Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Yes, not all of 10% .thanks
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
So, are you saying that ADA returned the favor to HAL in case of IJT by not sharing inputs? Or, was it a case of HAL trying to go all alone and literally re-inventing the wheel when knowledge existed in-house with ADA+DRDO?Viv S wrote:How? The IJT was a HAL product while the Tejas was designed by ADA and apparently suffered from fair bit of step-motherly treatment by HAL.rohitvats wrote:They can't deliver an IJT which was supposed to leverage our learning from LCA and yet, want the IAF to give them orders for HTT-40.
Couple of points that I'd like to get some clarity on from learned people on this forum:
1. Did HAL Design Bureau spear-head the effort in designing the LCA?
2. Was there any cross-pollination from ADA to HAL in terms of trained and experienced manpower and knowledge? Or, was this a complete de-novo development by HAL?
3. Was the design vetted with ADA or was some international consultant used during the Project Definition Phase?
4. The HAL Test Pilots have been testing the aircraft from what I've read/seen. Did HAL utilize the services of NFTC which was constituted especially to cater to requirement of flight testing and had the inputs from IAF Test Pilots?
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
HAL did design and manufacture Kiran Mk1 and Mk2 so not sure why they would need ADA help on this.
HAL has claimed that working on the Tejas and gaining experience on it helped them to speed up design and prototype production (and presumably initial testing) of the IJT/Sitara.
HAL has claimed that working on the Tejas and gaining experience on it helped them to speed up design and prototype production (and presumably initial testing) of the IJT/Sitara.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Before the ADA's formation HAL's in-house design capabilities were, I wouldn't say rudimentary, but considered insufficient. After ADA's formation, in effect the MoD found itself with two design houses and predictably the situation manifested itself in a silent but intense rivalry. Point being, HAL wouldn't have approached ADA for any inputs in the first place. As far as its concerned, the IJT is its baby through and through, no ADA fingers in the pie needed or invited.rohitvats wrote:So, are you saying that ADA returned the favor to HAL in case of IJT by not sharing inputs? Or, was it a case of HAL trying to go all alone and literally re-inventing the wheel when knowledge existed in-house with ADA+DRDO?
Oldies could probably shed better light on most of that. Haven't seen Kartik around unfortunately.rohitvats wrote:Couple of points that I'd like to get some clarity on from learned people on this forum:
1. Did HAL Design Bureau spear-head the effort in designing the LCA?
2. Was there any cross-pollination from ADA to HAL in terms of trained and experienced manpower and knowledge? Or, was this a complete de-novo development by HAL?
3. Was the design vetted with ADA or was some international consultant used during the Project Definition Phase?
4. The HAL Test Pilots have been testing the aircraft from what I've read/seen. Did HAL utilize the services of NFTC which was constituted especially to cater to requirement of flight testing and had the inputs from IAF Test Pilots?
AFAIK the ADA spearheaded the design effort with Dassault assistance during the PD phase. Also, the IJT testing is done at NFTC. Interdependence is inevitable, HAL relies on various DRDO labs for allied development while the Tejas' actual manufacture (to print) is HAL's domain.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
India offers to buy more Apache helicopters, hopes to drive down costs
So total 22+39=61 apache ah64D will be ordered
India has offered to increase an order for U.S. Apache helicopters to drive down costs as the two sides race to close a $1.4 billion deal, officials said, the first big military contract since a new government took office in New Delhi.
The Apache gunships and a deal for Chinook helicopters, both built by Boeing, top the agenda for visiting U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s talks on Friday with India’s incoming administration led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
India and the United States have rapidly expanded military sales in recent years, despite discord in areas such as trade and intellectual property rights.
Washington is keen to further step up defence cooperation with India, which it sees as a key strategic partner in Asia in the face of an increasingly powerful and assertive China.
India has offered a follow-on order of 39 AH-64D Apache helicopters in addition to the 22 now being negotiated, a defence ministry official said. The two sides have been wrangling over the price of the gunships in a deal estimated to be worth $1.4 billion.
The initial batch of helicopters is meant to replace the Indian Air Force’s ageing fleet of Soviet-era aircraft and will be armed with Hellfire and Stinger missiles.
The Indian army has separately requested a fleet of at least 39 of these attack aircraft, some of which will be deployed as part of a new mountain division it is raising along the disputed border with China, an army official said.
“The point is we are looking at 60 to 70 pieces eventually, so the expectation is the vendor will factor that in, in the price negotiations,” said the defence ministry official, asking not to be named in line with ministry policy.
