Indian Military Helicopters

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Shubham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 04 Feb 2009 01:06
Location: Hyderabad

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Shubham » 16 Feb 2018 09:59

Indranil wrote:Shubham,

Although, there is security in redundancy, modern aircraft engines are incredibly robust. Do the Chetaks & Cheetahs have a worse safety record than let's say the Dhruvs and Mi-17s? How about the Mirages over Mig-29s or Jaguars?


Read online that CO of 114 HU stating that they have lost 14 pilots in operations. Even if considering a few to be human error, the rest is a very high figure of casualty as compared to Russian fleet.

I will make an unsubstanted statement that had Su 30 been a single engine fighter, it would have reached crash rates quite close to crash rate of Mig 21/23/27 variants. The luxury of two engine is enormous.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6600
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 16 Feb 2018 10:50

Of course, if your engines are unreliable. An overwhelming majority of aircrafts in the world are single engined. They are not falling out of the sky.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3357
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby JayS » 16 Feb 2018 11:59

Shubham wrote:
Indranil wrote:Shubham,

Although, there is security in redundancy, modern aircraft engines are incredibly robust. Do the Chetaks & Cheetahs have a worse safety record than let's say the Dhruvs and Mi-17s? How about the Mirages over Mig-29s or Jaguars?


Read online that CO of 114 HU stating that they have lost 14 pilots in operations. Even if considering a few to be human error, the rest is a very high figure of casualty as compared to Russian fleet.

I will make an unsubstanted statement that had Su 30 been a single engine fighter, it would have reached crash rates quite close to crash rate of Mig 21/23/27 variants. The luxury of two engine is enormous.


Yes, Su-30 would have had rather bad record. A figure of 34 comes to my mind - no of engine related incidences when the jets had to land on single engine. But Russian engines which are not exactly famous for reliability. Comparing them with western engines is apples vs oranges comparison as far as reliability goes.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1274
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Manish_P » 16 Feb 2018 12:03

What about helicopter engines. How is the gap vis a vis the western engines, for helicopters

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1178
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Bart S » 16 Feb 2018 13:26

shiv wrote:
Bart S wrote:Would unmanned platforms (which could be built from something simple like a Cheetah) be viable to do stuff like dangerous high-altitude supply drops?

Drops are one thing. Drop and pick up is another thing. The pick up is not always from a pre-designated site - but has to be decided on the spot by the pilot. I am not sure how good it would be for a casualty/high alt sickness victim to be thrown into an unmanned helo because its unsafe for the pilot but safe enough for the sick soldier. That looks like hypocrisy to me.

You have no doubt read this story - it is the epitome of human decision making in the chain

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/histo ... -nose.html


I had in mind strictly cargo only (no human payload) - it would be a long time before we would be able to trust the system for the latter. There are already drones being used for delivery etc, so the concept is not radical in any way, of course dropping military supplies to Siachen etc would have a completely different set of parameters.

If we look at something like high-altitude supply drops to known posts and drop/pickup points, and assume that 80% of the cargo is completely routine, then if we are able to automate that, we can still do the remaining 20% by manned craft while cutting risk significantly and possibly improving payload (by not having to plan for humans on board).

Haridas
BRFite
Posts: 259
Joined: 26 Dec 2017 07:53

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Haridas » 16 Feb 2018 14:11

Shubham wrote:
Indranil wrote:Shubham,

Although, there is security in redundancy, modern aircraft engines are incredibly robust. Do the Chetaks & Cheetahs have a worse safety record than let's say the Dhruvs and Mi-17s? How about the Mirages over Mig-29s or Jaguars?


Read online that CO of 114 HU stating that they have lost 14 pilots in operations. Even if considering a few to be human error, the rest is a very high figure of casualty as compared to Russian fleet.

I will make an unsubstanted statement that had Su 30 been a single engine fighter, it would have reached crash rates quite close to crash rate of Mig 21/23/27 variants. The luxury of two engine is enormous.

114 HU loss of life is because of extream mission needs and pushing the available machines to its extreams with no room for error or curved ball thrown by Vayu deva at such altitude.

I have personally met three 114 HU pilots who survived on dint of good fortune of their wives prayers, one being my own brother when he crashed after lifting off Sonam post, (he was then CO 114 HU). :roll:

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 16 Feb 2018 16:01

Shubham wrote:Read online that CO of 114 HU stating that they have lost 14 pilots in operations. Even if considering a few to be human error, the rest is a very high figure of casualty as compared to Russian fleet.

I will make an unsubstanted statement that had Su 30 been a single engine fighter, it would have reached crash rates quite close to crash rate of Mig 21/23/27 variants. The luxury of two engine is enormous.

