Defcon 1
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 2,195
- Likes
- 1,842
No your post is nonsense. First of all you need to understand what concurrent development means. Its about development of different subsystems independently and parallely, which is already happening in case of LCH and Helina. Concurrent development never means that orders can be placed independently too. That would be stupid.Utter nonsense.
Like I said there are countless modern mil projects that see concurrent development. Accepting the LCH into service now will allow HAL to stabilise production, work out any issues there may be with production and operational service ahead of the ATGM issue being addressed if the IA/IAF could look beyond their noses for a moment and see the bigger picture they would understand this. But these morons don't think like this, Indian generals are trained up as import experts, they have no idea how to create anything or support local developments. They will recite foreign brochures but have no idea of what is available in their own backyard.
Anyways, such a long writeup is not needed. I had simply asked for the name of one foreign helicopter which has served for 6 years without ATGM. Provide that and I will shut up.
I have already responded to that in post #2229. Forget 1-2 years, even if Helina is operationalized tomorrow, first few years will be spent producing it for Rudras. So LCH which are inducted in the meantime will just be good for airshows and gathering dust.Besides, HELINA will be ready for operational deployments in the next 1-2 years, how long before the Apaches that are to be ordered in 2020 come? 3 years minimum. So even the argument that you are buying an off the shelf ready to fight solution falls flat.
No it doesn't. You are grossly misinformed on the topic. Contract of rocket integration was signed only in 2019 and it covers only 18 Rudras and 15 LCH. You need to read more on this topic before commentingBesides Rudra (and LCH if entered into service now) still has rockets and a cannon, ATGM is the only thing outstanding.
https://www.livefistdefence.com/201...ging-the-arming-of-indias-rudra-choppers.html
Dude no one is saying that LCH is not needed. LCH is needed, but it is needed with ATGM, not without. Till then, better to spend money elsewhere.The point is, what is IA's/IAF's long term vision (do they have one or are they just drooling over foreign toys?)? If it is IBGs supported by 150++ attack helicopters (Rudras don't count) then LCH is the obvious way to get to this goal and hence needs long term support from day one. Any war that breaks out in the next 2-3 years can be handled by existing systems (Mi-35s still have some teeth) so this argument that LCH can't be accepted because it doesn't have ATGMs is so myopic to the point that I can't even comprehend how someone can actually make it.
No they don't. You need to read up on F35 procurement. F35 has a commitment of 2400 fighters for the A variant, not orders. There is a difference. F35 orders were being placed annually by DOD, only last year, they placed a bulk order for 4 year production. I think about 400 were ordered at that time, though I think @asianobserve will be able to give the correct number. Every country commits a large number of weapons but orders it in bits and pieces only. LCH also has that commitment of 176 examples. Orders will be there too, in future. The fact is, in this case, western and Indian procurement exactly similar, but you are unable to understand it. And this is the second time I am telling you about F35 procurement. I have explained you exactly same thing in past as well. Kindly understand this before commenting further.Man, projects like F35, AH-46E, AH-1Z etc etc all have 100s/1000s of committed orders from the outset and Indian companies have to beg and plead for just 15 LSP models.
You have replied without understanding what I wrote. Kindly read my post again.So by that logic what's the need for the LCH at all? Rudra is a perfect substitute for the LCH?
Last edited: