Indian Military Helicopters

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 21 Dec 2015 12:29

^^ Same reason we are purchasing
a. only 36 Rafales and rest LCA
b. only 22 Apache and rest LCH

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Dec 2015 12:40

Who is denigrating indigenous efforts? Pl read the numerous statements by retd chiefs,analysts,CAG,etc.,on the huge gaps in our def. preparedness and urgent needs. We cannot indigenise by magic! Right now,it is barely 30-40% of our stuff that is desi. Even the LCA will fly with a US engine,Israeli radar,so where is the Desire to please Russia? Most def, purchases today are for buying US def eqpt! If we are getting only 5 S-400 systems,then that is what the experts feel is enough for now. India has to raise its def. expenditure to 3% to fill gaps and meet future reqs.,but when you have disasters each year like the Asian Tsunami,UKhand,Nepal earthquake,Chennai floods,whatever,apart from boosting the Indian economy with large govt. spending on projects.

The helo requirement is staggering,thanks to the Cong/UPA dereliction of duty.200-400LUHs,120+ ASW helos plus 50+ LUHs for the IN,another 50 or so MI-17Vs,More Chinooks,100+ LCHs,26 Apoaches,18 Sikorsky naval helos,extra Dhruvs all round,etc. With civil needs too,around 1000 helos will be required.Therefore ,fast tracking the indigenous helo engine development for the major types/numbers being acquired will help hugely.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 21 Dec 2015 14:14

-deleted-

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 21 Dec 2015 14:15

deejay wrote:....

This was the third time that this tender was scrapped. The existing fleet of Army Aviation Corps comprises Chetak, Cheetah and Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH). Chetak and Cheetah helicopters were originally manufactured by Aerospatiale, France, and were inducted into service in India in 1969 and 1971, respectively. The helicopters were later indigenously manufactured and delivered by HAL under licensed production since 1977.

The CAG observed that while the desired level of serviceability of assets in Army Aviation Corps was 80%, the overall level of serviceability in respect of R&O (Cheetah/Chetak) Helicopters was only 65% on an average.

“The position of serviceability in respect of Advanced Light Helicopter was more critical at an average of 44% only.”

“The poor serviceability of ALH was despite the fact that the fleet, which was inducted only from 2002 onwards, was relatively new and was designed, developed and manufactured indigenously by HAL,” the CAG said.

Quoting part of my own post with CAG report. With reference to the highlighted part of 44% serviceability of ALH, what could be the reason?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 21 Dec 2015 16:14

There was an article I read linked off BRF recently with reference to serviceability of ALH in which HAL blamed iAF in the following manner.

HAL said that there are certain spare parts that are too small in number and too expensive to be manufactured in house in such small numbers and are simply imported. But they are critical parts and the best way is to keep extra items in stock, because ordering them from abroad when necessary creates delays and downtime. Apparently IAF refused to go with HALs advice to order extra spares of those items and that reflects in serviceability. I think the meaning of this becomes more clear when we look at what the Americans do - they sign a servicing contract along with sales that ensures that critical items are always available at short notice and can be used while fresh stocks are ordered from manufacturers. This raises cost but the there are presumably cost savings in the long term withbetter serviceability

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Dec 2015 16:26

shiv wrote:There was an article I read linked off BRF recently with reference to serviceability of ALH in which HAL blamed iAF in the following manner.

HAL said that there are certain spare parts that are too small in number and too expensive to be manufactured in house in such small numbers and are simply imported. But they are critical parts and the best way is to keep extra items in stock, because ordering them from abroad when necessary creates delays and downtime. Apparently IAF refused to go with HALs advice to order extra spares of those items and that reflects in serviceability. I think the meaning of this becomes more clear when we look at what the Americans do - they sign a servicing contract along with sales that ensures that critical items are always available at short notice and can be used while fresh stocks are ordered from manufacturers. This raises cost but the there are presumably cost savings in the long term withbetter serviceability

HAL has been offering a US-style performance based logistics plan to the IAF, which the IAF in turn has firmly rejected, since it would threaten the sprawling business of its base repair depots.