The flying that the IAF does is hazardous - with one or two engines. This is not just about pilot error but "essential" missions that need to go at unusual times. Did you read the story I posted - I has some great detail about weather and time of day. The Su 30 comparison is rhetoric to buttress a point that you wish to make - it has only as much meaning as "If my aunt had a d--k she would have been my uncle." Rhetoric is fun but is a digression from facts. That part can be left out of this discussion

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 16 Feb 2018 16:12

Bart S wrote:If we look at something like high-altitude supply drops to known posts and drop/pickup points, and assume that 80% of the cargo is completely routine,

Here is my problem. What is routine? On what basis do you assume that X percentage are "routine" and involve drops only. The IAF often flies dual missions - drop and pick up -maybe at different spots. Without having any idea of what the IAF is doing exactly a new idea may sound serendipitous - so long as no one asks for the details. Do you have inside information on parameters like air temperature, humidity, visibility, altitude, fuel, payload capacity for those conditions that is now done either manually or has a man in the loop to overrule or accept. I read/hear about these parameters in hundreds of accident analysis that are available for the reader. I get the impression that there are a huge number of unclarified assumptions in your idea - kind and humane as it may be,

But let me ask a more fundamental question on a topic that has intruded here. You say that drone drops are routine. Yes. I think Amazon is testing it on some place in Africa, dropping vaccines. It is certainly not "routine" in Amazon's home country. I think Dubai is looking at unmanned sky taxis - then again - all experiments are great in some faraway land under idealized conditions and perfectly predictable parameters

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1178
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Bart S » 16 Feb 2018 16:23

^Sure, I am not saying that it is a piece of cake. However it does not mean that we should not at least be working on it. We have to start somewhere. It took the US 30 years of building and flying/testing UAVs before they could manage a carrier landing, something that they still have not perfected.

Also, what the IAF is doing now is at least to some extent tailored to their available rotorcraft and resources. Add in viable remotely piloted craft to the mix and that can change as they will be optimizing payloads and sorties to the equipment available to them.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 16 Feb 2018 16:43

Bart S wrote:^Sure, I am not saying that it is a piece of cake. However it does not mean that we should not at least be working on it.

Who should work on it? This is a DRDO thing and the air force would have to state a requirement. Right now the IAF is saying "Give us safe new helicopters with modern avionics and navigation equipment"

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3357
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby JayS » 16 Feb 2018 16:50

http://www.hal-india.com/Common/Uploads/TenderDoc/16140_TenderPDF1_EOI_ALH(Dhruv)-ToT.PDF

Boost to Make-in-India, HAL Invites Indian Partner for Licence Manufacturing of

ALH-Civil Under TOT



Bengaluru, February 16, 2018: For the first time in Indian history, as a major boost to defence manufacturing and Government’s ‘Make-in-India’ initiative, HAL has offered the indigenous ‘Advanced Light Helicopter-Dhruv’ (Civil version) for manufacturing to potential Indian private companies through Transfer of Technology. Accordingly, the Company has invited Expression of Interest (EOI) for identification of Indian Partner. “Considering the increasing need of helicopters in civil operations of the country, this will be a mega deal from HAL which is the OEM and Licensor”, says Mr. T. Suvarna Raju, CMD, HAL.



HAL is the Design Authority and Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of ALH-Dhruv. The Company is now looking forward to develop a reliable Indian Partner (IP) to service the potential demand to different customers in civil sector in shorter time span. The selected Indian Partner would also be required to provide support to the customers throughout the life of the product (20 years) thereby ensuring long term business relationship.



As a technology provider, HAL shall provide transfer of technology through license and transfer of know – how, technical assistance and license rights for production of ALH-Dhruv (Civil) for the selected business partner.



HAL is looking for the Indian Partner, who has the capability of having five years of experience in engineering/aerospace industry (including manufacturing and assembly), having net worth of Rs 2000 crores and minimum turnover of Rs 2500 crores, possessing skilled and qualified manpower, registered in India or having majority holding by Indian stakeholders and willing to enter strategic collaboration with HAL.



ALH Dhruv has successfully proved itself with different customers in varying roles and missions in demanding operational conditions and has bright business prospects. Besides the current orders, Dhruv is envisaged to have potential demands in domestic as well as foreign markets due to flexibility of configuration for different roles.


This is not the first time I am hearing of such initiative. Hopefully this time is works out. Good opportunity for Ambanis, Adanis, Tatas et all...

Link to the EOI:

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.hal-india.com/Common/Uploads/TenderDoc/16140_TenderPDF1_EOI_ALH(Dhruv)-ToT.PDF&ved=2ahUKEwi9_qCIqqrZAhVJQY8KHYusB5sQFjAJegQIERAB&usg=AOvVaw1bUaIILiIkGGnV3WXiM57P

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby srai » 16 Feb 2018 20:29

^^^

Good development! Now we are talking about organic MII within India with indigenous products. This is where indigenous MII would have a major impact on the maturity of Indian Aerospace MIC over the next decade. AMCA will have it easy ;)

LCA -> outsourcing of major components to 5 tier-1 private enterprises
ALH-Civilian -> offer of license manufacture w/ ToT
HTT-40 & LUH -> future (also will be offered license manufacture w/ ToT)

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1442
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Zynda » 16 Feb 2018 21:15

HAL should try to seek EASA/FAR certification for commercial variant. I'd imagine which ever private enterprise is interested in teaming up with HAL to produce civilian version of Dhruv, would want to export these choppers outside of India. And without EASA/FAR certification, it would be difficult to sell it outside India (& probably within India as well except for Govt. operators) & hence probably a weak business case.

