HAL Prachand - Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)

[TrueSpirit1]

has the look of commanche helicopters from the bottom........

Ominously, Commanche program could not succeed as expected, despite all the cool acrobatics.

 

[ninja85]

why lch needs to be bloated in area?

 

[arnabmit]

That area has the avionics bay, engine, gearbox and fuel tanks.

why lch needs to be bloated in area?

 

[Twinblade]

why lch needs to be bloated in area?

Your expert opinions have been registered and forwarded to HAL's rotorcraft division. The technical critique forced an urgent design review and the design team have decided to cut out the bloated parts. Here's a sneek peak to what LCH TD-3 will look like.

 

[sydsnyper]

Isn't that a paki latest generation attack helicopter.....developed with chinese technology transfer

Your expert opinions have been registered and forwarded to HAL's rotorcraft division. The technical critique forced an urgent design review and the design team have decided to cut out the bloated parts. Here's a sneek peak to what LCH TD-3 will look like.

 

[sydsnyper]

@ Kunal Biswas sir.... why do we not use gatlings on the chopper nose. What advantages do chain guns have over gatling guns.

Where you learn about names? there are no naming...



------------------------

How come Apache is what we need and not LCH ? , LCH is design as per Indian needs..

IAF was interested in something fancy, they got it..



--------------------------

Reduced ? please provide some links..

DRDO / HAL / ADA making, designing LCH ?

Thanks..



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

There is tool bar above the Quick post window, From right the third option ' Insert Image ' is use for inserting image ( Copy the image ULR ) and then post..

 

[he-man]

lch is pretty unique and an original design unlike some other nations in the habbit of copying anything and everything.

but

unless we develop the critical subsystems like the avionics and countermeasures for this we are still far behind.
2010 report on dhruv states that 90% of stuff is imported,now this may have improved over last 3 years but to what degree??

so i will be happy with an inferior helicopter but with bump up in indigenous content.

chinese did it that way,we need to follow that path too

before u quote me as newbie,i am same he-man from the .pk site

 

[Twinblade]

unless we develop the critical subsystems like the avionics and countermeasures for this we are still far behind.

Patently incorrect.

2010 report on dhruv states that 90% of stuff is imported,now this may have improved over last 3 years but to what degree??

The quote was with respect to raw materials and not sub components. Big difference. For eg there were no indigenous suppliers of carbon fiber that can match the quality of stuff supplied by Alenia until very recently.

before u quote me as newbie,i am same he-man from the .pk site

Who the hell cares, you can head back to that forum and wallow in filth. You should be ashamed of being a part of it.

 

[he-man]

Patently incorrect.



The quote was with respect to raw materials and not sub components. Big difference. For eg there were no indigenous suppliers of carbon fiber that can match the quality of stuff supplied by Alenia until very recently.



Who the hell cares, you can head back to that forum and wallow in filth. You should be ashamed of being a part of it.

don't teach me whats right and wrong

go check the report urself and stop ur jingoistic claims

that may serve the country better.



i come here to talk the shortcomings of our forces not to gloat on the achievements,thats better than ur ultra nationalistic fanboy claims

 

[Twinblade]

don't teach me whats right and wrong

I agree, that job should have been done by your parents.

go check the report urself and stop ur jingoistic claims

that may serve the country better.

I have that report open in front of me, it sits happily in my notes on my hard drive, quoting from that report :-

The consultant recommended for indigenisation level of fifty per cent of purchases of
raw material and bought out items by the year 2008. However, 90 per cent of the value of
material used in each helicopter is still imported from foreign suppliers. Even though
ALH is in production for 10 years, the Company has not been able to identify alternative
indigenous suppliers.

http://www.cag.gov.in/html/reports/commercial/2010-11_10PA/chap3.pdf

i come here to talk the shortcomings of our forces not to gloat on the achievements,thats better than ur ultra nationalistic fanboy claims

Strange ways of DFI, last night I was accused of posting under vested interest disparaging domestic products and today I am a nationalist fanboy You know what, stick to pakistani forums, your knowledge will be well appreciated there

 

[he-man]

okay just tell me

1)is shakti engine indian??