That said, consistent spares supply is only one part of the equation. None of this explains why the Dhruv's parts have been wearing out so fast.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Dec 2015 16:26

Cross-posting from the LCA thread -

From the CAG Report on the Army Aviation Corps

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 21 Dec 2015 17:20

Viv S wrote:
shiv wrote:There was an article I read linked off BRF recently with reference to serviceability of ALH in which HAL blamed iAF in the following manner.

HAL said that there are certain spare parts that are too small in number and too expensive to be manufactured in house in such small numbers and are simply imported. But they are critical parts and the best way is to keep extra items in stock, because ordering them from abroad when necessary creates delays and downtime. Apparently IAF refused to go with HALs advice to order extra spares of those items and that reflects in serviceability. I think the meaning of this becomes more clear when we look at what the Americans do - they sign a servicing contract along with sales that ensures that critical items are always available at short notice and can be used while fresh stocks are ordered from manufacturers. This raises cost but the there are presumably cost savings in the long term withbetter serviceability
HAL has been offering a US-style performance based logistics plan to the IAF, which the IAF in turn has firmly rejected, since it would threaten the sprawling business of its base repair depots.

That said, consistent spares supply is only one part of the equation. None of this explains why the Dhruv's parts have been wearing out so fast.

What business do the BRD do? Which BRD is responsible for ALH? Is there a BRD for ALH?

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 21 Dec 2015 17:33

deejay wrote:What business do the BRD do? Which BRD is responsible for ALH? Is there a BRD for ALH?

That wasn't specific to the ALH. I was quoting an article that's been posted earlier, in the context of the service contracts offered by the Americans (see Shiv's post).

Separately, HAL has offered the IAF "Performance Based Logistics" (PBL) for the Su-30MKI fleet - a solution common in advanced western air forces. PBL would bind HAL to maintain the Su-30MKI, providing the IAF a specified serviceability rate - calculated in flight hours, or as a percentage of the total aircraft fleet - in exchange for an annual service charge. Besides saving maintenance costs for the IAF, PBL has been found to encourage quality manufacture, since manufacturers know they will be responsible for keeping the aircraft serviceable through its operational life. MoD officials say IAF dislikes PBL model, because outsourcing maintenance to HAL threatens a large maintenance empire built around "base repair depots", manned by IAF personnel. - Link

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 21 Dec 2015 17:42

shiv wrote:There was an article I read linked off BRF recently with reference to serviceability of ALH in which HAL blamed iAF in the following manner.

HAL said that there are certain spare parts that are too small in number and too expensive to be manufactured in house in such small numbers and are simply imported. But they are critical parts and the best way is to keep extra items in stock, because ordering them from abroad when necessary creates delays and downtime. Apparently IAF refused to go with HALs advice to order extra spares of those items and that reflects in serviceability. I think the meaning of this becomes more clear when we look at what the Americans do - they sign a servicing contract along with sales that ensures that critical items are always available at short notice and can be used while fresh stocks are ordered from manufacturers. This raises cost but the there are presumably cost savings in the long term withbetter serviceability

Shiv Sir, this CAG report is about Army Aviation ALH. They operate far more ALH's than IAF. There spare orders are bigger and it seems to me far more critical. CAG report does not give the reason HAL gave to IAF.

Viv S had quoted the actual report and just look at what the reasons have been given for why "permanent failure of components affected the availability of helicopters and entailed financial loss," (I am trying to quote as accurately as possible since it is a PDF/image which I can't part quote)
i) poor workmanship
ii) obsolescence of spares of Cheetah/Chetak and closure of manufacturing lines of critical spares abroad due to over exploitation of spares
iii)) non materialisation of Repair Maintenance Supply Prders
iv) poor QC by HAL and QA by DGAQA.

"MGO further stated that there was an urgent need to improve the QC by HAL and added the recent Cheetah accidents were due to premature failure of engine."

I think, while we go gung ho about calling names to services for not supporting the Made in India military ware (and rightly so), are the defence PSU's, the creators of "Made in India" making serious efforts in supporting their products.

