HAL Prachand - Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)

[armyofhind]

.

Few days ago Vijendar Thakur said in twitter, that LCH will get Milan 2T anti tank missiles, while ALH Rudra may get PARS LR3 ( this said by Saurav Jha )

The actual planned missile for LCH is HELINA. HElicopter Launched NAG.
Once it clears user trials, the NAG will be put on it.

 

[SajeevJino]

The actual planned missile for LCH is HELINA. HElicopter Launched NAG.
Once it clears user trials, the NAG will be put on it.

If DRDO plans something better the Armed forces moves something better and promised delivery

Before Helina comes up, Rudra flies with PARS LR and LCH will fly with Milan 2T

Take it or start batting for DRDO

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Best keep personal opinions at bay..

Buying of PARS LR is repet of news from 2011, Their was never any official conformation on it ..

Before Helina comes up, Rudra flies with PARS LR and LCH will fly with Milan 2T

 

[Shaitan]

IAF Rudra

This one has air particle separators.

Another

 

[HariPrasad-1]

They have this light recon helicopter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin_Z-19 which can easily be mounted with the kind of weapons our LCH has.

Plus they have a medium attack helicopter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAIC_Z-10

BS chinese choppers. They can not carry 500 KG over 10000 ft altitude and nowhere LCH in climb rate and other parameter.

 

[flying.modi]

There two fighter helicopter now H.A.L Rudra and L.C.H.
100 LCH has been ordered by IAF nad 65 ordered by Army.
it has world record of landing on highest altitude
i made small descriptive vdo on it

 

[kstriya]

Guys what is the price of each LCH?

Thirty character rule sucks

 

[airtel]

There two fighter helicopter now H.A.L Rudra and L.C.H.
100 LCH has been ordered by IAF nad 65 ordered by Army.
it has world record of landing on highest altitude
i made small descriptive vdo on it

japan will never buy it . .

 

[tejas warrior]

Guys what is the price of each LCH?

Thirty character rule sucks

Around $20 millions.

http://m.indiatoday.in/education/story/helicopter/1/606834.html

 

[abingdonboy]

IAF Rudra

This one has air particle separators.

Another

Rudra in IAF colours is GLORIOUS.

65 of these beauties on order for them.

 

[Scrutator]

Anyone know the latest status on Helina?

 

[Scrutator]

I've been trying to find an answer as to why the CoMPASS Electro-optic pod on LCH/Rudra is oriented in a way different from that of most successful attack helos.

Does anyone else feel that the CoMPASS (electro-optic) pod on Rudra/LCH should have been flipped 180 degrees (much like most modern attack helicopters like Apache, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc)? It should have been fixed such that the domed part is pointing downwards while it's base is fixed to the underside of Rudra/LCH 'protruberance' (which itself could be raised slightly higher to make room) .
That way LCH/Rudra can 'see' under the helicopter and have a vast visibility angle; which is especially useful for surveillance (of terrorists and enemy troops) and recon missions. The current (inefficient) design seems to restrict the CoMPASS's visibility to only that limited 'cone' where the autocannon could be pointed at.
Thoughts? See the pictures/illustrations below......

This orientation (EO pod pointing downwards gives the helos like Apace, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc) a complete down view and of course forward view when rotated)

LCH/Rudra's EO pod can be rotated up and backwards but it cannot see down (due to obstruction), as such when flying over mountainous areas it is likely to be miss a lot of targets....

 

[bhramos]

I've been trying to find an answer as to why the CoMPASS Electro-optic pod on LCH/Rudra is oriented in a way different from that of most successful attack helos.

Does anyone else feel that the CoMPASS (electro-optic) pod on Rudra/LCH should have been flipped 180 degrees (much like most modern attack helicopters like Apache, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc)? It should have been fixed such that the domed part is pointing downwards while it's base is fixed to the underside of Rudra/LCH 'protruberance' (which itself could be raised slightly higher to make room) .
That way LCH/Rudra can 'see' under the helicopter and have a vast visibility angle; which is especially useful for surveillance (of terrorists and enemy troops) and recon missions. The current (inefficient) design seems to restrict the CoMPASS's visibility to only that limited 'cone' where the autocannon could be pointed at.
Thoughts? See the pictures/illustrations below......

View attachment 13488

This orientation (EO pod pointing downwards gives the helos like Apace, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc) a complete down view and of course forward view when rotated)

View attachment 13489

LCH/Rudra's EO pod can be rotated up and backwards but it cannot see down (due to obstruction), as such when flying over mountainous areas it is likely to be miss a lot of targets....

View attachment 13490

i accept your view, but now a day most of modern Attack having upwards scopes.. their should be be some study, i do not actual reason behind...

