performed well.

chinook and apaches need to be scrapped.
spend the money if you will on C-130 more of them.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4885
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Kartik » 11 Sep 2013 10:09

This will not be the acquisition costs alone. The figure looks more like it includes training, ground equipment, spare engines, other spares, simulators and Boeing support for the fleet for a few years. Nevertheless, very expensive.

Wonder what offsets are being given for this deal. Better be worth it.

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 » 11 Sep 2013 10:14

US deals somehow tend to be X in unit cost and 2X in these "support pkg"... all such addl costs have to be added on to see if the deal is VFM or not. whatever bells and whistles go into it, fact is we can at best get 6 Chinooks with 101% uptime at that massive cost. just 6 batmen are not enough to control gotham imo.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13134
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby pankajs » 11 Sep 2013 10:15

Before all of us get exited, some additional data points to ponder.

From the HT article the Unit price to India is ~$83.3M in 2013

Boeing starts final assembly of Canadian Chinook
Canada signed a $1.15bn contract with Boeing for the acquisition of 15 CH-47F Chinooks in 2009.
The Unit price to Canada was ~$ 76.6m in 2009.

Italian Army's first ICH-47F Chinook completes maiden test flight
Sixteen CH-47F Chinook helicopters were ordered by the Italian Ministry of Defence's (MoD) General Directorate of Air Armaments (ARMAEREO) from AgustaWestland under a € 900m contract signed in May 2009.
The Unit price to Italy was ~€ 56.25m (56.25x~1.35 ~ $ 75.93m) in 2009.
Let us take the Canadian contract as base to avoid the conversion related approximation.

Unit Price in 2009: $76.6m
Unit Price in 2013: $83.3m

Cost inflation in 4 years ~ $6.7m over $76.6m ~ 8.75% (Seems reasonable to me, I mean the inflation adjustment)

Now we can debate the cost benefit, etc but the price seems to be consistent with what has been offered by the US to its partners.
Last edited by pankajs on 11 Sep 2013 10:30, edited 1 time in total.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13134
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby pankajs » 11 Sep 2013 10:20

Kartik wrote:This will not be the acquisition costs alone. The figure looks more like it includes training, ground equipment, spare engines, other spares, simulators and Boeing support for the fleet for a few years. Nevertheless, very expensive.
Agree.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13134
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby pankajs » 11 Sep 2013 10:24

Singha wrote:US deals somehow tend to be X in unit cost and 2X in these "support pkg"... all such addl costs have to be added on to see if the deal is VFM or not. whatever bells and whistles go into it, fact is we can at best get 6 Chinooks with 101% uptime at that massive cost. just 6 batmen are not enough to control gotham imo.

Some additional data or should we call it ..
Preparing for a two-front war - Ajai Shukla
Besides equipping tens of thousands of soldiers, the major new acquisitions that could arise include 400-450 ultra light howitzers (ULH) for seven new artillery brigades - one each for the four new mountain divisions, and three directly under the strike corps. Negotiations are already under way for 145 pieces of BAE Systems' M-777 155-millimetre, 39-calibre howitzers for up to $885 million. If the army is satisfied with this weapon, it could purchase as many as 900-950 more for the artillery regiments of 15 more mountain divisions. In that case, the MoD would press BAE Systems hard to shift production of the M-777 to India.

There is also a growing requirement for helicopters to airlift troops on "vertical envelopment" missions to capture heights in the enemy's rear and flanks. India is negotiating to buy 15 CH-47 Chinook heavy lift helicopters, an order that could well be expanded. The tried and tested Russian Mi-17 V5 helicopter that the IAF has already ordered in large numbers could potentially see additional demand.

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Baldev » 11 Sep 2013 12:50

pradhan mantri ji ki sarkar suggesting to common people that don't buy gold,petrol station closed during nights,do's n don'ts for common people to save indian foreign reserves but 83 million for each helicopter doesn't seems too much to him.

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 695
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby karan_mc » 11 Sep 2013 14:56

Any update on TD3 of LCH ?

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 11 Sep 2013 21:57

That comes to almost $95M a Chinook. And what's the huge training cost required for just 6 Chinooks? Ye Gods! That's the approx. estimated production cost of a JSF with all its advanced stealth gadgetry.What is so special with a simple heavy transport helicopter,which is basically a hollow tube or box apart from its payload capacity,range and max operational alt.? It has no air-superiority,air-combat or strike role to play,not even as with the MI-17Vs a support package of rockets,anti-tank missiles and MG.What was also the cost of the MI-26s by comparison? The flurry of ultra-expensive defence deals just before the elections leaves a lot unanswered.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5660
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby vishvak » 11 Sep 2013 22:01

How would the defense personnel react for training costs for ALH or LCA. Should be similar no plus new logistic chain too if it can be affordable.

Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Surya » 11 Sep 2013 22:04

:)

Phillip saar that was IAF master plan to get your buy in to go for JSF

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 12 Sep 2013 07:10

I thought that we were going to buy 12 Chinooks/heavylift helos.Surely the unit price would come down if the number stayed the same.If we now buy just 6,plus later options for 6 more,we will be in effect paying much more for the lot than by ordering the 12 straight away.A clever way to reward the manufacturer! Instead of confirming the remaining 9 supers-luxurious VVIP AWs,mired in the AW scam,where only 3 have been delivered at enormous cost,and that's more than enough for the scam-singed backsides of our VVIPs,we should use the money saved for the 12 Chinooks and get a better price on the same.After all,we have a very large fleet of MI-17Vs and these are the helos that the Russian pres. uses.They are far cheaper,even their VVIP versions.Even O'Bomber dumped the AWs as being prohibitively expensive.

Ha!Ha! The IAF's master,master plan requires much moolah to dream about the JSF (the IN has a better chance though),but first has to get the Rafale deal rolling down the runway,otherwise it will simply run away! But look who always under the UPA gets first bite at the cherry,US manufacturers.How much difference will 6 Chinooks,smaller than the MI-26s, make in our logistic capability,when what we desperately need is the completion of the border roads delayed by a few years? True,transport aircraft like C-17s will undoubtedly boost our heavylift capability,but how much can be airlifted and supported only by an "air-bridge" during a spat? The IAF should get its priorities right and lobby the MOD to take crucial delayed decisions based upon its priority list,and to me the MMRCA deal is the top priority,even if the deal has to be modified in the current financial crisis.
Last edited by Philip on 12 Sep 2013 07:18, edited 1 time in total.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16504
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby NRao » 12 Sep 2013 07:17

15 Chinooks for $1.4 billion was the last story.

However, MMS like to give gifts to his host.

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 » 12 Sep 2013 07:47

is there something the chinooks that do the Mi17v cannot?
can the Mi17V lift the M777 cannons with adequate safety margin?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13134
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby pankajs » 12 Sep 2013 16:42

^^^
Indians Order 12 Mil Mi-17V5
A follow-on deal for 59 more Mi-17V5s is being considered. These machines represent a new production standard and feature many improvements. With a takeoff weight of 13,000 kg, the Mi-17V-5 can carry either 36 armed soldiers internally or 4,500 kg of cargo on a sling.
So Mi17V can lift M777 but there will have to be additional trip for the shells .. Chinooks can deliver the Gun and adequate no of shells in a single trip.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8141
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 12 Sep 2013 17:08

Mi 17V can lift M 777, at sea level. But how much it can lift, if taking off from 6000 Ft or higher, and how high it can climb with this load?

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby pragnya » 12 Sep 2013 17:10

pankajs wrote:^^^
Indians Order 12 Mil Mi-17V5
A follow-on deal for 59 more Mi-17V5s is being considered. These machines represent a new production standard and feature many improvements. With a takeoff weight of 13,000 kg, the Mi-17V-5 can carry either 36 armed soldiers internally or 4,500 kg of cargo on a sling.
So Mi17V can lift M777 but there will have to be additional trip for the shells .. Chinooks can deliver the Gun and adequate no of shells in a single trip.


it 'can' but only at sea level - lower altitudes. at higher altitudes the payload restrictions take a drastic fall. Vivek Ahuja had posted this before -

Image

take a look at his article too.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13134
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby pankajs » 12 Sep 2013 17:16

Thanks guys .. so we have no option to the Chinooks for high altitude ops? Do we know Chinooks performance metrics on this front? Given that the forces have requested for the Chinooks there shouldn't be any surprises here.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8141
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Pratyush » 12 Sep 2013 17:17

Could a similar report be found for the Chinook. India Strategic gives 1 ton at 20000 Ft.

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 » 12 Sep 2013 17:17

to me this proposal of using lumering chinooks to airlift a few guns, shells and troops sounds more akin to the afghani ISAF strategy of having a few isolated air-supported firebases in high locations, usually on the ruins of old forts and observing / firing from there.

not a greatly workable plan for a conventional war.....

