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.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12591
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 20 Feb 2012 18:20

Ivanev wrote:
Singha wrote:given these helis will never take part in direct assault role , if the Mi26T is reliable and cheap, with a decent supply chain we should get it instead of the Chinook.


Singha,

The MI26 is a huge fuel guzzler and the running costs are too high to keep it operational over extended periods of time. Also, spares are an issue. They practically serve very little purpose except when you have to carry huge nuclear missiles over Serbia during heights of cold war.
:lol:

Or you want Bull dozers to create roads in places like Kargil, recover crashed Mig 21's in feilds etc

Mil Mi-26

During the Kargil Operations, two Mi-26s logged about 25 hours airlifting heavy equipment and guns to the Kargil area.


One Mi-26 (Z3076) was written off after it crashed at Jammu airport on 14 Dec 2010. It was involved in the heavy lift of tunneling equipment for the Northern Railways. The crew escaped with injuries. This was the first and till date the only major airframe loss for the Mi-26 in nearly 25 years of service.

The Mi-26s have been utilised in the sky-crane role over the years.

- Feb 89, MI-26 helicopter undertook the only of its kind underslung operation taking Pontoon bridge form Ludhiana to Sirhind canal.
- Early 1999, a crashed MiG-21 was airlifted by the Unit to Chandigarh.
- 21 Nov 2001, the Mi-8 which crashed in the Rann of Kutch was helilifted by the Mi-26s to Bhuj.
- 2002, a MiG-21 Bison which crashed in the fields near Ambala was airlifted by the Unit to Ambala Air Force Station.
- In Jul 2002 the Mi-26 recovered the first civilian aircraft (Beechcraft), which had met with an accident at Kangra airfield. Another first was achieved as the unit flew the longest ever underslung flight (3:15 hrs).
- 22 Feb 2006 - An Mi-26 flown by the CO, Wg Cdr Sushil Ghera, airlifted an Mi-17 that forcelanded in a river bed a few days earlier to Chandigarh Air Force Station.
-Sept 2007 - Mi-17 1V airlifted from Bandipore to Awantipura
-In 2010, the helicopter was actively used to lift heavy equipment for the Katra-Quazigand Railway project providing rail connectivity to the Srinagar Valley.

member_19648
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:13

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby member_19648 » 20 Feb 2012 18:31

^^ I meant little purpose in respect to their operational cost and up-time specially with spare problem. Maybe it was wrong choice of words.

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 » 20 Feb 2012 18:37

I will throw my last card on the table. given its vast internal dimensions and load bearing capability could be G version be made with a 105mm auto loading cannon pointing out of the side, and a couple of GSH23 type cannons for backup?

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2750
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby darshhan » 20 Feb 2012 19:29

Singha wrote:I will throw my last card on the table. given its vast internal dimensions and load bearing capability could be G version be made with a 105mm auto loading cannon pointing out of the side, and a couple of GSH23 type cannons for backup?


Singha ji , I suppose you are alluding to gunship role for MI 26. Well in theory it is possible but then the service ceiling of Mi 26 is 4500 Mts(wikipedia) and like most of the helicopters its speed is much less than fixed wing aircraft.I don't see how any country would go for a gunship with such limitations(especially in mountains).It is practically a sitting duck.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5414
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Kartik » 21 Feb 2012 06:17

Things are way too quiet here on the LCH thread. Any idea what's happening and why things are so silent on the LCH front? Where is the third prototype and what is the status of testing on the 1st and 2nd TDs?

SidSom
BRFite
Posts: 119
Joined: 01 May 2011 07:49

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby SidSom » 21 Feb 2012 07:42

Wiki's Details on Mi-26
using the high altitude and high capacity performance of the Mi-26, the World Team quickly flew 300 participants, plus aerial judges, photographers, and cinematographers up to 6,700 metres (22,000 ft), then simultaneously dropped them in a tight formation


Later

Service ceiling: 4,600 m (15,100 ft)


Dunno Which end of Wiki to trust :-o

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 » 21 Feb 2012 08:22

I dont think there is any way the Mi26 goes to 22,000ft.

KrishnaK
BRFite
Posts: 949
Joined: 29 Mar 2005 23:00

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby KrishnaK » 21 Feb 2012 10:02

Apologies if this has been posted already India to go for open bidding for Navy deal, rejects US offer

shukla
BRFite
Posts: 1727
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 20:50
Location: Land of Oz!

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby shukla » 21 Feb 2012 11:09

The European's clearly shaken my the MMRCA and LCA engine snub and desperate not to loose again, comes an (under the belt) attempt to create an unnecessary controversy to win the MRH competition..

Navy: Europe firm ‘twisting’ facts for $1bn Multi-Role Helicopter deal
Asian Age

A big controversy has hit the acquisition of 16 Multi-Role Helicopters for the Indian Navy, a deal estimated to be worth around $1 billion, with the Indian Navy accusing European vendor NH Industries (NHI) of trying to “mislead” the defence ministry, “twist” the Naval Staff Qualitative Requirements (NSQRs), “falsify” the Request for Proposal (RFP) and cause delays with “unreasonable que-ries/concerns”. Documents accessed by this newspaper show the Navy criticised the European firm after it raised doubts about the helicopter of its American rival Sikorsky. This new US-European battle for an Indian defence deal is leading to a lot of acrimony.

NHI earlier alleged Sikorsky does not meet the NSQRs for the deal, and complained to the defence ministry. The Navy has now made it clear that both NHI and Sikorsky have met the NSQRs, making them both eligible. The Navy earlier submitted its Field Evaluation Trials (FETs) report to the MoD on acquiring the anti-surface and anti-submarine MRHs. NHI, based in France and with French, German and Italian participation, pitched its NH90 helicopter against Sikorsky’s S70B. NHI earlier raised doubts about the Sikorsky helicopter on various aspects, including dual redundancy, fitment of fuel tanks, full authority automatic flight control system, fuel reserves at the end of mission, sensor functions and usage monitoring system. The Navy has, however, given the Sikorsky helicopter a clean chit.

In its final recommendations and in response to NHI’s allegations, the Navy said: “It emerges that NHI is attempting to mislead the higher authorities and cause delays... with unreasonable queries/concerns. The Indian Navy has evaluated the (NHI) NH90 and (Sikorsky) S70B helicopters, and considers both platforms meet the NSQRs specified in... the RFP.” On NHI’s queries on the Sikorsky helicopter’s “sensor functions” and “fitment of both external and internal fuel tanks”, the Navy said: “It is clearly evident that NHI have twisted the NSQR, thereby falsifying the Request for Proposal on the MRH with an aim to misleading the higher authorities MoD”. NHI had raised doubts on several other features. It said: “(The NSQR) requires no failure of single system should lead to a catastrophic failure. NHI would like to understand how this is demonstrated since the S70B does not have dual redundancy built in to all aircraft flight control systems.”


All this chest thumping when it features prominently in the Australian Department of Defence's list of 'Projects of Concern' due to engine failures and have they not forgotten the German complaints??

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

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby keshavchandra » 21 Feb 2012 19:44

Anantha has posted a fresh snap of Dhruv-WSI firing ATGM.....
Will post related updates later. :)

member_20453
BRFite
Posts: 613
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby member_20453 » 21 Feb 2012 20:23

The problem with the Mi-26 is it being one huge target, it's a very easy target for a simple Stinger and we would loose a lot if one were to be shot down.

Chinook's the better offer or the CH-53K.

Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2017
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Bala Vignesh » 21 Feb 2012 21:15

Septimus,
Its not likely to happen as the Mi 26 would be used to ferry heavy loads from the nearest Air base to the Rear edge of the Battle Area, which is held by friendly forces. The Mi 26 will not be used to air drop Paratroopers behind enemy lines.


merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby merlin » 22 Feb 2012 10:17


suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3851
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby suryag » 22 Feb 2012 10:27

How do we know that this is HELINA ?

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10115
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby sum » 22 Feb 2012 10:32

^^ Well, caption for pic says:
Above sequence of photos are taken during Rudra's ATGM Helina trials.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12591
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Aditya_V » 22 Feb 2012 10:43

Only thing I would love if the simple machine gun is replaced by a Massa style gattling gun with say 4 mile range like the US browning single barrel machine gun.

Imagine a next version of ALH V- stealth Rudra with a Fenestrone.
Last edited by Aditya_V on 22 Feb 2012 10:46, edited 1 time in total.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1657
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Sid » 22 Feb 2012 10:44

sum wrote:^^ Well, caption for pic says:
Above sequence of photos are taken during Rudra's ATGM Helina trials.