I remember HAL had launched a campaign to get FAR certification for Dhruv but probably abandoned it.

Certification campaign is quite expensive and I doubt any private sector firm would be willing to chase certification efforts on their own dime. It could end up being a chicken & egg situation.

Shubham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 04 Feb 2009 01:06
Location: Hyderabad

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Shubham » 16 Feb 2018 22:59

shiv wrote:
Shubham wrote:Read online that CO of 114 HU stating that they have lost 14 pilots in operations. Even if considering a few to be human error, the rest is a very high figure of casualty as compared to Russian fleet.

I will make an unsubstanted statement that had Su 30 been a single engine fighter, it would have reached crash rates quite close to crash rate of Mig 21/23/27 variants. The luxury of two engine is enormous.

The flying that the IAF does is hazardous - with one or two engines. This is not just about pilot error but "essential" missions that need to go at unusual times. Did you read the story I posted - I has some great detail about weather and time of day. The Su 30 comparison is rhetoric to buttress a point that you wish to make - it has only as much meaning as "If my aunt had a d--k she would have been my uncle." Rhetoric is fun but is a digression from facts. That part can be left out of this discussion


The flying of IAF is hazardous but the fact remains that this hazard reduces greatly due to reduendecy of one more engine onboard. and here I am talking just about accident due to loss of an engine. The proof of this is that though IAF had 14 fatals (Army Aviation must also have some additional numbers) in Cheetah, there are hardly any fatals of Mi 17 fleet in the same area, even though both fleets have been supporting Op Meghdoot since it's inception till date.

Su 30 analogy is not merely retoric but a crucial comparison that clearly brings out the enhanced mission accomplishment and safety due to engine redundency. I am sure the numerous pilots who need not have to eject from their jets would feel that it is more than just fun !!

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby srai » 17 Feb 2018 05:46

Zynda wrote:HAL should try to seek EASA/FAR certification for commercial variant. I'd imagine which ever private enterprise is interested in teaming up with HAL to produce civilian version of Dhruv, would want to export these choppers outside of India. And without EASA/FAR certification, it would be difficult to sell it outside India (& probably within India as well except for Govt. operators) & hence probably a weak business case.

I remember HAL had launched a campaign to get FAR certification for Dhruv but probably abandoned it.

Certification campaign is quite expensive and I doubt any private sector firm would be willing to chase certification efforts on their own dime. It could end up being a chicken & egg situation.

No one is going to hand it on a silver platter so to speak. That has been one of the problems in India. Large Private companies are waiting on the sidelines for government to nominate them as one of the production agencies for imported MII and with it most of the funding associated with those provided by GoI.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 17 Feb 2018 10:45

Shubham wrote:The flying of IAF is hazardous but the fact remains that this hazard reduces greatly due to reduendecy of one more engine onboard. and here I am talking just about accident due to loss of an engine. The proof of this is that though IAF had 14 fatals (Army Aviation must also have some additional numbers) in Cheetah, there are hardly any fatals of Mi 17 fleet in the same area, even though both fleets have been supporting Op Meghdoot since it's inception till date.

Mi 17s and Cheetahs serve different roles. Ultimately - at the very edges - very high up it is the Cheetahs and not the Mi 17s. Don't forget that helicopters serve a far faaar larger role than just op Meghdoot.

Do not delude yourself into comparing planes with helicopters in the Himalayas. You are talking about simply staying in the air. Aircraft stay in the air with less power when one engine fails and will gradually lose altitude because the wings and forward movement provide lift. But a twin engine helicopter in the Himalayas - at the edge is its performance envelop will crash just as disastrously as a single engine because the air is so thin that even maximum power on two engines is barely enough and there is no forward movement and wing lift available. And they don't have ejection seats.

Can you explain this to me: If a single engine helicopter can land and take off at an altitude of 15,000 feet will a twin engine be able to do that at 25,000 feet. If not why not? It's an interesting question to me - but you may be able to figure out what I am saying at some time in the future.

Have you any images of an Mi-17 doing this:
https://twitter.com/rajatpTOI/status/964701530598260736

Shubham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 04 Feb 2009 01:06
Location: Hyderabad

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Shubham » 17 Feb 2018 12:38

shiv wrote:But a twin engine helicopter in the Himalayas - at the edge is its performance envelop will crash just as disastrously as a single engine because the air is so thin that even maximum power on two engines is barely enough and there is no forward movement and wing lift available. And they don't have ejection seats.


The able statements are grossly inaccurate.

Reality - a twin engine helicopter which is loaded to single engine OGE weight will NOT CRASH AT ALL ( removing cases when helicopter has high rate of descent and low terrain clearance ; while coming for landing. This case can be avoided if pilot is careful) when one of its engine fails.
The detrimental effect of winds can be countered by various techniques and if the winds are too much to handle the mission has to be cancelled.