U.S. defence sales to India have grown from the low hundreds of millions of dollars in the decade to 2008 to more than $9 billion since that year.
According IHS Jane’s, a defence research firm, India was the top foreign buyer of U.S. arms last year.
U.S. officials say there is the potential for billions of dollars of new sales in the next few years and are hoping the Modi administration can overcome bureaucratic obstacles that have held up some deals.
The two sides are also in talks to finalise a contract for the Indian Air Force to buy 15 CH-47F Chinooks, a twin-rotor helicopter capable of lifting heavy loads, also valued at $1.4 billion.
CONVERGING INTERESTS
Hagel’s trip, which will also take him to Australia, is focused on converging U.S. and Indian interests in the Asia-Pacific, the Pentagon said.
It follows U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit last week and is part of the build-up to Modi’s talks with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington in September aimed at revitalising ties between the world’s two largest democracies.
Hagel will discuss ways to strengthen military cooperation with India including exercises, defence, trade, co-production and co-development, Pentagon press secretary Navy Rear Admiral John Kirby said.
India’s cabinet has just cleared a proposal to allow 49 percent foreign participation in the defence industry, up from a current cap of 26 percent, in a bid to boost local manufacturing and end its decades-long dependence on overseas acquisitions that made it the world’s biggest arms importer in recent years.
Some Western manufacturers have been lukewarm about the raising of the cap on defence investment, saying it did not go far enough for them to transfer technology to India.
But Lalit Mansingh, an influential former Indian ambassador to the United States who has been pushing for greater ties with Washington, said it was a good start.
“Companies that want 100 percent will wait till the sector is opened up fully, but I am pretty sure there are American companies ready to come in,” said Mansingh. “They have been eyeing the market for a while now.”
Source : Reuters
So total 22+39=61 apache ah64D will be ordered
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
India offers to buy more US helicopters, hopes to drive down costs
India has offered to increase an order for U.S. Apache helicopters to drive down costs as the two sides race to close a $1.4 billion deal, officials said, the first big military contract since a new government took office in New Delhi.
The Apache gunships and a deal for Chinook helicopters, both built by Boeing, top the agenda for visiting U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's talks on Friday with India's incoming administration led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
India has offered a follow-on order of 39 AH-64D Apache helicopters in addition to the 22 now being negotiated, a defence ministry official said. The two sides have been wrangling over the price of the gunships in a deal estimated to be worth $1.4 billion.
The initial batch of helicopters is meant to replace the Indian Air Force's ageing fleet of Soviet-era aircraft and will be armed with Hellfire and Stinger missiles.
The Indian army has separately requested a fleet of at least 39 of these attack aircraft, some of which will be deployed as part of a new mountain division it is raising along the disputed border with China, an army official said.
"The point is we are looking at 60 to 70 pieces eventually, so the expectation is the vendor will factor that in, in the price negotiations," said the defence ministry official, asking not to be named in line with ministry policy.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
^^^^^
Thanks for the link!!
Seems that these pups will carry the Stinger and Hellfire. Could that mean "Co-development + Co-production" too?
Thanks for the link!!
Seems that these pups will carry the Stinger and Hellfire. Could that mean "Co-development + Co-production" too?
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Pakistan's whole tank fleet is worth less than that after factoring in depreciation. The Rudra is already in production, the LCH just two or three years away and the Mi-25/35s still have some life left. Meanwhile, China still continues modernizing its military at a blistering pace.SanjayC wrote:India offers to buy more US helicopters, hopes to drive down costs
India has offered to increase an order for U.S. Apache helicopters to drive down costs as the two sides race to close a $1.4 billion deal, officials said, the first big military contract since a new government took office in New Delhi.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
We could become a contractor for the program but final assembly will still take place in the US. Could be fairly lucrative though.NRao wrote:Seems that these pups will carry the Stinger and Hellfire. Could that mean "Co-development + Co-production" too?
On a related note, Hellfires & Stingers for the AH-64s, Mistrals & LAHATs for the LCHs & Rudras. Somehow standardization or logistical efficiency seems to be an totally alien concept.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Dunno.
Mr. Hagel is in town to propose co-development *and* co-production - one reason being (per reports) to overcome the fear India has about sanctions. The thinking being that "production" (in India) would overcome any sanctions.
BTW, on the same lines - as I have been saying for a year+ now - there is an expert (somewhere) that claims that the services from the two nations are very, very close.
My feel is that, by Nov, a few shoes should drop. This increase in no of Apaches I think is just the start. Would love to see 6 more C-17s.
