Indian Military Helicopters

Trikaal · Post by **Trikaal** » 18 Dec 2017 11:25

Do we have something like a procurement board? Or do we put together a new team every time we need to buy some equipment? If we don't, it's time to put together a committee with representation from all stakeholders that needs to be held accountable if there are loopholes or substandard acquisitions. Right now, the main problem seems that no one is accountable for the loopholes and other mistakes that occur. Just stopping graft isn't enough.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 19 Dec 2017 01:51

Ramana sir,

LUH's 40 crore price also includes infrastructure + training + misc costs. That it can borrow from ALH's infra+training should not be held against it. Ultimately, it is how much do we pay for a capability. Let us say LUH=Ka-226 in terms of capability. Why should I pay more for one of them? Especially when both of them are going to start deliveries at almost the same time and almost the same rate?

Here is some data: The cheapest of the HAL made Su-30s were 70% more expensive than the Russian sticker price(CAG reports say this). Labour cost for training + building Rafale in India was 400% more (Manohar Parrikar said this). Why do we expect Ka-226s will come at the price of 4.5M sticker price quoted to the Russian govt. in 2012?

Anybody who is holding their breath on a $1.1 Billion price tag is in for a shock. Those were the prices in 2008-2011 time frame.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Dec 2017 01:59

Philip wrote:Looking at the IT report on the escalation, I have a simple solution.First 200 at earlier agreed upon prices, in the stages spelt out,then TOT escalated prices ONLY for the rest built with desi material as with the MKIs.By that time the HAL LUH would've arrived and we would've got our 200 at the initially agreed upon price, cost of spares, support, etc. fixed. Kamov would have no alternative but to keep prices low or else....The LUH will be the only one acquired thereafter! Fait accompli what?

Wasn't the entire deal for 200 total? Or have I understood it incorrectly? Are we planning on buying more than 200?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Dec 2017 02:30

200 KA-226 originally planned.The idea is that the extra price hike is only for TOT birds which come after the fully built abroad (60) ,SKD,CKD kits are delivered.So after these 200 are built/acquired, the TOT 100% Desi material birds come with whatever escalation is agreed upon.At this point, HAL's LUH production should be kicking in at the same price or lower .So more expensive KA-226s unless urgently reqd. as a preferred design and/or LUH production is slow, may be few and far between.

We are told that the total req. for LUHs will be 400+, may be even more with future reqs. as these would be the cheapest built in India.So clients can choose their pick of the two types.HAL LUH guaranteed at least 200.However, the longer the MOD fiddles and farts with defence deals which have been approved (Scorpene, Rafale, Sikorsky S-70s and now KA-226's) , the higher the price will climb each year.And while we wait, and wait, and wait....like the refugees in Casablanca waiting for their exit passes, the ancient flying machines piloted by those magnificent men of the AAC and IAF , keep risking their lives and those of their passengers operating antiques held together by duct tape ,while the babus tie up in knots the deal and their files with red tape!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 19 Dec 2017 03:41

deejay wrote:Admiral, thank you for the wonderful effort of recording the tributes to Mi 8. I have special memories of both the Mi 8 and 112 HU. Good to see the photos. Coincidentally, the CO today is a coursemate. Hope the new machines work out just as well as the older Mi 8s. 112 HU, Thoroughbreds is where all of IAF's twin engine helicopter pilots are trained initially.

You are welcome Saar. I knew you would appreciate it the most!

This one is a keeper. From the same retirement ceremony. Too bad they do not have it as wallpaper sized.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 19 Dec 2017 04:57

Wow. This must be emotional to so many in the IAF and ex-IAF. When the Mig-21 finally goes, it will be another.

Rishi_Tri · Post by **Rishi_Tri** » 19 Dec 2017 07:13

Indranil wrote:Wow. This must be emotional to so many in the IAF and ex-IAF. When the Mig-21 finally goes, it will be another.