Well best way to identify is to look at its unique multi-directional exhausts at mid body.

No other missile which India is evaluating has such thing.

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

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby SagarAg » 22 Feb 2012 10:51

Waiting for HELINA trials for soo long..
Finally :D :D :D :D 8)

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1064
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Kailash » 22 Feb 2012 10:56

This is an amazing development. If they could qualify the gun/missiles for static and moving targets, shoot down a few manuvering lakshya's and should gear up for more orders :)

If this IOC is only for the weapons testing, FOC should also be pretty quick

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby koti » 22 Feb 2012 11:00

From the link I think the FOC is only to qualify the Machine for a new ATGM. This maybe the Helina post successful trails.

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 » 22 Feb 2012 11:04

Aditya thats not a machine gun under the nose...its a 20mm giat (nexter) cannon which will shred thin skinned vehicles where the massa browning HMG or small gatling MGs will just bounce off.

this gun is fairly typical for the role and all gunships mount such guns.

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

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby keshavchandra » 22 Feb 2012 11:14

ALH Rudra ready to spit fire | HAL equates it with Black Hawk & Puma | Phase-1 IOC likely in May-By Anantha Krishnan M

Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) is all set to unleash Rudra, a beast of a machine from its hangars soon. Rudra (fierce form of Lord Shiva) is the Mk-IV weapon systems integrated (WSI) version of HAL’s star chopper Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH) and is expected to get the Phase-1 Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) this May. Painted in black, the Rudra is one hell of a machine -- fully-loaded and truly menacing. HAL says get on beyond the looks!
The IOC is split into two parts, with Phase-2 expected later, only to accommodate the users’ choice of an anti-tank guided missile (ATGM). The Defence Research Development Organisation too is tempting the user (Army & IAF) with a desi-ATGM (Helina, the air version of Nag also called as alternate ATGM). “The weapon trials are on and we have completed the Missile, gun and rocket trials at Pokhran, Chandipur and Kalaikunda. We are conducting integrated weapon trails with all sensors coming into play,“ sources said. The Rudra is powered by Shakthi engine.
As per the initial orders, close to 70 Rudras are to be supplied to Indian armed forces. “It has comfortably-exceeded the payload and performance requirements at 6 km height. It has integrated sensors, weapons and electronic warfare suite using an upgraded version of the glass cockpit used in the Mk-III. The cockpit avionics is a state-of-the-art technology when it comes to helicopters. The sensors include stabilised day and night cameras, Infra-Red imaging, as well as laser ranging and designation,” sources said.
The weapons onboard Rudra cover all role aspects including air-to-air and air-to-ground from the stabilised and turreted high-velocity M621 20 mm cannon to long-range 70 mm rockets (8 km) and air-to-air missiles (Mistral-II). The EW suite consists of MAWS (missile approach warning system) laser and radar warning systems and automated with sensors covering all envisaged threats. It has automatic dispensation of countermeasures like chaff and fare dispensing systems.
HAL claims that Rudra is the only attack helicopter in the world which can operate in the higher reaches of the Himalayas with a decent armament load. “The MI-35 is restricted to well below 6000 feet and the newly-acquired Apache will be restricted to below 12,000 feet. This puts the onerous task of defending the Himalayas on Rudra. It is not strictly an attack helicopter in the present day context and perhaps be compared to a proof-of-concept US-Israeli Black Hawk (completed in 2009) and to the recent IAR-330 SOCAT armed upgrade version of Eurocopter’s Puma helicopter,” says HAL sources.
Both Black Hawk and Puma are in the 9 tonne AUW (all-up weight) Class, and have far lesser high-altitude performance compared to Rudra. The Mk-III version of Dhruv holds the record of landing on a helipad at 20,000 feet in Siachen (world’s highest helipad) carrying a load in excess of 600 kg, during peak summers.
Copyright@The New Indian Express

Manish_P
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2517
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Manish_P » 22 Feb 2012 11:48

^
"...newly-acquired Apache will be restricted to below 12,000 feet..."


:shock: :?:

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 » 22 Feb 2012 17:05

yes on paper around 16,000ft but I will bet its only been battle tested to around 10,000ft in Afghanistan.

it is a big heavy helicopter.