On the other hand a single engine helicopter WILL CRASH IN ALL CASES, when its engine fail. The only saving grace will be as Hari ji said - potent luck and prayers well answered by almighty.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6600
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 17 Feb 2018 13:03

That is incorrect sir. OEI flight ceiling will always be lower than service flight ceiling. I have forgotten the number for Dhruv, but typically it is about 75% or so for twin engine helis. If you are flying over territory which is higher than your OEI ceiling, you will crash. There are no two ways about it.

Shubham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 04 Feb 2009 01:06
Location: Hyderabad

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Shubham » 17 Feb 2018 13:26

Indranil wrote:That is incorrect sir. OEI flight ceiling will always be lower than service flight ceiling. I have forgotten the number for Dhruv, but typically it is about 75% or so for twin engine helis. If you are flying over territory which is higher than your OEI ceiling, you will crash. There are no two ways about it.


Absolutely true, but I didn't say anything about OEI ceiling 8) , I wanted to present facts one by one so as to avoid people mixing up issues.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 17 Feb 2018 14:09

Shubham wrote:
Reality - a twin engine helicopter which is loaded to single engine OGE weight will NOT CRASH AT ALL ( removing cases when helicopter has high rate of descent and low terrain clearance ; while coming for landing. This case can be avoided if pilot is careful) when one of its engine fails.
The detrimental effect of winds can be countered by various techniques and if the winds are too much to handle the mission has to be cancelled.

I see that you have now backed down from your original assertion about the blanket superiority of twin engine over single engine by imposing a long series of some laughable conditionalities that suit your viewpoint rather than what is required from helicopters in service. Let me look at the conditions you have imposed:

1. Load a twin engine helicopter to the maximum load that it can carry OGE if it was running on one engine alone. Nice condition for more rhetorical arguments. So let me get this straight. You are saying that a 5 ton Dhruv or a 7.5 ton Mi-17 should be loaded with only so much payload (+fuel) that it can carry with one engine and make sure that it stays within the limits of flying conditions for one-engine flight, by staying within the payload/altitude limits imposed by one engine flight. These are some ridiculous conditions to lay down. Under this condition the helicopter will not crash at all because of single engine failure, but it can crash because of multiple other reasons which need to be ignored. May I ask you - how many single engine helo crashes in the Himalaya have occurred because of engine failure? If you don't know - this is a worthless argument that I will dismiss even if I accept the ridiculous flight envelope limitations you are imposing on a twin engine helo. I put it to you that most accidents are NOT from engine failure.

2. Do you have any data that a Dhruv on single engine or an Mi 17 on single engine can reach the same heights as a Cheetah? I would like to see the data please? Or else you are simply trying to get away with a bluff the way you have just been caught above.

3. "Low terrain clearance" To my mind (correct me if I am wrong) you seem to imagine helicopter flights over the Himalayas as civil airliner flights over the ocean - that is there is constant and easy "terrain clearance". But over the Himalayas - helos (and fixed wing aircraft) are often flying 5000 feet above a valley with a peak or ridge that is 1000 feet above them that they are approaching. In order to avoid hitting that peak, the helo will have to gain altitude for which more power will be required. Any engine failure at this stage can lead to controlled flight into terrain. Twin engine or single engine. Naturally if you pre-set the exact condition where a twin "just makes it" you can then claim that twin engine is better. But that is sales talk for the brochure because the salesman cannot ensure that those conditions are met in real life.

Shubham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 04 Feb 2009 01:06
Location: Hyderabad

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Shubham » 17 Feb 2018 15:05

shiv wrote:
Shubham wrote:
Reality - a twin engine helicopter which is loaded to single engine OGE weight will NOT CRASH AT ALL ( removing cases when helicopter has high rate of descent and low terrain clearance ; while coming for landing. This case can be avoided if pilot is careful) when one of its engine fails.
The detrimental effect of winds can be countered by various techniques and if the winds are too much to handle the mission has to be cancelled.

I see that you have now backed down from your original assertion about the blanket superiority of twin engine over single engine by imposing a long series of some laughable conditionalities that suit your viewpoint rather than what is required from helicopters in service. Let me look at the conditions you have imposed:

1. Load a twin engine helicopter to the maximum load that it can carry OGE if it was running on one engine alone. Nice condition for more rhetorical arguments. So let me get this straight. You are saying that a 5 ton Dhruv or a 7.5 ton Mi-17 should be loaded with only so much payload (+fuel) that it can carry with one engine and make sure that it stays within the limits of flying conditions for one-engine flight, by staying within the payload/altitude limits imposed by one engine flight. These are some ridiculous conditions to lay down. Under this condition the helicopter will not crash at all because of single engine failure, but it can crash because of multiple other reasons which need to be ignored. May I ask you - how many single engine helo crashes in the Himalaya have occurred because of engine failure? If you don't know - this is a worthless argument that I will dismiss even if I accept the ridiculous flight envelope limitations you are imposing on a twin engine helo. I put it to you that most accidents are NOT from engine failure.

OEI limits are actually followed religiously. So whatever is being done now and till now , has been within these limits.
To ensure this rather then landing everywhere, drops are carried out.

