Indian Military Helicopters

[ambati]

when will LCH get a name

[Prem]

Not Indian but Russian Chopper : Russia have completed delivery of 4 Mi35 to Paki.

[Trikaal]

Trikaal: Why don't we continue this discussion when HAL brings out a heavy attack helicopter? Till then, I think your point has been understood loud and clear. Can we move on?

If u say so
Can we discuss the place of heavy attack helicopters in the indian army war doctrine ? Are they required or obsolete ?

[Trikaal]

Jaitley inaugurates light combat helicopter manufacture in HAL
http://ajaishukla.blogspot.ca/2017/08/j ... ombat.html

Fixed cost over *Limited* SP build will makes its cost higher. Once production start in full swing expect the tag to fall depending on how much we can sweat the assets.

Also probably doesn't include radar costs. The quoted price is only for LSP which is without radar

[Rakesh]

Can we discuss the place of heavy attack helicopters in the indian army war doctrine ? Are they required or obsolete ?

I am not a forum moderator. You do not need my permission to discuss the above topic. Go ahead if you want to.

[YashG]

The requirement of apache inspite of having lch confounds me. The arguments i have read till now - apache being able to take more crap being heavy, its longbow radar, ego and geopolitics - none of these truly convince me.

Except if i were to extend @indranil suggestion - it's electronics package somewhat convinces me. Having operated a western attack heli, we may learn a number of intangible design level things from their use.

[ks_sachin]

The requirement of apache inspite of having lch confounds me. The arguments i have read till now - apache being able to take more crap being heavy, its longbow radar, ego and geopolitics - none of these truly convince me.

Except if i were to extend @indranil suggestion - it's electronics package somewhat convinces me. Having operated a western attack heli, we may learn a number of intangible design level things from their use.

Ah! they are not being bought to convince you.

There may be a doctrinal logic here that necessitates this acquisition. This is where you should go to understand the logic of this purchase. I think Deejay sir has alluded to this in a previous post.

[Khalsa]

Not Indian but Russian Chopper : Russia have completed delivery of 4 Mi35 to Paki.

Oh My my and that completes my token punishment for buying too many American aircrafts and having too many exercises.
Meh ... dear putin you do the same with President Shee Shee of China. Selling to our adversary , items that are cuting edge.

Its okay you seem to be learning a lesson with the Su-35 ... we are learning our lessons in private too.

[shiv]

Decades earlier it was British type of expressions (boffins, bash on, jingo etc), now it is the turn of the American types (badass, rain hell,..)

Yes and these are an indicator of where we get our information from, The use of certain expressions to indicate "postives" like strength, victory, heroism and goodness are borrowed and used in the same way for the same things as the people we borrow them from use them This equally applies to negatives. This is the reason why words of similar meaning like "veer" sound weak to us while "badass" sounds strong. Tejas sounds weak and Raptor sounds strong (as expressed right here on this forum). Professor is impressive. Pandit does not make the grade. Language is the way we think and when we learn language we learn how to think and we use the expressions that impress us and find useful Sorry to go OT. Some day I hope to wrote a sociological treatise on the effects of colonization and "fractal recursivity" - a term that ramana taught me, This is not just about the forum but the entire nation including young armed forces officers who may become senior over time and continue to fall for brochures with the "right language"

More to the point - there is one more "unfortunate term" that has come into use with respect of Apache and similar "heavy" helicopters and that is "flying tank". The expression makes us think of a battle tank that flies and is the "bringer of destruction on the enemy" ("Arihant"). Tanks have armour in excess of 60 or 80 centimeter thickness. Forget 7.62 mm or 12.5 mm - even 30 mm will bounce off a tank. However an Apache or other "flying tank" could be brought down or crippled by a stray 7.62 mm bullet that shears off the tip of a rotor.