2)are cockpits fully indian??

3)are countermeasure systems indian??

4)are optronic systems with cameras etc indian??

if they are then i am wrong

nope,they are not

 

[he-man]

any again i will say

if u need to be a fanboy,this forum is not for u

even at the other site u mentioned,there are ppl like u(sorry to say this) who fail to see the truth.
the truth is that we have not even produced a single missile for a helicopter,forget about a jet

helina is in trials and astra has not gone beyond captive trials.

the gun we use on rudra is not indian(maybe licensed produced but not indian)


so what are u talking about dude??
when the whole core avionics are foreign then whats the need to demonise me??

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I think you need to read the thread before making knee jerking comment, You have asked the same questions people made three years back and they too have answered right in this thread ..

Any more of your knee jerking post will be deleted unless you have some latest and solid source to back your claims..

okay just tell me

1)is shakti engine indian??

2)are cockpits fully indian??

3)are countermeasure systems indian??

4)are optronic systems with cameras etc indian??

if they are then i am wrong

nope,they are not

any again i will say

if u need to be a fanboy,this forum is not for u

even at the other site u mentioned,there are ppl like u(sorry to say this) who fail to see the truth.
the truth is that we have not even produced a single missile for a helicopter,forget about a jet

helina is in trials and astra has not gone beyond captive trials.

the gun we use on rudra is not indian(maybe licensed produced but not indian)


so what are u talking about dude??
when the whole core avionics are foreign then whats the need to demonise me??

 

[ghost]

Kunal Biswas and Twinblade both of you are senior member here full respect to that but that does not mean that you own this forum and even if you did your behavior with he-man is unacceptable.he is just expressing his opinion what ought to be done in this forum just because because his views don't go with ur believe you have no right to delete his post or threaten him to leave this forum .difference of opinion is natural thing you should counter it with your own fact .both of you are behaving as bullies and i don't care you are senior member but behave appropriately. This is my humble request.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Everybody ease up and stick to thread topic please, and @Twinblade's information has always been found to be factually correct and backed up by evidence.

Anyways, that apart, while all the talk of LCH and its subsystems are going on, the focus of the Army aviation is most probably shifting to how to effectively use these assets in coordination with other arms of the army.

Many people miss this, but at 179+33+71 (LCH+AH64D+Rudra) the Indian army is expanding from just 25 odd attack helis to 283 gunships. The IA will have to change/modify/improve many of their current tactics and doctrines to make proper use of this massive expansion.

And call me whatever anyone wants, I'll be very disappointed if the Eastern Army command does not get the largest share of these death angels . We demand reservation/quota/preferential treatment, but we want them. (pun intended)

 

[ghost]

Everybody ease up and stick to thread topic please, and @Twinblade's information has always been found to be factually correct and backed up by evidence.

Anyways, that apart, while all the talk of LCH and its subsystems are going on, the focus of the Army aviation is most probably shifting to how to effectively use these assets in coordination with other arms of the army.

Many people miss this, but at 179+33+71 (LCH+AH64D+Rudra) the Indian army is expanding from just 25 odd attack helis to 283 gunships. The IA will have to change/modify/improve many of their current tactics and doctrines to make proper use of this massive expansion.

And call me whatever anyone wants, I'll be very disappointed if the Eastern Army command does not get the largest share of these death angels . We demand reservation/quota/preferential treatment, but we want them. (pun intended)

use of increased number of attack heli on indian army doctrine

As part of the doctrine of maneuver warfare, the helicopter gunship has come to carve a niche for itself in the battlefield. With speed and range and altitude capabilities a rotary-winged platform lends itself admirably to the "top attack" mode especially against tanks and mechanized infantry formations in the plains and foothills.

However, they become vulnerable to shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles in the close confines of high mountains and deep valleys.

India learned a lesson the hard way when it lost a MI-17 helicopter to a Stinger missile fired by a Pakistani soldier during the Kargil war.