These Cheetahs/ Chetaks or ALH's fly in for emergency rescue, Chennai, Uttarakhand or Nepal. Their wartime or operational use probably will not resonate here as well hence just look at search and rescue and imagine the cost of failure to the affected parties beyond INR values. Poor QC is criminal negligence (IMO) at whichever end it happens.

ALH, equipment failure rate is even more alarming. Except instruments, which is zero and a great achievement all else is not good at all.

ALH now has been part of Army Aviation since 2002, which means both user and manufacturer have had time to develop the ALH eco system.

If we as a nation are serious about Made In India defence equipments these flaws in our system must go. Blaming the Ecuador air force for every thing that went wrong will not solve our problems. An honest inward assessment will help us overcome these challenges.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 21 Dec 2015 23:40

If Russians helicopters face issues in India and American ones will not is a presumption here then I am not sure if laws of physics will change for American ones. There won't be any jugaad at all, going by complexity for American ones. I am not sure how that will work, for IAF considering that IAF could field huge number of fighter jets on very first day in the past.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 22 Dec 2015 00:13

The serviceability and availability of aircraft for ops becomes crucial as the aircraft get more and more complex.

Logistics and the sheer effort required to keep a fleet in the air or at sea is quite a science, and a whole industry can be built just around MRO activities.

We are seeing the same issues in MiG-29K, Su-30MKI, ALH, A-50EI, IL-76 ... spread across types and age. The only aircraft where such issues have never been reported is Mirage-2000.

Two questions come to mind:

Layperson view is that newer aircraft (or ships) should have higher availability .... but is that the case?

Secondly, complexity of the machine has to be considered. How much man effort, consumables and parts are required to keep a fleet of 10 Cheetak (single engine, simple or no avionics) in the air for 100 hours each vs 10 ALH (two engines, glass cockpit, wiz bang)?

I can appreciate why Navy operates ISVs, FICs and OPVs. Imagine getting a Kolkata on every task.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 22 Dec 2015 01:13

Why should navy have to operate ISV, FIC's and OPV's (ok maybe OPV's is fine)? These can be given to CG and tasked with the same job?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Dec 2015 12:06

There has been a QC problem with HAL for decades.MIG-21 engines,etc.,etc.Why? HAL has no competition,it has an unhealthy monopoly over aircraft and helo manufacture in India. To improve component quality,while still maintaining its premier status,it should farm out a large list of components to pvt. industry ,where QC could be better monitored and improve upon its products. This would also mean a steady supply of spares and support when the product is operational with the services. Sinc eit is already overloaded with orders,the KA-226 LUH manufacture might very well go to a pvt. entity ,let's see after the PM's Moscow visit.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 22 Dec 2015 13:04

Bheeshma wrote:Why should navy have to operate ISV, FIC's and OPV's (ok maybe OPV's is fine)? These can be given to CG and tasked with the same job?

Thats a separate debate. My point was less complicated ships will have higher availability due to lesser maintenance, training and preparation overhead.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Dec 2015 17:11

Quite right.That's been the design policy of the Soviets/Russians all along. Large numbers,or relatively easy to operate and tough platforms.Components to have less lifespan than those of the West,they learnt this from WW2.Remove and replace easier than remove and epair on the battlefield.However,all mil forces worldwide are perhaps moving towardsa a mixed bag of assets.Those "bomb trucks" that US admirals speak of,along with stealth fighters,etc. Though this is the helo td,the IN needs large numbers of inexpensive smaller warships,corvettes in particular, that can maximise the area to be patrolled.

Our helos too need to be easy to operate,maintain and are tough enough to endure the hardships of operating in the various climes in the subcontinent.

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 22 Dec 2015 17:22

Philip wrote:they learnt this from WW2.Remove and replace easier than remove and epair on the battlefield.

Hmm, must be why tincan engine is so much easier to repair than the German power pack on the Arjun, which can be removed as a whole and replaced in a short time, without bothering to repair.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Dec 2015 17:26

True,the Germans lost the war remember and learnt the hard lesson from the Russians!

