Indian Military Aviation

[Dmurphy]

the desired roles seem to be?

Jag-upg/Jag-nuova/Tejas - interdiction missions of 200-500km radius from base

Sorry for my ignorance, but interdiction role for Jags? Is being armed with 2 A2A missiles enough for air interdiction missions?

[Rahul M]

the desired roles seem to be?

Jag-upg/Jag-nuova/Tejas - interdiction missions of 200-500km radius from base

Sorry for my ignorance, but interdiction role for Jags? Is being armed with 2 A2A missiles enough for air interdiction missions?

Air interdiction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Air interdiction (AI) is the use of aircraft to attack tactical ground targets that are not in close proximity to friendly ground forces. It differs from close air support because it does not directly support ground operations and is not closely coordinated with ground units.

[Bob V]

Could you please tell us how sea state is tied to landing gear for the Naval ALH?

The landing gear by design is capable of withstanding much higher G loading, vertical and lateral accelerations then that generated in sea state 5.

The NALH (anti-sub) was not certified to land on a deck in Sea State 5. The process got delayed due to time constraints, spent in addressing other shortfalls .

The engine has to be marinised to withstand the saline atmosphere in which it has to operate. I am sure that this was already done.

The engine was marinised to withstand the effects of salinity , but the internal layout was not tampered with.

[Rahul M]

The Naval ALH (anti-sub) suffered from lack of real estate, endurance

as compared to the chetak or whatever is brought in as the next light helo ? doesn't seem right.

in terms of mission requirements (ASW).......the comparison is not wrt to some other chopper , but whether it could accommodate all of the mission critical equipment.

that is what I'm asking too. the comparable chopper IN currently employs, which is the only one that ALH can be realistically expected to replace i.e the chetak has a utility/limited ASW role (called MATCH IIRC). one would think that the ALH would beat it on any specs easily.

what mission equipments does the chetak carry over what range that the ALH can't match ?
------------------------

Also the present powerplant for ALH is optimised for maximum efficiency at high altitudes. Hence there are chances of not meeting operational parameters at sea-level

does not use the shakti which is the hi-alt engine you are speaking of.

there is an upgrade programme going on currently at HAL which proposes to replace all engines with Shakti.....I think around 55 of them have been upgraded, including the NALH used in utility roles....I would like to add that the earlier engines were found to have lower sea level performance when compared to its hi-alt performance.

so all TM333's are going to be replaced ?

btw, which engine are you talking of as having a lower SL performance, TM333 2B2 or the shakti ?
TIA.

[Dmurphy]

Air interdiction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Air interdiction (AI) is the use of aircraft to attack tactical ground targets that are not in close proximity to friendly ground forces. It differs from close air support because it does not directly support ground operations and is not closely coordinated with ground units.

Thanks RM. That was on oversight on my part.

[Bob V]

that is what I'm asking too. the comparable chopper IN currently employs, which is the only one that ALH can be realistically expected to replace i.e the chetak has a utility/limited ASW role (called MATCH IIRC). one would think that the ALH would beat it on any specs easily.

what mission equipments does the chetak carry over what range that the ALH can't match ?

Definitely the ALH can perform much more than a chetak, but the ASW roles expected out of an ALH is different from that performed by chetak, due to its bigger size.Hence if at all ALH has to be compared in terms of achieving mission objectives , then it has to be done with either a similar or a bigger product currently in service, which the manufacturer proposes to either replace or complement.Thus, in the above context, expecting the ALH to perform more or less the roles played by SeaKings is not justified.

[Rahul M]

this is the part of this argument that I never understood. ALH is a light helo, comparing with the sea king that is almost twice its weight makes no sense to me !

anyway, IN ships that can carry two helos don't carry 2 sea kings or 2 kamovs AFAIK (chetak am I right ?). one chetak is carried along with a sea king/kamov. if the NALH is rejected, what will future IN ships carry ?

my question being, is the IN going to employ a light helo in it's future ships or not ? if the answer is yes, I don't see how continuing with the venerable chetak or some equally light weight light helo of its class from the international competition is a better option than the NALH.

is IN going to replace the chetaks on its ships ? with what ?