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

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby keshavchandra » 22 Feb 2012 18:16

Manish_P wrote:^
"...newly-acquired Apache will be restricted to below 12,000 feet..."


:shock: :?:

But this beast is very quiet on above 1500 feet, which is good for land operation. still I have doubt on Apache operations on our eastern front for deep striking. For that we have WSI which has reached on siachen around 20,000 feet on world highest halipad, which is a world record itself. :)

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 » 22 Feb 2012 19:32

if it cannot fly with some payload beyond 17,000ft it cannot fly over the series of high passes along the manali road to demchok region and neither can it deploy from Leh area over the Khardung la to nubra valley/daulat beg oldie or over Chang la to the pangong tso lake region. all of these are 17000ft+

and since neither the C130J or AN32 flying into the ALGs like DBG or Demchok can carry this baby even with rotors removed, it cannot be airlifted in.

I am skeptical if it can be put on a trailer and road carried there whether for a permanent base or wartime fwd basing.

in short it looks totally useless for Ladakh.
what exact value does it add vs TSP that a combo of WSI and LCH cannot impart - IAF/IA are afterall getting their choice of imported weapons like mistral and atgm.

not sure what kind of obstacles are there to deploying from north bengal to north sikkim ....

I am afraid such a expensive purchase that cannot be deployed vs our biggest problem is a useless purchase - would be better to just buy more 40 more LCH for the cost of 22 apaches. Nag mmw is also in works, so matter of time before we get Helina mmw.

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

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby keshavchandra » 22 Feb 2012 19:40

Dhruv MK-3 has automatic dispensation of countermeasures like chaff and fare dispensing systems. Any senior kindly elaborate me how exactly it works in auto mode? :?:
k

Bala Vignesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2017
Joined: 30 Apr 2009 02:02
Location: Standing at the edge of the cliff
Contact:

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Bala Vignesh » 22 Feb 2012 21:41

My guess is that there could be that there could be an on-board computer which classifies and prioritizes the threats and based on that triggers the launch of the Countermeasures..

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby koti » 22 Feb 2012 22:16

keshavchandra wrote:The MI-35 is restricted to well below 6000 feet and the newly-acquired Apache will be restricted to below 12,000 feet.

I do not know where this figure is pulled form.
Everywhere I verify, the AH-64D is said to have a Service ceiling of 21000 ft, not 12000 ft.
Comparative Picture posted by Rajneesh here sometime back
Singha wrote:if it cannot fly with some payload beyond 17,000ft it cannot fly over the series of high passes along the manali road to demchok region and neither can it deploy from Leh area over the Khardung la to nubra valley/daulat beg oldie or over Chang la to the pangong tso lake region. all of these are 17000ft+

and since neither the C130J or AN32 flying into the ALGs like DBG or Demchok can carry this baby even with rotors removed, it cannot be airlifted in.

I am skeptical if it can be put on a trailer and road carried there whether for a permanent base or wartime fwd basing.

in short it looks totally useless for Ladakh.
what exact value does it add vs TSP that a combo of WSI and LCH cannot impart - IAF/IA are afterall getting their choice of imported weapons like mistral and atgm.

not sure what kind of obstacles are there to deploying from north bengal to north sikkim ....

I am afraid such a expensive purchase that cannot be deployed vs our biggest problem is a useless purchase - would be better to just buy more 40 more LCH for the cost of 22 apaches. Nag mmw is also in works, so matter of time before we get Helina mmw.

LCH is a 5 tonne class gunship. Apache is a 10 tonne class one. The Engines in Apache are around 80% more powerful than the LCH and the useful load is also 5 tonnes compared to 2.5 tonnes for the LCH.

Both the machines belong to different classes so one on one comparison IMO is not necessary.

what exact value does it add vs TSP that a combo of WSI and LCH cannot impart

I see this as 'what can 10 Rafale achieve that 20 Gripen cannot'.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby koti » 22 Feb 2012 22:27

Amitabh wrote:
koti wrote:The apaches are experts in tank killing. The plains of Punjab, Rajastan can prove pretty messy for enemy Armored units in the presence of these.
The Attack Choppers usually travel in groups, so if a lone MANPADS team tries to engage them, irrespective of their ........

Ask the 11th Regiment, 3rd Infantry Division, US Army: 2003 Attack on Karbala, Iraq

Sorry for the delay, I missed your post.
The element of surprise is all powerful. A bad mission does not necessarily translate to a bad platform.

IAF sees the use of heavy Attack Heli in its doctrine, and I believe Apache is the best in the market now. What other heli do you think could have fared better if it were to be in Apache's place in Karbala?

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 » 22 Feb 2012 22:48

>> Both the machines belong to different classes so one on one comparison IMO is not necessary.

nobody is comparing them 1:1. but I am saying it might be 0:1 since the apache might not even be able to fly in combat ops in the areas where the PRC is poised to pounce. the chances of a indo-pak clash are quite minimal vs the chances of PRC pouncing on us somewhere given the superior logistical lines and economic confidence they are building up.

secondly we can afford far more LCH/WSI than 44 apaches (let us say we buy another 22 later)...we can likely put up 2 LCH/WSI for every 1 apache on a cost basis.

what kind of track record does it have @ 15,000ft in sustained or even periodic ops?

> What other heli do you think could have fared better if it were to be in Apache's place in Karbala?

none. it was a wrong decision to send the apaches ahead and acknowledged as such later. we need not repeat the same mistake.

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

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby keshavchandra » 22 Feb 2012 23:31

Bala Vignesh wrote:My guess is that there could be that there could be an on-board computer which classifies and prioritizes the threats and based on that triggers the launch of the Countermeasures..

I get the point...Thanks bala sir.

koti
BRFite
Posts: 1119
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 22:06
Location: Hyderabad, India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby koti » 23 Feb 2012 00:32

Singha wrote:> What other heli do you think could have fared better if it were to be in Apache's place in Karbala?none. it was a wrong decision to send the apaches ahead and acknowledged as such later. we need not repeat the same mistake.

That is the point I like to make too. A bad mission does not necessarily mean a bad Heli.

Singha wrote:secondly we can afford far more LCH/WSI than 44 apaches (let us say we buy another 22 later)...we can likely put up 2 LCH/WSI for every 1 apache on a cost basis.

I am not that worried about the cost.
What I am more interested in a Ah-64 is the LongBow. The Attack Helis can be mashed into one complex flight of one longbow for every 4-5 LCHs. I don't know of anything on LCH in the league of longbow yet.

By this we can have a very balanced and pertinent force.
If can somehow manage to use Helina with Longbow, it becomes even more sweeter.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5359
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby jamwal » 23 Feb 2012 01:02

Is that kind of integration possible between LCH & Longbow ? I'm not talking about just the electronics, communications etc, but also about the different Army units which will operate these choppers. Lastly, I don't think Americans are going to allow it either.

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

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby keshavchandra » 23 Feb 2012 01:04

koti wrote:
Singha wrote:> What other heli do you think could have fared better if it were to be in Apache's place in Karbala?none. it was a wrong decision to send the apaches ahead and acknowledged as such later. we need not repeat the same mistake.

That is the point I like to make too. A bad mission does not necessarily mean a bad Heli.

Singha wrote:secondly we can afford far more LCH/WSI than 44 apaches (let us say we buy another 22 later)...we can likely put up 2 LCH/WSI for every 1 apache on a cost basis.

I am not that worried about the cost.
What I am more interested in a Ah-64 is the LongBow. The Attack Helis can be mashed into one complex flight of one longbow for every 4-5 LCHs. I don't know of anything on LCH in the league of longbow yet.



By this we can have a very balanced and pertinent force.
If can somehow manage to use Helina with Longbow, it becomes even more sweeter.



But Koti sir I think, we need to understand the roll in between the different classes of Air combat vehicles of IA. The both class of combat air vehicles (Heavy and light) are requires to full filling the war doctrines (Offensive plus defensive). Like….
1.With Apache-AH64 IA will get a boost to its deep strike capabilities and also to its limited strike capacity (During interview one of NSG commando was questioned, would you like to die for this country. He said I am not trained to die just but to fight and return back alive). This deal definitely will be morale booster for the strike core.
2.LCH as its main role (order of IA 114 Units) will give aerial support to IA armed division. But if we integrate one such discipline with our ground combat group, we need whole planned roles for each and every unit/type. (Like LCH tracked targets should be shared in between all in range combat units via a uniform Battle management system and the same way sharing of Arjun MK 1&2 and T-90 tracked targets mutually with LCH). Such platform (Air plus ground) needs more focus on joined developments & exercises to get better integrated outcomes.
3.As an add-on with the first point, another role for WSI or our new MI-17 V5 for deep troop’s deployment under apache cover for limited strike or evacuation. And this will be the best indigenous effort or option for such role (Leave aside the Eurocopter deal), which we will required not just on western front but also on eastern (for deployment plus evacuation).
4.The front role for the apache would not be just strike but to map the immediate front battle field (esp. by 11 millimetre-wave Longbow radars in low visibility) also and this data will get help in battle management and on-time deployment....

So I think it is a matter of time for proper absorption of capabilities of each individual unit under proper training, then IA will get a set role for each, and this will take time. :)

anishns
BRFite
Posts: 1348
Joined: 16 Dec 2007 09:43
Location: being victim onlee...

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby anishns » 23 Feb 2012 04:01

Ooooh! What a sight? :D

Looking Awesome! :twisted:

Image

TARMAK007 BLOG

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5414
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Kartik » 23 Feb 2012 06:17

This year we need to look out for the first flight of the LUH (Light Utility Helicopter) from HAL's Rotary Division. At least, back in 2009, Ashok Nayak during an interview with Force had stated that first flight should occur in 2012 and it should be delivered to the users in 2014. If the current stalemate in the other LUH competition carries on, AND HAL manages to stick to its own deadlines for once, then the GoI should simply cancel that competition and hand over the entire order to HAL instead with another private partner identified to manufacture it as well.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16947
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby NRao » 23 Feb 2012 06:32

Mid 2011 Hal ran into an issue of finding a good engine for the LUH. Has that been resolved?

OH, here goes:

Jan 16, 2012 :: HAL scouts for automatic flight control system for LUH

anuary 16, 2012 : As its 3-ton light utility helicopter (LUH) takes shape, HAL has invited bids from global suppliers to design and supply the automatic flight control system (AFCS). HAL has called for the development of a 3-axis simplex digital AFCS that is interfaced with helicopter sensors and stability, controllability and autopilot actuators.

HAL is working hard to meet timelines, considering that it is working to meet an order of 187 units (126 for the Army and 61 for the IAF). Following the first public display of the LUH mock-up in January 2011, HAL is currently in the process of selecting a turboshaft engine for the platform.

In September last year, it opened two bids for Turbomeca's Shakti engine (which powers the ALH Dhruv and Light Combat Helicopter prototypes) and the LHTEC (Rolls-Royce and Honeywell joint venture) T800. In a break from tradition (and its existing agreement with Israel on the Dhruv programme), HAL has asked for indigenously developed designs for the LUH glass cockpit, ensuring that the man-machine interface and avionics of the platform are fully indigenous in an effort to offset the foreign component percentage contributed by the engine and flight control system.

According to HAL, the LUH is being developed for reconnaissance & surveillance (including armed reconnaissance), aerial photography, scout missions in conjunction with attack helicopter(s), NBC monitoring, platform for electronic support measure (ESM), Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) & ElectronicCounter Counter Measures (ECCM), airborne forward air controller (FAC), casualty evacuation, troop transport for military version and commuter role for civil version.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21227
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

Postby Philip » 23 Feb 2012 17:33

Sept.The Chinook is a very vulnerable helo.Many posts ago there were details about Chinooks shot down in Af-Pak,etc.,the high rate of attrition when faced with anti-air fire from both MGs and MANPADs.As another poster has said,the MI-26s aren't going to be used directly over the battlefield as troop transports,but are needed ,apart from thir multi-role uses in support of army ops,to lift heavy eqpt. to the high Himalayas where no roads exist,so that the BRO can use the eqpt. to build the strategic highways required to counter the Chinese in Tibet.The absence of these eqpt. is sorely hampering the speed of construction.

The weaponised Dhruv is excellent news.We need numbers plus quality and with the LCH and Rudra arriving,and with their ability to carry almost all helo weaponry required,guns,rockets and missiles,the numbers of expensive Apaches can be curtailed,money saved on more acquisitions of indigenous attack helos.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests