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.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 05 Nov 2016 11:01

^^Rohit Apaches can be used for SAR by tying 2 men with ropes on either side to go and rescue a downed pilot. If those men are carrying Berettas we can make those as well under licence in India :D

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Singha » 05 Nov 2016 11:15

If all you need is to take out a radar best option is fire a kh59 kh31 or brahmos. Or later garuthma. All these too are under iaf thumb so no prestige issues therein.

Ods apache thing happened due no iraqi radar in desert and no iraqi air patrols. try that stunt over belarus or kaliningrad and see what happens....a big growly 9m96e will jump from behind a car and say Boo lol.

Even the us has become cautious about the apache these days. with high quality manpads and atgm sensors capable of tracking helicopters and anti heli tank rounds the gunship is vulnerable to well trained foes and they know it.

They are movng atgm shooter to 10000feet upward using reapers and ucavs

Apache for iaf is all about power and ownership not any real use case diffetent from rudra or lch

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Singha » 05 Nov 2016 11:20

Ia got a creta so iaf needed a fortuner

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7711
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby rohitvats » 05 Nov 2016 11:25

Indranil wrote:I also don't think that AH-64 will hamper LCH's chances. But what was the real need? I really cannot find any. Can anybody draw me a combat situation where 2 LCH's cannot carry out the same operation as one AH-64. Costs and payloads are the same. LCH pilots have been categorical in saying that LCH's high altitude flying capabilities is unmatched by any helicopter in the world. So high altitude scenarios are definitely out.


Indranil - Review of various articles written by ex-artillery and AAC senior offices since 2011 shows that WSI-Dhruv and LCH form the center-piece of attack helicopter component for the expanded AAC. 70-80 WSI-Dhruv and 114 LCH is a consistent number which flows through all these articles. And these articles talk of employment of LCH from high-altitude areas to Strike Corps. Army is actually pretty excited across the board to have this capability organic to them.

AH-64 Apache began to enter into some of these articles only from 2014 onward. And I've a theory why this has happened.

That we needed a replacement for Mi-24/35 in our service was always there. Apache entered into the fray courtesy our expanded relationship with USA. I'm of the firm opinion that C-17, AH-64 and Chinook are some sort of quid-pro-quo for the nuclear deal. That these fit perfectly with existing requirements of the Services is a bonus and helped to push the deals.

If indeed we needed a heavy gunship replacement for our Mi-24/35 inventory, the ideal course of action should've been as follows - These units should've been transferred to AAC and at best, IA could've at best have 39 Apaches for three squadrons @ 1 per Strike Corps.

But things are as they stand today - IAF retains their two squadrons and IA gets its three squadrons.

IMO, this is a case of then PMO through MOD pushing a system then Services asking for it. Be that as it may, I'm not complaining. Because for whatever reason, we get to add pretty serious capability.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5095
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby jamwal » 05 Nov 2016 11:29

IIRC, a majority of Apaches involved in tip of the spear attacks in GW1 sustained heavy damage.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11424
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Aditya_V » 05 Nov 2016 11:32

It shows during kargil time we had absolutely very poor satellittle coverage over Northern areas, today we are able to detect launch pads. Truely we were in slumber.

from URL http://kaiser-aeronaut.blogspot.in/2009/01/kargil-conflict-and-pakistan-air-force.html

It also must be noted too that other than F-16s, the PAF did not have a capable enough fighter for patrolling, as the minimum requirement in this scenario was an on-board airborne intercept radar, exceptional agility and sufficient staying power. F-7s had reasonably good manoeuvrability but lacked an intercept radar as well as endurance, while the ground attack Mirage-III/5s and A-5s were sitting ducks for the air combat mission.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 05 Nov 2016 15:36

Indranil wrote:
chola wrote:There is no way in hell that the LCH would be as well armored as a craft that is twice as heavy. If that were possible then why the hell would anyone design heavyweight copters (or tanks)?

Oh! please don't feel. It is not that difficult to find out. I can give you the answer right now, but let us see you take the trouble take of actually finding out the level of protection that both helicopters employ and then let us talk. It is a good practice before posting.