[Bob V]

the ALH was not compared with SeaKing in terms of size or its weight ,but in terms of the amount of mission critical equipment that it can carry. There are certain technologies(Equipment) that can't be integrated with the SeaKing now( due to the lack of dedicated avionics busbars), but can be comfortably adapted on the ALH (due to its modern avionics architecture).Hence in that case,the same output can be obtained by using a lighter and efficient equipment , than by using a heavier equipment. The point to be noted is that the heavier equipment is not of a previous generation but is used simply because the interface technology for using a lighter product is non-existent/ cannot be added, on the old chopper. Hope you got the point that I'm trying to express.

[Aditya G]

The main problem with the Naval Dhruv is the time it takes to collapse the rotors - which unfortunately is a result of the hingeless rotor design which happens to be a USP of the helicopter! Else it is miles ahead of Chetak Match and can replace older Kamovs also.

[Rahul M]

some comparison with the Sea king/kamov is inevitable if you consider the NALH for the same role, although in spite of the generational advances in NALH that you mention it will always have shorter legs than a much heavier helo like the sea king or the kamov. (yes, I understand it will carry some equipments that the sea king can't)

even so, I think you didn't get the point I was trying to make in my last post. as of now, IN helos on its ships have two roles,
> dedicated ASW (sea king/kamov),
> limited ASW (MATCH) + utility + SAR (chetak)

I understand from media reports and from what you say that NALH can't replace the sea king in the dedicated ASW role. but what about the SAR/utility role ? what better helo to replace the chetak than the NALH, considering its significant ASW capability as well, which is a big bonus ?
do you get me ?

older Kamovs

are the ka-25's still around ?

[Bob V]

The main problem with the Naval Dhruv is the time it takes to collapse the rotors - which unfortunately is a result of the hingeless rotor design which happens to be a USP of the helicopter! Else it is miles ahead of Chetak Match and can replace older Kamovs also.

the Dhruv's rotors cannot collapse,as in case of hinged rotors. There is no provision for folding the main rotor as of now. The manufacturer had proposed a method of folding the blades at their mid-sections.

[Bob V]

I understand from media reports and from what you say that NALH can't replace the sea king in the dedicated ASW role. but what about the SAR/utility role ? what better helo to replace the chetak than the NALH, considering its significant ASW capability as well, which is a big bonus ?
do you get me ?

Ofcourse, NALH (anti-sub version) can comfortably perform the role of chetaks, but that would be an overkill. Additional logistics and support would be needed to accommodate onboard a bigger,twin-engined chopper without foldable rotors.

[Rahul M]

I understand from media reports and from what you say that NALH can't replace the sea king in the dedicated ASW role. but what about the SAR/utility role ? what better helo to replace the chetak than the NALH, considering its significant ASW capability as well, which is a big bonus ?
do you get me ?

Ofcourse, NALH (anti-sub version) can comfortably perform the role of chetaks, but that would be an overkill. Additional logistics and support would be needed to accommodate onboard a bigger,twin-engined chopper without foldable rotors.

but from your post I got the impression that NALH's ASW capability will be significantly more than the chetak, not just match its role ??
even common sense dictates so. and similarly it should give a jump in capabilities in SAR and endurance as well. the extra weight carrying capability might well come in handy in a SAR mission. or even in a MARCOS mission. chetaks can carry 5 on board, ALH carries about 12, that would be a welcome capability augmentation IMHO. also, considering the generation gap would the NALH really be that much harder to maintain than the long in the tooth chetaks, two engines notwithstanding. even if it is a little harder to maintain won't the boost in capabilities make it worth it ?

of course, all this is moot unless the primary problem i.e the rotor problem is solved, now that the vibration problem has been solved. (or so I hear)

[Bob V]

but from your post I got the impression that NALH's ASW capability will be significantly more than the chetak, not just match its role ??
even common sense dictates so. and similarly it should give a jump in capabilities in SAR and endurance as well. the extra weight carrying capability might well come in handy in a SAR mission. or even in a MARCOS mission. chetaks can carry 5 on board, ALH carries about 12, that would be a welcome capability augmentation IMHO. also, considering the generation gap would the NALH really be that much harder to maintain than the long in the tooth chetaks, two engines notwithstanding. even if it is a little harder to maintain won't the boost in capabilities make it worth it ?

of course, all this is moot unless the primary problem i.e the rotor problem is solved, now that the vibration problem has been solved. (or so I hear)

Ofcourse NALH gives a quantum jump in capabilities over the chetak in ASW role. Its upto the policy makers to decide whether to accommodate the NALH in that form onboard.
Now regarding the inclusion of armed combatants to the ASW chopper; both the roles cannot be performed simultaneously coz both the roles require different flight profiles .Also the monitoring instruments are sensitive in nature .