Nobody is fool enough to take extra load and loose advantage and safety of one engine, when the nominated load can be achieved by more number of flights.

Believe what you want !! but more then enough cheetah pilots have sacrificed their lives to failed engines.

2. Do you have any data that a Dhruv on single engine or an Mi 17 on single engine can reach the same heights as a Cheetah? I would like to see the data please? Or else you are simply trying to get away with a bluff the way you have just been caught above.

The places where Dhruv / Mi 17 can land/drop constitute a minority, say 0.01 of overall scheme of things and even there are means of taking care of situation when such a case arises.


3. "Low terrain clearance" To my mind (correct me if I am wrong) you seem to imagine helicopter flights over the Himalayas as civil airliner flights over the ocean - that is there is constant and easy "terrain clearance". But over the Himalayas - helos (and fixed wing aircraft) are often flying 5000 feet above a valley with a peak or ridge that is 1000 feet above them that they are approaching. In order to avoid hitting that peak, the helo will have to gain altitude for which more power will be required. Any engine failure at this stage can lead to controlled flight into terrain. Twin engine or single engine. Naturally if you pre-set the exact condition where a twin "just makes it" you can then claim that twin engine is better. But that is sales talk for the brochure because the salesman cannot ensure that those conditions are met in real life.


Read my statement properly, don't miss the punctuation marks. No point in quoting a word from a sentence.

Low terrain was mentioned only while the helicopter was making approach. In approach high descent rate when terrain clearance is low is deadly. On approach if you have high rod but have height in hand then a safe go around can be carried out. In other cases the recovery is as per avoid- area curve.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 17 Feb 2018 19:42

Shubham wrote:
Believe what you want !! but more then enough cheetah pilots have sacrificed their lives to failed engines.

I am willing to believe this but your word is not enough. I have been following flight accidents for decades and while all sorts of reports exist - please point me to engine failure as one of the most frequent causes or even among the top 3. If you can't -it YOUR belief versus mine

Shubham wrote:The places where Dhruv / Mi 17 can land/drop constitute a minority, say 0.01 of overall scheme of things and even there are means of taking care of situation when such a case arises.

So you are saying that Dhruv/Mi-17 cannot land/drop in 99.99% cases. So what are you proposing exactly by demanding 2 engine helicopters for the 99.99% where they cannot land/drop

Shubham wrote:
Read my statement properly, don't miss the punctuation marks. No point in quoting a word from a sentence.

Low terrain was mentioned only while the helicopter was making approach. In approach high descent rate when terrain clearance is low is deadly. On approach if you have high rod but have height in hand then a safe go around can be carried out. In other cases the recovery is as per avoid- area curve.


Here is your statement
Reality - a twin engine helicopter which is loaded to single engine OGE weight will NOT CRASH AT ALL ( removing cases when helicopter has high rate of descent and low terrain clearance ; while coming for landing. This case can be avoided if pilot is careful) when one of its engine fails.

There are 2 fullstops and a semicolon. It says
1. Load a twin engine to single engine OGE weight

You have not explained if the helo with 2 working engines will then be allowed to reach areas that it can reach with 2 engines but not with one. As Indranil pointed out - if it has exceeded the single engine altitude it can certainly crash if one engine fails. But in your next post you say :
OEI limits are actually followed religiously. So whatever is being done now and till now , has been within these limits.


I do not believe this. You need to provide data. Not your beliefs. I do not believe that twin engine helicopters are invariably used only up to single engine height limits. I am willing to be shown that I am wrong - but not from the changing colours of your post where you have gone from saying that twins are safer, to twins need to be restricted to Single engine limits and now you are saying that they are ALWAYS restricted to those limits despite flying only 0.01% of missions. You are moving the goalpost with every post and apart from telling me about your deadly punctuation marks and a iffy "0.01%" data point you have managed to actually quote no statistics or proof. But you refer to my beliefs and claim that I have belief and you have facts. Does not seem like that to me.

What is the single engine limit for the Mi 17. How do you know that it is being implemented. I don't mind you saying that this is what you heard. That is easier to believe than this rearguard battle you are fighting to simply stick to your point

1. what percentage of Cheetah crashes were engine failure. How was that crash cause established after the crash
2. What is the single engine OGE altitude limit of the Mi 17/Dhruv?

For the time being I will ignore that fluff about "how the pilot must approach" and "what he must do and must not do". Surely if you know all that you will also be able to answer what I have asked you. If you say "This is what I believe" I will accept that as an honest answer. Or else we are still where we started. I remain unconvinced by your changing argument

Also I must point out a gaping hole in your argument. You claim that "OEI limits are actually followed religiously" for twin engines. If they are so worried about engine failure in twin engine helos they should surely not be such hypocrites and should ground all single engine helos because OEI limits for single engine is "No engine - so do not fly at all". How come religiosity comes in for twin engine while single engine pilots are sent to their deaths in your story. This is completely unconvincing.