Even outside IAF. For civil engineers posted in Arunachal who created the airfields of Mechuka, Tuting, elsewhere; MI8 was the bird to fly them from their bases in Along, Basar.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Dec 2017 11:29

The legacy of the MI-8 lives on in its new avatars, the MI-17V of which we have 150 or so? Given the huge number of the type acquired, why we did not set up at least screwdriver tech manufacture beats me.We could've developed variants to meet tri-service reqs. too. It will be some too before our MH matures into serial prod.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 19 Dec 2017 16:56

deejay wrote:
Rakesh wrote:Photos of Mi-8 retirement ceremony at Yelahanka AFS. When you click on the link, please make sure to click again on the picture for a larger sized version. The link is just a large thumbnail.
...
Admiral, thank you for the wonderful effort of recording the tributes to Mi 8. I have special memories of both the Mi 8 and 112 HU. Good to see the photos. Coincidentally, the CO today is a coursemate. Hope the new machines work out just as well as the older Mi 8s. 112 HU, Thoroughbreds is where all of IAF's twin engine helicopter pilots are trained initially.

Was fortunate to have got an opportunity to visit 112 HU, an year ago or so. Sat in Mi8 cockpit and all. Got a detailed look at the Mi8.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 19 Dec 2017 20:19

Saar, come on....you should know better

Don't leave us jingos hanging with one sentence. Please provide some summary.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 19 Dec 2017 22:14

May be able to get a pretty good flavour here: DCS: Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 20 Dec 2017 01:42

Philip wrote:The legacy of the MI-8 lives on in its new avatars, the MI-17V of which we have 150 or so? Given the huge number of the type acquired, why we did not set up at least screwdriver tech manufacture beats me.

Good question.
Perhaps it is their biggest cash cow. Why would they want to establish a parallel line anywhere else ?
Even blood and bone overhauls for forward deployed squadrons are done in Russia.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Dec 2017 02:55

The Q must be asked of the IAF/MOD.

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 20 Dec 2017 05:47

Khalsa wrote:Perhaps it is their biggest cash cow. Why would they want to establish a parallel line anywhere else ?
Even blood and bone overhauls for forward deployed squadrons are done in Russia.

China is license producing Mi-17Vs, there's not reason we couldn't have done the same, given our requirements.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Dec 2017 10:59

Kashi wrote:
Khalsa wrote:Perhaps it is their biggest cash cow. Why would they want to establish a parallel line anywhere else ?
Even blood and bone overhauls for forward deployed squadrons are done in Russia.
China is license producing Mi-17Vs, there's not reason we couldn't have done the same, given our requirements.

You serious?

When China produces Russian stuff it is strategic vision
When India produces Russian stuff it is import pasand and pleasing the Russians

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 20 Dec 2017 11:55

They will not serial produce a competitor of its own designs when the former is more expensive and latter is almost ready.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 22 Dec 2017 08:23

Russians did propose making mi17 v5 in india a few years back.

chola · Post by **chola** » 22 Dec 2017 09:09

Interesting point about the Mi-17 so I researched it. Apparently Russia sold licensed production to PRC with a caveat that the Chini-Russki joint venture “Sichuan Lantian Helicopter Company Limited” will build all Mi-17 once Russia moves on to the Mi-38.

Sounds to me like Cheen has bought rights to the Mi-17 after Russia discards it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sichuan ... ny_Limited

In future all Mi-17 will also be built by SLHCL (Mi-171, Mi-17V5, and Mi-17V7) once Mil stops domestic production and tool up for the successor to the Mi17, Mil Mi-38.

chola · Post by **chola** » 22 Dec 2017 09:34

Doing more checking, it seems other reports say that the chini Mi-17 joint venture was a dud. The Sichuan company had no news since 2008. Its website is offline.

According to a pretty reputable chini aviation blog, all Mi-17/171’s in the PRC were imported.

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogsp ... i.html?m=1

I don’t think the Russians are willing to give up the Mi-17 line just yet.

ashishvikas · Post by **ashishvikas** » 22 Dec 2017 16:36

Manu Pubby - HAL says it has received a Request for Proposal (RFP) for 15 Limited Series Light Combat Helicopters from the Indian Air Force.

https://twitter.com/manupubby/status/944159034768162817

HAL - Boost to Indigenous Light Combat Helicopter: One More Request for Proposal (RFP) for HAL from Indian Air Force and Indian Army.

https://twitter.com/HALHQBLR/status/944156729813508097

fanne · Post by **fanne** » 22 Dec 2017 17:05

As I said, someone at the political level is pushing hard for Indian developed birds. LCA check, LCH check, Arjun?