Mr. Hagel is in town to propose co-development *and* co-production - one reason being (per reports) to overcome the fear India has about sanctions. The thinking being that "production" (in India) would overcome any sanctions.
BTW, on the same lines - as I have been saying for a year+ now - there is an expert (somewhere) that claims that the services from the two nations are very, very close.
My feel is that, by Nov, a few shoes should drop. This increase in no of Apaches I think is just the start. Would love to see 6 more C-17s.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
From the link about the Apache:
As I thought, the Apaches are not primarily for anti-tank role although some may be used as such when the time comes. They are far more effective in mountain valleys where they are already needed on a daily basis. Hopefully a few will arrive this year itself and the first of these put to use asap in J&K LOC to monitor and counter the expected massive jehadi intrusions come Spring of 2015. Also hope the Longbow will be integrated with the Rudras right away.The Indian army has separately requested a fleet of at least 39 of these attack aircraft, some of which will be deployed as part of a new mountain division it is raising along the disputed border with China, an army official said.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 783160.cms
US eyes big-ticket arms deals during Hagel’s visit
Rajat Pandit,TNN | Aug 7, 2014,
US eyes big-ticket arms deals during Hagel’s visit
Rajat Pandit,TNN | Aug 7, 2014,
The Israelis are very shrewd negotiators.I put my money on Spike. India would rather prefer working with the Israelis,no conditions,than the Americans.The success/delay of the Indo-Israeli JV on the LR-SAM might prove to be a factor.Everyone now wants a BMos style JV with India,which is the jewel of JVs we've embarked upon.NEW DELHI: The Obama administration will push for the stalled mega deals for M-777 ultra-light howitzers and Javelin anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) when US defence secretary Chuck Hagel comes visiting from Thursday.
There will be talks on ways to further bolster the already expansive strategic partnership, ranging from sharing of intelligence and cooperation on counter-terrorism to joint combat exercises, but the cornerstone will remain the US offer to provide India with "ground-breaking" weapon technology on par with its closest allies.
Having bagged defence deals worth over $10 billion over the last decade, the US is obviously hungry for more. Of the different co-development and co-production offers, ranging from helicopters to UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles), Washington is hard-selling the one for next-generation of Javelin ATGMs the most, said sources.
But no defence deal will actually be inked during the visit of Hagel, who is slated to meet PM Narendra Modi, defence minister Arun Jaitley, external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, NSA Ajit Doval and chairman of the chiefs of staff committee, Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha on Friday.
Interestingly, Hagel is being accompanied by a top-level delegation which includes assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs Puneet Talwar and under secretary of defence acquisition, technology and logistics Frank Kendall. Pentagon's Defence Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI) with India, which is yet to gather steam, is led by Kendall.
While the $2.5 billion deals for 22 Apache attack and 15 Chinook heavy-lift helicopters are virtually finalised now, India is not too interested in buying the second-hand MRAP (mine-resistant ambush protected) vehicles the US had deployed in Afghanistan and will not be taking them home after its pull-back from the war-ravaged country later this year.
What the US is really keen on is the Javelin ATGM, which is facing stiff competition from the Israeli 'Spike' tank-killing missile. Under the over Rs 15,000 crore project to equip Indian Army's all 382 infantry battalions with such man-portable missiles, there will be an initial direct acquisition, followed by technology transfer to defence PSU Bharat Dynamics for large-scale indigenous manufacture.
Similarly, Washington is keen to resurrect the long-pending $885 million deal for 145 ultra-light M-777 howitzers, which has hit a dead-end due to high costs and "non-compliant" offsets package, as was first reported by TOI. The air-mobile howitzers were meant to equip the new XVII Mountain Strike Corps (90,000 troops) being raised by the Army to gain "quick reaction force capabilities" against China.
The US says it's working around foundational military pacts like CISMOA (communication interoperability and security memorandum agreement), which India is reluctant to ink, through the DTTI.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
What's the status of India's Man portable ATGM? How long we will import?
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
do we have a Man Portable ATGM project ???
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Indeed they do. A normal JV (like Javelin II or Barak 2) would oblige the other party to place an order as well.Philip wrote:Everyone now wants a BMos style JV with India,which is the jewel of JVs we've embarked upon.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
I don't get it. How will this benefit the other party? It seems like they only invest in developing something they are not using.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
The party that uses the equipment foots the bill.koti wrote:I don't get it. How will this benefit the other party? It seems like they only invest in developing something they are not using.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
[/quote]Philip wrote:Everyone now wants a BMos style JV with India,which is the jewel of JVs we've embarked upon.
Well what is this Bmos Jv any way , customized Oniks ( with input in INS and FCS ) and a production facility here , which even our partners can not induct because that will put them into some constitutional crisis or its another way of funding their own system ( yakhont ) which they are selling to other nations and we are still contemplating. If this is indeed one "idle JV" ( or agreement )then we had BDL-MBDA producing Milans long back.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
There are some Internet articles that Garrett TPE-331-12A has been selected as engine for HTT-40. Anybody has more info?
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
But is this confirmed?
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Looks like it. But it would be TPE331-12B.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
http://profprodyutdas.blogspot.in/2014/ ... 4602536514
prof prodyut's response to IJT issues...Indranil and other gurus whats your take on his views?
prof prodyut's response to IJT issues...Indranil and other gurus whats your take on his views?
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Hey Victor,Victor wrote:From the link about the Apache:As I thought, the Apaches are not primarily for anti-tank role although some may be used as such when the time comes. They are far more effective in mountain valleys where they are already needed on a daily basis. Hopefully a few will arrive this year itself and the first of these put to use asap in J&K LOC to monitor and counter the expected massive jehadi intrusions come Spring of 2015. Also hope the Longbow will be integrated with the Rudras right away.The Indian army has separately requested a fleet of at least 39 of these attack aircraft, some of which will be deployed as part of a new mountain division it is raising along the disputed border with China, an army official said.
http://content.time.com/time/nation/art ... 86,00.html
The Apache's combat record at altitude raises considerable doubt that is the right choice.
http://www.military.com/video/military- ... 984816001/The 14 Americans who died in Afghanistan on Monday were a reminder that U.S. troops who die in Afghanistan are twice as likely to be killed in helicopter crashes as are their counterparts in Iraq. And the reasons for that discrepancy are not to be found in the country's skies, but on the ground — the Taliban's growing footprint has forced the U.S. to be far more reliant on moving troops and supplies by air. And the rugged terrain often makes helicopters the only option, even as the altitudes involved greatly increase the risks.
Why are BRF posters so obsessed with buying useless US maal, when the desi maal is actually superior on all points. Especially at high altitude performance, the Dhruv and Rudra completely outperform the Apache especially on safety. And you can't even consider such an obese overweight helicopter like the Apache in the high altitudes.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
The Apache was evaluated by the IAF at altitude and at the desert. They know a tiny bit about what they are seeking from it and whether it matches their expectations or not.
What was tested was most likely the standard D, with the new E upping the thrust and restoring the power of the jet to the original AH-64 spec (first version) which was the best as far as maneuverability and performance was concerned.he U.S. Army rotorcraft, which is said to have outperformed the rival Russian Mi-28N Night Hunter in tests, was strongly recommended by the IAF earlier this year as its choice following trials in 2010.
Defense ministry sources reveal that differences in performance between the two helicopters was so great that the IAF’s case was difficult to question. The final contract, a direct commercial sale, could be worth $1.5 billion.
Another IAF source suggests that the Apache also had superior armor protection and performed well in both desert and high-altitude conditions.
The new helicopters will replace the IAF’s aging Mi-35s. The AH-64D and Mi-28 were put through field evaluation trials in mid-2010 at the Jaisalmer desert base in western India and Leh, the world’s highest operational air station, in the Himalayas. This was followed by weapons firing trials, targeting and maintenance trials in the contenders’ home
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Hmmmmmmmmmmm.........................
Not complaining, but IIRC there were two RFP/tenders issued. The first one was cancelled (for some reason, ..... of course), the second one pretty much said "we want the Apache".
?????
Not complaining, but IIRC there were two RFP/tenders issued. The first one was cancelled (for some reason, ..... of course), the second one pretty much said "we want the Apache".
?????
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
the original apache did not have the huge canoe (cheek) fairings of the later models where a lot of additional avionics bays are housed, maybe even extra fuel tanks toward the back end.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
As systems evolve and as the requirements and survivability concerns demand capability addition the operator and the designers constantly look at the right balance between mission_effectivness and weight creep that has a detrimental impact on the overall performance of the aircraft. From the looks of it, the tradeoff was in favor of upping the mission effectiveness of the strike helo and post the AH-64D they decided that new capability would be coupled with performance enhancements that would restore the AH-64E's performance to the original AH-64 specs and regain a lot of survivability through maneuverability and performance. This was validated when the AH--64E was tested at the ranges against simulated air defenses tasked with shooting it down. The AH-64 due to the performance bump was able to survive in situations where the AH-64D would have been shot down. I have provided detailed explanation on the changes and how the performance was regained a month or so ago on this very thread.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
The Mi-28 is perhaps the better helicopter where manouverability is concerned, certainly against the AH64D and probably also against the E. Almost certainly, what clinched the issue in favor of Apache is its aquisition, targeting, networking and weapons capability combined with its maintenance ease and cost.
I am continually amazed by Apache gun camera footage that shows jehadi cartoons going about their business totally unaware that they are in an Apache's gunsights right upto the second they are obliterated by a shower of high explosive rounds. It doesn't matter if its night or day, in the open or under thick forest cover. Obviously, the gunship is far enough away that it can't be heard or seen, probably a mile or more. To be able to accurately deliver cannon shells at that distance, compensating for wind and platform movement is truly impressive.
I am continually amazed by Apache gun camera footage that shows jehadi cartoons going about their business totally unaware that they are in an Apache's gunsights right upto the second they are obliterated by a shower of high explosive rounds. It doesn't matter if its night or day, in the open or under thick forest cover. Obviously, the gunship is far enough away that it can't be heard or seen, probably a mile or more. To be able to accurately deliver cannon shells at that distance, compensating for wind and platform movement is truly impressive.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
I am not a guru my friendrrao wrote:http://profprodyutdas.blogspot.in/2014/ ... 4602536514
prof prodyut's response to IJT issues...Indranil and other gurus whats your take on his views?

What Prof. Das is suggesting is aerodynamics taught in 2nd to 3rd year of bachelors in aero. His analysis and solutions (and also that of the first poster) are fundamental and make obvious sense. However, he is also going off on public data (though he must be visiting many pan shops in HAL's ARDC).
Having said that, I agree with him. IJT design team is shy of making any drastic changes, so they are trying small changes hoping that collectively it will solve the problems. I say, they should be given time. Any foreign procurement today will not arrive before 3 years (at the very minimum). And I think the infrastructure is present to produce IJTs quickly at HAL Kampur. The HAL management (I am not a big fan of the HAL chairman. I would have liked somebody like CNR Rao who speaks for his scientists) should insulate the designers from IAF's pressures and just let them play. In parallel, get the original IJT team back as consultants and create a modified IJT with redesigned air intake and probably a cruciform tail. Build a prototype of that and fly it. And don't be worried of losing prototypes, attach as many prototypes with spin chutes as required.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Current HAL chairman is a hard nosed business guy - IMHO better than the last 3 dudes who were in power under whom HALs relations with IAF plunged, LCA went nowhere & R&D remained limited. The IJT is more of the mistakes of the past come home to roost. The Current chairman is attempting to support his designers w/the HTT-40 but IMHO with Pilatus a given, it should be dropped and priorities should be LCA & FGFA. Complete the IJT if need be, but its nowhere near as important as the other two programs. (IMHO).
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
And vice versa--insulate the country's urgent requirements from the results of said "play". This may have been the fundamental error in our planning (such as there is) which has resulted in a lose-lose situation. What needs to be created is a playfield, a sandbox, where our people can take their time to develop an aircraft without any pressure. Today of course, that sandbox should include all the resources available in the country including academic, public and private. No question we need this capability asap and equally no question we have the resources. It's just that the current setup won't let that happen.indranilroy wrote:..insulate the designers from IAF's pressures and just let them play...
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
The judgement of the IAF is exactly in question.brar_w wrote:The Apache was evaluated by the IAF at altitude and at the desert. They know a tiny bit about what they are seeking from it and whether it matches their expectations or not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAfIDeDB-mY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_av ... fghanistan
What is very clear that they did not assess the safety record of the helicopter at high altitudes. Do you have an excerpt addressing that issue? Nor have either of the pro US import mafia on this thread come up with any reply to the safety issue. We can take it they have conceded the abysmal safety record of this 1970s era chopper.
It's also very clear why the Apache struggles at altitudes. It is a very heavy chopper.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_AH- ... 64A.2FD.29
AH-64 Rudra
Empty weight: 5,165 kg 2,502 kg
Loaded weight: 8,000 kg 2,600 kg
Power/mass: 310 329.73 W/kg
Service ceiling: 6,400 m minimum loaded 6,096 m
Price $US35.50 million 71 Crore(US 9.9 million)
That power/mass ratio is decisive. The Rudra has more power than it needs to stay aloft, while the Apache simply doesn't.
It can carry more useful load higher. The Apache simply can't cut it in the mountains. And there is no need for such an expensive chopper for the deserts. Minimum loaded means that it can't carry any weight at all that high.
We can have 3Rudra's for every Apache. There is no conceivable mission that the Rudra could not outperform the Apache at, but when you consider the fact that we can have 3 of them for the same price. The IAF's analysis is very clearly jury rigged to justify an expensive, unneeded import.
In conclusion, Rudras are indigenous. They are sanctions proof, carry Helina and integrate with other indian weapons. The Apache is foreign, expensive and with questionable safety record/sanction prone. Too many risks.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
I am continually amazed by Apache
gun camera footage that shows
jehadi cartoons going about their
business totally unaware that they
are in an Apache's gunsights right
upto the second they are obliterated
by a shower of high explosive rounds.

Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
HTT-40 can be fall back for failure of HJT-36 and can be used as an IJT. But it seems that even HTT-40 first flight is delayed to 2016. I agree with Indra that HAL is hesitating in major redesign of HJT-36 and trying patch work fixes.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
What aspect of the technical evaluation of the IAF are you in possession off and which points within it do you take a different position on? Do you have a copy of the exact requirements the IAF and the Indian army have from the AH-64 or similar helicopters?The judgement of the IAF is exactly in question.
Nor have either of the pro US import mafia on this thread come up with any reply to the safety issue. We can take it they have conceded the abysmal safety record of this 1970s era chopper.
How is this clear? What is the total number of sorties flown for the AH-64 What is the average duration of each sortie? What is the average duration of a high altitude sortie? What is the average flight hour each pilot is subjected to in combat situation per sortie flown at high altitude? Around 2150 AH64's have been built and no one will look at the safety record of the aircraft without putting the total number into prospective, taking into account the different versions and their relation with the E version, total number of combined sorties flown between all the operator nations, total number of combat sorties flown by multiple nations. How many have been shot down by MANPADS or lower threat systems. The safety of the pilot, the survivability and armor protection provided. This is a heavy attic helicopter and compares to that. At higher altitude it may operate differently. CAS is different at high altitude when compared to in the plains, or in the jungle etc.
I have posted a link to a detailed book on the AH-64 operations over afghanistan. Read it - its quite fascinating.
The Ah-64E is the variant the IAF and the IA are concerned since that is the current production standard. The performance of the AH-64D is less relevent since the AH-64E not only restores the performance of the AH-64A but exceeds it in many aspects (I am talking about helicopter performance and not the weapons system performance). If the Delta model squared up against the competition and was judged the winner in the trials conducted at Leh and Jaisalmer than the E version which the IAF and IA will get will be even more capable especially at the highly demanding missions (range, payload, altitude). If the AH-64D grossly failed the Trials (which cannot be concluded based on any sort of evidence emerging from any source) then the IAF or IA can re-evaluate the E model either at the high altitude mountainous environment training center at Idaho, or ask it to come back to Leh - or better send a team to afghanistan to evaluate it in real combat conditions.
This is a valid argument. Any decision to go in for a foreign helicopter, whether russian or american has to be made after weighing in an indigenous option even if that particular helo is not optimum for the sort of usage the service wants to put the particular hardware. A compromise here and another there will go a long way in reducing import culture and restricting it to areas where it is absolutely necessary.We can have 3Rudra's for every Apache
Last edited by brar_w on 11 Aug 2014 01:14, edited 3 times in total.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
I have demonstrated that the Apache can't cut it in the mountains. So I take issue with both parts of the IAF evaluation that the choppers perform well in the plains and the mountains. There is no case to be made for the Apache, whether it is in terms of safety, cost, reliability, or ToT requirements. The PA army simply isn't some unstoppable juggernaut. Even without either the JSF, Javelin or Apache we can easily stop them exactly as we stopped them in the past(Longewala etc). The "need" for expensive imported anti tank weaponry simply doesn't exist.brar_w wrote:What aspect of the technical evaluation of the IAF are you in possession off and which points within it do you take a different position on? Do you have a copy of the exact requirements the IAF and the Indian army have from the AH-64 or similar helicopters?The judgement of the IAF is exactly in question.
The cited IAF claim is that the Apache performs well in the plains. Well, that too is open to question.
http://madmax.lmtonline.com/textarchives/032304/s5.htm
WASHINGTON - The only retreat by U.S. forces in their stunningly successful invasion of Iraq last year has sparked a re-examination of the battlefield role of Army attack helicopters in the face of fierce criticism that the aircraft is ill-equipped for future wars.
The retreat near Karbala, Iraq, last March 24 marked the abrupt end of a strike deep behind enemy lines by 30 AH-64D Apache Longbow helicopters, based at Fort Hood, Texas, and Illesheim, Germany.
The Boeing Co.-manufactured helicopters, the most advanced in the U.S. inventory, bristled with high-tech missiles and enemy detection devices but were turned back by a barrage of low-tech ground fire.
Nor have either of the pro US import mafia on this thread come up with any reply to the safety issue. We can take it they have conceded the abysmal safety record of this 1970s era chopper.
brar_w wrote: How is this clear? What is the total number of sorties flown for the AH-64 What is the average duration of each sortie? What is the average duration of a high altitude sortie? What is the average flight hour each pilot is subjected to in combat situation per sortie flown at high altitude? Around 2150 AH64's have been built and no one will look at the safety record of the aircraft without putting the total number into prospective, taking into account the different versions and their relation with the E version, total number of combined sorties flown between all the operator nations, total number of combat sorties flown by multiple nations. How many have been shot down by MANPADS or lower threat systems. The safety of the pilot, the survivability and armor protection provided. This is a heavy attic helicopter and compares to that. At higher altitude it may operate differently. CAS is different at high altitude when compared to in the plains, or in the jungle etc.
I have posted a link to a detailed book on the AH-64 operations over afghanistan. Read it - its quite fascinating.
The Ah-64E is the variant the IAF and the IA are concerned since that is the current production standard. The performance of the AH-64D is less relevent since the AH-64E not only restores the performance of the AH-64A but exceeds it in many aspects (I am talking about helicopter performance and not the weapons system performance). If the Delta model squared up against the competition and was judged the winner in the trials conducted at Leh and Jaisalmer than the E version which the IAF and IA will get will be even more capable especially at the highly demanding missions (range, payload, altitude). If the AH-64D grossly failed the Trials (which cannot be concluded based on any sort of evidence emerging from any source) then the IAF or IA can re-evaluate the E model either at the high altitude mountainous environment training center at Idaho, or ask it to come back to Leh - or better send a team to afghanistan to evaluate it in real combat conditions.
I don't see the need to evaluate the E model in any context. The D model is the issue here. That's what was evaluated and that is the standard by which it will be judged. You haven't cited any stats in favour of the Apache safety record. I've shown my stats and the crashes so that people can judge the safety record for themselves.
We can have 3Rudra's for every Apache
There is substantially restricted room for foreign helicopters. 80-90% of helicopter needs can be met domestically with only niche areas left for foreign suppliers, where it's not cost effective. HAL has been amazingly successful with helicopters. I wish I knew why!brar_w wrote: This is a valid argument. Any decision to go in for a foreign helicopter, whether russian or american has to be made after weighing in an indigenous option even if that particular helo is not optimum for the sort of usage the service wants to put the particular hardware. A compromise here and another there will go a long way in reducing import culture and restricting it to areas where it is absolutely necessary.
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Tactical miscalculations are something that going to make even the best kit vulnerable. How many AH-64's have been lost to MANPADS vs how many missions flown over its service life?The cited IAF claim is that the Apache performs well in the plains. Well, that too is open to question
Based on what exactly? A scientific assessment that takes into account things which any half reasonable assessment would? In a similar fashion you technically evaluated the GE F404/414?I have demonstrated that the Apache can't cut it in the mountains
Again, I pose this question. How many hours has the AH-64 fleet, operated by various nations flown? How many years has it been in production. How many combat sorties for how many hours has it flown over the 3 or 4 wars it has seen. Without answers to such basic questions one cannot even begin to answer questions on safety or reliability. Some of the answers pertaining to the the afghanistan conflict have been provided on this thread. The British operational reliability (Afghanistan) data is also on the net and you can search for it and compare it to the peacetime availability of most helicopters. Britain is case that has almost 40% of all Apache fleet hours spent in REAL combat around 5500-6000 km from home base in a harsh forward deployed setup.There is no case to be made for the Apache, whether it is in terms of safety, cost, reliability, or ToT requirements.
Yeah why bother. Its not like the IAF and IA are going to get the E model or anything...Oh wait..I don't see the need to evaluate the E model in any context.
And as per the IAF evaluations the D model was tested in Leh and Jaisalmer and was considered technically superior to its competitor. If it is such a dog, how did it pass the evaluation? Its also a fact that the E model which is now the production standard is much better performing bird and intact betters the performance (Flying) of the Alpha model which was the original Apache - and the best performing model before the arrival of the E. This is before one gets into the weapons system capably of the D or the E which i have provided plenty of information on in this forum.The D model is the issue here
Your links are laughable at best. Who will look at accidents and incidents without first going into how much the damn thing has flown in the first place? What sort of missions it was flown on and what sort of limitations due to expeditionary warfare it operated in? Do you even know how combat records, safety records are looked? An F-16 will always have more crashes, accidents and incidents compared to an M2K simply on account of having many times a larger fleet, having flown many hours of operational combat sorties and participated in many conflicts halfway across the world in an expeditionary fashion. Similarly, any evaluation conducted on the safety record has to count the total worldwide fleet size, total number of combat sorties flown, total number of combined sorties flown (peacetime and wartime), total number of mission sorties flown (Much more stressful), total number of aircraft downed by MANPADS and by small arms fire and a host of other technical things, total number of maintenance depots operating in wartime fashion in an expeditionary environment etc. You began with comparing the Rudra's safety record with the AH-64. Do you realize how ridiculous this comparison is? How many Rudras have been built? How many combat hours have they flown and how many wars have they participated in halfway across the world where everything from pilot housing to maintince depots have to be built up in an expeditionary fashion? The Ah-64 has been technically evaluated by a host of army's and air wings..The D has been evaluated by the IAF, if you not have the evaluation or even the basic requirements on what the IAF sought from a heavy attack helicopter then don't start to find holes in an imaginary report based on ridiculous claims on safety when you have no hard numbers to put sorties into proper context, something that even a cursory look into safety firmly warrants. Without these basic questions you cannot even begin to calculate things like operational availability and mission effectiveness let alone the all important aspect of safety.You haven't cited any stats in favour of the Apache safety record.
No person with even a basic degree of common sense will look at crashes and accidents without first knowing the total fleet size, total combat sorties flown, where they were flown, when they were flown (peacetime vs wartime), how they were flown, under what conditions were they flown etc etc.I've shown my stats and the crashes so that people can judge the safety record for themselves
An overall combat assessment of the various US units of the AH-64 apache during the latest Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts has been provided for forum members to read and assess. I believe that a fair assessment of UK's AH-64 operations over Afghanistan is also available on the internet. Those interested in reading up on the helo's performance in that conflict can do so. Placing a record on the helicopter losses without stating the basic underlying facts without which those stats are absolutely useless is no way to drive home a point let alone run a comparison. The IAF would have asked for a host of documents on the various performance parameters..There is no reason to believe based on what is known that they didn't. On top of that they asked each competitor to come to India and fly in operationally challenging environments that took care of both extreme set of conditions the IAF and IA are going to operate in. They did all this and it was reported by multiple sources. You on the other hand are trying to find holes in an assessment you have no details about, and trying to come up with stats without any basic background of even the most basic things that any military evaluating these sort of things will look at.
Lets look at some of the recent acquisitions -1970s era chopper.
AH-64 First flight - 1975
Mig-29 First Flight - 1977
Su-27 First flight - 1977
C-130 First flight - 1950's
C-5 First Flight - 1960's
Boeing 737 - 60's.
The AH-64E is as different from the original 1970's era apache than the Su-30 MKI or the Mig-35 is from their original au-27 or Mig-29 designs. Or the C-130J is from the first generation C-130. India is getting the Block 3 or E version of the apache that has only been recently inducted and differs greatly from the Delta model in almost all valuable aspects of combat effectiveness. Its in service and at the front lines at the moment and all the enhancements done on the apache and planned for the notional F variant are going to be upgrade compatible with the D and E fleet -
Last edited by brar_w on 11 Aug 2014 01:39, edited 2 times in total.
-
- BRFite
- Posts: 220
- Joined: 08 Jun 2009 23:12
- Location: Earth
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
What does Battle of Longewala has to do with this?Rien wrote: Even without either the JSF, Javelin or Apache we can easily stop them exactly as we stopped them in the past(Longewala etc).
For the story do not have any helicopters in it, you are a strong anti-US aren't you? or you are a strong hidden anti-India campaigner(shakuni type)?
Re: Indian Military Aviation- September 29 2013
Long-e-wala ---> Long-e-bow?govardhan wrote:What does Battle of Longewala has to do with this?Rien wrote: Even without either the JSF, Javelin or Apache we can easily stop them exactly as we stopped them in the past(Longewala etc).
There seems to be some confusion about whether we are getting the AH-64D or E versions. Reports mention the D mostly but some also mention the E. Hopefully the Army at least insists on the E. Whether we get it or not is another matter.
Zee News on You-e-tube: Bharat ke dushman kanpne lage hain...