By the way, a heavy helicopter need not be more heavily protected. It can have more fuel or payload carrying capability. AH-64 has more payload carrying capability in the plains than the LCH (and the reason I said AH-64 and two LCHs). But LCH's design point is for higher altitude performance, and believe it not LCH can carry more load than the AH-64 at really high altitudes. It is not magic. It is physics only. LCH pays a price elsewhere because it is optimized for high altitude warfare. I will leave it to you to find that out as well.



Sorry Sahib, no found black magic formula that allowed a light attack helo such as lch to be as well protected as heavy attack helo like apache. Granted the optimization for altitude, lch would still be a less well protected aircraft. Sorry I am no magician and work on common sense onlee.

Again I do not believe expansion of apache program will affect lch because of different roles. But lch being in 4 prototypes onlee and HAL hoping for orders is worrisome. Regardless of black magic that makes a Drhuv weighted, Dhruv derived attack helo as well armored as an Apache twice as heavy.

JTull
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2678
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby JTull » 05 Nov 2016 15:38

I'm no expert, but I'll take a shot at this discussion.

When enemy is advancing we need the Apache/LCH combo to slow down progress. Against well equipped forward column you need heavier versions to deliver maximum bang in every sortie. Logistics lines will require a certain amount of guerrilla tactics for which a Longbow equipped Apache could well be used to direct a large flight of LCH. If the warfare was in high-altitude, then LCH has it's obvious advantages.

When we're advancing then also I see Longbow+LCH combo as the practical mix of Apaches providing top-cover and LCH doing the grunt work.

Imagine all above scenarios when don't have any Apaches. Against advancing columns, we'll need just too many LCH and/or sorties to achieve the same effect. Similarly, when operating behind enemy's forward column or when attacking, LCH will require top cover. Our AEW assets are not available in sufficient numbers to be tasked for these, and they certainly cannot get as close to action as Apaches with Longbow can.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 05 Nov 2016 16:03

JTull wrote:I'm no expert, but I'll take a shot at this discussion.

When enemy is advancing we need the Apache/LCH combo to slow down progress. Against well equipped forward column you need heavier versions to deliver maximum bang in every sortie. Logistics lines will require a certain amount of guerrilla tactics for which a Longbow equipped Apache could well be used to direct a large flight of LCH. If the warfare was in high-altitude, then LCH has it's obvious advantages.

When we're advancing then also I see Longbow+LCH combo as the practical mix of Apaches providing top-cover and LCH doing the grunt work.

Imagine all above scenarios when don't have any Apaches. Against advancing columns, we'll need just too many LCH and/or sorties to achieve the same effect. Similarly, when operating behind enemy's forward column or when attacking, LCH will require top cover. Our AEW assets are not available in sufficient numbers to be tasked for these, and they certainly cannot get as close to action as Apaches with Longbow can.


More reasonable than black magic super LCH being able to do everything.

The leading military powers designed the Apache, Hind and Ka-50 to serve as mobile support against mobile/armor columns. Light attack helos derived from light utility helos like Cobras serve as scouts or bodyguards for the utility helos with which they share common engines and parts.

The IA is not stupid. There is very little armor at "altitude." We do not face a tank/armor invasion to or from the Tibetan plateau. The lch would work best as a COIN asset and protection buddy to the Dhruv that plies the area.

But most of our western border are not high altitude and that is where armored movements would come in play. This is where a dedicated heavy attack helo designed by the US from the ground up to deal with massed armor of the Russians would best be used.

Now in this day and age the attack helo concept against peer rivals might be dated but that is another discussion. (And at any rate, we have no peer rival in the one nation presenting an armored threat on our border.)

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 05 Nov 2016 18:23

chola wrote:This is where a dedicated heavy attack helo designed by the US from the ground up to deal with massed armor of the Russians would best be used.
:rotfl: Love it!

Of course the design is American but the armchair marshal doing the planning has Indian buddhi of defence where we say "We do not covet an inch of anyone's territory". We wait for them to attack with China built Russian knockoffs and hit them with God Bless America Apaches designed from ground up for freedom and democracy

Actually if you put India in attack mode a combination of LCH and armed Dhruv would be better with the latter being able to insert special forces behind enemy lines which the Apache can't do

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 05 Nov 2016 19:11

shiv wrote:
chola wrote:This is where a dedicated heavy attack helo designed by the US from the ground up to deal with massed armor of the Russians would best be used.
:rotfl: Love it!

Of course the design is American but the armchair marshal doing the planning has Indian buddhi of defence where we say "We do not covet an inch of anyone's territory". We wait for them to attack with China built Russian knockoffs and hit them with God Bless America Apaches designed from ground up for freedom and democracy


Nuts. We are not going have an armored assault from the cheenis over the himalayas. No super evil psyops would allow the chinis to place an armor corps on the mountains. As I said this is the front where the lch will have a role.

Actually if you put India in attack mode a combination of LCH and armed Dhruv would be better with the latter being able to insert special forces behind enemy lines which the Apache can't do


WTH?! Why would you expect an ATTACK copter to insert troops? Why not say a Chinook is better than an Apache since it can insert even MORE troops.

Saar, that is a stoopid bit of retort from you I must respectfully say.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 05 Nov 2016 19:46

chola wrote:Nuts. We are not going have an armored assault from the cheenis over the himalayas. No super evil psyops would allow the chinis to place an armor corps on the mountains. As I said this is the front where the lch will have a role.

Who said the Chinese would attack? I am speaking of an Indian attack on Pakistan

shiv wrote:Actually if you put India in attack mode a combination of LCH and armed Dhruv would be better with the latter being able to insert special forces behind enemy lines which the Apache can't do


chola wrote:WTH?! Why would you expect an ATTACK copter to insert troops? Why not say a Chinook is better than an Apache since it can insert even MORE troops.

Saar, that is a stoopid bit of retort from you I must respectfully say.

:lol: Nice try. My stoopidity is an irrelevant diversion from what you don't know. I will tolerate your calling me stupid on the forum once. But the next time this cissy will tell momma admins. Of course the choice is always yours - you ARE the boss, from God Bless America I guess.. But then again I don't have to tolerate it. So I reported it

The armed ALH Dhruv is what can be used to insert SF. The LCH is for escort. But I must apologize for making a mistake. The Apache can be used as well - but you have to tie 2 men with ropes to the outside of the helo - and idea that was designed from ground up in God Bless America (smoke gets in my eyes) to combat the towelhead Taliban

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7711
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby rohitvats » 05 Nov 2016 20:29

chola wrote:<SNIP>Nuts. We are not going have an armored assault from the cheenis over the himalayas. No super evil psyops would allow the chinis to place an armor corps on the mountains. As I said this is the front where the lch will have a role.
<SNIP>


Please disabuse yourself of this notion.

That China can launch an armor thrust in eastern Ladakh is a possibility Indian Army has grappled with since 1962. During that war, we anticipated Chinese to push armor through Spanggur Gap which lies south-east of the Pangong Tso lake. Indian Army even in 1962 airlifted a troop of AMX-13 tanks in An-12. While no armor push came in 1962, these tanks ended up supporting the infantry brigade in Chushul.

Jump to 2016 and Indian Army has raised a full-fledged independent armored brigade under 14 Corps for eastern Ladakh. It will comprise of 3 x armored regiments and 1 or 2 x mechanized infantry regiments. That about 150 tanks.

There are regions in eastern Ladakh which allow for large mechanized push from Tiber. And vice versa.

Chinese army has exercised deployment of armor and mechanized infantry on Tibetan plateau for quite sometime. They've even developed 105mm gun equipped light tank for mountainous areas.

And here is some small factoid - Indian Army raised the first ever Combat Aviation Brigade under 14 Corps which is responsible for eastern Ladakh and Siachen.

And forget eastern Ladakh which has vast flat areas, Indian Army has gone ahead and deployed tanks and BMP-2 in northern Sikkim. Which has very less real estate on our side for armor deployment. But whatever flat real estate we have on our side, opens onto large flat areas on Tibetan Plateau.

In both these area, 2-3 squadrons of LCH with their anti-armor capability will be substantial advantage.

BTW - As per internet, China maintains an armored division in Kashgar.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Philip » 06 Nov 2016 06:28

US-2 amphib deal for 12 to be finalised during M's Japan visit.Signal to the dragon that we are buddies ah so! However,these unarmed amphibs being bought at over $1B,are totally useless fighting enemy subs while the most critical ASW helo requirement for over 100 ASW helos is being sidelined!

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 06 Nov 2016 09:52

rohitvats wrote:
chola wrote:<SNIP>Nuts. We are not going have an armored assault from the cheenis over the himalayas. No super evil psyops would allow the chinis to place an armor corps on the mountains. As I said this is the front where the lch will have a role.
<SNIP>


Please disabuse yourself of this notion.

That China can launch an armor thrust in eastern Ladakh is a possibility Indian Army has grappled with since 1962. During that war, we anticipated Chinese to push armor through Spanggur Gap which lies south-east of the Pangong Tso lake. Indian Army even in 1962 airlifted a troop of AMX-13 tanks in An-12. While no armor push came in 1962, these tanks ended up supporting the infantry brigade in Chushul.

Jump to 2016 and Indian Army has raised a full-fledged independent armored brigade under 14 Corps for eastern Ladakh. It will comprise of 3 x armored regiments and 1 or 2 x mechanized infantry regiments. That about 150 tanks.

There are regions in eastern Ladakh which allow for large mechanized push from Tiber. And vice versa.

Chinese army has exercised deployment of armor and mechanized infantry on Tibetan plateau for quite sometime. They've even developed 105mm gun equipped light tank for mountainous areas.

And here is some small factoid - Indian Army raised the first ever Combat Aviation Brigade under 14 Corps which is responsible for eastern Ladakh and Siachen.

And forget eastern Ladakh which has vast flat areas, Indian Army has gone ahead and deployed tanks and BMP-2 in northern Sikkim. Which has very less real estate on our side for armor deployment. But whatever flat real estate we have on our side, opens onto large flat areas on Tibetan Plateau.

In both these area, 2-3 squadrons of LCH with their anti-armor capability will be substantial advantage.

BTW - As per internet, China maintains an armored division in Kashgar.



Nice historical review, Rohitvats!

But sorry, if you need to go all the way to Kashgar to find a PLA armored division then there is no armored cheeni threat.

Kashgar is in Central Asia (next to Tajikistan) and in a desert onlee. It is probably composed of heavy MBTs conditioned on hot flat ground so cannot possibly be deployed on the Tibetan plateau even if it made this massively long journey to the Indian border.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 06 Nov 2016 10:26

chola wrote: so cannot possibly be deployed on the Tibetan plateau even if it made this massively long journey

In any case not even a miniscule a blade of grass grows in those areas apart from the fact that most Chinese forces are based in the unbelievably distant east and will be unable to make the massively long journey from the east - going up to the incredibly high Tibetan plateau.

Whichever way one cuts it, we are totally and irreversibly safe.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 06 Nov 2016 10:34

shiv wrote:
chola wrote: so cannot possibly be deployed on the Tibetan plateau even if it made this massively long journey

In any case not even a miniscule a blade of grass grows in those areas apart from the fact that most Chinese forces are based in the unbelievably distant east and will be unable to make the massively long journey from the east - going up to the Tibetan plateau.

Whichever way one cuts it, we are totally and irreversibly safe.


There are no absolutes, Saar. So it is best to say we are 99.9% safe from this PLA armored division in Kashgar and 99.99% from those on the chini East Coast because those are further away and faces what are considered existential threats for them -- the US, Japan and Taiwan.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 06 Nov 2016 10:49

chola wrote:There are no absolutes, Saar. So it is best to say we are 99.9% safe from this PLA armored division in Kashgar and 99.99% from those on the chini East Coast because those are further away and faces what are considered existential threats for them -- the US, Japan and Taiwan.

If you say so saar. I find it easier to understand numbers rather than adjectives.

I also think a 5% error in estimation would be safe. So the 99.9% safety could be 95-100% safety.

95% safety from an armored division of 300 tanks would mean that we have to face 5% of the tanks - i.e 15 tanks. If we are attacking - it is better to have a 3:1 numerical superiority - so we need a minimum of 45 tanks in the area. To account for breakdowns and maintenance issues a total of 50 Indian tanks would be needed if your estimates are correct. Supporting that attack we would need 3 attack helicopters.

I am sure you are wrong, but on BRF this is allowed.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1264
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Gyan » 06 Nov 2016 10:56

The great thing with these Japanese Amph is that when they can land in water and then Fuel, ammo, spares, weapons, personnel will miraculously appear in middle of ocean to service these behemoths for the next sortie. I love such import deals. :P

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1264
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Gyan » 06 Nov 2016 10:58

shiv wrote:
chola wrote: so cannot possibly be deployed on the Tibetan plateau even if it made this massively long journey

In any case not even a miniscule a blade of grass grows in those areas apart from the fact that most Chinese forces are based in the unbelievably distant east and will be unable to make the massively long journey from the east - going up to the incredibly high Tibetan plateau.

Whichever way one cuts it, we are totally and irreversibly safe.


In the cold and clear climate, even the present versions of Nag Missile will be very effective. Any takers?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 06 Nov 2016 11:01

Gyan wrote:The great thing with these Japanese Amph is that when they can land in water and then Fuel, ammo, spares, weapons, personnel will miraculously appear in middle of ocean to service these behemoths for the next sortie. I love such import deals. :P

Ammo? Weapons? what are you talking about? This aircraft is totally unarmed and will be for logistics and SAR alone. Just to reach all our Islands - currently accessible by kattamaram

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 06 Nov 2016 11:01

Gyan wrote:[
In the cold and clear climate, even the present versions of Nag Missile will be very effective. Any takers?

Launched from?

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 06 Nov 2016 11:12

shiv wrote:
chola wrote:There are no absolutes, Saar. So it is best to say we are 99.9% safe from this PLA armored division in Kashgar and 99.99% from those on the chini East Coast because those are further away and faces what are considered existential threats for them -- the US, Japan and Taiwan.

If you say so saar. I find it easier to understand numbers rather than adjectives.

I also think a 5% error in estimation would be safe. So the 99.9% safety could be 95-100% safety.

95% safety from an armored division of 300 tanks would mean that we have to face 5% of the tanks - i.e 15 tanks. If we are attacking - it is better to have a 3:1 numerical superiority - so we need a minimum of 45 tanks in the area. To account for breakdowns and maintenance issues a total of 50 Indian tanks would be needed if your estimates are correct. Supporting that attack we would need 3 attack helicopters.

I am sure you are wrong, but on BRF this is allowed.


If we are attacking, we would need to acclimatize around 200,000 men and go light and mobile. Tanks (and aircraft) are pretty much worthless on the plateau. Have the Tibetan population rise up in a coordinated attack.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby shiv » 06 Nov 2016 11:20

chola wrote: Tanks (and aircraft) are pretty much worthless on the plateau.

Wrong

chola wrote: Have the Tibetan population rise up in a coordinated attack.

Done and failed in the 1950s

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4456
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby JayS » 06 Nov 2016 14:05

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/manhohar-parrikar-dac-army-aircraft-helicopters-drones/1/803569.html

Order of 10 LCH for Army and 5 LCH for IAF up for discussions. :mrgreen:

Another major indigenous project likely to be discussed at the meeting is for the indigenously designed and developed Light Combat Helicopter by the HAL. "The Army is planning to place orders for 10 LCH choppers while the IAF would initially buy five of them," the sources said.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 06 Nov 2016 18:08

JayS wrote:http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/manhohar-parrikar-dac-army-aircraft-helicopters-drones/1/803569.html

Order of 10 LCH for Army and 5 LCH for IAF up for discussions. :mrgreen:

Another major indigenous project likely to be discussed at the meeting is for the indigenously designed and developed Light Combat Helicopter by the HAL. "The Army is planning to place orders for 10 LCH choppers while the IAF would initially buy five of them," the sources said.


Sh1t. The other shoe have dropped. I knew the big orders were too good to be true for a prototype in testing.

IA is onlee "planning" to place orders for "10" LCH? And only "5" for the IAF?

They were supposed to be 114 and 64 respectively! Holy crap, I feel like tearing my hair out.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7711
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby rohitvats » 06 Nov 2016 23:39

^^^10 number LCH for army means strength for a full LCH Squadron.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7872
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 07 Nov 2016 01:12

chola wrote: I knew the big orders were too good to be true for a prototype in testing.

Since you cannot see past US systems let me give you examples. How many F-35s ordered based on prototypes in testing? How about the T-X program?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7872
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 07 Nov 2016 03:55

chola wrote:Sorry Sahib, no found black magic formula that allowed a light attack helo such as lch to be as well protected as heavy attack helo like apache. Granted the optimization for altitude, lch would still be a less well protected aircraft. Sorry I am no magician and work on common sense onlee.

I have tried hard not to call you out. But I think it is warranted. Based on your posts, I don't think you know the difference between common sense and non-sense. Let me lay out the facts.

LCH does not compromise on the crew's safety and protection. Actually the designers followed the ADS-33E spec to the hilt (please consider to find out what that is). In fact, most of the systems on LCH were designed in accordance to western standards. Both occupants sit in bullet proof compartments. I forgot the level (it was listed in a HAL tender), but I can tell you that it can take shots from AK-47s at point blank range. Similar to the AH-64, they have armour plating between the two occupants, so that at least one of the crew can survive and get back home. The rotors and engine compartments of both the aircrafts are also designed to the same safety standard. The same for fuel tanks and fuel systems, and the same for crash worthiness.

By the way, the Apache's are not all that more powerful than the LCH. It has about 20% more power :wink: , which it uses for more payload. On the other hand, Apache's have lower endurance than the LCH. And it's performance degrades faster than that of the LCH with altitude and temperature. Apaches have few advantages over LCH: higher top speed (a compromise that LCH has to make in lieu of high altitude performance), the advantages of the Longbow radar (in conditions where FLIR does not allow enough standoff distance), and the half the number of crew for the same amount of payload delivery. So in a way, the Apaches can serve as the proverbial tip of the spear if Apaches and LCHs are to work together. That is in the case of planes. At high altitude, Apaches are unlikely to go where the LCH can. Having said all this, I am yet to find a reason for India to NEED AH-64s, except for the artificial need created by IAF/IA tug of war outlined aptly by Rohit. India can do perfectly well with LCHs alone.

Everything, that I have posted here is not that difficult to find out if you try. But you would rather parrot nonsense under the garb of common-sense. I gave you a chance, but you threw it away. Frankly, you have added nothing, except a call for looking at the bigger picture (filled with more nonsense). Other posters have reported you for the same besides name calling. If you want to refute, refute with data and facts, rather than prejudice and non-sense.

As a moderator, I am giving you a soft warning to stop this. If you can't, I will.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1528
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Thakur_B » 07 Nov 2016 07:37

^^ LCH is designed to take direct hits from 50 cal hmg. Chola ji does not know what he is talking about.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 07 Nov 2016 08:39

Two words. Bull manure.

The empty weight of a LCH : 4960 lbs
The empty weight of an Apache : 11387 lbs

You will never get the same armor on the LCH as the Apache. If this kind of lack of common sense prevails then I could care less if I were warned or banned.

Following the LCH is going to give me heartburn like the LCA anyways. Hoping for 15 orders after this talk of 114 for the army and more for the air force? F..k it.
Last edited by Indranil on 07 Nov 2016 09:19, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: User is warned for thread derailment with unsubstantiated blabber. User reported by other posters for name-calling. "Soft" warnings went unheeded. Therefore, banned for one month.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3988
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby chola » 07 Nov 2016 09:05

Thakur_B wrote:^^ LCH is designed to take direct hits from 50 cal hmg. Chola ji does not know what he is talking about.


Yes, why bother designing and deploying heavyweight attack copters like the Apache, Hind or the KA-50?

Don't the Americans and Russians know you can get the same protection in a lightweight utility derivative?

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1856
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby uddu » 07 Nov 2016 09:31

The Apache's were designed in the 1980's. The Comanche built in the 1990's is 9,300 lbs and may be having the same protection level of the the Apache's or even higher. As time goes on the kind of technology that can provide the same level of protection do increase with new materials etc. Also the size of the Apache's being larger than the LCH and that could be one more reason for the higher weight rather than armor protection. Also if more Armour can be added to LCH and the performance brought down to the same level as the Apache (by not having the higher altitude performance of LCH but capable of more Armour and weapons for the plains plains) could be possible.

uddu
BRFite
Posts: 1856
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby uddu » 07 Nov 2016 09:34

Don't worry about the orders. This could be just the initial order during which time rather than sit idle and wait for all the tests to complete, the are placing an initial order so that the production line can start functioning before the larger orders are placed.

Sid
BRFite
Posts: 1640
Joined: 19 Mar 2006 13:26

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Sid » 07 Nov 2016 09:38

I think the usage of such terminology is relative to the platform role. An AH-64 can be part of recon group as well as an assault group.

Similarly we have used Mi-17s in attack role against heavily defended sites since nothing else would fit in that role at the time. Now we have LCH tailor made for that role only, which not even AH-64s can accomplish in that envisioned environment.

Calling it "light" due to its weight classicification does not make any sense.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7711
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby rohitvats » 07 Nov 2016 10:21

chola wrote: Nice historical review, Rohitvats!


You seem to have missed the part where I mentioned that Indian Army has stationed close to 150 tanks and 120+ BMP-2 IFVs in eastern Ladakh as of today. If these tanks can go west to east, surely, tanks can come from east to west, no?

But sorry, if you need to go all the way to Kashgar to find a PLA armored division then there is no armored cheeni threat. Kashgar is in Central Asia (next to Tajikistan) and in a desert onlee. It is probably composed of heavy MBTs conditioned on hot flat ground so cannot possibly be deployed on the Tibetan plateau even if it made this massively long journey to the Indian border.


A bit of reading on the PLA Orbat in Tibet will tell you that compared to India, PLA does not maintain any sizable army on the Tibetan Plateau.

As for terrain, the Tibetan plateau is flat as a pancake. Ideal tank country. And PLA has been exercising deployment of armor, IFV and other mobile forces on the plateau. A simple Google search of PLA armor/tanks in Tibet will give you enough information.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20311
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Philip » 07 Nov 2016 11:31

As a proponent of amphibs from the earliest days of BRF,esp. after seeing the dozens of amphibs in the Maldives used as water taxis for tourism,
unarmed amphibs for the CGH for SAR is OK,great firefighting capability too,but for the IN's use,it must be armed,possess ASW capability,carry anti-shipping missiles and also some degree of anti-air/missile capability/decoys too, to deal with subs and warships equipped with SAMs. 12 US-2s at such high cost seems excessive to me.6-8 would've sufficed.

Attack hekos must be heavily armoured for protecting the crew from various anti-air munitions. We've operated v.successfully the large MI-25/35 Hinds and now there are two Ru birds which can do the business.The KA-50/52 and MI-28N. The desi LCH must have a minimum std. of armour given the vast experience in recent decades ,esp. in our region,of attack helos against regular and irregular forces.Afghanistan has been the great proving ground for a variety of aircraft and helos. The US losses show that nothing much has been learnt/changed from those of the Soviets' experience when they forayed there.

Here is an old Time mag article on the subject,where in Afghanistan,Apaches and Chinooks took a beating.
Why Flying Choppers in Afghanistan Is So Deadly
By Mark Thompson / Washington Tuesday, Oct. 27, 2009
Brennan Linsley / AP
A U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter at dawn in Helmand province, Afghanistan

The 14 Americans who died in Afghanistan on Monday were a reminder that U.S. troops who die in Afghanistan are twice as likely to be killed in helicopter crashes as are their counterparts in Iraq. And the reasons for that discrepancy are not to be found in the country's skies, but on the ground — the Taliban's growing footprint has forced the U.S. to be far more reliant on moving troops and supplies by air. And the rugged terrain often makes helicopters the only option, even as the altitudes involved greatly increase the risks.

Afghanistan's few roads are now increasingly monitored — and mined — by insurgents, meaning that many of the 180 U.S. outposts spread across the country can now only be reached by helicopters. "We don't have freedom of movement on the ground," a senior Army logistics officer says. "We're resupplying between 30% and 40% of our forward operating bases by air because we just can't get to them on the ground."

(See pictures of a U.S. Marine offensive in Afghanistan.)
That forces the U.S. military to rely on helicopters, not only to reach remote outposts, but also to carry out dangerous combat missions that thinly spread troops couldn't do without the helicopter's ability to hopscotch hundreds of miles. It was precisely such an antidrug mission that a twin-rotor Army MH-47 Chinook was flying when it went down in western Afghanistan, killing 10 Americans including three civilians with the Drug Enforcement Administration. Earlier in the day, a Marine UH-1 Huey troop helicopter collided in midair with an A-1 Cobra helicopter gunship over southern Helmand province, killing four. U.S. officials said they don't believe hostile fire caused either crash. The death toll could rise because some of the 28 people left injured by the crashes are in critical condition.