Shubham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 04 Feb 2009 01:06
Location: Hyderabad

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Shubham » 17 Feb 2018 22:18

shiv wrote:
Shubham wrote:
Believe what you want !! but more then enough cheetah pilots have sacrificed their lives to failed engines.

I am willing to believe this but your word is not enough. I have been following flight accidents for decades and while all sorts of reports exist - please point me to engine failure as one of the most frequent causes or even among the top 3. If you can't -it YOUR belief versus mine


Accidents in helicopters have happened for numerous reasons ( lack of airmenship, weather etc), but the crux of my argument is that in those cases of single engine ,where it was due to engine conking off, they were avoidable.
Infact since you say you have been following accidents details for decades, then kindly provide reference of twin engine helicopter crashing due to engine failure.
I cant provide reference in support of my assertion that single engine helicopter accident in India that are TD (technical defect) have had a major percentage of engine associated one. I am open to being refuted in this regards. Till that time - you believe what you want , I will mine.

Shubham wrote:The places where Dhruv / Mi 17 can land/drop constitute a minority, say 0.01 of overall scheme of things and even there are means of taking care of situation when such a case arises.

So you are saying that Dhruv/Mi-17 cannot land/drop in 99.99% cases. So what are you proposing exactly by demanding 2 engine helicopters for the 99.99% where they cannot land/drop

My apologies for typo on this one. I want to say Dhruv/Mi 17 can do the job 99.99 per cases.
Shubham wrote:
Read my statement properly, don't miss the punctuation marks. No point in quoting a word from a sentence.

Low terrain was mentioned only while the helicopter was making approach. In approach high descent rate when terrain clearance is low is deadly. On approach if you have high rod but have height in hand then a safe go around can be carried out. In other cases the recovery is as per avoid- area curve.


Here is your statement
Reality - a twin engine helicopter which is loaded to single engine OGE weight will NOT CRASH AT ALL ( removing cases when helicopter has high rate of descent and low terrain clearance ; while coming for landing. This case can be avoided if pilot is careful) when one of its engine fails.

There are 2 fullstops and a semicolon. It says
1. Load a twin engine to single engine OGE weight

You have not explained if the helo with 2 working engines will then be allowed to reach areas that it can reach with 2 engines but not with one. As Indranil pointed out - if it has exceeded the single engine altitude it can certainly crash if one engine fails. But in your next post you say :
OEI limits are actually followed religiously. So whatever is being done now and till now , has been within these limits.


I do not believe this. You need to provide data. Not your beliefs. I do not believe that twin engine helicopters are invariably used only up to single engine height limits.

Below is the manual of mi 17 varient.
https://www.manualslib.com/manual/84082 ... 17-1v.html?
page=152&term=One+engine+In+operative&selected=12
Page 152 of this gives the OEI limits upto 3 km. Our guys have filled in the blanks to adequately cater for our requirements. Anything further I don't have reference.


I am willing to be shown that I am wrong - but not from the changing colours of your post where you have gone from saying that twins are safer, to twins need to be restricted to Single engine limits and now you are saying that they are ALWAYS restricted to those limits despite flying only 0.01% of missions. You are moving the goalpost with every post and apart from telling me about your deadly punctuation marks and a iffy "0.01%" data point you have managed to actually quote no statistics or proof. But you refer to my beliefs and claim that I have belief and you have facts. Does not seem like that to me.


So let's clear this colour thing.
I am saying:
1. Twins are safer (redundency of one more engine, historical data is proof)
2. But life is not so simple, hence to ensure safety of twins and redundency of two engines, OEI limits are enforced. Here we have resorted to drops since, it allows view of K2 as well guys are kept feed as well as wife's can skip prayers once in a while.
3. This drop+safety+adequate load supplied works in 99.99 per cases.


What is the single engine limit for the Mi 17. How do you know that it is being implemented. I don't mind you saying that this is what you heard. That is easier to believe than this rearguard battle you are fighting to simply stick to your point

1. what percentage of Cheetah crashes were engine failure. How was that crash cause established after the crash
2. What is the single engine OGE altitude limit of the Mi 17/Dhruv?

For the time being I will ignore that fluff about "how the pilot must approach" and "what he must do and must not do". Surely if you know all that you will also be able to answer what I have asked you. If you say "This is what I believe" I will accept that as an honest answer. Or else we are still where we started. I remain unconvinced by your changing argument

As per Natasha OEI of mi 17 is 3 km at 120 KMPH.(reference above),
but our Bangalore guys have ensure we can go where ever it is required (It's purely figment of my imagination :rotfl: )


Also I must point out a gaping hole in your argument. You claim that "OEI limits are actually followed religiously" for twin engines. If they are so worried about engine failure in twin engine helos they should surely not be such hypocrites and should ground all single engine helos because OEI limits for single engine is "No engine - so do not fly at all". How come religiosity comes in for twin engine while single engine pilots are sent to their deaths in your story. This is completely unconvincing.