So the analogy that we need a badass flying tank to counter massed attacking tank columns comes with the following questions that need to be asked (IMO)

The idea of heavily armed/armoured helos came from the cold war where Europe was expected to face a massive Soviet tank attack with thousands of tanks in a situation where the Soviets had a massive superiority in tank numbers.. The only flat ground that we have where massed tank attacks can occur are in Punjab/Rajasthan and parts of the Tibetan plateau. The Apache is not going to be useful up in Tibet, the LCH is. If the LCH can do the same job as the Apache why have two different types?

This is not to say that I think the Apache is useless - because that is the argument that is usually thrown at me. It is about utility and relevance. There were two stories from Afghanistan that are relevant here. One was the Taliban sitting on a mountain throwing a rock at a Soviet Mi 25 flying in the valley below and bringing it down with a rock. That won't happen to a real tank. The other story actually makes me laugh. Apaches were designated to rescue a downed pilot and because the Apache cannot carry any men other than pilots two rescuers had to do "jugaad" where the men tied themselves on to the side of the Apache because they had to go and pick up the downed man. Reminded me of this song Two other Apaches were fire suppression escorts. In this instance even LCH would be no good but both armed Dhruv and Mi 35 would make the cut.

The intense admiration of Apache (or Mi 28 for that matter) bordering on worship is partly based on the aura that has been built up around it which tends to hide its lack of utility and shortcomings in situations that may be important to us.We need to think of our needs and not the laudatory language of the countries that designed them for their use.

[Singha]

>> If you are going to last one or two trips to the battlefield, you need to be able to bring a tonne of hurt in those few trips

which era are you talking of - not WW2 i hope? if a modern asset lasts only a few trips to battle we have already lost and its game over. nobody has enough pilots to take such fearful losses.

in ww2 people and assets were thrown in as more disposable due to total war and tens of thousands of successful models were built.

even unsuccessful models like B24 liberator 19,000 were made. IL2 sturmovik around 35000. Spitfire 20000, Me109 30000. P51 mustang 15000.

today even a very successful plane like JSF or Flanker might see a production run of 1000-2000.

you think IAF is cool about losing $100 mil craft and costly trained pilots for 3 trips to battle ? thats a completely false point.

[Cosmo_R]

^^^Any discussion in one language (English for example) that references a name rooted in another (for example 'Anil Dikshit') has immense (and unfortunate) connotations.

'Tejas' (pronounced like 'TayJuice') is also often wrongly pronounced 'Teyhas' which doesn't sound too menacing.

FWIW, Hunt & Wesson didn't think its Big John line of products would connect in Canada so it changed it to Gros Jos which unfortunately was slang for 'Big Tits'. GM changed its Chevelle brand name in Canada after it discovered it mean 'goat' and 'Camaro' was dropped after it seemed to refer to an outhouse.

Anyway, the Chinese 'WIng Loong' doesn't exactly bring the same fear as 'Predator' or 'Reaper'. It sounds more like what you'd order.

[Karan M]

Tejas' (pronounced like 'TayJuice') is also often wrongly pronounced 'Teyhas' which doesn't sound too menacing."

Lets ask America to change the name of Texas then.

[Karan M]

The requirement of apache inspite of having lch confounds me. The arguments i have read till now - apache being able to take more crap being heavy, its longbow radar, ego and geopolitics - none of these truly convince me.

Except if i were to extend @indranil suggestion - it's electronics package somewhat convinces me. Having operated a western attack heli, we may learn a number of intangible design level things from their use.

Ah! they are not being bought to convince you.

There may be a doctrinal logic here that necessitates this acquisition. This is where you should go to understand the logic of this purchase. I think Deejay sir has alluded to this in a previous post.

The Apaches can and will act as the eyes of LCH and Rudra strike packages.

We have nothing like the Longbow radar in development yet.

[Singha]

but could that not be done more effectively and powerfully with a dedicated ASTOR type platform or even just a eyes like the french cougar with gmti sensor? but that would nullify the rationale of the IAF wanting a 1:1+ replacement for the Hinds.
we could mount such a domestic or israeli sensor under a Mi17 which we already build in large nos.

[Karan M]

...
That argument is fallacious. The Apache is bought a little out of ego (IAF vs IA turf war), a bit our of geo-politics and a bit for its electronics especially the longbow radar.

Even this argument is fallacious.

I believe the Apache was brought because it is a proven (as much as it can be) package with a leading sensor package, and weapons system that simply aced the Mi-28 in our trials. Will it be successful in India? I hope so, fingers crossed that the decision makers don't skimp on spares and product support. In recent years we seem to be making the right moves there.

I would personally hope the IA and IAF nboth get all the Apaches they want. Less finger pointing & each service can use their systems as they see fit, Army for tank busting & recce, IAF for SEAD and supporting the IA.. but budget issues may crop up.

Perhaps the UK style joint operation setup may work, in the future.

[Karan M]

but could that not be done more effectively and powerfully with a dedicated ASTOR type platform or even just a eyes like the french cougar with gmti sensor?

In an ideal set up, yes but you begin with something. IAF recently refloated the ASTOR type requirement but its many years away. Till then why not use what is available quicker & is multirole to boot.

The Apaches can see further & act as battle commanders. This is a huge force multiplier.

Think Muntho Dhalo & Mirage 2000 with Litening. They set up the initial strike for then sorties of MiGs to come and plaster the entire area with HE

Similarly, a flight of Apaches can act as the eyes for a larger strike package of Rudra and LCHs armed for bear with HELINA etc. The former can mark the target or direct others to targets of opportunity.

We will have a huge all-weather advantage over TSP and PRC. Granted MMW radar will be attenuated by rain, but in many circumstances the Longbow radar can be very useful.

[shiv]

'Tejas' (pronounced like 'TayJuice') is also often wrongly pronounced 'Teyhas' which doesn't sound too menacing.

If one had not studied English at all and knew only Indian languages - Tejas would hold the equivalent meaning of "Brightness of a nuclear explosion". Or "shining like a million suns".

In Kannada badass would be "kettu-thiga" - a meaningless banality for which one might ask "Why would anyone speak of a stinking bum with admiration?"

[shiv]

The Apaches can see further & act as battle commanders. This is a huge force multiplier.

Think Muntho Dhalo & Mirage 2000 with Litening. They set up the initial strike for then sorties of MiGs to come and plaster the entire area with HE

Similarly, a flight of Apaches can act as the eyes for a larger strike package of Rudra and LCHs armed for bear with HELINA etc. The former can mark the target or direct others to targets of opportunity.

We will have a huge all-weather advantage over TSP and PRC. Granted MMW radar will be attenuated by rain, but in many circumstances the Longbow radar can be very useful.

This is probably the real reason why Apaches will be useful

[Khalsa]

I think the LCH High Altitude capability seems to be an over_learning from the Kargil War where we saw the Hinds unable to go past a certain altitude limit. If you cast your mind back, it all started off with Indian Army officers asking their counterparts about Mil-17 payload capabilities which led to Mil-17 strikes and losses, you know the story.

However I think this morphed into more than a requirement to pound static enemy sites with rocket pods. let me explain how.

We briefly de-inducted the T-72s from Leh | Karu | Chushul etc and thinned our resource pools of BMPs against the chinese.
With a china that was happy to capture inch by inch instead of kilometres I think our knee jerk was to send back the 72s and increase BMP numbers which I think we have done albeit quietly.

By the way, Let it be noted that China lulled us into thinning our resources opposite Aksai Chin through a series of confidence building measure because its a logistical nightmare to build up that strength for India, so China man pretended peace and got us descalatin. If you think I am wrong , look at the equipment injecting infrastructure they built.

Strength checks China Man .... their aim was to reduce it and they did without firing a single shot.
They don't have the shlong size to oppose us in Sikkim and Arunachal and they know it, because we keep our ratio really high over there.

Now back to the LCH, i think with LCH there now came an opportunity to multiply our strength in Ladakh region with the mixed use of LCH with armoured formations and thus the LCH focus on high altitude has been welcome in the army circles. Also to note is that the LCH is to army , what INS VIKRANT Version2.0 is to Navy. Call it an Air Defence Carrier or whatever you want but get it under your control first and then file for the divorce papers from the Air Force.

I think it certainly is a red letter day for the Indian Army when the helicopter gunship will allow it to fight in a dimension where it had to jump through umpteen hurdles just to get a kick. I think today when they are about to get 6 Apaches and 15 LCHs or 65. Its time to raise another Corps and relieve the mech infantry of its title of being the youngest corps.

[deejay]

...

I would personally hope the IA and IAF nboth get all the Apaches they want. Less finger pointing & each service can use their systems as they see fit, Army for tank busting & recce, IAF for SEAD and supporting the IA.. but budget issues may crop up.

...

See, there is no ego problem in the first place. Apache's (and specially the Apaches's) are being bought for Indian Army only. Some from IAF budget and some from IA budget. IAF does not have exclusive right of use over its Apache's as the helicopters are embedded with strike corps. There is also a difference on how the two services deploy in an op. However, wrt the Apaches it will be as per IA only.

And yes there are budget issues. Trikaal ji was making a good point on Cold Start.

[Karan M]

Point well taken Deejay. I think ego problem etc are all perception driven by DDM reports when actually there are resource constraints and each service (obviously) trys to get max pound for the buck and tries to get such scarce resources in its Orbat!

But I do hope we C3I all these birds. I can well imagine Rafales acting as scouts for Jaguar & LCA strike packages or Su-30s using Bars to find long range targets of oppty which are then assigned to lurking Rafales.

Similarly I hope we network all these assets together but at the very least even radio ops will be a huge step forward.

I hope at least now funding for all these programs is constant & not start-stop-start.

[Karan M]

And I do hope Apaches are also available to IAF for specific ops. In particular SEAD type radar busting roles.

[Singha]

are we planning to get the new laser guided rockets that seem in vogue now vs a general shower of unguided ones?

[Gaur]

India to get 10 military copters from Russia in first tranche

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/new ... 833804.ece

Russia plans to deliver 10 Kamov Ka-226T military helicopters to India in a first tranche as part of a $1-billion deal, under which India will procure 200 such copters from that country. It expects the Indian Defence Ministry to make the first tranche of payment by the year-end.

“We plan to deliver the first shipment of 10 helicopters after we receive the first payment. We are still in discussions with the Indian Ministry of Defence as to when the first payment will be made. We hope it will be made by this year,” Russian Helicopters CEO Andrei Boginsky told BusinessLine in an interview.

[brar_w]

are we planning to get the new laser guided rockets that seem in vogue now vs a general shower of unguided ones?

The original FMS notification for the AH-64 deal mentioned only around 1600 missiles (Mostly hellfire Longbow and II missiles and a few stingers) and did not include guided rockets. India's FMS notification is dated 2010, and the APKS itself did not IOC till a few years later so it is quite likely that if it is to be considered it will be added on later through a separate contract.

It is quite possible to modify some terms as the notification is just an indication of what is being discussed and not a definitive contract but regardless, since the weapons on the AH-64 are acquired through the FMS process, a congressional notification for additional weapon types will have to be made available before the contract negotiations can proceed..so we'll know.

[JayS]

That is exactly what I am not doing !!! Did u not read my comment ? I said india has apples and is trying to use apples in scenarios where we need oranges, while buying a few oranges from outside. We need to be building our own brand of oranges.
Apples- LCH
Oranges-Apache
I agree with you on making LCH was a smart decision. Not contesting that. All I am saying is that now that LCH is ready, we need to focus on a heavy attack indigenous copter instead of trying to fit LCH into that role. If we start development soon, we won't be dependent on imports in orange category in future.

There is a fine line between trolling and being an ignorant/uninformed newbie. If you want your crazy ideas to be cut to realism then you ought to have an attitude to listen to people who are trying to tell you something. If you have so much conviction in your ideas that you are willing to push them despite many calling them out for ignorance, then you cannot claim to be a newbie, innocent or ignorant who want to learn anything new. You are trolling, plain and simple.

The need of large number of HCH for India itself is debatable. So who exactly is trying to fit LCH into shoes of HCH..?? Last time I checked IA or IAF have never spelled out any requirement of HCH of any large numbers would would call for a development program for HCH in HAL. Apache's are at best silver bullets, not the backbone of out CH forces.

There is no need for HAL to divert attention from incomplete LCH to some HCH fulfilling some imaginary requirement. In plains against baki armour we have our own armour too to counter and we are not totally dependant on CH. While on the northen border, the armour would be limited due to terrain and we are covering that requirement well with LCH. LCH is not so incompetent vis-a-vis Apache in plains. The capability gap is mostly related to sensor, weapons load and endurance (in our context). Small number of Apaches will take care of sensors and being the silver bullets. But other "perceived" short-comings can easily be fulfilled with numbers with LCH. Survivability is not really an issue as such, because survivability is not only dependant on the machine but also the environment it is used, training of the men using it and the tactics. What is lacking in the platform can be made up with training and tactics to some extent. Definitely the gap is not so much as to call for a clean sheet HCH design. Also to be kept in mind it that LCH will be improved in time.

[abhik]

How effective is the longbow when the helicopter is flying a couple hundred feet above the ground and the terrain is not a flat empty dessert but has vegetation/hills/built up area?

[brar_w]

The idea is to limit exposure to those that may wish to target the aircraft and effect a mission or hard kill. With the Longbow LPI radar you stay low, exposing yourself for the shortest amount of time required to find, fix and deploy your fire and forget RF Missile. If the terrain is hilly then it will be used as a defensive aid by the attack aircraft as well.

[Rakesh]

India to get 10 military copters from Russia in first tranche

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/new ... 833804.ece

You forgot an important part of the article....

Copyright © 2017, The Hindu Business Line.

Link only please, at the most a para to highlight your point.

[Gaur]

^^
Apologies. Edited it just now.

[YashG]

The requirement of apache inspite of having lch confounds me. The arguments i have read till now - apache being able to take more crap being heavy, its longbow radar, ego and geopolitics - none of these truly convince me.

Except if i were to extend @indranil suggestion - it's electronics package somewhat convinces me. Having operated a western attack heli, we may learn a number of intangible design level things from their use.

Ah! they are not being bought to convince you.

There may be a doctrinal logic here that necessitates this acquisition. This is where you should go to understand the logic of this purchase. I think Deejay sir has alluded to this in a previous post.

Doctrinal Logic is the thing that I'd love to know. I'm really looking forward to anyone in this forum to put forward that doctrinal logic. All ears for that! Specially how in that docrtrinal logic will work with apache and not LCH.

---
Added Later: #1 Longbow Advantage as some have put up is indeed useful. Its like a tactical level AWACS, (like flying SU30MKI with other planes in radio silence). #2 Secondly the proven ability of Apache while not absolute necessary - is somewhat important. #3 Experiences with Western Attack Heli is important too - It may seem trivial but in product development, experience with superior design will help in long term through the personnel. Overall these are important points. If there is a doctrinal logic as well - all the more better.

But One doubt I have is - apache can work with LCH fleets only at low/medium altitudes? But this mixed coterie will not work at HA. So this doctrine will be for western borders? Aint it?

[Philip]

I was at the very first BLR air show when the Alligator and Hockum (?) were unveiled.V.impressive was the Alligator .2+ decades later the KA-52s are being delivered to Egypt for its Mistrals.These are arguably the only true heavy armoured helos ,more than the Apaches,that could be called flying tanks.MI-35s have good protection too.But as posted earlier,Apaches have srverely sufferrd in recent conflicts and at almost the price of sn MKI ridiculously ecpensive.This is merely a "marquee" acquisition.All attack helos will come in for much stick from AAA fire,small arms ,MANPADS and RPGs.The real dogwork will be done by all the other arrmed utility helos like Dhruvs, MI-17Vs,LUHs,and LCHs which being scquired in large numbers and low cost in comparison with Apaches,can absorb large losses in a long conflict.

[abhik]

There is an inherent contradiction here, the helicopter has to stay low for survivability but the radar needs to be at a high altitude for best possible unobscured view. Its one thing to say that the Longbow is an additional sensor that improves situational awareness, quite another to claim that it is a mini AWACS that will "quarterback" LCHs and Rudras.

