LCH and other Helicopters Discussion Thread

karan_mc · Post by **karan_mc** » 25 May 2010 07:39

@suryag , LCA TD-1 was a technology demonstrator there was no commitment from IAF it was a ADE product , while LCH PT-3 will be first be handed to Air force .

Indrajit · Post by **Indrajit** » 25 May 2010 07:54

Not being able to view Shiv Aroor's blog,for that matter any blog,can anyone advice what to do?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 25 May 2010 08:14

Indrajit wrote:Not being able to view Shiv Aroor's blog,for that matter any blog,can anyone advice what to do?

Check your firewall? Use a friend's computer?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 25 May 2010 08:39

Indrajit wrote:Not being able to view Shiv Aroor's blog,for that matter any blog,can anyone advice what to do?

Indrajit I am facing the same problem for few days cant view any "xx.blogspot.com" site seems to be a DNS resolution issue , just add these additional open DNS nameserver , if you use linux in resolv.conf or something similar for windows , it worked for me

DNS Server: 208.67.222.222
DNS Server: 208.67.220.220

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 25 May 2010 09:13

http://mangalorean.com/news.php?newstyp ... tid=181322

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 25 May 2010 10:38

karan_mc wrote:
In latest Mock up it seems that HAL is sticking with Conventional Tail rotor instead of shrouded tail rotor which was first displayed in Aero India 2009 model. Aero India model of LUH had shrouded tail rotor which is also known as Fenestron or Fantail in aviation circle. Our Defence expert Rajesh Sharma told idrw.org that it might have been done to keep the construction cost lower and ducted fan tail rotor adds weight to helicopter , LUH is supposed to be a 3 ton helicopter powered by a single HAL/Turbomeca Shakti engine. The aircraft will have a range of up to 500km (270nm) and a 500kg (1,100lb) payload. LUH will be used in Higher Attitude region.
http://idrw.org/?p=1777#more-1777

What is the right range of the LUH? 500 km quoted in this report or >350 km by HAL's posters everywhere! Just for laughs: > 350 km does capture the 500 km range too. lol

P.S. Should there be a LUH discussion thread?

atreya · Post by **atreya** » 25 May 2010 12:07

P.S. Should there be a LUH discussion thread?

I think we should change the name of this thread and include it here rather than create a new thread for every new development

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 25 May 2010 12:12

Here's a good book for people interested.

Helicopter Theory-Peformance Parameters

Pankaj C · Post by **Pankaj C** » 25 May 2010 15:05

The IAF has already commited to 65 machines and the IA is still in the process of showing interest. They still are skeptical of the desi maal

. Unfortunate, considering the IA will be the bigger user of the two and needs it much more than the IAF.

Bharadwaj · Post by **Bharadwaj** » 25 May 2010 15:40

The ducted rotor would have created a new complication that could have created further complications during the test process-Kudos to Hal for not falling into the technology trap. The bird does seem big compared to the fennec and kamov but as long as the weight target is achieved it will do well.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 25 May 2010 16:22

Pankaj C wrote:The IAF has already commited to 65 machines and the IA is still in the process of showing interest. They still are skeptical of the desi maal . Unfortunate, considering the IA will be the bigger user of the two and needs it much more than the IAF.

Food for thought - has IA been authorized to raise additional squadrons for inducting LCH into service? Remember the brouhaha over IA requirement for Mi-35 Gunships to be under IA control?

Let us get some facts in place before hauling the IA over the coals.

Pankaj C · Post by **Pankaj C** » 25 May 2010 17:39

Has the IAF been authorized funds for their induction? Asking this as I do not know if they have been.

Mayuresh · Post by **Mayuresh** » 25 May 2010 17:44

Team, has the LCH been named yet? I thought it would get a name in its first official flight. Anyways, If we really want a name, I suggest - "Cheetah" - a fitting tribute to the Cheetah helicoptors that have served us with distinction and also to the animal - sleek, slender, stealthy, fast and an efficient hunter.

Sriman · Post by **Sriman** » 25 May 2010 18:45

Please discuss the naming in the Military Misc thread..

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 25 May 2010 18:50

Mayuresh wrote:Team, has the LCH been named yet? I thought it would get a name in its first official flight. Anyways, If we really want a name, I suggest - "Cheetah" - a fitting tribute to the Cheetah helicoptors that have served us with distinction and also to the animal - sleek, slender, stealthy, fast and an efficient hunter.

The LCA's TD units flew without a name till 2003 when the PV-1 flew. It'll be a while before the aircraft is officially given a name.

Juggi G · Post by **Juggi G** » 26 May 2010 01:34

India’s First Attack Copter Takes Flight
The Indian Express

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 26 May 2010 05:36

Anyone notice the LCH doing the Vertical Nose dive, with what looked like (to me) only with ONE ENGINE POWERED ON?? See the video posted by madushan by Gujarat 9 on LCH here

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 May 2010 06:32

Craig Alpert wrote:Anyone notice the LCH doing the Vertical Nose dive, with what looked like (to me) only with ONE ENGINE POWERED ON?? See the video posted by madushan by Gujarat 9 on LCH here

Both engines are connected to both rotors. You will never know if one is off from a video. Care to indicate the exact time on the video that you think shows this?

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 26 May 2010 08:02

if you look carefully at the tail rotor at around 1.02 sec, you'll see how fast it spins and now that same tail rotor at 1.18 ~ 1.20 sec seems so slow, like it was almost running on the main engine power.. This is just my Personal Opinion, as I'm no Flight control Expert, but based on my understanding I was under the impression, that the primary reason for a dual engine helo was to ensure Realiability.i.e. say if one engine is shot, the LCH can still land safely with the second engine Only. I believe someone had posted a video demonstrating this on the Mi-24 Hind helis...
But I'm willing to be educated!

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 26 May 2010 08:28

lot of education ahead. tail rotor speed in this case has nothing to do with engines running or stopping. PLUS its an optical illusion.

Pratik_S · Post by **Pratik_S** » 26 May 2010 08:54

I think the tail rotor is running at a constant speed, its probably a unintentional illusion created by the camera.

Vikram W · Post by **Vikram W** » 26 May 2010 09:42

The video of MI-24 hind where it appears that the main rotor is not spinning is an optical illusion. The Russians created a way to sync the camera shutter speed with the Main rotor and this makes the main rotor look stationary , although it is moving at the same rate as the camera is clicking (rpm wise). The russians did this to observe the stresses and movements of the main rotor. but its a cool trick isnt it .

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 26 May 2010 10:21

Tail rotor speed is proportional to the main rotor speed -- it has to be for the tail rotor to do what it is meant to do, which is to counter the torque of the main rotor. That's why they're both connected to the main engine or engines. Haven't heard of any helos that have separate engines for tail rotors.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 26 May 2010 10:27

Vikram W wrote:The Russians created a way to sync the camera shutter speed with the Main rotor and this makes the main rotor look stationary , although it is moving at the same rate as the camera is clicking (rpm wise). The russians did this to observe the stresses and movements of the main rotor. but its a cool trick isnt it .

This is called a Stroboscope and is widely used.

negi · Post by **negi** » 26 May 2010 10:44

Armen not always as the rotor blades have variable pitch so RPM is not the only variable here, also tail rotor is also used as a control surface in which case it might rotate at higher or lower RPM than the value required to cancel the torque (for a given pitch). However another possibility is both rotors rotate at constant RPM (no reduction gear and stuff required) all controlling achieved by adjusting the PITCH only.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 26 May 2010 14:14

For those mujahids interested,

NDTV is likely to have a program on the LCH today night at 2230 hours.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 May 2010 14:16

Vikram W wrote:The video of MI-24 hind where it appears that the main rotor is not spinning is an optical illusion. The Russians created a way to sync the camera shutter speed with the Main rotor and this makes the main rotor look stationary , although it is moving at the same rate as the camera is clicking (rpm wise). The russians did this to observe the stresses and movements of the main rotor. but its a cool trick isnt it .

Any run of the mill automobile workshop in India 40 years ago could be found with a stroboscope slaved to the old "distributor" to freeze the movement of the valves.

You can make crude stroboscope yourself using only your fingers - but in videos the effect of freezing/slow motion of props is incidental, not deliberate.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 May 2010 14:20

Craig Alpert wrote:if you look carefully at the tail rotor at around 1.02 sec, you'll see how fast it spins and now that same tail rotor at 1.18 ~ 1.20 sec seems so slow, like it was almost running on the main engine power.. This is just my Personal Opinion, as I'm no Flight control Expert, but based on my understanding I was under the impression, that the primary reason for a dual engine helo was to ensure Realiability.i.e. say if one engine is shot, the LCH can still land safely with the second engine Only. I believe someone had posted a video demonstrating this on the Mi-24 Hind helis...
But I'm willing to be educated!

What you are seeing is the stroboscopic effect of movie frame rate being synchronized proportionally to the rotor RPM.

Twin engines or three engines is not just about reliability - it's about power as well.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 May 2010 20:14

chetak wrote:For those mujahids interested,

NDTV is likely to have a program on the LCH today night at 2230 hours.

I hope this is right. I have set up the recorder for this.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 26 May 2010 21:51

recently at the Deusche Museum in Munich got to see the BO 105 up close and realise it was really a light helo even thought the 6 HOT missile capacity made it look more threatening

and the LUH comes along

nice

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 27 May 2010 02:01

AAHHHA, thank you for the Engine 101 lesson.. Now I know what my eyes saw (or in this case clearly didn't see)..
@ Shiv ~ Correct! there's more to 2/3 engines than just realiability, but I was just pointing out 1 scenario. But hey, I learned 2 new things today

If you have the LCH program recorded for us (preferably in 720/1080 HD ~ what has this world come 2? beggars being choosers??) please upload for us abduls! Thank you sir in advance!

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 27 May 2010 08:42

Guru's any comparison of LCH with this :

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/helicopter/z10.asp

Looks like has lot of thick hide for protection and better capacity. I hope beggers would want this one itself (for free ofcourse)

Jaeger · Post by **Jaeger** » 27 May 2010 11:03

^Valid question. A detailed anal-ysis can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK2tWVj6lXw

Alternatively, you can use:
http://www.google.com, who is your friend.

Jaeger · Post by **Jaeger** » 27 May 2010 11:07

Also, could you point how you were able to discern the fact that:

Looks like has lot of thick hide for protection and better capacity.

I mean since you've already figured this much out, can you tell us -
What exactly would this "thick hide" be made of? Steel? Composites? Toilet paper?
What does this particular helo have a "better capacity" for? Beer? Whiskey? Tarrel than mountain flied lice?

Jaeger · Post by **Jaeger** » 27 May 2010 11:17

IMHO whatever else may come in the future, the LCH is a shining example of the advantages of indigenous design & development catering to indigenous needs. Which other attack helo - extant at the time of the LCH project's initiation - could claim to designed for consistent performance at >6000m? Which other country has the mix of operational zones that this would be required to operate in - desert, himalayan, tropical rainforest?
This is a product by India for India. Period. There is no need to compare to any other piece of equipment out there, because if this piece of kit meets its users stringent requirements (as I'm sure it will) then it will by definition be a high-performance machine that will play its role in fulfilling our defense requirements.

krishna_krishna · Post by **krishna_krishna** » 27 May 2010 15:30

Dear Mr.Jaege :

Me only illeterate short midget from north east , to me capacity means stuff carryng ability although I meant weapons store however the beer ,whiskey whatever the pilot wish to take with them to mine illeterate mind it has bigger tummy(****), the point is from wikki for LCH and this link shows our :
-LCH has MTOW of 5700kg,where as the other guy has 8000kg.
-The powerplant has 1531hp in both engines where as our LCH 1200hp in both.
-The maximum speed for our LCH is 275+ km/hr where as the other one 300+ km/hr.

The thicker hide I meant was better armor protection considering the legens has it the panda skin has miracle powers so making its hide stuffing inside helicopter has better protection results of magical powers. Please forgive my ignorant , beer and whiskey stuffed stomach with goes out for unkown answer from gurus. So please leave at that and let any wise guru answer my question or have an serious discussion.

sathyaC · Post by **sathyaC** » 27 May 2010 16:05

guys can the LCH do a flip or role over like tiger Helo

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 27 May 2010 16:27

sathyaC wrote:guys can the LCH do a flip or role over like tiger Helo

Nothing to do with flip or role over ... just for information sharing as tiger helo is mentioned. Cross posting from "International Aerospace Discussion"

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 60#p877748

Ministry slams defective Tiger attack helicopter

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 60#p877952
Germany suspends EADS Tiger attack helicopter purchase

Jaeger · Post by **Jaeger** » 27 May 2010 18:04

krishna_krishna wrote:Dear Mr.Jaege :

Me only illeterate short midget from north east , to me capacity means stuff carryng ability although I meant weapons store however the beer ,whiskey whatever the pilot wish to take with them to mine illeterate mind it has bigger tummy(****)

The reason my post had the tone it did, and the reason I pointed out that Google is your friend is that your question itself indicates that either 1. Your question has a drone-type agenda OR 2. You have ignored the content on this thread, perhaps looked at the pictures, and decided to set up a pointless comparison. Why pointless? Well, how much do we really know about either machine's protection levels ("thick hide")? There is no exact open-source information on the LCH's armour composition or thickness. AFAIK, neither is there any info on the same for the WZ-10, chicom drone psyops apart. So on what basis are you asking for a comparison or making a statement like:

Looks like has lot of thick hide for protection

Can you provide facts/sources to back your point up in the matter of armour protection?

As for your "capacity" (payload is the word you're looking for) point:

krishna_krishna wrote:the point is from wikki for LCH and this link shows our :
-LCH has MTOW of 5700kg,where as the other guy has 8000kg.
-The powerplant has 1531hp in both engines where as our LCH 1200hp in both.
-The maximum speed for our LCH is 275+ km/hr where as the other one 300+ km/hr.

If you had been following the LCH discussion so far, perhaps you would have realised that when one helo has an MTOW that's 40% greater than the other, it's a good bet that its payload (fuel+weapons) is going to be higher.
Your second factoid also tells us that the LCH's power-to-weight ratio is significantly better than the WZ-10's, which underscores the design's emphasis on performance in response to the Indian armed forces' requirements for extreme hot & high and high altitude capabilities. In fact vivek_ahuja has mentioned at some point in the thread that perhaps the only 5 ton-class attack helo to exceed the LCH's PWR is the T-129 with the LHTEC engines.
Your 3rd factoid is questionable, because as yet LCH has not been tested to its full operational envelope (to the best of my knowledge it's been pushed to 220km/h so far) so wiki could well be pulling numbers out of its Musharraf. Or those are design targets. Either way, there's no ground for serious comparison.

krishna_krishna wrote:The thicker hide I meant was better armor protection considering the legens has it the panda skin has miracle powers so making its hide stuffing inside helicopter has better protection results of magical powers. Please forgive my ignorant , beer and whiskey stuffed stomach with goes out for unkown answer from gurus. So please leave at that and let any wise guru answer my question or have an serious discussion.

A serious discussion is somewhat distinct from a schl*ng-measuring contest. And that is why I took exception to your post. Where was the seriousness or any indication that you had read the rest of this thread before jumping in with a pointless comparison?
Don't try and pretend I made personal remarks about your dietary or beverage habits or anything about your belly. All those immature statements were wholly yours.
We're all here to learn, and we can do ourselves and the forum a service by spending time imbibing the incredible knowledge being shared here and THEN making a contribution, instead of whipping out a supposed Taepodong and then being shamed into admitting that it is, in fact, a No Dong.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 May 2010 18:28

chetak wrote:For those mujahids interested,

NDTV is likely to have a program on the LCH today night at 2230 hours.

Did not occur. I recorded some complete rubbish.