Well this is the crux of the whole discussion, my guess is as good as yours. My take it that people realized the problem , did trials of alternate, one was almost finalized, freak accident sinks the whole plan. People persisted with cheetah, engine problem became too frequent, situation seems untenable, HAL came as a saving grace (albeit a bit late), Cheetal is born , keeping people happy as of now.
Summary - We are fighting with what we have, not what is required

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6600
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 17 Feb 2018 23:44

I was following this discussion till it became namecalling and unnecessarily verbose. You guys are oldies, come on!

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 536
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby jaysimha » 18 Feb 2018 18:46

Image

Air Force rescues pregnant woman from a remote village in Ladakh.

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 536
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby jaysimha » 19 Feb 2018 10:18

pib link of the above article,,

http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=176609

koti pranam to these guys,,

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 19 Feb 2018 19:10

Shubham wrote:
Accidents in helicopters have happened for numerous reasons ( lack of airmenship, weather etc), but the crux of my argument is that in those cases of single engine ,where it was due to engine conking off, they were avoidable.
Infact since you say you have been following accidents details for decades, then kindly provide reference of twin engine helicopter crashing due to engine failure.
I cant provide reference in support of my assertion that single engine helicopter accident in India that are TD (technical defect) have had a major percentage of engine associated one. I am open to being refuted in this regards. Till that time - you believe what you want , I will mine.

May I point out that neither you nor I have evidence or any helicopter of the IAF - single engine or twin engine having crashed due to engine failure. On the contrary I have read at least one ref that there has been no in flight failure of the Astazou engine. That said I vaguely recall one incident involving an early version of the (twin engine) Dhruve that crashlanded for a reason that may have involved the gearbox.

You are using lack of evidence as proof that it probably must have happened. This is nonsense

Shubham wrote:Below is the manual of mi 17 varient.
https://www.manualslib.com/manual/84082 ... 17-1v.html?
page=152&term=One+engine+In+operative&selected=12
Page 152 of this gives the OEI limits upto 3 km. Our guys have filled in the blanks to adequately cater for our requirements. Anything further I don't have reference


Please re read your own post. In one half you post a reference. Then you jump way out of ANY facts given in the reference and are making an assumption. I cannot accept your assumption where you say:
Our guys have filled in the blanks to adequately cater for our requirements.

Even your assumption does not say that "our guys" have restricted the Mi 17 to one engine weight/height limits. You are simply stating what you think - which is fine , but what you have provided does not prove anything to support what you say.


Shubham wrote:So let's clear this colour thing.
I am saying:
1. Twins are safer (redundency of one more engine, historical data is proof)
2. But life is not so simple, hence to ensure safety of twins and redundency of two engines, OEI limits are enforced. Here we have resorted to drops since, it allows view of K2 as well guys are kept feed as well as wife's can skip prayers once in a while.
3. This drop+safety+adequate load supplied works in 99.99 per cases.

This post will be my last post on the topic. The above quote is a nice "light hearted one" that only reflects your beliefs and I state yet again that I believe you are wrong and because of that you will continue to be unable to produce evidence to support your contention that twin engine helicopters are operated only at single engine heights and weights.

Shubham wrote:As per Natasha OEI of mi 17 is 3 km at 120 KMPH.(reference above),
but our Bangalore guys have ensure we can go where ever it is required (It's purely figment of my imagination :rotfl: )

Thank you for stating that it is your imagination, which it is.

Shubham wrote:Well this is the crux of the whole discussion, my guess is as good as yours. My take it that people realized the problem , did trials of alternate, one was almost finalized, freak accident sinks the whole plan. People persisted with cheetah, engine problem became too frequent, situation seems untenable, HAL came as a saving grace (albeit a bit late), Cheetal is born , keeping people happy as of now.
Summary - We are fighting with what we have, not what is required

Sir you are simply deluding yourself. The Astazou engines used in the Cheetah are among the most reliable engines. There is virtually no record of failure and there is at least one reference to a site that is unavailable that says that there has never been an in flight failiure of that engine.

Also the Cheetal was not re engined because of engine failure. You can Google for that yourself. You are simply deluding yourself and misleading others by making assumptions that you have not managed to substantiate.

I would like to say
    1. Single engine helicopters of the IAF - specifically the Cheetah have given excellent service and that Astazou engine has been very reliable
    2. Twin engine helicopters of the IAF a_r_e N_O_T restricted to single engine altitudes/weights as you have misleadingly claimed

I will say no more on this subject - at least in response to you

Shubham
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 85
Joined: 04 Feb 2009 01:06
Location: Hyderabad

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Shubham » 19 Feb 2018 23:45

How a failed Artouste 3 B engine, took away two lives.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Database/22947

On 11 April 2007, Squadron Leader Basu was detailed for an air logistic sortie to Amar helipad located on the Siachen Glacier, as the leader in two aircraft formation. Flying over this vast frozen ice mass entails flying in the extremes of climatic conditions over exceedingly inhospitable terrain.