BTW what is the actual combat experience of the longbow radar?

[brar_w]

If there is a mountain, or a hill, the aircraft would still require LOS to target for the radar to work. Similarly, the shooter would still require LOS to the aircraft for his weapons to work. The point of using an RF sensor, and and an RF FF missile is to limit this exposure in all weather conditions. As far as quarterbacking, yes that is possible through data links with manned and unmanned aircraft that could be carrying an appropriate weapon. The Echo variant Apache for the first time lays out a common interface for all Unmanned teaming and cooperative tactics to be enabled. With the Echo the AH-64 for the first time gets level 4 UAS capability which allows it to physically control the operations of the UAV which means that non Longbow equipped aircraft or even the radar equipped ones can be in a position where they send only the UAV for LOS to the target to develop a threat picture further minimizing their own exposure.

BTW what is the actual combat experience of the longbow radar?

Against what type of target using what type of tactics? You can employ weapons quite easily in a counter insurgency campaign where the primary threat is going to come from AAA and small arms fire. Longbow and the cooperative targeting capability will be more useful against armor and other defended targets using both the RF missile and dual or tri-mode missiles of the future.

[Singha]

from what I understand out apache order of 22 is not all longbows. 12 is.

http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/in ... elicopters
50 T700-GE-701D engines, 12 AN/APG-78 Fire Control Radars, 12 AN/APR-48A Radar Frequency Interferometers, 812 AGM-114L-3 HELLFIRE LONGBOW missiles, 542 AGM-114R-3 HELLFIRE II missiles, 245 STINGER Block I-92H missiles, and 23 Modernized Target Acquisition Designation Sight/Pilot Night Vision Sensors, rockets, training and dummy missiles, 30mm ammunition, transponders, simulators, global positioning system/inertial navigation systems, communication equipment, spare and repair parts; tools and test equipment, support equipment, repair and return support, personnel training and training equipment; publications and technical documentation, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistics support to be provided in conjunction with a proposed direct commercial sale of 22 AH-64D Block III APACHE Helicopters. The estimated cost is $1.4 billion.


^^ it will need american radio modems on LCH/Rudra to get anything from the longbow radar. actually even the 10 non-longbow helis will also need it.

[brar_w]

Most AH-64 users including the US Army choose to operate both aircraft both with and without the radar.

[Singha]

here is a very detailed test report on the Link16 + longbow combo on the apache 64E
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a617060.pdf

I am sure IAF would have been provided similar data at greater depth.

onlee thing is all our gunships will need the link 16 terminal and avionics changes to benefit from the longbow feeds

good thing about khan is they test and document properly and do not gas about things as much as psyops gurus like dlagon do. so their stuff may be costly and complex, but will work if the proper 'network' is there to take advantage and a lot of training

[brar_w]

It would either need a Link-16 terminal, or an appropriate data link worked into its open architecture that provides similar or better latency, and performance and utilizes similar bandwidth for compatibility. As far as the IR survivability cited by Gilmore, that is being addressed through the CIRCM program which I had written about earlier Low Rate production for that system is expected to begin shortly.

[YashG]

from what I understand out apache order of 22 is not all longbows. 12 is.
^^ it will need american radio modems on LCH/Rudra to get anything from the longbow radar. actually even the 10 non-longbow helis will also need it.

Means that the deployment of Apache as the lead wolf in the pack is being on some kind of thin ice!

[brar_w]

The STT should be a part of non longbow AH-64s because it enhances their situational awareness as well. This ability to prosecute targets cooperatively means that not all of the fleet needs to be equipped with the MMW radar which impacts both cost, O&S but also payload. STT provides a system that utilizes Link-16 but the terminal can absorb other waveforms as well depending upon the specific mode of communication through insertion of software defined waveforms independent of L-16 (a few already exist at baseline in the US systems and user specific can be added). It is a dual channel system allowing concurrent operations between Link16 and non Link16 compliant waveforms.