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby pragnya » 12 Sep 2013 17:29

Pratyush wrote:Could a similar report be found for the Chinook. India Strategic gives 1 ton at 20000 Ft.


you will have to 'ping' vivek. he has some magic wand which churns out numbers like 'idlis' out of an udupi joint!! :lol:

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Lalmohan » 12 Sep 2013 19:01

Singha wrote:to me this proposal of using lumering chinooks to airlift a few guns, shells and troops sounds more akin to the afghani ISAF strategy of having a few isolated air-supported firebases in high locations, usually on the ruins of old forts and observing / firing from there.

not a greatly workable plan for a conventional war.....



not necessarily, i think it would involve airlifting entire arty units between firebases as the battle space moves around
also, don't forget, we need to move E-W across N-S valleys depending on where the main thrust of the attack comes (and it has to come N-S). if we are in valley A and the attack in depth is in valley B, we better have a quick way to move men and materials across, rather than rely only on the valley roads

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 13 Sep 2013 07:11

Latest media reports that 15 Chinooks,the lot of 140+ light-weight howitzers,6 more C-130s,Apaches,in a $5B deal is being fast tracked as AKA reassures the US.Having already scored with about $8B ,this will cause much gnashing of teeth in those who lost out in these contests and those whose deals are negotiating the interminable red tape of MOD babudom.They will now howl about preferential treatment being given to the Yanquis,a hallmark of the UPA-2.There has also been considerable cost escalation in these deals to.

Nevertheless,Further delays will bring with it further deterioration in our defence modernisation,but why AKA could not have taken these decisions earlier until the 11th hour just before elections, is a massive kick in the face to the Indian taxpayer,you and I.No guesses as to who is not going to get my vote!

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 » 13 Sep 2013 07:24

theoritically rosboronexport was supposed to be the one-window thing and smooth out the nitty gritties of dealing with their vast and far flung network of producers but looks the US has a far larger network of client states and production volume and hence its FMS runs quite smoothly. they also dont need to bribe anyone here because those who need to be bribed or cajoled have already long since been put in the goodie bag feeding trough.

the losers are france and russia mainly. israel does not make big finished products except UAVs, they are more into smaller kit and subsystems of big kit. I really still think just getting more Mi17V would have worked instead of a bare 16 chinooks and their associated logistical tail...Mi17V units are all over and airframes could be X-supported by any unit. chinook will need their own special support crew now.

more LCH could have sufficed for small number of apache. but with IA getting LCH(BMW5) I suppose it was inevitable IAF wants a BMW7 to park in the driveway and "show them" who works at fbook/goog/appl and who works in a dal-roti desi owned shop :rotfl:

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 13 Sep 2013 09:23

More MI-26s would've been far better,they're in service,and even rescued downed Chinooks in Afghanistan! As you've said,we could've got a few dozen MI-17Vs for far less than what we are now paying for a small fleet of flying Lincoln Continentals.But the play of the day of the UPA is to "stroke Uncle Sam" all the way.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7716
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby rohitvats » 13 Sep 2013 09:45

Philip wrote:More MI-26s would've been far better,they're in service,and even rescued downed Chinooks in Afghanistan! As you've said,we could've got a few dozen MI-17Vs for far less than what we are now paying for a small fleet of flying Lincoln Continentals.But the play of the day of the UPA is to "stroke Uncle Sam" all the way.


Mi-26 are relics of a bygone era - one or two being used here and there by private operators is not same as being operated by professional air forces.

Secondly, their utility needs to be seen from two-perspectives - (1) Operational requirement for roles like air-maintenance and troop movement and military cargo movement; plus, their requirement from IA airlift POV (2) IAF being repository of heavy-lift capability for varying uses - like airlifting bulldozers to super-computers to almost anything.

In my opinion, M-26 class of helicopters fulfill the second role; the number of helicopters and the way they can be used - like trucks from Point A to Point B - makes them unsuitable for tactical military requirement.

Frankly, if you ask me, them having to compete with Chinook in a heavy lift competition is a mockery of the competition - and an indication of what IAF actually wanted. If they really wanted something in same class as Mi-26, then CH-53 should have been competing and not Chinooks.

Chinook is a more versatile and have much larger tactical deployment potential than Mi-26.

PS: As for Apaches, gird your loins - this is not the end of numbers to be inducted. The final number will scare the sh1t out of pakee tank commanders. IA is very serious about the vertical envelopment part - and is absolutely looking forward to Rudra and LCH. They regularized the officer Cadre of AAC some time back because they know, going ahead, they will need much more officers and dedicated crew.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 948
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby KrishnaK » 13 Sep 2013 09:53

Boeing and the US Army are planning a CH-47F Block 2 to be introduced after 2020. The Block 2 is aiming at a payload of 22,000 lb with 4,000 ft/95 °F high/hot hover performance, with an eventual increase up to 6,000 ft/95 °F, to carry the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle. It is to feature the advanced Chinook rotor blade (ACRB), derived from the canceled RAH-66 Commanche, 20 percent more powerful Honeywell T55-715 engines, and the active parallel actuator system (APAS). The APAS is to enhance the Chinook's digital advanced flight-control system, and provide an exact torque split between the rotors for more efficient use of performance.