The sortie was uneventful till final approach. On short finals, an overshoot had to be initiated as tail winds were encountered. The helicopter experienced a sudden loss of power and height after crossing the helipad. Sqn Ldr Basu maintained his cool in the unusual emergency and handled the situation in a competent manner displaying a high degree of professionalism. He asked his copilot to keep a close check on the engine parameters and initially tried to recover the aircraft by reducing the power demand smoothly. The engine jet pipe temperature (JPT) also shot up. Unfortunately, the JPT failed to respond to the emergency actions by the pilot and the aircraft contintued to lose height. He therefore took the highly courageous decision of attempting to force land across the Actual Ground Position Line. However, due to the absence of a suitable force landing field in the harsh, snow bound and sloping terrain, the helicopter crashed having no chance of survival of the crew.

Squadron Leader Shantanu Basu displayed exceptional courage and gallantry in the face of imminent death in dangerous circumstances beyond the call of duty.


This is one among many such cases.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6600
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 19 Feb 2018 23:49

Shubham, Hakeem,

if you have said what you wanted to say, let's move on. There is no need for a last word.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35617
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby SaiK » 20 Feb 2018 00:47


shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 20 Feb 2018 09:32

Incidentally I found something related to recent debates - now only as a Google cache
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... ent=ubuntu
The SE-3130 helicopter's power plant is a 400 shaft horsepower, Turbomecha Artouste 2 - series C-6 engine (derated from 790 HP). This model engine also has an impressive history all its own. In the history of aviation, no C-6 has ever experienced catastrophic engine failure in flight on any aircraft in its production and service history! The SA-318c has a (not derated) more powerful 512 shaft horsepower Astazou.

Part of the Alouette 2 series of helicopters (known as Lark in the United States), includes it's ugraded sisters the Lama and Cheetah, which support some of the highest weight capacity grosses for any helicopters in their weight class. The highest being the Cheetah & Cheetal (made in India), follwed by the Lama (mainly produced in Brazil), with the original design, Alouette 2 (SA-318), not too far behind.

Combine this with their high altitude flying capabilities (Lama with the record - Cheetah capable of tying or breaking it), it is no wonder why they would be a favorite of over 80 countries, and why they are best known for their role as a mountain rescue craft (the three are used bythe Swiss, Tibetan, Nepalese and Indian governments).

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49648
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby ramana » 21 Feb 2018 00:57

Ok. Please no more Cheetah fights!!!

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby NRao » 28 Feb 2018 03:57

Feb 28, 2018:: India Moves Forward With Purchase of 6 More Apache AH-64E Attack Helicopters

......

The six AH-64E Apache helicopter gunships are reportedly slated for delivery in 2020 after the completion of an initial order placed in 2015 for 22 AH-64Es and 15 CH-47F Chinook heavy-lift helicopters for the Indian Air Force (IAF). The six additional helicopters, however, are intended for service in the Indian Army’s Aviation Corps (AAC).

......

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 14 Mar 2018 21:46

https://twitter.com/atahasnain53/status ... 0810814466
Syed Ata Hasnain
‏Verified account @atahasnain53

Syed Ata Hasnain Retweeted Manmohan Bahadur

Excellent video.The Dhruv fundamentally changed the calendar pattern of winter vacated posts in the Valley. Counter infiltration posts endangered by high snowfall on routes for return could be evacuated so much later due to Dhruv availability.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49648
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby ramana » 16 Mar 2018 01:18

^^^ So this reduces probability of a Kargil type occupation of vacated posts.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1200
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Khalsa » 16 Mar 2018 01:38

^^^^ Great to hear (re Dhru + counter infil posts)

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 202
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby pravula » 16 Mar 2018 01:41

ramana wrote:^^^ So this reduces probability of a Kargil type occupation of vacated posts.


Don't we have a restricted air space agreement or something around LOC?

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10941
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Gagan » 16 Mar 2018 20:12

Only for fixed wing aircraft, not for helos.
Most peaks on LOC have a helipad.

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 202
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby pravula » 16 Mar 2018 20:23

makes sense. Thanks Gagan!

jaysimha
BRFite
Posts: 536
Joined: 20 Dec 2017 14:30

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby jaysimha » 19 Mar 2018 15:13

Ministry of Defence18-March, 2018 16:25 IST
Casuality Evacuation: Mendhar Sector

In a case of indiscriminate mortar shelling at Balakot near Gursai, Thesil Mendhar, Dist Poonch on 18 Mar 18 morning, seven people were injured, of which five succumbed to their injuries. The two survivors were evecuted to Jammu by helicopter.

The crew of the helicopter belonging to 132 FAC flight, Flight Lieutenant Mittal and Flying Officer Akash quickly swung into action and landed at rajouri at 1200. They were airborne with, Maurin aged 7 years and Nourin aged 10 years within the next two minutes. They landed at Jammu at 1239 whereon the casualties were shifted to the Civil Hospital. The sisters were escorted by their uncle Inzamam.

ARG/BBS

(Release ID :177629)

------------------------------------
http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease. ... lid=177629
-------------------------------------

why nic baboons cannot publish their full names.
why they dont get full coverage/credit.............
No photos,,, nothing..
whereas we find 1000s of photos like these http://pib.nic.in/newsite/photoright.aspx?phid=123421


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests