Indian Military Helicopters

YashG · Post by **YashG** » 05 Sep 2017 18:49

ambati wrote:
JTull wrote:
I think it's "TigerBird"

I was thinking bhediya or wolf would me niche . Think about it three or four of them becomes wolf pack

Lakkadbaggha, Dhol ( Indian Dog)

YashG · Post by **YashG** » 05 Sep 2017 18:57

Vidur wrote:
Bala Vignesh wrote:Vidur saab,
Can you please post a link of the above post here or better yet in the FAQ thread since it will be referred to very often.
Thanks
Don't know how to post the link. Its in the Industrial Development and Military Aviation discussion.

Vidur, did you mean this post? Am posting the link - pl edit f you meant another post viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6387&p=2203837&hili ... n#p2206206

Bart S · Post by **Bart S** » 05 Sep 2017 19:22

YashG wrote:
ambati wrote:

I was thinking bhediya or wolf would me niche . Think about it three or four of them becomes wolf pack
Lakkadbaggha, Dhol ( Indian Dog)

OT:

No shame whatsoever in being a Dhole (wild dog), they are actually better at hunting than more 'glamorous' predators like Tigers/Lions. Dholes are not to be trifled with....like wolves and killer whales, their pack hunting tactics and teamwork make them among the top 5 predatory animals (including humans, chimps etc) in terms of efficiency of kill.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 05 Sep 2017 20:00

darshhan wrote:So basically you are asking HAL to create its own competitor. Why would any company do such a thing?

HAL should be a design bureau and the so-called "competitor" should be its partner - a manufacturing house. Government run companies shouldn't be in the business of mass production. At the very least they should rely heavily on private players which have (i) a much more agile, updated and cross-experienced workforce, (ii) a cheaper workforce given equal productivity (when you include all benefits), (iii) economies of scale by virtue of multiple product lines, (iv) competitive drive needed to access foreign markets, (v) better service-oriented thinking and less bureaucracy amongst others. At least that's my belief.

Designing a system to make a few functional prototypes is one thing, and mass production together with service guarantees, parts supply chains, training and operations is an entirely different beast. I have more confidence in HAL's ability in the former than in the latter.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Sep 2017 20:09

yensoy wrote:
darshhan wrote:So basically you are asking HAL to create its own competitor. Why would any company do such a thing?
HAL should be a design bureau and the so-called "competitor" should be its partner - a manufacturing house. .

This is precisely what the MD of HAL stated wrt to LCA. HAL should just be an integrator - but they have had great difficulty in finding private partners for the type of stuff aerospace manufacturing requires.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 05 Sep 2017 22:54

If lockmart & boeing will hand-hold and bring up private companies, HAL can and should too. Heard how many companies were handheld by isro & drdo labs to produce what they needed. HAL can too.

YashG · Post by **YashG** » 05 Sep 2017 22:54

Somebody in this forum asked earlier about the policy of twin engined helicopters for Army Chiefs - Sorry if it has been already answered but a link of an article that states the policy in here -

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 378688.cms

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 06 Sep 2017 07:45

shiv wrote:
yensoy wrote:
HAL should be a design bureau and the so-called "competitor" should be its partner - a manufacturing house. .
This is precisely what the MD of HAL stated wrt to LCA. HAL should just be an integrator - but they have had great difficulty in finding private partners for the type of stuff aerospace manufacturing requires.

Agreed it will take a good amount of ramp-up but this must absolutely happen now. Not just the established players like L&T (which is the name bandied about for just about anything), Tata, Kalyani, Taneja, Punj Lloyd, Adani (shudder), Reliance (dhoti shudder), but a crop of new players who can get promoted from smaller assemblies to larger systems. 20 years sounds about right to reach full steam but early harvest should be visible in 3-5 years.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 06 Sep 2017 08:04

yensoy wrote:
darshhan wrote:So basically you are asking HAL to create its own competitor. Why would any company do such a thing?
HAL should be a design bureau and the so-called "competitor" should be its partner - a manufacturing house. Government run companies shouldn't be in the business of mass production. At the very least they should rely heavily on private players which have (i) a much more agile, updated and cross-experienced workforce, (ii) a cheaper workforce given equal productivity (when you include all benefits), (iii) economies of scale by virtue of multiple product lines, (iv) competitive drive needed to access foreign markets, (v) better service-oriented thinking and less bureaucracy amongst others. At least that's my belief.

Designing a system to make a few functional prototypes is one thing, and mass production together with service guarantees, parts supply chains, training and operations is an entirely different beast. I have more confidence in HAL's ability in the former than in the latter.

Both GOI as well as HAL management do not seem to agree with you. HAL is continuing to build factories. Infact the foundation stone for its Tumkuru unit(helicopters) was laid recently and PM was himself present on this occasion.

What you are saying is an idealistic situation that will not be changed for next 10 years.

sum · Post by **sum** » 06 Sep 2017 10:46

HAL was already crying about what to do once Su-30 order is compelted in few years since they spent so much on infra etc and lievlihood of the trained folks.
So, doubt they will just let go of their babies to someone else for manufacturing after all the initial hard work

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 06 Sep 2017 10:46

^^^^ The way I see it, HAL is becoming the final assembler or integrator and the subsystems are being sourced from vendors. The scope of these subsystems is becoming larger and larger, so finally the only "manufacturing" to do is to bolt these various parts, do QC and signoff for delivery. Boeing has figured this out as well, at least in the passenger plane segment where large components - fuselage tubes, wingboxes, wings, cockpit assemblies etc are put together by 3rd parties (or Boeing factories located elsewhere than Everett/Renton/Charleston) and only final assembly done by Boeing's own workers in these locations.

A factory will still be needed. Final assembly is still a complex job, but represents probably only 10-20% of the total labour and time.

This also allows better scaling up or scaling down of throughput by getting 3rd parties to bear a substantial portion of the risk. HAL's underemployed engineers (in the event of a downturn in orders) will sit idle; L&T's underemployed engineers will be assigned to other projects.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 06 Sep 2017 12:15

i know its a red rag to the unions but why does not HAL sell off some of its factories and trained pools of workers to private parties . this will instantly boost the pvt entrant up a few levels too. a token price of Rs1 for the sale and a job guarantee for 10 years for everyone currently in the gig and continuation of their pkg as is ? that will take care of concerns of older people in the system.

why does HAL need to be so big if its moving to be a integrator of major assemblies.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 06 Sep 2017 12:48

Singha wrote:i know its a red rag to the unions but why does not HAL sell off some of its factories and trained pools of workers to private parties . this will instantly boost the pvt entrant up a few levels too. a token price of Rs1 for the sale and a job guarantee for 10 years for everyone currently in the gig and continuation of their pkg as is ? that will take care of concerns of older people in the system.

why does HAL need to be so big if its moving to be a integrator of major assemblies.

It's not just the job alone. It's the job (that one can't get fired from) + accommodation + family health benefits + leave policies + dearness allowance/cost-of-living based increments + PENSION. Restructuring into private industry is possible - has been done in the past but needs strong deal-making skills and takes a while to resolve different styles between a "tenured" group of older people and a younger bunch who feels aggrieved that they work harder and are paid less.

Perversely, it would be easier to convince a sick unit to get privatized than it would be a unit which for all intents and purposes is doing great.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 06 Sep 2017 15:28

yensoy wrote:
darshhan wrote:So basically you are asking HAL to create its own competitor. Why would any company do such a thing?
HAL should be a design bureau and the so-called "competitor" should be its partner - a manufacturing house. Government run companies shouldn't be in the business of mass production. At the very least they should rely heavily on private players which have (i) a much more agile, updated and cross-experienced workforce, (ii) a cheaper workforce given equal productivity (when you include all benefits), (iii) economies of scale by virtue of multiple product lines, (iv) competitive drive needed to access foreign markets, (v) better service-oriented thinking and less bureaucracy amongst others. At least that's my belief.

Designing a system to make a few functional prototypes is one thing, and mass production together with service guarantees, parts supply chains, training and operations is an entirely different beast. I have more confidence in HAL's ability in the former than in the latter.

If you think, you can separate MFG from design like that, then you are asking for a huge trouble coming in your way. Already we saw trouble with LCA. You want to replicate it..??

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Sep 2017 00:13

YashG wrote:Somebody in this forum asked earlier about the policy of twin engined helicopters for Army Chiefs - Sorry if it has been already answered but a link of an article that states the policy in here -

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 378688.cms

In 1963 the most infamous helicopter crash in IAF history when a Mi-4 hit a overhead transmission wire and killed Air Vice Marshal E.W. Pinto and three other IA general level officers and the IAF helicopter pilot.

It took out the cream of the crop of IA and IAF officers.

Very, very sad day with two inch black headlines in all major papers of the day.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 07 Sep 2017 08:30

JayS wrote:If you think, you can separate MFG from design like that, then you are asking for a huge trouble coming in your way. Already we saw trouble with LCA. You want to replicate it..??

Huh, why wouldn't HAL continue to work closely with the manufacturing partner? When did I imply that HAL would just walk away? There will have to be ongoing improvements to manufacturing and operations processes, as well as minor design changes due to needs, feedback/experience, material availability/manufacturing changes, cost reduction drives etc. Why are we assuming that there will be an adversarial relationship or no relationship between the design and manufacturing parts of the project?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 07 Sep 2017 09:10

yensoy wrote:
JayS wrote:If you think, you can separate MFG from design like that, then you are asking for a huge trouble coming in your way. Already we saw trouble with LCA. You want to replicate it..??
Huh, why wouldn't HAL continue to work closely with the manufacturing partner? When did I imply that HAL would just walk away? There will have to be ongoing improvements to manufacturing and operations processes, as well as minor design changes due to needs, feedback/experience, material availability/manufacturing changes, cost reduction drives etc. Why are we assuming that there will be an adversarial relationship or no relationship between the design and manufacturing parts of the project?

Do you think it didnt happen in LCA that way..? Its sub-optimal way of work. Happens only on paper. Doesnt work in real life. What HAL's approach currently for LCA is best. But more needs to be done on Tier1 supplier development. Along with MFG of modules (more MFG also needs to be offloaded, not just structural assembly), module level detailed design should also be offloaded to Tier1 companies. And HAL needs to help them doingit. Also train them to manage their suppliers on their own with proper quality plan.

yensoy · Post by **yensoy** » 07 Sep 2017 10:50

You are going 2 steps when I was going only 1

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Sep 2017 14:10

Isn't there some rule that states that sr. commanders/offrs. of the same exalted rank should not travel in the same aircraft/helo?

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 07 Sep 2017 18:16

^^^There are many rules including some on pilot qualifications etc and even with my faded memories I could fill a few pages. However, operational requirements can/may/ should over rule all.

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 08 Sep 2017 18:48

From IDRW :

We are expecting orders for more 200 Advanced Light Helicopters (ALH) Soon: HAL Chief

http://idrw.org/we-are-expecting-orders ... hal-chief/

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 09 Sep 2017 14:23

Back in AI 2013, I was talking a young BEL guy who was manning the chopper MAWS stall. He told me that MAWS will alert the pilot about a missile launch but will not tell him the target of the missile i.e. if there are a bunch of helicopters equipped with MAWS, are flying nearby each other and if a missile is launched, then MAWS in all helicopters will trigger an alarm but won't tell which helicopter is the target. I am assuming all the choppers then will have to perform evasive manoeuvres and deploy countermeasures.