When you buy KhanKit, you get a well funded and planned upgrade path besides other benefits. If you buy BearKit, they'll take cheque and then call up the manufacturing plant and have them call the power plant to get power going again on promise of paying up past defaults.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20412
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 13 Sep 2013 12:15

The MI-26 is far more capable than the Chinook for heavy-lift duties,in transporting larger pieces of eqpt. and mil. hardware..A simple comparison of specs would suffice.Upgraded and new built MI-26s are also available.Maximum take-off weight of 56,000kg (MI-26), the US-made Chinook 's maximum gross weight is about 22,668kg.In fact the contest was a mismatch,like the Gripen squaring off with the SU-30MKI.The Chinook acquisition should've stood on its own merit,with any other contending helos in its class.

The Mi-26 was designed as a heavy-lift helicopter for military and civil use, and was to replace earlier Mi-6 and Mi-12 heavy lift helicopters, with twice the cabin space and payload of the Mi-6, then the world's largest and fastest production helicopter. The primary purpose was to move military equipment like 13 metric ton (29,000 lb) amphibious armored personnel carriers, and mobile ballistic missiles, to remote locations after delivery by military transport planes such as the Antonov An-22 or Ilyushin Il-76.


The Russian helicopter manufacturer, Rostvertol, is in the process of refurbishing and upgrading the entire fleet of Mi-26s serving in the Russian Air Force. The fleet is estimated to number around 20 helicopters. Refurbished and upgraded aircraft will be comparable to an up-to-date variant: Mi-26T. Contract completion is planned for 2015. The same contract covers the manufacture of 22 brand new Mi-26T helicopters. As of January 2012, eight new-production helicopters have been delivered to operational units.[8]

However,the deal was virtually sealed when the C-17 was chosen, for this reason that the Chinook can be carried in the hold of a C-17.The MI-26 is too large.So one hand clasped another.This is more suited however to a trans-continental expeditionary role,which India does not have at the moment.In the sub-continental scenario ,there would be little need for such an event.Which mountainous airfields can the C-17 operate from,which Chinooks cannot fly to on their own? Being a smaller helo than an MI-26,less than half the gross TOW, it was naturally a cheaper option . However,it would still be worthwhile for the IAF/IA to acquire a number of MI-26s which were put to very good use in the U'Khand floods.They will be able to transport the heavy eqpt. required for the Border Roads Org. in building up the Himalayan infrastructure which is years behind schedule because of the lack of heavy earth moving eqpt. needed,and also to recover any Chinook that crashes as was being done in Afghanistan!

Reasons why the Chinook was chosen:

http://www.defencenow.com/news/991/us-m ... -deal.html

US-made Chinook Outshines Russian Mi-26 as Lowest Bidder for IAF’s Heavy Lift Chopper Deal
The long awaited opening of the commercial bids for the 15 heavy-lift helicopter for Indian Air Force (IAF) has taken place and US firm Boeing’s Chinook helicopter has emerged as the lowest bidder in the race. Boeing’s Chinook has emerged as the winner over the Russian Mi-26 helicopter since it turned out to be more cost-effective for India.

According to Defence Ministry, Boeing’s Chinook and Russian Mi-26 had both passed the extensive field trials held earlier but Boeing’s Chinook turned out to be lower in terms of its acquisition and life-cycle costs. Now that the L-1 or the lowest bidder has been determined, the helicopter deal will head towards the contract negotiation committee for the finalization of the deal.

The US-made Chinook copter can be used for heavy-lift assault, troop movement, logistics support, aerial battlefield recovery and special operations. It is also capable of being refueled mid-air for extended range and can carry 55 combat-ready troops or over 11,100 kg of logistical supplies or weight. The Chinook can also be transported in the hold of the C-17 Globemaster III of which India has ordered 10 aircraft. Boeing had indicated that this greatly enhances the CH-47F's ability to be deployed to distant locations.
Last edited by Philip on 13 Sep 2013 14:16, edited 1 time in total.

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 » 13 Sep 2013 12:45

the chinooks will be placed close to the border. I dont forsee any event wherein they would need to go inside a C17 unless its ferry mission to some IAF base repair plant in the south.

INSTEAD of the chinooks I have been shouting to little effect that we should go for the CH-53K which the USMC has ordered atleast 200 of. we could have interleaved our order with the much larger USMC order like we did for P8I.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_C ... r_Stallion

now thats a bird somewhere in league of the mi26, but far more modern and will have a good service life for another 3 decades post production. it will also have self-defence suite to the usual high khanish standard given the rate CIA is arming the jihadi militia allies er rebels.

it will lift the M777 and a houseload of shells like a toy.

I think the older CH53 were air portable either in the C17 or C5. a bunch of them were flown into Hyderabad for Pres Bush visit when he visited some pumpkin farm. the C5 takes it for sure http://www.africom.mil/Image/751/High/0 ... 217-105x70

in any case they are fast, powerful, LR helicopters and can easily fly from Hyd to Delhi and beyond on those massive outrigger tanks that Khan likes to hang.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests