Indian Military Helicopters

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 22 Feb 2017 23:59

I have no time to waste on this. You can believe whatever you want.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 23 Feb 2017 00:09

Gyan wrote:HAL is a limited company with financial statements. Point it out from financial statements of HAL about Shakti Manufacture. Are you telling me 250/2 = 125 Shakti ALH Helos have been manufactured? And yes, name calling is abuse. SAFRAN Uses the term assembly in in the first line of article and then papers over by using term co/produced. Taking out a kit from a wooden box and screwing it together is not manufacturing. And if our friend is from Helo division, let him enlighten us as to which components of Shakti Engine are manufactured at HAL. Even if I am proved wrong, it will be good news atleast.

Does HAL Financial Report contains anything about Al-31FP manufacturing..?? If it doesn't would that mean HAL doesn't manufacture Al-31FP as well..??

How about Sukhoi-30MKI..? I have gone through the financial report of HAL once. There is nothing specific saying how much Su-30MKI they made or How much of each a/c they make.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 23 Feb 2017 00:37

HAL EOI for Risk Revenue Sharing Partnership for Rotary UAV - converting 2 ton class Heli to RUAV.

http://hal-india.com/Tender_Details.asp ... ivkey=MTY=

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Feb 2017 00:48

Gyan wrote:And if our friend is from Helo division, let him enlighten us as to which components of Shakti Engine are manufactured at HAL. Even if I am proved wrong, it will be good news atleast.

He shouldn't, and he won't. You can believe it is 0%. That's completely fine.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Feb 2017 01:17

Singha wrote:Imo the imrh looks but too tall for a naval heli...they should target tri service from day1 and arrive at right shape size weight and engine from day2 ...rest are adjustable

I loved the height. Better it succeeds in two places than fails all 3.

For a second I thought I was seeing our own Puma or Sea stallion.
Beauty.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 23 Feb 2017 01:25

From 2010ish time frame

HAL will manufacture 70% of the engine .

Asked about its association with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), he said “We have a fruitful co-production program with HAL. There is an agreed transfer of technology plan with HAL for Ardiden1 (Shakti) in four phases. In phase 1, we provide the complete engine to HAL and in the following phases HAL will gradually manufacture. In the ultimate phase, HAL will manufacture 70 per cent of the engine, with Turbomeca providing 30 per cent of smaller kits.” On where the program was currently, Philippe said “it is between phase 1 and 2” and that the ultimate phase would depend on the helicopter development program of HAL.

There were some parts that were co-developed when deriving Shakti from Turbomeca TM333

Engine and Test Bed Research & Development Centre’s (ETBRDC) from HAL :
- casing modelling
- rotor dynamics
- stress analysis at Turbomeca, France.

I recently read somewhere that engine MRO would be about 40% of engine cost during its lifetime. If labor and parts manufacturing is done locally , only IP costs remain. My guess is that the turboshaft core is with France and rest is with HAL.

Which would mean a large part of MRO costs would be with India with only license costs for parts manufacture flowing out.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 23 Feb 2017 01:49

Atmavik wrote:
Singha wrote:Imo the imrh looks but too tall for a naval heli...they should target tri service from day1 and arrive at right shape size weight and engine from day2 ...rest are adjustable
The VVIPs need to stand. this is requirement was changed my the earlier PMO put this requirement in.

They can bend a bit, the jawans do! The internal volume seems very similar to Aw101 (6.5m L by 2.3m W by 1.91m H) and for IMRH( 5.7m L by 2.1m W by 1.9m H). It will need 3000 shp engine class if the payload weight is going to be similar.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 23 Feb 2017 02:05

Russia to start delivering Ka-226T Hoodlum helos to India in 2019

Russia will start delivering Kamov Ka-226T 'Hoodlum' light multirole helicopters to the Indian military in 2019, said the CEO of state-owned manufacturer Russian Helicopters, Andrey Boginsky, according to Reuters on 20 February.

Speaking at the IDEX show held in Abu Dhabi, Boginsky who took over as the company's CEO in January 2017 said, "The joint venture [JV] is in process and the first delivery will start in 2019. After-sales service will also be provided in India."

Some 60 helicopters will be delivered to India and the remaining 140 will be assembled or manufactured in the south Asian country, Boginsky added.
..

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 23 Feb 2017 02:17

Kartik wrote:Russia to start delivering Ka-226T Hoodlum helos to India in 2019

Russia will start delivering Kamov Ka-226T 'Hoodlum' light multirole helicopters to the Indian military in 2019, said the CEO of state-owned manufacturer Russian Helicopters, Andrey Boginsky, according to Reuters on 20 February.

Speaking at the IDEX show held in Abu Dhabi, Boginsky who took over as the company's CEO in January 2017 said, "The joint venture [JV] is in process and the first delivery will start in 2019. After-sales service will also be provided in India."

Some 60 helicopters will be delivered to India and the remaining 140 will be assembled or manufactured in the south Asian country, Boginsky added.
..

3 years for a delivery for light helicopter, is a long time. when one is made to believe it is production ready. something is missing. Is the product ready as described in the brochure.

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 23 Feb 2017 02:19

Cybaru wrote:
Atmavik wrote:
The VVIPs need to stand. this is requirement was changed my the earlier PMO put this requirement in.
They can bend a bit, the jawans do! The internal volume seems very similar to Aw101 (6.5m L by 2.3m W by 1.91m H) and for IMRH( 5.7m L by 2.1m W by 1.9m H). It will need 3000 shp engine class if the payload weight is going to be similar.

Now we seem to be complaining of it being too tall. Man, we are never happy.
This is a big/heavy helicopter, whatever space it can have is good, whether tall or wide does not matter. first complain about volume and then complain about too big. Like Women some are never happy.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 23 Feb 2017 02:27

Who is complaining? I am comparing.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 23 Feb 2017 03:00

More height is good frm payload perspective too..

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 23 Feb 2017 03:47

Cybaru wrote:Who is complaining? I am comparing.

Sorry my point was not against your comment. It was meant to be a comment against someone saying it is too tall.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 23 Feb 2017 04:24

ragupta wrote:....

3 years for a delivery for light helicopter, is a long time. when one is made to believe it is production ready. something is missing. Is the product ready as described in the brochure.

But it's not US/LM/Boeing and so they are not making exorbitant profits do it must be a good deal. I wonder Why HAL can't blow this stuff out of the air.

Someday, everybody will understand why things are not simpler. Just not today.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 23 Feb 2017 05:16

Even the ready made, supposedly well test 226T won't come before 2019, even though its coming straight from mother factory according to reports.

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 23 Feb 2017 05:30

Cybaru wrote:Even the ready made, supposedly well test 226T won't come before 2019, even though its coming straight from mother factory according to reports.

yes was talking about 226T only, but the same folks, media and our own armed forces start doing naga dance, when HAL would say LUH will be ready and produced in 2019.

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 23 Feb 2017 05:33

Ah, makes sense. Cosmo took out the reference to 226T and confused me!

Go on Cosmo, explain away how profits are linked to schedule!

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 23 Feb 2017 12:44

IN ships can handle the coaxial Kamovs, so height should not be a problem. But yes, a big cavernous inside is not very useful for the Navy. It can be ironed out. These are very early days.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 23 Feb 2017 14:49

If Navy wants lesser high, and HAL knows this a priori, they can easily make first version such that reducing height later would be easy job for them. I don't think its a big deal. HAL would be anticipating Navy orders later and would get some inputs from them informally, if Navy is interested.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Feb 2017 15:07

ragupta wrote: Now we seem to be complaining of it being too tall. Man, we are never happy.

Saar you are forgetting that height of cabin was a crucial requirement for the world's best ~~bribecopter~~ er I mean that Agust Westland thing

Rishi Verma · Post by **Rishi Verma** » 23 Feb 2017 16:32

^^ so someone commented about a mock-up with "too-tall", "what a beauty" etc etc and a discussion ensued. BRFites are too hungry for something to come out of our factories - anything. They see a mock-up and they start day-dreaming. By the way the AW bribecopter is tall but it's in production for how many decades now?

Nobody's asking the relevant question, is the mock-up made of recycled cardboard or foam.

BTW.. short blades on top looked ridiculous - almost like TomNJerrycopter.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 23 Feb 2017 19:54

This discussion on Ka 22T is a joke. This particular model is powered by Turbomeca Arrius 2G1 engine. Are these engine still available to Russia after European sanctions? In absence of that engine are they gonna offer an alternate engine/recertification/tests in Indian locations?

My gut feeling says after purchase we will end up spending time/money on this chopper to bring it on par with LUH as this bird is nowhere close to what we want.

A Sharma · Post by **A Sharma** » 23 Feb 2017 20:03

Army looks to fast track process of acquiring anti-tank missiles for Rudra helicopter

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Feb 2017 20:05

There is no chance of euro mil exports to russia in near future but for indian deal france might relent.
This means no ka226t in ruaf service and we holding the bag as usual.

I can see the makings of a financial disaster

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Feb 2017 20:07

A Sharma wrote:Army looks to fast track process of acquiring anti-tank missiles for Rudra helicopter

So no phoren maal could hit at 7km and tender was scrapped now they are repeating the same folly again lol

Marten · Post by **Marten** » 23 Feb 2017 20:38

Rishi Verma wrote:^^ so someone commented about a mock-up with "too-tall", "what a beauty" etc etc and a discussion ensued. BRFites are too hungry for something to come out of our factories - anything. They see a mock-up and they start day-dreaming. By the way the AW bribecopter is tall but it's in production for how many decades now?

Nobody's asking the relevant question, is the mock-up made of recycled cardboard or foam.

BTW.. short blades on top looked ridiculous - almost like TomNJerrycopter.

Quite obviously you did not see the chopper, or you would not be asking the question. It looked as close to the real thing as possible. Typically frp is used for models, around a frame.This model looked like the real thing. I've seen almost all the HAL mockups but this one was well made and for that reason alone I had asked if Tata Elxsi had gotten into chopper production. It looked damn good. I mean, forget the blades... Just won't fit in the hangar.

Marten · Post by **Marten** » 23 Feb 2017 20:39

Singha wrote:
A Sharma wrote:Army looks to fast track process of acquiring anti-tank missiles for Rudra helicopter
So no phoren maal could hit at 7km and tender was scrapped now they are repeating the same folly again lol

This time around, one would think the tender is to be awarded before Helina gets certified, and the RM asks folks to take a long walk before raising further questions.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 23 Feb 2017 22:08

Rishi Verma wrote:BTW.. short blades on top looked ridiculous - almost like TomNJerrycopter.

Right, otherwise HAL could have flown it inside the hangar. Gee, why didn't they think of that?

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 23 Feb 2017 22:15

Marten wrote:
Singha wrote:
So no phoren maal could hit at 7km and tender was scrapped now they are repeating the same folly again lol
This time around, one would think the tender is to be awarded before Helina gets certified, and the RM asks folks to take a long walk before raising further questions.

That dpp point about imports only when no local alternative could come mighty handy. Also note requirement for twin-tube launcher. Dhruvastra is a twin tube launcher.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 23 Feb 2017 22:39

7KM range requirement is a polite way of asking for Hellfires since Helina will never pass our golden standards.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Feb 2017 22:58

You nailed it.
"Common logistics with iaf apaches" also
Apache delivery starts next year

Cybaru · Post by **Cybaru** » 23 Feb 2017 23:00

So whats the big deal about 7kms? What makes this a hard requirement? RBS70? That has an 8 km range.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 23 Feb 2017 23:01

Its perhaps 1km beyond the helina range.

Good enough for the good times to flow

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 23 Feb 2017 23:17

Sid wrote:This discussion on Ka 22T is a joke. This particular model is powered by Turbomeca Arrius 2G1 engine. Are these engine still available to Russia after European sanctions? In absence of that engine are they gonna offer an alternate engine/recertification/tests in Indian locations?

My gut feeling says after purchase we will end up spending time/money on this chopper to bring it on par with LUH as this bird is nowhere close to what we want.

Yes the Russian can still and they do use the Arrius engine as long as its for non-military role including the police paramilitary casevac etc

It was mentioned many time before here that Arrius engine was asked by IAF as it met the hot and high operational requirement , The VK-800 or RR engine used on Ka-226 did not meet IAF hot/high requirements

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 23 Feb 2017 23:25

shiv wrote:
ragupta wrote: Now we seem to be complaining of it being too tall. Man, we are never happy.
Saar you are forgetting that height of cabin was a crucial requirement for the world's best ~~bribecopter~~ er I mean that Agust Westland thing

not forgetting, clearly remembers that.

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 23 Feb 2017 23:32

JayS wrote:If Navy wants lesser high, and HAL knows this a priori, they can easily make first version such that reducing height later would be easy job for them. I don't think its a big deal. HAL would be anticipating Navy orders later and would get some inputs from them informally, if Navy is interested.

Well why not just raise the floor or create false ceiling to create space for accessory or anything that would meet navy's desire of reduced height. Obviously the overall height is not the problem as they seems to be using coaxial rotors helos.

The extra space can be used for something else or ask your other half they would advise on how to use them.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 24 Feb 2017 00:10

ragupta wrote:
JayS wrote:If Navy wants lesser high, and HAL knows this a priori, they can easily make first version such that reducing height later would be easy job for them. I don't think its a big deal. HAL would be anticipating Navy orders later and would get some inputs from them informally, if Navy is interested.
Well why not just raise the floor or create false ceiling to create space for accessory or anything that would meet navy's desire of reduced height. Obviously the overall height is not the problem as they seems to be using coaxial rotors helos.

The extra space can be used for something else or ask your other half they would advise on how to use them.

I thought we are talking about overall height not the internal cabin height. Why would Navy have issues with internal height if their ships can take the existing external height inside their ships..??

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 24 Feb 2017 00:19

Rishi Verma wrote:
BTW.. short blades on top looked ridiculous - almost like TomNJerrycopter.

You should have seen the rotors on the Mi-17 Mock-up right opposite to Brahmos stall (was it Astra's stall..?) Then you wouldn't be complaining about those of IMRH.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 24 Feb 2017 01:19

Doesn't TATA manufacture Helo Bodies for the S92, C-130 parts, Chinook and Apaches?
They probably want to do screwdrivergiri just like the Akash Missile in a JV with DRDO.
Hence this IMRH Model.

The build quality of the Akash Missile looks quite good from the recent pictures, Indian PVT companies will do a pretty good job.
If GoI lets them market and sell the products, I am certain, all these foreign agents and their natashas will vanish and our def min babus will by buying Make In India goodies.

ragupta · Post by **ragupta** » 24 Feb 2017 01:42

JayS wrote:
ragupta wrote:
Well why not just raise the floor or create false ceiling to create space for accessory or anything that would meet navy's desire of reduced height. Obviously the overall height is not the problem as they seems to be using coaxial rotors helos.

The extra space can be used for something else or ask your other half they would advise on how to use them.
I thought we are talking about overall height not the internal cabin height. Why would Navy have issues with internal height if their ships can take the existing external height inside their ships..??

OK, here is the height of various naval helicopter, some used and some eyed by IN.
ka-28 = 5.4m, Aw101=6.62m, s-92=4.71m, EH101=5.67m, ul-60L = 5.13m

IMRH=5.34M, it is less than Ka-28 that navy uses, IN does not have problem with 5.4m, but has problem with overall height of 5.34m

the imrh height information from
http://en.avia.pro/blog/vertolyot-hal-i ... stiki-foto