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 22 Dec 2017 19:07

Breaking News: HAL has received RFP for 15 Limited Series LCH.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Dec 2017 19:37

Another v.positive act.The LCH promises to be a real Intel.
killer, pun intended.Great export potential if we can keep the price down and if Nag can be added to its arsenal, another killer too as a package.In fact the LCH could earn its combat slurs first in Afghanistan.

vasu raya · Post by **vasu raya** » 22 Dec 2017 22:11

Good news!

brf to do items in no particular order,

1) Give some to the Japanese and get those Sea planes in return, they still have to make the ALH optimized for sea level flying...

2) Starting integrating with the Apaches as soon as they are available, even the Japanese might want this feature I guess

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 23 Dec 2017 01:27

Thakur_B wrote:Russians did propose making mi17 v5 in india a few years back.

Which year was that sir ?
Any sources.

Khalsa · Post by **Khalsa** » 23 Dec 2017 01:32

I have a feeling we are about to offload the remaining the Mil-35 gunships to Afghanistan in the next year.

Rishi_Tri · Post by **Rishi_Tri** » 23 Dec 2017 01:53

ashishvikas wrote:Manu Pubby - HAL says it has received a Request for Proposal (RFP) for 15 Limited Series Light Combat Helicopters from the Indian Air Force.

https://twitter.com/manupubby/status/944159034768162817

HAL - Boost to Indigenous Light Combat Helicopter: One More Request for Proposal (RFP) for HAL from Indian Air Force and Indian Army.

https://twitter.com/HALHQBLR/status/944156729813508097

Good news this. Had asked a few posts back what was the stealthy LCH upto.

Rakshma Mantri had mentioned a few days ago that many pending acquisitions shall be cleared. She is doing as she promised.

Heli Division of HAL is one real performer. 100s of ALH flying, Rudras in Air, LCH almost battle ready, LUH under trials, IMRH on design board perhaps even further. Shows that HAL, criticism notwithstanding, can do a fantastic job.

So glad those Rooivalks, Tigers were never bought.

Thakur_B · Post by **Thakur_B** » 23 Dec 2017 06:42

Khalsa wrote:
Thakur_B wrote:Russians did propose making mi17 v5 in india a few years back.
Which year was that sir ?
Any sources.

https://www.ndtv.com/opinion/russian-bo ... ear-712399

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Dec 2017 07:30

Thakur_B wrote:
Khalsa wrote: Which year was that sir ?
Any sources.
https://www.ndtv.com/opinion/russian-bo ... ear-712399

How does Mi-17 V5 compare to which Sikorski helicopter?

Luxtor · Post by **Luxtor** » 23 Dec 2017 20:37

LCA, ALH, LCH ....

All well and good....our great efforts and and good success at viable aircrafts. But we need to stop using the term "Light". Everything we endevour to make for ourselves is called Light this and Light that. "Light" somehow denotes less capability. Why can't we just name the damn things something and not say what they're perceived as or proposed to be used as? Did Lockheed Martin, call F-16 a light fighter...No, They just called it F-16 Fighting Falcon. Did McDonald Douglas/Boeing call their F-15, a Heavy Fighter, No, They just called it F-15 Eagle.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 23 Dec 2017 20:38

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/944553716950056961 ---> It seems that HAL has also made progress on the HTSE-1200 turboshaft engine that it is developing for helicopter use. In-house component fabrication as well as sourcing is presently underway.

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/944553261356347392 ---> HAL is going to start building limited series production Light Combat Helicopter Units from January 2018 itself. They intend to deliver six units in the next fiscal itself.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 24 Dec 2017 00:52

The word Light is not representative of the class of product but rather the advanced nature of the product i.e. the product will be lighter due to its extensive usage of advanced materials like composites and thus would be lighter than an all metallic constructed product. I agree that inclusion of Light could lead to misinterpretation.

chola · Post by **chola** » 24 Dec 2017 01:06

Zynda wrote:The word Light is not representative of the class of product but rather the advanced nature of the product i.e. the product will be lighter due to its extensive usage of advanced materials like composites and thus would be lighter than an all metallic constructed product. I agree that inclusion of Light could lead to misinterpretation.

