LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

prithvi · Post by **prithvi** » 08 Jul 2011 20:05

Helos don't need to move with the unit. They can operate off semi-prepared areas 25 to 50 km behind the lines and still be as effective and less vulnerable and will not need a dedicated number of men to protect them and maintain them and lug them around in the front lines. They can also be used exactly where needed and if they are not needed immediately for the unit that is lugging them around in a truck. It does not make sense to treat helos like mortar or tanks.

Apache does not have refueling capability..?

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 08 Jul 2011 20:23

prithvi wrote: Apache does not have refueling capability..?

I assume, you mean Air to Air refueling capability?
If so, then yes. But Attack helo's of the Apache's class rarely need to go out for a long distance trip unless when ferrying within a theater and they are generally deployed about 80-100km behind the front lines so that they are close to the action but not that close that an accidental breach by enemy forces can put them in a big risk.

Senior maulanas, pliss to correct if this abdul is wrong..

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 08 Jul 2011 20:35

Philip ji,

what you say has a lot of merit. the Air Force guys usually look down on "support" roles and operations which involve giving extra muscle to land forces. this is a problem that a lot of countries face. even in US you have AF guys fighting fiercely to stay out of "control" of Army guys. this is an ego problem. the ideal solution would be, to let the Army have its own dedicated air wings so that their operational tactics are geared strictly around Army doctrines and focus areas.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 09 Jul 2011 19:12

Tarmak is back to regular updates

LCH TD-2 first flight

naird · Post by **naird** » 09 Jul 2011 22:23

Where is Hari Nair sir ? Why is HAL so silent about this thing ? No pics ? No vids ?

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 09 Jul 2011 23:10

from the link above

The LCH TD-2 was the main draw at Aero India 2011 wrapped in digital camouflage paint -- a technology mastered by India recently. Incidentally, LCH will be the first Indian Air Force asset to don this new paint scheme.

What exactly is the 'technology' when it comes to digital camouflage paint? - Is it not similar to painting a closed set of abstract shapes made of small pixel like squares?

How does this digital camouflage work better than a traditional camouflage paint job and in this instance, why have the white & black colours as part of the colour scheme, rather than green and brown?

If this is done to make the helicopter difficult to spot on the ground, then shouldn't the rotors/wings too be coloured in the same scheme?

added later: found this link: http://www.kamouflage.net/article/science.php

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 10 Jul 2011 00:04

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

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

There needs to be a conscious effort to reduce dependency on imported arms, especially when an indigenous option is already available or is in the horizon. If we do decide to buy the AH64d then the deliveries will start only after about 4 years, which is probably enough time for the LCH to mature. It is best to scrap the competition. And if the problem is not time but some inherent short coming in the LCH then they should scrap it instead.

rohankumaon · Post by **rohankumaon** » 10 Jul 2011 03:56

abhik wrote:There needs to be a conscious effort to reduce dependency on imported arms, especially when an indigenous option is already available or is in the horizon. If we do decide to buy the AH64d then the deliveries will start only after about 4 years, which is probably enough time for the LCH to mature. It is best to scrap the competition. And if the problem is not time but some inherent short coming in the LCH then they should scrap it instead.

I am not sure this is right way forward. While indigenisation is important but not at the cost of combat edge. I think IAF would have different roles in mind for AH 64/ Mi 28 as compared to LCH. To this point, I am trying to understand the role of AH 64/Mi 28 vs LCH in the IAF. I assume that IA will not be operating heavy gunships. I tried searching on the Google for different roles but no substantial results. In fact, during the search one of the article showed the limitations of gunships in mountainous terrain. So gurus please show some light here!

http://www.g2mil.com/apaches.htm

Apologies if it is posted before and also do not know how authentic the information in this link is.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Jul 2011 05:37

rohankumaon wrote:
http://www.g2mil.com/apaches.htm

Apologies if it is posted before and also do not know how authentic the information in this link is.

Great link and a must read for armchair marshals.

Indaruta · Post by **Indaruta** » 10 Jul 2011 06:07

Just shows the limitation of helicopters to Manpads and small arms, I believe even prop driven fixed wing aircraft are a cheaper and more effective option vis a vis helicopters

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 10 Jul 2011 16:32

HAL's chopper programmes on right track: P.S. Rajan - Tarmak007

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 10 Jul 2011 18:54

Wondering why we are not looking at lighter versions of v22 sdre ospreys? Given blue water needs, and ADS getting done is imminent, the sdre ospreys can do wonderful job for IN.

Is the design too risky?

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 10 Jul 2011 20:38

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 10 Jul 2011 23:01

SaiK wrote:Wondering why we are not looking at lighter versions of v22 sdre ospreys? Given blue water needs, and ADS getting done is imminent, the sdre ospreys can do wonderful job for IN.

Is the design too risky?

Extremely risky. You can read about the Osprey's ill fated test programmes on the net.

prithvi · Post by **prithvi** » 11 Jul 2011 00:03

Deleted

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jul 2011 06:36

osprey also need a giant footprint on the deck to land safety - kind of like two large helis landing side by side. in a emergency , a normal naval heli could land on any FFG/DDG around, not so the osprey I think.
the Merlin AW101 also cannot land on FFG decks due to its size methinks...on deck of arkroyal it looked like a outsize kind from class6 sitting with the class1 kids.

Sriman · Post by **Sriman** » 11 Jul 2011 09:44

Osprey is also facing a lot of dust related engine issues in Afghanistan.

jai · Post by **jai** » 11 Jul 2011 11:24

shiv wrote:
rohankumaon wrote:
http://www.g2mil.com/apaches.htm

Apologies if it is posted before and also do not know how authentic the information in this link is.
Great link and a must read for armchair marshals.

No weapon system on it's own is invincible - tanks can be destroyed, aircrafts shot down, ships and subs sunk etc in a war - the point is this is why dedicated tactics and strategies are drawn for the employment of each weapon to capitalize on it's strengths and minimize losses due to it's weaknesses.

Also, not every weapon can be successful in each and every theater of war and if a commander still goes ahead and employes equipment and troops even in such scenarios you can not say that the equipment was not good.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jul 2011 11:30

the point was not to prove the apache as vulnerable, but to dispose off the myth that it can do deep strike into Tibet on logistical/C3I nodes. I now realize its just too risky and wont happen based on what happened over karbala...a strike a/c can do it far faster and safer and put more bombs on target.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 11 Jul 2011 14:15

pics of the lch td2 in air, camo looks menacing, in pic4 it is hard to make out the LCH in the midst of the buildings

Just Loving It! Here Comes LCH TD-2!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2011 14:40

The camouflage is definitely effective
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ltj2dUHPjyg/T ... /LCH-4.jpg

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 11 Jul 2011 15:12

a case of a solution designed and tested in indian conditions no doubt.

one example of a good product whose "behaviour" was designed for developed countries is the humble but reliable APC UPS. over there, the power going off is a major "incident" so they trigger a loud and annoying beep beep beep that keeps on howling till the charge is over. over here, power goes on and off, so this is a major mosquito bite esp in middle of night when ur machine is doing a long download and you left it on. the lowest model has no way to turn it off other than perhaps dismantling it and cutting the speaker if it exists inside. the higher models have a linux pkg that connects via USB intf and can be turned off..no easy UI or switches.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 11 Jul 2011 16:56

Tell me about it. The annoying beep, beep is truly something that bugs me no end. I'm so surprised that this isn't customizale. LCH no doubt will have indian solutions to uniquely indian problems.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 11 Jul 2011 17:02

shiv wrote:The camouflage is definitely effective
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Ltj2dUHPjyg/T ... /LCH-4.jpg

Excellent.

A type flying below or just about the tree-line in plains or below the ridges in mountains will be near impossible to find out - but for good radar. Now, imagine this chopper hugging the tree line in western sector in Punjab and hovering low before popping up to launch a LOAL ATGM. Nice!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Jul 2011 17:03

Now, I have to see LCH, loaded to bear with helinas.

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 11 Jul 2011 17:33

suryag wrote:pics of the lch td2 in air, camo looks menacing, in pic4 it is hard to make out the LCH in the midst of the buildings

Just Loving It! Here Comes LCH TD-2!

Kudos to tarmac for posting these pics!!

pkudva · Post by **pkudva** » 11 Jul 2011 17:37

Luks sleet from the front view and agile....

John · Post by **John** » 11 Jul 2011 17:53

shiv wrote:
rohankumaon wrote:
http://www.g2mil.com/apaches.htm

Apologies if it is posted before and also do not know how authentic the information in this link is.
Great link and a must read for armchair marshals.

No platform can operate without support, even IDF found that out when multiple Merkava/Abrams were destroyed when they were sent in without air support in recent Hiz-Israel conflict.

prabhug · Post by **prabhug** » 12 Jul 2011 10:45

Some pics of the LCH-TD2 hovering in maiden flight -- Courtesy Tarmak

http://tarmak007.blogspot.com/2011/07/h ... -td-2.html

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 12 Jul 2011 11:45

why does an underdevelopment craft require such intense camouflage?
During this phase, when there is a higher chance of accidents, shouldn't the plane be easier to spot rather than making it more difficult?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 12 Jul 2011 11:54

AdityaM wrote:why does an underdevelopment craft require such intense camouflage?
During this phase, when there is a higher chance of accidents, shouldn't the plane be easier to spot rather than making it more difficult?

Shub shub bolo... who shabdh math bolo..
God forbid an acc$$$$$ happens, HAL will not be relying on visual detection. there will be beacon locators as well as tail helos during tests. Shub shub bolo...

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 12 Jul 2011 12:17

AdityaM wrote:why does an underdevelopment craft require such intense camouflage?
During this phase, when there is a higher chance of accidents, shouldn't the plane be easier to spot rather than making it more difficult?

Well they might be trying to see the effect of these paints on the weight of the bird. The weight of paint on the birds generally in hundred plus KG's. Also they may be trying to see the effectiveness of the camouflage scheme itself.
Just my guesses. But if HAL and NFTC decided to leave them on then there must be a sane reason for the same.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Jul 2011 13:54

AdityaM wrote:why does an underdevelopment craft require such intense camouflage?
During this phase, when there is a higher chance of accidents, shouldn't the plane be easier to spot rather than making it more difficult?

How do you test camouflage on a non flying aircraft?
They have reduced the chances of accidents by getting TD 1 right and are testing the camouflage on TD 2.
Test aircraft are always under telemetry unlike an aircraft flying over mountains, jungles and oceans - so the search requirement is not necessary.
How is a totally shattered and burnt bright orange "glow in the dark" aircraft easier to see than a burnt and shattered camouflaged aircraft?

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 12 Jul 2011 14:06

shiv wrote:
AdityaM wrote:why does an underdevelopment craft require such intense camouflage?
During this phase, when there is a higher chance of accidents, shouldn't the plane be easier to spot rather than making it more difficult?

How do you test camouflage on a non flying aircraft?

They have reduced the chances of accidents by getting TD 1 right and are testing the camouflage on TD 2.

Test aircraft are always under telemetry unlike an aircraft flying over mountains, jungles and oceans - so the search requirement is not necessary.

How is a totally shattered and burnt bright orange "glow in the dark" aircraft easier to see than a burnt and shattered camouflaged aircraft?

Spot on.

Avid · Post by **Avid** » 12 Jul 2011 18:01

SaiK wrote:Wondering why we are not looking at lighter versions of v22 sdre ospreys? Given blue water needs, and ADS getting done is imminent, the sdre ospreys can do wonderful job for IN.

Is the design too risky?

It is worthwhile to read this article from The Economist.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/ ... elicopters

and earlier one talking about Sikorsky X2:
http://www.economist.com/node/16990748

What Osprey tried to do was make a prop plane into a helicopter. The helis are now trying to integrate wings and propellers into their design to increase the speed and range. We are likely to see weaponized version of these in the coming years.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 12 Jul 2011 21:26

Bala Vignesh wrote:Well they might be trying to see the effect of these paints on the weight of the bird. The weight of paint on the birds generally in hundred plus KG's. Also they may be trying to see the effectiveness of the camouflage scheme itself.

you're talking about the weight of paint on large sized commercial or military transport aircraft.
you can refer to weight penalties on a commercial Boeing aircraft on this Boeing page

On a narrow fuselage LCH, the surface area will be much lesser than that on any of these commercial airliners and the weight of paint will be much lesser.

For instance, even the smallest airliners in that list, i.e. the 717 and MD-80 will have significantly higher surface area of the LCH in their fuselage alone and the weight of paint on the upper & lower half of the fuselage and the tail is only 119 lbs (54 kgs).

So this is definitely not to check the effect of the weight of paint.

Katare · Post by **Katare** » 12 Jul 2011 21:58

I may be wrong but here is what I think it is........

This digital paint scheme is primarily for reducing IR (& may be others) signature of the aircraft, visual effects are secondary concerns. White doesn't absorb/emit EM specta and blacke/darker part does, so this change in color on skin breaks the thermal signal into hundreds of small pieces of cold and hot signals, instead of one giant integrated IR signature. These small signatures would be a lot more difficult to stich in one piece by thermal/IR sensors. That is why it is called digital cameo, once you have digitized signal and developed a model, computers can generate different models for different environments.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 12 Jul 2011 22:14

Sounds most plausible Katare ji

SriniY · Post by **SriniY** » 12 Jul 2011 22:34

At the resolution at which an IR sensor would see the chopper, my guess is you would find one smooth (but not so bright) image

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 12 Jul 2011 23:25

when we say visual camouflage, what is the expected enemy line of sight are we talking? from a point at higher altitude and the camouflaged target is lower and against the ground colors? or from sky to sky facing the horizon or from bottom to top facing the blue or grey or night sky?