[Kartik]

Well without knowing the FOV of the sensor and the slope of the nose we cannot comment if its position above/below the nose in any way affects the LCH's A2G capability , in fact we don't know if this was a conscious decision specially keeping in mind the ops in the mountainous terrain where the potential targets on peaks might very well be above the pilot's LOS.

you can see this picture of the LCH and its quite obvious that the nose hardly restricts the look-down FOV of the optronics ball. when it swivels down, the nose is hardly in its path.

[Singha]

imo a new folding rotor and reduction of payload of NDhruv from 12 to 6 by introducing a new fuel tank of 360kg capacity would make it far superior to Chetan inshallah. NH90 is too big and costly for utility roles and we can never buy enough to deploy on OPV, fleet oilers, aux ships, carriers, LPD, new MCMV and type28 corvettes. there is a need for 100 NDhruvs in that niche to replace the Chetak and make sure everyone has SAR and light attack bubbles.

the dedicated FFG/DDG can continue with Kamovs and Sea Kings until NH90/SH60s arrive.

since eurocopter/augusta have some products in same space maybe we could obtain their help with
the mods needed for folding rotor.

[nachiket]

the dedicated FFG/DDG can continue with Kamovs and Sea Kings until NH90/SH60s arrive.

Has any such tender been floated?

[Gagan]

At this location and from those pictures, it doesn't look like the optics can look vertically down.
Does it matter if the optics can look vertically down underneath the helicopter? I am sure that the nose mounted gun has a much restricted angle, and unless one expects the pilot to be dropping hand grenades below from an open window, how is it important?

The attack helo's main task is to take out targets 2-12 Km away, strafe at enemy positions and soldiers, not sure how indispensable that vertical look down ability helps here.

[srai]

The main problem with the Naval Dhruv is the time it takes to collapse the rotors - which unfortunately is a result of the hingeless rotor design which happens to be a USP of the helicopter! Else it is miles ahead of Chetak Match and can replace older Kamovs also.

the Dhruv's rotors cannot collapse,as in case of hinged rotors. There is no provision for folding the main rotor as of now. The manufacturer had proposed a method of folding the blades at their mid-sections.

What's your source of info for this?

Some old diagrams have shown folding main rotors as well as tail boom.

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/ALH.html
The Dhruv features a 'System Bolkow' four-blade hingeless main rotor with carbon fibre composite blades. ... The fibre elastoner rotor head holds the blade between a pair of CFRP star-plates, with manual blade folding and a rotor brake provided as standard equipment. ...

[Aditya G]

The Navy's issue was that the Dhruv does not support automatic folding like seen in Sea King. While manual is required in chetak, it is seems to be an easier task than in Dhruv.

[chetak]

Could you please tell us how sea state is tied to landing gear for the Naval ALH?

The landing gear by design is capable of withstanding much higher G loading, vertical and lateral accelerations then that generated in sea state 5.

The NALH (anti-sub) was not certified to land on a deck in Sea State 5. The process got delayed due to time constraints, spent in addressing other shortfalls .

The engine has to be marinised to withstand the saline atmosphere in which it has to operate. I am sure that this was already done.

The engine was marinised to withstand the effects of salinity , but the internal layout was not tampered with.

Bob V

Naval helos are never meant to land on deck in sea state five. That being said, they can and may is another matter all together. The ship's commanding officer will inevitably pay a very expensive price and very soon at that.

No trials of any sort ever call for landing demonstrations in such high sea states. It is beyond all acceptable flight safety norms and puts the crew and helo at near fatal risk.