In the LCA, it was definitely related to the size of the aircraft since it was tied to the specs for a single Kaveri which is a RD-33 class medium turbofan. Think single-engined MiG-29. It can’t be anything but light.

Going after a light version of any class when we do not have a lot of experience is not necessarily a bad idea. Though, if we went two engines with the LCA we could have had more leeway for a less than reliable first try at a domestic engine.

srai · Post by **srai** » 24 Dec 2017 12:56

^^^
In the 1980s, FOREX was non-existent; oil import was expensive. India needed a very affordable “world-class” fighter to replace hundreds of MiG-21s in its fleet. It needed to fit into the MiG-21 base infrastructure, like HAS. From what I remember, rupee crore figure used to be painted on the planes to let the technicians and pilots know of how “expensive” it was so that they would treat it with extra care.

Under this context, the LCA was thought up. It needed to be cheap to buy and cheap to operate. Hence, it needed to be “light”. Same applies for ALH.

Even today, India requires affordable fighters to reach its targeted 42 squadrons. MMRCA competition revealed how expensive foreign fighters really are. India doesn’t have the funds to buy those to replace very cheap old fighters in the quantities desired.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 24 Dec 2017 13:15

Luxtor wrote:LCA, ALH, LCH ....

All well and good....our great efforts and and good success at viable aircrafts. But we need to stop using the term "Light". Everything we endevour to make for ourselves is called Light this and Light that. "Light" somehow denotes less capability. Why can't we just name the damn things something and not say what they're perceived as or proposed to be used as? Did Lockheed Martin, call F-16 a light fighter...No, They just called it F-16 Fighting Falcon. Did McDonald Douglas/Boeing call their F-15, a Heavy Fighter, No, They just called it F-15 Eagle.

The F-16 was chosen by the USAF as the winner of the Lightweight Fighter program

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 24 Dec 2017 13:29

Luxtor wrote:LCA, ALH, LCH ....

All well and good....our great efforts and and good success at viable aircrafts. But we need to stop using the term "Light". Everything we endevour to make for ourselves is called Light this and Light that. "Light" somehow denotes less capability. Why can't we just name the damn things something and not say what they're perceived as or proposed to be used as? Did Lockheed Martin, call F-16 a light fighter...No, They just called it F-16 Fighting Falcon. Did McDonald Douglas/Boeing call their F-15, a Heavy Fighter, No, They just called it F-15 Eagle.

Totally unnecessary rant. Calling it light doesnt take anything away from the product of pride of the nation making it. And calling it by some macho name doesnt add anything significant either. This kind of classification and nomenclature is widely used in Aerospace n Defense by all. Infact we do have names for them. Tejas, Dhruv, Rudra and all. All projects initially are called some generic class name and given some name later.

shaun · Post by **shaun** » 24 Dec 2017 15:33

Yup LCA teja's , LCH Dhruv .....that light nomenclature sucks

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 24 Dec 2017 15:59

I don't know if IAF had light, medium & heavy fighter categories back in the 80s when LCA was conceptualised. AFAIK, the term Light is meant as what I said in my previous post. This came from a person who was intimately involved with LCA program right from its beginning. I specifically asked him about the word "Light" because back in early 2000s, I had an argument was a person who was mocking the term "Light" in LCA and thus I specifically wanted to understand the intent behind its inclusion for future references.

I think the more recent terms like LUH specifically stands for the weight category that product goes in to.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Dec 2017 02:34

Are we planning a coaxial rotors variant for LCH. Given complexities and design, has as huge benefits for stability on mountain ops, besides counter rotating benefits.

The Kamov 226t deal should give us enough knowledge and exposure to this technology. We can't be silent to such innovation opportunities

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Dec 2017 08:39

I think that a new design would be required.We need heavyweight attack helos too like the KA-50/52s both for US and IN amphibs.Perhaps that design could be co-axial.The config of the LCH, long and slim designed conventionally, may have to be altered.?