Italian AgustaWestland A129 Mangusta

not sure.........

 

[Scrutator]

i accept your view, but now a day most of modern Attack having upwards scopes.. their should be be some study, i do not actual reason behind...

Italian AgustaWestland A129 Mangusta

not sure.........

Actually, I wouldn't consider A129 as a very modern attack helicopter. Firstly it doesn't have a 360 degree rotatable electro-optic pod like Apache, Mi-35, Viper, Z10 etc. A129 was built several decades ago and they went with a kind-of static FLIR pod (that you see as a cylindrical tube above the cannon). Since the pod cannot rotate in multiple planes (like CoMPASS on LCH/Rudra) it really doesn't matter where that pod is located (above/below cannon, or above/below the rotor).
Turkey took this A129 from Italians and replaced the FLIR pod with a 360 deg rotatable EO pod (much like LCH/Rudra) but did not make any major structural changes to the helo, as such the EO of T129 (Turkish version) suffers a similar fate like LCH/Rudra - but this is understandable as they didn't venture into redesigning a foreign product.
But if you see the most versatile and battle hardened attack helos (Apaches & M-35s; US is also buying Vipers in big numbers) they all have them pointed downwards.
If HAL/IA used T129 as their model, then they chose a poor example!! The tragedy is Rudra/LCH got built up from scratch, fitted it with a awesome (fully rotatable) EO pod but screwed up the placement!! This is like buying a Ferrari and disabling all the higher gears and being content driving in the 1st gear all the time!!!
Some helos place it on a mast above the rotor - which is fine too as the pods can rotate and see in ALL directions from that vantage point (not to mention 'look over' from hiding behind ridges/treelines).

 

[AnantS]

Well what advantage you are going to get on seeing downwards for fleeting seconds? And that too when you cant fire anything at it. While on move, before things which are going to come below you, are going to come first in front of you. And there you will have flexibility of pointing your weapons also. If you placed EO pod below nose, its FOV is partially going to be obstructed by gun.

 

[Scrutator]

Well what advantage you are going to get on seeing downwards for fleeting seconds? And that too when you cant fire anything at it. And there you will have flexibility of pointing your weapons also. If you placed EO pod below nose, its FOV is partially going to be obstructed by gun.

Remember Pathankot air base attack episode? Mi-35 hovered above the air base and tracked the jihadis hiding in the elephant grass - and directed the commandos towards them. With Rudra's EO orientation, it cannot do this job!!
Further, the EO pods can lock onto to certain spot/area even when the helo is moving. If a heat signature is detected as the helo is flying, it can then lock onto it. Not to mention pass on the info to the central command station and other helos.
That's how modern attack helicopters operate.

While on move, before things which are going to come below you, are going to come first in front of you.

Disagree. Not sure if you saw the rough sketch I posted earlier, if LCH/Rudra were to be flying over mountainous terrain - just after it passes a ridge/mountain-top, it won't be able to see one side of the valley wall when it flies over it; in fact it won't be able to see the valley floor either!! Having the pod pointed downwards, the helo will be able to see scan both walls of the valley, the moment it crosses the ridge.mountain-top. Current LCH/Rudra has to turn the entire helo around to see that side!!

If you placed EO pod below nose, its FOV is partially going to be obstructed by gun.

Not at all. If it's flipped 180 deg, the position of actual lenses of the EO pods relative to the cannon will more or less remain unchanged. You'll move the support base up and under sling the pod. See the picture of WZ-10 (which is pretty similar to LCH in some ways); Apache, of course has it's cannon way behind/below!

 

[SilentKiller]

Remember Pathankot air base attack episode? Mi-35 hovered above the air base and tracked the jihadis hiding in the elephant grass - and directed the commandos towards them. With Rudra's EO orientation, it cannot do this job!!
Further, the EO pods can lock onto to certain spot/area even when the helo is moving. If a heat signature is detected as the helo is flying, it can then lock onto it. Not to mention pass on the info to the central command station and other helos.
That's how modern attack helicopters operate.


Disagree. Not sure if you saw the rough sketch I posted earlier, if LCH/Rudra were to be flying over mountainous terrain - just after it passes a ridge/mountain-top, it won't be able to see one side of the valley wall when it flies over it; in fact it won't be able to see the valley floor either!! Having the pod pointed downwards, the helo will be able to see scan both walls of the valley, the moment it crosses the ridge.mountain-top. Current LCH/Rudra has to turn the entire helo around to see that side!!


