LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 09 Oct 2010 18:26

Aged Dauphin? Coast Guard doesn't use Dauphin, AFAIK. And anyways, Dauphin is a modern helicopter, not "aged"

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 09 Oct 2010 20:57

sankum wrote:
Reports indicated that two prototypes of naval ALH have been flying, one with indigenous SV2000 radar and other with ELTA radar. Once fully developed can very well be offerred for export market.

These trials were completed circa 2003. The helos flew together against the same targets.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 09 Oct 2010 21:21

What is the issue with the SV2000 radars that Dhruv was supposed to carry? Long time back, in Aero India 2005, I was told that most of the work was done and user trials were progressing. Is this still not in service?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Oct 2010 21:22

I stand corrected. the CG official page mentions 17 chetak helis (no radar,no EO) and 4 dhruvs. so obviously all of these and more can be where a navalized Dhruv fits in from shore(as is) and OPV(if folding rotor is done).

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 10 Oct 2010 00:27

SV 2000 is replaced by a new variant that has new modes for the Navy, and will be fitted to some planes and helicopters

sankum · Post by **sankum** » 10 Oct 2010 23:15

The successor to SV 2000 is XV 2004.

arun · Post by **arun** » 17 Oct 2010 14:35

Update on the 22 Attack and 15 Heavy Lift Helicopter acquisition plans of the IAF.

Flight and Weapon trials of Boeing‘s offerings completed (AH-64D Apache and CH-47F Chinook) and those of MIL awaited (Mi-28 Havoc and Mi-26 Halo):

…………. With regard to the IAF's tenders for 22 attack and 15 heavy lift transport helicopters, Lall said Boeing's Apache AH-64D and Chinook had completed the flight and weapon trials in both India and the US.

The IAF is awaiting the arrival of the Russian Mil Mi-28 and the Mi-26 for the trials of the two class of helicopters to strengthen its armed chopper and transport fleet. …………….

TOI

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Oct 2010 17:36

the Mi26T equivalent or somewhere near is the CH53. ch47 is nowhere near the Mi26 payload. I wonder why the CH53 heli was not put on the table?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_CH-53K

thought its not in service yet, will have a 15t max payload and a 14,000ft ceiling. enough to potter around in areas like Leh and north sikkim. perhaps the chinook and Mi26T having a higher ceiling and able to fly over 18,000ft passes were the criteria.(web entries for Mi26 max out at 15000ft though)

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 17 Oct 2010 20:36

am still wondering what we need 22 heavy attack helos

not entirely convinced

and if we do need it is 22 enough?? even down a to a pathetic 1 sqd per strike corp is not enough

D Roy · Post by **D Roy** » 17 Oct 2010 21:20

The best part is that the Ch-53K or CH-53X as it was earlier known is essentially a new chopper despite the 'appearance'. But to push it through DOD cleverly continues with "Ch-53".

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Oct 2010 21:29

Surya wrote:am still wondering what we need 22 heavy attack helos

not entirely convinced

and if we do need it is 22 enough?? even down a to a pathetic 1 sqd per strike corp is not enough

Who wants 22? Army or Air force? If the latter - then I guess they are not planning deployment on a "per strike corps" pattern. The army has its own ideas about the use of air power as does the air force. To that extent there is a turf war. That is true between AF and Navy as well.

arun · Post by **arun** » 17 Oct 2010 21:42

Singha wrote:the Mi26T equivalent or somewhere near is the CH53. ch47 is nowhere near the Mi26 payload. I wonder why the CH53 heli was not put on the table?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_CH-53K

thought its not in service yet, will have a 15t max payload and a 14,000ft ceiling. enough to potter around in areas like Leh and north sikkim. perhaps the chinook and Mi26T having a higher ceiling and able to fly over 18,000ft passes were the criteria.(web entries for Mi26 max out at 15000ft though)

Production of the CH-53 ended in 1999 and perhaps that is the reason it was not on the table.

In the interim, in 2005, some 10 mothballed CH-53 D/E models were pulled out of a bone yard in Arizona with the intention of refurbishment for putting back into service. IIRC this process was completed this year.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 17 Oct 2010 22:03

he means the CH-53K, which is in development and expected to replace older CH-53 versions.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 18 Oct 2010 09:13

What the Russian are getting for demo is the Mi-26T2

http://www.mi-helicopter.ru/eng/getarticle.php?id=213

and Mi-28NE

http://www.mi-helicopter.ru/eng/index.php?id=208

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Oct 2010 09:18

I suppose with 150 CH53K on order ahead of anyone, and IOC only in 2014 (flight tests 2011), its not a realistic choice for something that is orderable and works immediately. maybe around 2015 if we are planning a big push for airborne divisions (our desi "1st airborne") a mix of CH53K, CH47/Mi26T and MH53K would be good. could even make a desi AC-130 of it using its capacious belly to house a 105mm cannon and a gatling gun

SriSri · Post by **SriSri** » 20 Oct 2010 15:02

Eurocopter inaugurates Indian subsidiary; Aims to Grow Presence in Indian Civilian, Military Markets

vic · Post by **vic** » 31 Oct 2010 23:55

Let me start by saying that except engine there are very few sub-systems incorporated in ALH which can not be produced in India. But there is a catch HAL, is a profit intensive PSU which gives far more importance to profit than percentage of indigenous content. Here is few example.
Cross posting a Rahul Singh post from DFI Forum:-

1. HAL using DRDO and BEL expertise produced entire avionics including MFDs for Dhruv but later selected Israeli package instead.