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 22 Dec 2015 17:34

Philip wrote:True,the Germans lost the war remember and learnt the hard lesson from the Russians!

Oh, they learned their lessons alright. Their Swiss watch-esque state-of-the art engines during WW2 were a pain on the battlefield so the made them robust and more easily replaced.

If they indeed had learned it from the Russians, why is the propulsion pack on the tincan still a piece of crap that takes forever to repair or replace?

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 22 Dec 2015 18:29

recently i met a electrician for T 90 on a trip from jaisalmer to delhi...told me a lot abt servicibility of the tank... said its not too hard to maintain... the technicians are GPS equipped to find a disabled tank in the battlefield.. also trained on map / compass to find locations of tanks to be repaired in the field...said many times jugadd is done like Mseal etc ..but they always ask for spares. sometimes they have to source locally the spares...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Dec 2015 19:20

This is the Indian Military Helicopters thread people

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 23 Dec 2015 03:40

Enough with the non-helicopter discussions people.

And if possible put some new photos of the LUH too

It's been a while.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 23 Dec 2015 07:54

Okay LUH is on the tarmac at HAL airport. It is quite far for a good look and for want of a good camera no pics. Today's air display will be between 10 to 11: 30 hrs.

The display includes, LCH, Rudra, Dhruv, Tejas, Hawk etc. Have not seen the IJT fly for last 02/03 days.

The helicopter display is beautiful.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 24 Dec 2015 09:53

Did it fly?

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 26 Dec 2015 05:49

Manu Pubby reports:

HAL chosen over Reliance to manufacture KA-226

NEW DELHI: India and Russia took forward a project to jointly manufacture military choppers under the 'Make in India' initiative even as other plans, including one to construct frigates, took a backseat during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to Moscow.

Among the 16 agreements inked during the visit, the only one on defence cooperation - a significant facet of the bilateral relation - referred to plans to manufacture 200 of the KA 226 light choppers for the Indian armed forces. State owned HAL is believed to have pipped a proposal by the Anil Ambani owned Reliance Defence as the main partner for the contract that is expected to cost over $ 1 billion.

Contrary to projections, no deal was signed between the two countries for the production of advanced Krivak class frigates in India. Also, the joint agreements did not include a formal deal for the S 400 air defence systems, even though talks on its procurement progressed during the visit.

On the defence front, the highlight was an agreement to manufacture Kamov choppers in India that are needed by the army and air force to operate in border areas. "The agreement on manufacture of Kamov 226 helicopter in India is the first project for a major defence platform under the Make In India mission," MEA spokesperson Vikas Swarup quoted PM Modi as saying.

India and Russia have been negotiating for months for the deal to manufacture Ka 226 choppers. Sources told ET that HAL will be a primary partner for the choppers that are desperately needed by Indian Army to operate in mountainous regions. Commercial aspects of the deal are to be worked out, with sources telling ET that Reliance Defence had been edged out of the contract.

srai · Post by **srai** » 26 Dec 2015 09:34

^^^

Reliance and other big private Indian companies will still participate in a big way because most of the Tier-1 supplies/components will be handed out to them. That effort is already underway with the LCA Mk.1 production. HAL would be the vertical and final integrator since at this point in time they have the facilities and technical know-hows required. In time through Tier-1 capabilities being acquired by these private conglomerates where they manufacture/assemble complete components like cabin, wings, etc., they would be better prepared to become HAL-equivalent as vertical integrators. Necessary steps ... otherwise they would just be a front for foreign companies because they have no experience.

Expect something like this with the final assembly at HAL but major components being built by HAL, Reliance, Tata, Mahindra and L&T.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Dec 2015 10:53

One would go without hesitation giving the KA-226 deal to HAL simply becos it has built hundreds upon hundreds of helos,while the "R" Co. has built ...zero!