Standard ops procedures generally do not go beyond sea state three.

All NALH ( anti sub or not ) will be certified to the same standards.

Marineised engines simply undergo an extensive modification. If ever the internal layout of an engine is "tampered" with then the tampered engine simply becomes a derivative or a special purpose engine.

The IN is one of the few operators who have a long tradition of "washing" live or running engines. I remember many years a grizzled old Rolls Royce rep whose eyes nearly fell out when he saw it being done.

He said later that is had been decades since he was last surprised at work.

[chetak]

The Navy's issue was that the Dhruv does not support automatic folding like seen in Sea King. While manual is required in chetak, it is seems to be an easier task than in Dhruv.

The IN is not wildly enthusiastic about automatic blade fold systems.

In fact they are very happy with manual systems.

[chetak]

I understand from media reports and from what you say that NALH can't replace the sea king in the dedicated ASW role. but what about the SAR/utility role ? what better helo to replace the chetak than the NALH, considering its significant ASW capability as well, which is a big bonus ?
do you get me ?

Ofcourse, NALH (anti-sub version) can comfortably perform the role of chetaks, but that would be an overkill. Additional logistics and support would be needed to accommodate onboard a bigger,twin-engined chopper without foldable rotors.

The NALH is a "hunter killer". It has its own dunking sonar and sonobouys that it can actually use to hunt down a submarine.

The dedicated ASW Chetak a k a MATCH role is simply a fully vectored ASW platform completely dependent on the ship even to the extent of weapon delivery instructions.

The NALH carries its own specialised weapons and sonar systems officer while the MATCH is operated by (under very high workloads) two pilots only and depends solely on the ship for for sonar info.

The ranges and ops parameters and deployment of the two platforms are completely different.

[chetak]

The main problem with the Naval Dhruv is the time it takes to collapse the rotors - which unfortunately is a result of the hingeless rotor design which happens to be a USP of the helicopter! Else it is miles ahead of Chetak Match and can replace older Kamovs also.

the Dhruv's rotors cannot collapse,as in case of hinged rotors. There is no provision for folding the main rotor as of now. The manufacturer had proposed a method of folding the blades at their mid-sections.

The Blade fold capability of the NALH already exists and its a done deal.

The NALH has already demonstrated blade fold capability with blades folded and stowed in aft position just like a Seaking with blades folded.

HAL had proposed another system with one blade in forward position and the others at rear but this was not acceptable by the IN.

I know of no blade fold system in which blades can be folded mid section. I would be grateful if some link could be provided to such a system. IMHO the already complicated rotor system would be complicated beyond all practicality.

[Picklu]

Ok, so all being said and done, is it correct to state the below as the current status?
vibration problem - solved
blade folding - solved
marinisation - solved

In that case, "not enough endurance with the required mission load" is the only problem remaining?
Will shakti help?

[chetak]

I understand from media reports and from what you say that NALH can't replace the sea king in the dedicated ASW role. but what about the SAR/utility role ? what better helo to replace the chetak than the NALH, considering its significant ASW capability as well, which is a big bonus ?
do you get me ?

Ofcourse, NALH (anti-sub version) can comfortably perform the role of chetaks, but that would be an overkill. Additional logistics and support would be needed to accommodate onboard a bigger,twin-engined chopper without foldable rotors.

Bro, not to nit pick but a non folder is currently not even cleared to operate from deck.

Say, for the purpose of trials the IN may accept a nonfolder in relatively calm seas for the day, the very high risk of damage to a nonfolder lashed on open deck in medium to heavy seas is a sure fire invitation to heavy damage, the eventual disembarkation of such helo at the nearest port by dockside crane and the completely certain and quick termination of many budding careers.

[Bob V]

The blade fold capability, as shown in the pic by the poster, has been proposed but has not been accepted for the ASW version
(throughout this page ,whenever I talked about NALH, I meant the ASW version only).If the blades are folded in that manner, it gives aggregate width of around 5 mts. IN had strictly specified the width to around 3.5 mts. Hence, the new proposal to fold the blades at the mid-section. I will try to upload docs on it , if I find it available as open-source.

[Bob V]

Bro, not to nit pick but a non folder is currently not even cleared to operate from deck.

Say, for the purpose of trials the IN may accept a nonfolder in relatively calm seas for the day, the very high risk of damage to a nonfolder lashed on open deck in medium to heavy seas is a sure fire invitation to heavy damage, the eventual disembarkation of such helo at the nearest port by dockside crane and the completely certain and quick termination of many budding careers.

Yes, thats what I meant when I said its upto the policy makers to decide what version to operate from a deck and whether it is suitable or not. There have been instances when a product had been rejected coz the nut tightening mechanism ( the universally accepted method was used here) was not according to clients manual.

[chetak]

Ok, so all being said and done, is it correct to state the below as the current status?
vibration problem - solved
blade folding - solved
marinisation - solved

In that case, "not enough endurance with the required mission load" is the only problem remaining?
Will shakti help?

The current status could perhaps be more accurately stated as

Vibration problem -- somewhat improved but certainly not solved and still a sticking and sore point with the IN.

Blade fold -- best of a bad solution. IN unhappy with the complications.

Shakti can be marinised but why?

It's output at sea level exceeds the capability of the current gearbox.

There is no alternate to this gearbox. It's a unique specimen in the whole wide world.

The Shakti's output can of course be de rated as indeed the Chetak's Turbomeca Artouste engine ( first run in 1947! ) is also de rated.

This will not solve the NALH's problem of short legs.

[chetak]

Bro, not to nit pick but a non folder is currently not even cleared to operate from deck.

Say, for the purpose of trials the IN may accept a nonfolder in relatively calm seas for the day, the very high risk of damage to a nonfolder lashed on open deck in medium to heavy seas is a sure fire invitation to heavy damage, the eventual disembarkation of such helo at the nearest port by dockside crane and the completely certain and quick termination of many budding careers.

Yes, thats what I meant when I said its upto the policy makers to decide what version to operate from a deck and whether it is suitable or not. There have been instances when a product had been rejected coz the nut tightening mechanism ( the universally accepted method was used here) was not according to clients manual.

The policy makers can hardly go against the laws of physics and violent natural phenomena. Gleeful auditors will write off many a career.

Crew and platform safety will be paramount in any such scenario and finally policy makers with such unparalleled testicular fortitude
have yet to take birth in our country.

[chetak]

The blade fold capability, as shown in the pic by the poster, has been proposed but has not been accepted for the ASW version
(throughout this page ,whenever I talked about NALH, I meant the ASW version only).If the blades are folded in that manner, it gives aggregate width of around 5 mts. IN had strictly specified the width to around 3.5 mts. Hence, the new proposal to fold the blades at the mid-section. I will try to upload docs on it , if I find it available as open-source.

ALL IN helos of any and every description mandatorily require blade fold capability.

The IN has no requirements of the non fold variety.

[Bob V]

[

The policy makers can hardly go against the laws of physics and violent natural phenomena. Gleeful auditors will write off many a career.

Crew and platform safety will be paramount in any such scenario and finally policy makers with such unparalleled testicular fortitude
have yet to take birth in our country.

[Bob V]

ALL IN helos of any and every description mandatorily require blade fold capability.

Exactly.

IN has no requirements of the non fold variety.

But the NALH (ASW) was proposed with such folding mechanism.

[Picklu]

Thanks Chetak.
So, Vibration, blade fold and endurance - none of these sticking problems are resolved completely to IN's statisfaction yet. In that case, ALH does not have much promise even as the Utility/SAR help onboard IN ships

[chetak]

the dedicated FFG/DDG can continue with Kamovs and Sea Kings until NH90/SH60s arrive.

Has any such tender been floated?

Not a major issue.

It requires only minor mechanical modifications as long as the hanger can physically accommodate the largest of the helos being operated in terms of size and acceptable clearances. This involves provision of lashing points and eyes on the bulkhead to tie down the helo inside the hanger and restrict blade movement.

That being said, It requires additionally and mainly the provision of specialised electrical and hydraulic power supplies required to operate both types. This also is a fairly simple matter.

[chetak]

Thanks Chetak.
So, Vibration, blade fold and endurance - none of these sticking problems are resolved completely to IN's statisfaction yet. In that case, ALH does not have much promise even as the Utility/SAR help onboard IN ships

This is not such a pressing issue for the IN.

The Chetaks have a fair amount of residual life left in them yet.

The endurance of the ASW version may, just may IMHO, be insurmountable. I sincerely hope that it is not.

[chetak]

ALL IN helos of any and every description mandatorily require blade fold capability.

Exactly.

IN has no requirements of the non fold variety.

But the NALH (ASW) was proposed with such folding mechanism.

Yes boss, I agree.

But a majority of other sticking points are not resolved yet.

When you first go to see the girl she is invariably well made up and blemishes are covered with make up, no?

The first date or two will give you a clear indication of whether you would want to proceed further or quickly come up with a " its not you but its me story".

Or you may compromise and go ahead but with clear conditionals.

Or then again you will wind up with the unenviable task of trying to push an unmarried girl out of your home whereas the opposite party ( like the DRDO often does ), is shouting from the rooftops that the marriage is already over and you were not even consulted.

Swanning around the world with the Sarang team is OK but why are the majority of the intended customers still baulking?

[sanjaychoudhry]

‘It’s India’s decade in aviation’

Special Correspondent

BENGALURU: India’s capability of building state-of-the-art fighter planes and rockets would be put to test in the New Year. Scientists are confident of propelling the country’s aerospace industry into a new orbit in the coming decade.

Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) will hurl a rocket with an indigenous cryogenic engine that can put communication satellites of four tonnes and above into orbit.

The satellite GSAT-4 itself would test new technologies that India plans in its space programme in the coming decades. ISRO has so far been using Russian-made engine on its Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle or GSLV, to put large satellites into space.

“This will be a landmark achievement for India’s space industry,” said a senior Isro official.

Around the same time, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd, the sole defence aircraft maker based in Bengaluru, will fly for the first time the Light Combat Helicopter, an attack helicopter that could improve the armed forces capability against the enemy in high altitudes.

The new chopper, which will be an armed version of HAL’s flagship advanced light helicopter Dhruv, would be flown for at least 500 hours before it is certified.

While the chopper will take wings, Tejas, the light combat aircraft will attempt to complete its first phase of flight trials to get the initial operational clearance that would pave way for the induction into the Indian air force.

The Indo-Russian fifth generation fighter aircraft or FGFA will also make its first flight during the year, that would set the ground to build the world’s most potent fighter after the F-35 of the Americans.

“This will be the decade of Indian aviation,” said a HAL official.

ISRO will also partner HAL in the country’s Rs2,500 crore passenger plane project.

The regional transport aircraft, or RTA-70, being designed to carry 70-90 passengers on short-haul routes, is part of an ambitious programme to build civilian planes and bridge the gap in aeronautical expertise with countries like China and Brazil.

http://www.sakaaltimes.com/SakaalTimesB ... 529125.htm

[anand_sankar]

Talking of the N-ALH, there is an incident that I can now reveal.

I had a close friend working with HAL who was present at a meeting between them and the Indian Navy. The MoD was trying to mediate so that everyone went home with something. The navy did not want ANYTHING to do with the N-ALH. A brightspark from the MoD then offered a solution -- since the rotors of the N-ALH cant fold all the way, why doesnt the navy cut holes on the sides of its ship hangars to accomodate the rotors.

Representing the services, the navy men had keep their cool but one officer couldnt bite his lip any more. He told the brightspark, of course politely but it meant, since we are discussing tearing holes, why dont we tear you a new a-hole.

The N-ALH is a compromise and is dead, confirmed by another source, a classmates dad who was the programme head from the navy side. A few will be pushed down the navys throat but they will do utility and fly littoral patrols.

[Sagar G]

A brightspark from the MoD then offered a solution -- since the rotors of the N-ALH cant fold all the way, why doesnt the navy cut holes on the sides of its ship hangars to accomodate the rotors.

Representing the services, the navy men had keep their cool but one officer couldnt bite his lip any more. He told the brightspark, of course politely but it meant, since we are discussing tearing holes, why dont we tear you a new a-hole.

If this incident is true then it's really a shame that such ignorant people find a place in MoD and I think the navy guy went easy on him.