"Helicopters are not shot down in battle very much in either place [Iraq or Afghanistan]," says Brookings Institution defense analyst Michael O'Hanlon. He and his colleagues are keeping running tallies of U.S. fatalities in both theaters. While 5% of U.S. deaths in Iraq have been caused by helicopter crashes — 216 out of 4,348 — the total is 12% in Afghanistan — 101 of 866 — even before Monday's losses. "The main issues [responsible for the higher rate of helicopter-crash casualties in Afghanistan] have to do with terrain, weather and of course frequency of use," O'Hanlon says.

(See pictures of Afghanistan's dangerous Korengal Valley.)
The U.S. has over the past year doubled its number of helicopters based in Afghanistan to about 225, but troop numbers have risen even faster, making for a more acute chopper shortage. Helicopters are swift but delicate machines. The physics of flight make them inherently unstable, and therefore less reliable, than fixed-wing aircraft which generate their lift from stationary wings instead of egg-beater-like rotor blades. More critically, chopper pilots are commonly expected to fly in hot weather at high altitudes, where less-dense air offers them less control over their aircraft.

Air Force Captain Matthew Miller wrote about the challenges of flying in Afghanistan after returning from a four-month deployment there in 2007. His medevac unit, from Georgia's Moody Air Force Base, had lost three helicopters and seven crew members in the two wars. Enemy fire had been a factor in none of the Afghan crashes. "In Iraq, helicopter pilots face a greater prospect of being shot at by ground fire," Miller wrote. "In Afghanistan, the greatest threat is the terrain." He described flying in Afghanistan as "'graduate level' piloting more challenging than cruising over the flatlands of Iraq. "It didn't take long to feel the perils of mountainous flying in Afghanistan," he added. "Between Iraq and Afghanistan, most helicopter pilots I've spoken to consider Afghanistan the more dangerous place to fly."

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7872
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 07 Nov 2016 12:17

Thakur_B wrote:^^ LCH is designed to take direct hits from 50 cal hmg.

Do you have this document? I had it archived in my old computer, and lost it while transitioning to my new system.

vivek_ahuja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2223
Joined: 07 Feb 2007 16:58

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby vivek_ahuja » 07 Nov 2016 12:18

I feel like we go through this circle about the LCH versus Apache once per-year.

Last year, I had posted a detailed performance analysis of the Apache-E and the LCH for high altitudes. See here: Why the Apache is a brute and LCH is elegant

And the relevant performance chart from that article:
Image

I am sure the Apaches carry a lot more stuff than the LCH at lower altitudes (at least for the moment compared with the LCH prototypes). But I am still not fully convinced you need both the Apache and LCH. If we don't have the funds to support two different attack birds, why not go for the home-grown bird in larger numbers instead of penny-packet numbers of both types?

AH-64 Apache began to enter into some of these articles only from 2014 onward. And I've a theory why this has happened.

That we needed a replacement for Mi-24/35 in our service was always there. Apache entered into the fray courtesy our expanded relationship with USA. I'm of the firm opinion that C-17, AH-64 and Chinook are some sort of quid-pro-quo for the nuclear deal. That these fit perfectly with existing requirements of the Services is a bonus and helped to push the deals.


I am willing to accept this argument partially. Chinook and C-17s are useful, of course, but AH-64 seems like its been added for reasons other than real need (in light of the LCH already flying and almost ready). Of course the AH-64 is a heavy attack bird compared to the LCH. But there is also a quantity aspect to all this. Beggars can't be choosers: if there aren't enough funds to make it your main bird, go with what you can afford.

-Vivek

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7872
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Indian Military Helicopters

Postby Indranil » 07 Nov 2016 12:27

uddu wrote:The Apache's were designed in the 1980's. The Comanche built in the 1990's is 9,300 lbs and may be having the same protection level of the the Apache's or even higher. As time goes on the kind of technology that can provide the same level of protection do increase with new materials etc.

It is not the materials here. The latest Apaches use the very best technologies out there. They are sturdy machines too. I see them daily on my way to work baking in the hot summer sun, with not even a tarpaulin over them. But "heavy" does not always mean "heavy" armour. It can also also mean heavy weapon load, which is the case here. Apache has twice the payload of LCH at lower altitudes.

Also, just a matter of choice. Many people find the Apaches ugly. I find them to be very beautiful fighting machines.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Avinandan, Kakarat, Prem Kumar, souravB, VickyAvinash and 71 guests