In recent times,the Dhruv has been a great success,support and spares issues notwithstanding. Hundreds on order for the services,the LCH on the cusp of becoming another great success and if the LUH can be similarly tweaked,in a few years time,it too will enter production,to complment the KA-226,as 300-400 LUHs will be required. What HAL should do is to swiftly outsource the components.The KA-226 is a relatively unsophisticated helo and this should be easily accomplished given the large order and at least 25 years of spares/support required. A great opportunity for HAL and Indian pvt. industry,esp. if we are able to export it too.

A pity something similar wasn't thought of for the MI-17,but given the 200 or so to be in service,spares manufacture in a pvt/Ru JV should be engineered.This is where Tatas ,the R co.etc.,can start off with their helo ambitions.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 26 Dec 2015 22:55

HAL did not fly the LUH at the Platinum Jubilee celebrations. In fact it was the same model as AI-15.

I was also hoping against hope that they may showcase a Dhruv with folding rotors. Nah!

Another thing I was really really hoping for was a close up picture of the IJT.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 27 Dec 2015 00:22

Kakkaji wrote:Manu Pubby reports:
HAL chosen over Reliance to manufacture KA-226

Very interesting. I am much happier with HAL driving this project than Reliance. But, that is my bias against Reliance.

1. How will HAL approach the the 226s vis-a-vis its own LUH? How about support when both come on-board?
2. Tata manufactured helis is just a matter of time. I guess we will have to wait for them to provide any competition for HAL products.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 27 Dec 2015 06:37

In my opinion, the KA226 should not be manufactured by HAL, but be awarded to a private sector company.

If HAL gets the KA226, it would kill its motivation for accelerating the LUH project. Why bother to develop the LUH for 200 units, when you can simply delay and thus force the GoI to buy 200 more KA226 from you where you make easy money through screwdriver-giri?

The KA226, being essentially a screwdriver++ project, is exactly the kind that the GoI can use to develop a parallel helicopter assembler in the private sector. The hand-holding will be done by Kamov while the private Indian company brings in investment and project management. Competition from KA226 being assembled outside its assembly lines would spur HAl also to deliver on the LUH in time.

I do not particularly like Reliance, and I would rather prefer Tata or Mahindra to get this project. But even if Reliance gets it, with a good contract and strict monitoring by the MoD, they can be made to deliver on this relatively low-risk project.

For the last 20 years, we have been hearing talk about building up a parallel MIC in the private sector, but everytime when it comes time to award the contract, the public sector gets it. It is an infinite loop that we have not been able to get out of. I am not holding my breath on it.

JMHO

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 27 Dec 2015 07:33

indranilroy wrote:HAL did not fly the LUH at the Platinum Jubilee celebrations. In fact it was the same model as AI-15.

I was also hoping against hope that they may showcase a Dhruv with folding rotors. Nah!

Another thing I was really really hoping for was a close up picture of the IJT.

There are bichhars, not up close, but showing enough of the ghaghra choli to debunk much spec-e-culation. Outwardly nothing significant seems to be different compared to the last published fotograf e closeup.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 27 Dec 2015 10:09

I am hearing some negative reviews about Dhruv's performance these days. None of these are straight from horse's mouth. Instead its from chaiwallah's panwallah's uncle. So I don't consider them reliable. But one of the uncle is supposedly an Army Aviation Dhruv pilot. No specifics were shared about what was bad with Dhruv. Just a comment that it was "pathetic". So take it FWIW...

I was surprised 'cause my impression was that both Army & IAF are quite pleased with ALH, barring the recent service issues.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 27 Dec 2015 17:55

The DM/MOD have to crack the whip reg. serviceability of helos and aircraft. If the above CAG reports are accurate,then the IAF is primarily at fault for not ordering enough spares with the quality issue remaining a problem with HAL. Along with SU-MKI serviceability issues ,where it now appears that Tatas will manufacture spares/components,the Pvt sector must be encouraged by the GOI/MOD to step up to the plate and the services told to play ball,by ensuring with aircraft/helo orders that critical spares for at least 5 yrs,plus a support facility established from inception (perhaps in the pvt. sector) are included in the deal.

The fig of just 44% availability of the ALH will kill any further export orders and from a cost analysis of the helo,far more costly than importing a reliable bird. perhaps that's why the MI-17V orders keep on increasing.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 27 Dec 2015 21:51

My panwallah found out from his chaiwallah that IAF and IN are extremely happy with the Dhruvs and want more of the weaponized version.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 27 Dec 2015 21:56

Zynda wrote:I am hearing some negative reviews about Dhruv's performance these days. None of these are straight from horse's mouth. Instead its from chaiwallah's panwallah's uncle. So I don't consider them reliable. But one of the uncle is supposedly an Army Aviation Dhruv pilot. No specifics were shared about what was bad with Dhruv. Just a comment that it was "pathetic". So take it FWIW...

I was surprised 'cause my impression was that both Army & IAF are quite pleased with ALH, barring the recent service issues.

The topic should never be about problems - everyone and every product has problems. What the heck are people doing about it is the question.

This has been going on for some 20 years now - complaining.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 29 Dec 2015 21:57

Boost for Make in India: Russia's Rostec to form JV with HAL for making Kamov 226T choppers

NEW DELHI: In a fillip to the government's 'Make In India' drive, Russia's Rostec will form a joint venture with Indian PSU HAL for manufacturing Kamov 226T military helicopters in India.

According to the document, the State Corporation Rostec will organize in India the production of the Russian Ka-226T and its modifications in the amount of not less than 200 units. The agreement also provides for the maintenance, operation and repair of helicopters and providing them with technical support.

While I am glad that the armed forces will finally get the long overdue replacements for the Chetaks and Cheetahs, I think this contract award to HAL will effectively kill the LUH project.

The LUH may continue on as an R&D project, but I am willing to bet now that HAL will never put it in production.

Indranil · Post by **Indranil** » 29 Dec 2015 23:38

I feel it will be the other way around. HAL will manufacture all the 226Ts, but will not support it well enough. On the other hand, it will support its baby LUH the best they can. I have another question though. Will HAL be license manufacturing the Arrius 2G1 engines and the transmission box? Those are important capabilities.

Kakkaji · Post by **Kakkaji** » 30 Dec 2015 05:57

PSU beats Anil's Defence

New Delhi, Dec. 29: In Prime Minister Narendra Modi's showpiece "Make in India" project to be opened this Sunday, a public sector firm has beaten Anil Ambani's Reliance Defence that was lobbying to make Russian helicopters.

Moscow announced last night that the Russian state arms export agency, Rosoboronexport, and the chopper-maker, Rostec, have chosen the Indian defence undertaking Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) to make the Kamov 226t "Sergei" light utility helicopters for the military.

India's army and air force have a requirement of 200 such reconnaissance and surveillance helicopters immediately to replace the Cheetah and Chetak machines that currently undertake the task. The initial order is estimated to be worth $1 billion.

Most of the Cheetah and Chetak helicopters are more than 40 years old and have a high rate of accidents. Earlier this year, the wives and widows of military officers who fly/have flown the Cheetahs and Chetaks urged the government to replace them.

The total order for Sergeis could go up to 400 with the navy also projecting the requirement.

"The agreement with India is the result of the long work with our Indian partners," the CEO of Rostec, Sergei Chemezov, said in a statement distributed by Russian news agencies.

An Indian government source said "the Russians chose HAL".

RIP LUH

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 30 Dec 2015 08:38

India needs far more helos than 200 Ka 226s. Besides the whole idea of make in India is to have a lead integrator who subcontracts components. The Russians have done separate deals with reliance and HAL. HAL will be able to outsource components to reliance and it is win win for all. This will not necessarily be a zero sum game between HAL and Reliance

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Dec 2015 09:45

Another reason why Russia chose HAL,apart from its experience,is that it could provide sufficient leverage to close the FGFA deal. This deal could have a snowball effect on sev. other aviation related deals with Ru. As Shiv has said above,the R.co. could easily provide components for the LUH.Everybody wins.Most of all the forces who desperately require hundreds of LUHs .