In fact, a fixed-wing aircraft was also shot down with a Stinger missile. A Canberra aircraft on photo-reconnaissance mission was grazed by a Stinger missile but returned safely to base. There were at least two known near-misses on helicopters operating around Tololing Peak.

The fact that the Government of India has recently conceded the Army's demand for making the helicopter gunship as an integral part of its terrestrial support operations underscores its role in modern warfare.

With inbuilt capabilities of range and high altitude the helicopter gunship is a quick reaction platform that can help the commander in a battlefield, as varied as that obtaining in India-from the deserts and plains to the Himalayan foothills and its craggy crests-a great deal of flexibility in deployment.

An attack helicopter can accompany armored columns and mechanized infantry beyond 450 km from home-base and, with airborne refueling, that can be extended till crew fatigue, replenishment of weapons and munitions and maintenance requirements limits operations.

Force multiplier

With radius of operations in the hundreds of kilometers the helicopter gunship is a potent force multiplier in its ability to detect enemy tank and mechanized forces, enemy troop concentrations and artillery emplacements and engage them without delay.

The situational awareness that such range provides, matched with nape-of-the-earth flying techniques and slow speed and hover gives the local commander an advantage that cannot be gainsaid in a battlefield situation.

This kind of "organic relationship" between the air component and the ground forces makes for a high degree of combat mobility and flexibility in both attack and defensive operations.

Now that military operations are no longer circumscribed by daylight hours, yet, night-time operations by combined forces can mould the battlefield to full advantage.

"Top attack" against armored vehicles has proved to be the Achilles heel of tanks and infantry combat vehicles falling prey in droves to strikes by fixed-wing aircraft making steep dives to release missiles, dumb bombs or shoot high calibre cannon.

It is not always that an airstrike can be called to stop enemy tanks in their tracks. That is why helicopter gunships are desired by infantry commanders to be an organic part of their echelon.

Their role being to detect and engage enemy armor/mechanized columns well before the main force joins the battle to wrap up proceedings. Tank and mechanized infantry columns too have incorporated organic anti-aircraft/helicopter missiles intended to keep the predators at bay.

It is a cat-and-mouse game in which the helicopter has the advantage of swift movement in any direction and the ability to use the landscape to advantage, "popping up" from a decline to launch its rockets to devastating effect.

The Russians had developed the concept of helicopters as chariots for infantry to first shoot up the locale and then allow the infantry to dismount and hold ground.

India bought into that doctrine when it acquired the MI-25/35 helicopter gunships from the former Soviet Union. These attack helicopters can carry either eight infantrymen or four stretchers for casualty evacuation.

In the deserts, the plains and the foothills these helicopters have faced missiles, anti-aircraft guns and shoulder-fired rocket-propelled grenades during the war in Afghanistan and Iraq with mixed results.

In the mountains of Afghanistan, however, the attack helicopter was unable to escape the direct fire weapons in the hands of the Afghan Mujahideen because of lack of room to maneuver to take evasive action. Many helicopters were lost to ground fire.

With the reported contracted with the American firm for Apache helicopter gunships-which do not carry any troops-the Indian Army will slowly move away from carrying infantry to the battlefield by the aerial route.

It will not happen suddenly on the arrival of the Apaches but will be diminished gradually till the Russia-supplied fleet is decommissioned over the next decade.

Aerial warfare

Nonetheless, in the Indian context because both the India-Pakistan and the India-China confrontations will take place in extremely rugged territory in the Himalayas (as during the Kargil conflict), the ability to ferry troops to dominating features (or relocating them at short notice at heights below 15,000 feet which is their service ceiling) is an advantage that will be lost when only the Apache helicopters remain in the Indian fleet.

India's Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd has developed what can be said to be a terrain-specific attack helicopter, the light combat helicopter (LCH) which with an inbuilt capability to climb to an altitude of 21,000 ft with a choice of rockets, 20-mm cannon, air-to-air missile, air-to-surface missiles and dumb bombs.

Its roles include high-altitude warfare, anti-tank and counter-air operations against other helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles, counter-insurgency and urban guerrilla warfare and search and rescue operations.