2. SU-30 MKI MK-3 will use SAMTEL MFDs while HAL ALH will more likely continue using Israeli.

3. HAL imported EW suit off the self for ALH WSI even when EW suit for LCA has been developed through JV.

4. HAL bought french HUD for IJT when LCA uses Indian HUD. Most interesting is that former is just a trainer and later is front line multi-role fighter and both products are for same customer.

Let me claim on record. Most of the imported stuffs in ALH can be manufactured in India as technology to design, develop and manufacture them exists. But it will always depend on OEM to chooses what they want to put inside their product.

ALH is 90 % foreign only because of thinking of HAL not because India's lack of technical expertize.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 05 Nov 2010 23:38

A promo for CH-53K.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1Fmozff ... r_embedded#!

If you check the video carefully they have also managed to sneak in a X-2 at 4:00 .As far as marketing is concerned you have to give it to these guys.Although the products are also good(or so it seems).

srai · Post by **srai** » 06 Nov 2010 06:48

Surya wrote:am still wondering what we need 22 heavy attack helos

not entirely convinced

and if we do need it is 22 enough?? even down a to a pathetic 1 sqd per strike corp is not enough

They are pretty much a 1-to-1 replacement for the 22 Mi-25/35 in IAF's service. They are needed somewhat immediately to replace the aging Mi-25/35 by 2015.

These will be supplemented in large numbers by the LCH post 2015/17+. IAF has an intent to purchase 65 indigenous LCH and the IA 114 LCH. As with any new R&D, there is a risk of delays and "under" performance initially. 22 Apache AH-64D should help minimize these risks and offer at least equivalent (or more) firepower as today for the next decade regardless of the LCH program. If LCH is significantly delayed, IAF can always order more AH-64Ds in the future.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 06 Nov 2010 08:30

srai

even then 22 Mi 35s were not enough

thats what perplexes me

shukla · Post by **shukla** » 18 Nov 2010 12:58

Shiv Aroor

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 20 Nov 2010 02:58

Lets just go with the Russians on this one. At least the spare part issue will be because of non availability versus some retarded act of some new law.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 20 Nov 2010 09:14

The Russian will also be a great deal cheaper as opposed to 40 mil us $ for the gold plated AH 64.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Nov 2010 14:26

any idea on progress and induction schedule of the WSI Dhruv? we could do with 200 yesterday.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 13:30

if there is LCH mk2 then it should look like (very stealthy)

Boeing Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche canceled due to cost

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Dec 2010 13:39

Cost was not the only reason for its cancelation. Its job could have been better done by a UAV. That too without the political risk of a human crew.

The Indian armed forces have not expressed any desire for a Mk2 LCH at the moment.

BTW, how many flights has it conducted by now?

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 13:46

Pratyush wrote:Cost was not the only reason for its cancelation. Its job could have been better done by a UAV. That too without the political risk of a human crew.

How can u distinguish a UAV job from attack helicopter

UAV-support, resonance , light attack

attack -support , heavy attack ,

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Dec 2010 13:49

The cancellation of this excellent above design reveals that "best" is the enemy of "good enough".Even the US cannot afford it.Exorbitant costs of "gold-plated" eqpt. as was well put,should be avoided in acquisitions for a still mainly poor nation like India.There is v.little chance that we will face the US on the battlefield,but the chance of top US eqpt. being sold/awarded to Pak is of serious concern.PRC wares are less sophisticated,but plentiful.Therefore,we should acquire what is "good enough" capable,robust and and affordable,to keep numbers happy.We require a variety of helos,from small,light armed helos (LAH?),to medium sized multi-role helos,dedicated attack helos and heavy-lift helos like the MI-26.A large number of the last type is urgently required to be able to supply our mountain troops .

Anabhaya · Post by **Anabhaya** » 16 Dec 2010 13:56

There's an eerie quiet on the LCH front...

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 13:58

with US having possible stratigic nuke sites in PAK

pak airforce can get f22 in no time

how many heavy lift mi26 iaf have now since 1 crash

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Dec 2010 14:37

tushar_m wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Cost was not the only reason for its cancelation. Its job could have been better done by a UAV. That too without the political risk of a human crew.
How can u distinguish a UAV job from attack helicopter

UAV-support, resonance , light attack

attack -support , heavy attack ,

Think preadator and reaper!

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 14:47

predator & reapers doesn't provide close range support i guess

predator can carry 2 hellfire not sure abt reaper but both don't have guns needed for close range support

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Dec 2010 15:09

Tushar,

Think Apache for for that role and now ask your self do you really need Comache? Or can the job be done with currently available resources.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 15:17

comache don't know ???

maybe when stealth became important in attack heli's just as became important in fighter aircraft's we need something called LCH mk2 with stealth

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 16 Dec 2010 15:38

I am asking form the US context but this is OT for this thread. In context of the IA the LCh is steathy enough to do the job.

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 16 Dec 2010 16:10

ok sir i agree

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 17 Dec 2010 11:44

Second LCH prototype by AeroIndia 2011

tushar_m · Post by **tushar_m** » 17 Dec 2010 12:12

GREAT NEWZ

hope 2 get more information on LCH in aero india

neerajb · Post by **neerajb** » 17 Dec 2010 12:50

Pratik_S wrote:Second LCH prototype by AeroIndia 2011

Thanks for sharing. Why weapon testing is not possible on first prototype? Can you dig into that?

Cheers....

rajkumar · Post by **rajkumar** » 17 Dec 2010 13:21

neerajb wrote:
Pratik_S wrote:Second LCH prototype by AeroIndia 2011
Thanks for sharing. Why weapon testing is not possible on first prototype? Can you dig into that?

Cheers....

Weapons testing is not possible because the 1st prototype is not equipped with the sensor package required to aim and fire weapons.