How is the above dealt in real life?

brar_w · Post by **brar_w** » 09 Sep 2017 14:29

It will be interesting to see how long it takes helicopter based mission systems to evolve like the F-35's EODAS where the system is able to tell the pilot whether an incoming missile is going to target his/her aircraft or not. I guess it requires sensor sensitivity and lots of computing power and mission data entry on the software side. Give it a generation and you will probably see multi-function IR channels (not just a MAWS / MD roles) incorporated in the next gen. helicopters as well.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Sep 2017 09:46

sleek rudra helicopter in our most fwd airbase on west - naliya in rann of kutch, same base from where we downed the atlantique. a sand filter seems on intake.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 13 Sep 2017 10:25

I never noticed how the doors opened before, somehwhat like an expensive sports car.

Karthik S · Post by **Karthik S** » 13 Sep 2017 10:33

jamwal wrote:I never noticed how the doors opened before, somehwhat like an expensive sports car.

If you are referring to scissor doors as seen in few Lambos, they open vertically from the hinges, doesn't look that's the case with Rudra.

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 13 Sep 2017 12:29

India’s Rudras Back In Sight, Still Awaiting Missiles - Livefist

chola · Post by **chola** » 13 Sep 2017 12:37

Kakarat wrote:India’s Rudras Back In Sight, Still Awaiting Missiles - Livefist

OMG. It is the Kalvari story again. Attack subs with no torpedos, attack copters with no missiles. For four years?!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 13 Sep 2017 12:46

how many missiles do you think the hinds,havocs and alligatr in syraq are using? mostly I see use of guns and showers of rockets. I dont think the russians have brought more than a token number of ATGMs to syria probably near expiry stock.

using a hellfire to take out a $20k pickup is only affordable for the khan. even our hellfires will be wrapped in wool and covered with two blankets for a real war.

for that matter 99+% of russian mutions in syraq are unguided bombs and rockets ranging from SU25 upto the backfires and the mighty Platypus. only for specific intel based targeting of leadership meetings they use GLONASS guided weapons like recently a platypus and su35 duo took down 4 Emirs near DEZ including Gulmurod Khalimov, a ex Tajik SF veteran and Colonel who had even been trained in the US.

day to day out there its just guns, bombs and unguided rockets. the Hinds have a bomb bay and can drop a couple of largeish bombs. using all 3 effectively needs lot of skill and practice, than just flying to a point 100km away from target, "logging into the network" and releasing a smart weapon with its own NLOS datalink from third parties , before coming home for tea. see videos of pairs of Hinds flying as team at treetop level attacking jihadi targets, one swoops in, fires and turns away, just as other is turning to attack.....

chola · Post by **chola** » 13 Sep 2017 12:53

^^^ Sorry Singhaji, in a western army a Hellfire-type weapon should be the main armament of an attack copter. And we are a western army by tradition.

Besides, Hinds are heavily armored and useful when set on insurgents and what not. But they still took a beating in Afghanistan from Stingers. No, it is still better to have a stand-off weapon as the main armament.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 13 Sep 2017 13:05

Singha wrote:sleek rudra helicopter in our most fwd airbase on west - naliya in rann of kutch, same base from where we downed the atlantique. a sand filter seems on intake.

The square perforated box - is that a filter for keeping FOD from engine intake..?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 13 Sep 2017 13:24

I think that is a device that mixes cool air with hot so that exhaust temp is cooler to reduce vulnerability from manpads saw something similar on Mi-17

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 13 Sep 2017 13:29

Austin wrote:I think that is a device that mixes cool air with hot so that exhaust temp is cooler to reduce vulnerability from manpads saw something similar on Mi-17

Seems to be new. Can't find it on older helicopters. A gadget used to cool exhaust gases should be on exhaust outlet itself.

The heat dissipaters are used to reduce the infra-red signature of the helicopter engine exhaust. They are also used in other helicopters, like the 'black hole ocarina' (BHO) infra-red suppression device used in AH-64 Apache.

The main purpose of the IR suppressors in use today is twofold:

Reduce the IR signature by reducing the exhaust temperature
'Shield' the hot engine from view.
The infra-red suppression systems in service today usually work by

'Bending' the exhaust, usually upwards, and shielding the exhaust from view by an insulating cowl. In these IR suppressors in Mi- 35 (export version of Mi-24), the exhaust is turned almost 90°.

Most of the present IR suppressors focus on achieving a thorough mix of the cool ambient air and the exhaust to reduce temperature and uneven mixing, in order to prevent 'hot spots'. Cooling of the exhaust pipe itself is achieved in some cases by using film cooling. In most helicopters, the infra red suppression system (IRSS) is optional and can be added separately.

The figure shows the schematic of the infrared suppression system used in AH- 64 Apache and the associated reduction in IR signature.

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/ques ... es-it-work

Edited for details

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 13 Sep 2017 13:50

Its air filter used primarily in desert conditions

A few HAL Dhruvs have been fitted with Pall Corporation 'Centrisep' Engine Advanced Protection System (EAPS) filters.

Another from forum.keypublishing.com

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 13 Sep 2017 13:55

^^^ Yes it is Air Filter. On Mi 17 it was called Dust Protection Device or DPD (02 ball like things infront of intake).

The Engine Eflux Reducer System (EES) fitted on Mi 17 and Hinds are designed to scatter the exhaust gas upwards into the rotor down wash so that the ease of acquisition for thermal sights on MANPADS are reduced. On both the Russian systems, exhaust vented to the sides and provided easy side on target acquisition - broad front. Afghan experience was critical in these two developments for Russians.

The Dhruv (all versions) already have their exhaust pointing upwards into the rotor down wash hence EES is not needed.

The photo above is interesting with the Dhruv clam shell doors removed for slithering ops part of the SHBO roles. You can see 02 ropes hanging.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 13 Sep 2017 16:14

chola...how come we are a western army? just because we have british traditions, thats a way too funny argument ..oh yes and we speak good english in the army as well !! how many LGB;s did we fire in Kargil ! i think Singha is totally right on how attack helos will be employed in indo pak/chini context... missiles will be used ( with prior approval of Def Min babu and doubly signed by RM) but majorly it will be guns , rockets etc..cheap ordanance.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 13 Sep 2017 19:11

deejay wrote:^^^ Yes it is Air Filter. On Mi 17 it was called Dust Protection Device or DPD (02 ball like things infront of intake).

The Engine Eflux Reducer System (EES) fitted on Mi 17 and Hinds are designed to scatter the exhaust gas upwards into the rotor down wash so that the ease of acquisition for thermal sights on MANPADS are reduced. On both the Russian systems, exhaust vented to the sides and provided easy side on target acquisition - broad front. Afghan experience was critical in these two developments for Russians.

The Dhruv (all versions) already have their exhaust pointing upwards into the rotor down wash hence EES is not needed.

The photo above is interesting with the Dhruv clam shell doors removed for slithering ops part of the SHBO roles. You can see 02 ropes hanging.

Thanks for confirmation deejay. Don't remember to have seen it in HAL. Obviously its fitted on need basis for deployed helis. But this particular filter looks weird to me.

BTW which A2A missiles are qualified for WSI..??

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 13 Sep 2017 20:06

A2A? I don't think any. Is there a plan?

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 13 Sep 2017 20:22

deejay wrote:A2A? I don't think any. Is there a plan?

From the livefist link posted above, which says this is from HAL literature about WSI. And from what I remember when I visited HAL, they did mention A2A missiles. But can't recall which. I remember because I asked them about the guidance and they (maintenance staff) were little confused since there is no Radar until I suggested it must be IIR.

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2017/09 ... siles.html

Rudra can carry four air to air missiles

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 13 Sep 2017 20:28

Then good. Acchaa hai. Even helicopter pilots can try aerial combat

Good to take on enemy helicopter is my guess or UAVs and UCAVs. Though A2G missiles should be primary IMO.