Based on the Dhruv utility helicopter, the Indian light combat helicopter is the product of the Kargil war experience where due to the inability the MI-25/35 armed helicopters were unable to take a full load of weapons up to a height beyond 14,000 ft.

The Pakistan Army Northern Light Infantry armed with Stinger shoulder-fired SAMs was ensconced at heights between 15,000 and 18,000 ft. The Indian Air Forces decided to use the MI-17 helicopter converted to a gunship role as was done during the Sri Lanka IPKF.

However, that did not come up to expectations because, in order to be able to deliver its weapons load, the helicopter had to fly to a point less than four kilometers of the entrenched Pakistani soldiers and thus it came within range of the Stinger heat-seeking missiles.

That was why also other fixed wing sorties had to be curtailed after the MI-17 and MiG-27 were hit by Stingers.

That was when it was discovered that using high-trajectory guns like the Bofors howitzer in a direct-fire role proved to be more efficacious than air attacks by fixed winged and rotary-winged aircraft till the Mirage-2000 and its laser-guided weapons began taking a big toll of the entrenched enemy.

Much of the Indian experience in the Kargil war was gained by trial and error-hardly a way to conduct aerial warfare more particularly after how the Soviets learned their lessons at the hands of the Afghan Mujahideen in Afghanistan.

One lesson was that all helicopters operating in the mountain terrain need to carry flares to decoy heat-seeking missiles.

However, it needs to be conceded that the threat to helicopters is not just from heat-seeking missiles but also from direct-fire infantrymen's guns.

Shooting the pilot or puncturing the fuel tank was an easy way of knocking down helicopters in the close confines of Himalayan Mountains. Standoff munitions usually fell far from the target.

In any future warfare many of the crucial tactical targets will be along the higher reaches of the Himalayas and appropriate lessons have been learned from the Kargil experience.

Helicopters are very useful platforms in high altitude warfare but a proper assessment of the weapons in the hands of the enemy need to be made before deploying the helicopter gunships in such terrain.


source:strategic affairs

 

[Kyubi]

Kunal Biswas and Twinblade both of you are senior member here full respect to that but that does not mean that you own this forum and even if you did your behavior with he-man is unacceptable.he is just expressing his opinion what ought to be done in this forum just because because his views don't go with ur believe you have no right to delete his post or threaten him to leave this forum .difference of opinion is natural thing you should counter it with your own fact .both of you are behaving as bullies and i don't care you are senior member but behave appropriately. This is my humble request.

In Conformity with Mr Kunal Biswas, IMHO i feel what he did was the right thing, if asking the same old questions again and again by a newbie is the order of the day then the seniors in question should abandon their work and be at their beck and call. I consider myself a newbie and my opinion is that we need to study, understand and then take a informed decision. Such an act would be a great help to the fellow seniors to objectify their opinions.

This ain't LCA TOPIC where it is divided into four threads to accommodate different views but just a single thread which consists of 61 pages , if going through it is a big problem, then its suffice to say we can never ever have a meaningful discussion.

 

[sydsnyper]

@Kunal Biswas sir.... why do we not use gatlings on the chopper nose. What advantages do chain guns have over gatling guns.

@ Kunal Biswas sir.... why do we not use gatlings on the chopper nose. What advantages do chain guns have over gatling guns.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Excuse me for late reply, Gatling gun is heavy as it has multiple barrels, It also have a higher rate of fire which exhust ammo very quickly also for this very reason it gets hot faster ..

Such issues are not very common with Chain gun ..

@Kunal Biswas sir.... why do we not use gatlings on the chopper nose. What advantages do chain guns have over gatling guns.

 

[sydsnyper]

Thank you sir. I repeated my question in case you missed my prior message, I had not tagged your name correctly on it the first time.

The A10 uses a GAU Avenger on its nose used to turn tanks to mush, as they say. Can the same effectiveness be achieved through chain guns, if there are any that fire the 30 cal round.

Excuse me for late reply, Gatling gun is heavy as it has multiple barrels, It also have a higher rate of fire which exhust ammo very quickly also for this very reason it gets hot faster ..

Such issues are not very common with Chain gun ..