Not at all. If it's flipped 180 deg, the position of actual lenses of the EO pods relative to the cannon will more or less remain unchanged. You'll move the support base up and under sling the pod. See the picture of WZ-10 (which is pretty similar to LCH in some ways); Apache, of course has it's cannon way behind/below!

my observations.
Apache with long bow has radar over rotor for over the tree line coverage, without breaking cover and EO pod below to cover base view..
considering LCH is not supposed to be front line attach helicopter as we have ordered Apache, LCH is meant to fly in himalayas and IAF wanted that both aspects i.e.. long front and below coverage but considering weight parameter, adding EO pod only below would have reduced front line view but better below view angel.
we couldn't add both EO pod and long bow type setup as payload would have reduced at such a high altitude.

Even in Tiger Helicopeters i have seen above EO Pods.
What i feel is below, we have Heavy attach as apache 22 for airforce and planned 39 for army...heavy hitting..
Rudra and LCH for Troop support, limited anti armor role, convey protection.
LCH for High altitude operations.
Dhruv MK3 has EO pod below, so that can be used for enemy tracking etc. may be LUH with below EO pod will act as main heli for this role.
all listed helicopters in your post are pretty heavy than LCH or Rudra and have lower altitude performance.
DRDO or IAF isn't that dumb that its using Rudra or LCH in current form, they might knew its shortcomings or + points.

 

[bhramos]

=========== Not necessary =============

MOD

 

[Kunal Biswas]

They had this under nose, But due to some reason they moved it upwards ..

I suspect is for detecting UAVs flying above the gunships, One of LCH duties is to detect and destroy UAVs and Drones ..

===============

2003 Model was like Rudra just with Tandem seats and Armored body ..

I've been trying to find an answer as to why the CoMPASS Electro-optic pod on LCH/Rudra is oriented in a way different from that of most successful attack helos.

Does anyone else feel that the CoMPASS (electro-optic) pod on Rudra/LCH should have been flipped 180 degrees (much like most modern attack helicopters like Apache, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc)? It should have been fixed such that the domed part is pointing downwards while it's base is fixed to the underside of Rudra/LCH 'protruberance' (which itself could be raised slightly higher to make room) .
That way LCH/Rudra can 'see' under the helicopter and have a vast visibility angle; which is especially useful for surveillance (of terrorists and enemy troops) and recon missions. The current (inefficient) design seems to restrict the CoMPASS's visibility to only that limited 'cone' where the autocannon could be pointed at.
Thoughts? See the pictures/illustrations below......

View attachment 13488

This orientation (EO pod pointing downwards gives the helos like Apace, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc) a complete down view and of course forward view when rotated)

View attachment 13489

LCH/Rudra's EO pod can be rotated up and backwards but it cannot see down (due to obstruction), as such when flying over mountainous areas it is likely to be miss a lot of targets....

View attachment 13490

 

[Adioz]

I've been trying to find an answer as to why the CoMPASS Electro-optic pod on LCH/Rudra is oriented in a way different from that of most successful attack helos.

Does anyone else feel that the CoMPASS (electro-optic) pod on Rudra/LCH should have been flipped 180 degrees (much like most modern attack helicopters like Apache, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc)? It should have been fixed such that the domed part is pointing downwards while it's base is fixed to the underside of Rudra/LCH 'protruberance' (which itself could be raised slightly higher to make room) .
That way LCH/Rudra can 'see' under the helicopter and have a vast visibility angle; which is especially useful for surveillance (of terrorists and enemy troops) and recon missions. The current (inefficient) design seems to restrict the CoMPASS's visibility to only that limited 'cone' where the autocannon could be pointed at.
Thoughts? See the pictures/illustrations below......

View attachment 13488

This orientation (EO pod pointing downwards gives the helos like Apace, Viper, Mi-35, WZ-10 etc) a complete down view and of course forward view when rotated)

View attachment 13489

LCH/Rudra's EO pod can be rotated up and backwards but it cannot see down (due to obstruction), as such when flying over mountainous areas it is likely to be miss a lot of targets....

View attachment 13490

Good catch.

The EO pod is mainly meant to target stuff. IMHO, the Nexter turret or any other armament can not target anything that the EO pod cannot see from its current location. However, limited FLIR visibility does compromise surveillance capability of the chopper (in cases where it only needs to see the targets and not actively engage.

But I believe its a trade-off. The only missions where FLIR visibility directly below the chopper is an absolute necessity are limited. In most missions, the chopper is supposed to keep targets in their cross-hairs. They need to engage the instant the order is given. DRDO and Air-force may have made this trade-off for better aerodynamic performance or better structural strength to weight ratio, or some other reason.

If a mission specifically requires searching for targets directly below, they could employ UAVs. Or else, as a last minute fix, they could install a separate EO pod (upside-down) on one of the hardpoints of the chopper.