HAL Prachand - Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)

[Scrutator]

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 ..

That's a very logical reason.

However, I am not totally sure if LCH/Rudra would be that effective in the UAV hunter/killer role. The mistral air-to-air missile that it carries has an altitude ceiling of 10,000 feet. Most target-able sized UAVs fly well above that altitude (even the tiny Burraq flies above 20,000 ft, and better/bigger ones fly above 30,000 ft). With the EO pod flipped it might still detect UAVs (forward-n-above but not directly above),
The low flying and target-able UAVs (via Mistral) will be forward-n-above. The UAVs directly above may be detected but cannot be targeted by Mistral. There're already a tonne of ground based light weight radars that can already 'detect' UAVs (in defensive positions)

 

[Scrutator]

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.

Most anti-terror operations will require some kind of ground scannable EO pod. Remember Pathankot air base attack. It took an Mi-35 to hover above and detect the jihadis.

 

[Scrutator]

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.

The reason to fly at such high altitude is to look down on the mountains and engage targets below on the mountainous terrain. As I had illustrated in my rough sketches, LCH/Rudras will completely miss seeing targets in deep valleys and the sides of the valleys.
The first step is to detect and tract a target before engaging it.

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.

Some Tigers have mast mounted EO - which is fantastic as it literally has 360 deg visibility. The other Tigers that have it located below rotors are actually radars (not EOs).

Having different helos for slightly different roles seems overbearing. I wish the EO pod is just flipped so LCH/Rudra can become truly multi-role! It's always good to have the device tracking/scanning the enemy to be armed

all listed helicopters in your post are pretty heavy than LCH or Rudra and have lower altitude performance.

WZ-10 (chinese) is in the same weight category as LCH. Irrespective, the weight category of the helicopter shouldn't affect its scanning capabilities.

DRDO or IAF isn't that dumb that its using Rudra or LCH in current form, they might knew its shortcomings or + points.

HAHA. You're a hopeful man. Even the mighty US Air Force selected F35 (over X-32) because they liked the looks of it - a fact admitted by USAF.

 

[AnantS]

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.

Instead of manned helicopter an unmanned hovering UAV with FLIR would be more suitable in this scenario

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!!

Yes in this case, Having the EO/FLIR pod below nose may be more beneficial than having above nose. EO pod on the mast would be pretty useless. However In both cases you will need to turn your chopper for target re acquisition. A chopper would be making rounds over area of interest than just flyby. However your scenario is more plausible if a chopper is being used for pursuing tangos in mountains or clearing Kargil like intrusion on mountains. Hari Nair(Test Pilot of LCH) on on other fora would be able to throw more light on it

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!

Actually I can see with the EO flipped, the FOV will be partially obstructed by protrusions in chasis. Now remember EO ball is not sitting at the same level as the underside of chopper( ref wz-10). Now I think whatever limitation that we see, you must remember in today scenario , UAV's will be used for recce. Ideally comanche like UAV integration capability could also be employed with LCH. That will be much more effective in getting better picture of area of interest

 

[Scrutator]

Instead of manned helicopter an unmanned hovering UAV with FLIR would be more suitable in this scenario

Why not make use of the hundreds of Rudra/LCH that we'll definitely have?? All it takes is right-orienting the pod. Why forgo a awesome capability for no real gain?? Why should the helo be blindfolded and then expected to hold someone else's hand?
Mi-35 did do yeoman job in Pathankot (all of which will retire in few years).

Yes in this case, Having the EO/FLIR pod below nose may be more beneficial than having above nose. EO pod on the mast would be pretty useless. However In both cases you will need to turn your chopper for target re acquisition. A chopper would be making rounds over area of interest than just flyby.

Yep. The chopper will need to turn around to target and shoot (no way around it). But detecting and acquiring the target is more than half the job done. What good are all the armaments when the chopper cannot even detect/see them (especially in the mountainous terrain).

However your scenario is more plausible if a chopper is being used for pursuing tangos in mountains or clearing Kargil like intrusion on mountains. Hari Nair(Test Pilot of LCH) on on other fora would be able to throw more light on it

All scenarios that actually happened in the past and are currently happening everyday and will happen in future!! Remember that the genesis for LCH was actually the desperate need for a high altitude attack helicopter during Kargil war.
Thousands of Apaches have been doing precisely the same job (pursuing the tangos in mountains) in Afghanistan and Iraq! Our Rudras don't support in counter terror operations because the EO pod is gazing at some pie in the sky.
The only plausible explanation for this pod orientation (which I thought helped star gazing and selfie taking) was provided by 'kunal biswas' that it could have been oriented to look up for UAVs. I feel that even with Mistral missiles LCH/Rudras cannot hunt UAVs (which fly way above the altitude ceiling for Mistrals). Detection of UAV can be accomplished much more easily with portable, light weight ground based radars! I feel the designers/Army/AF might have gotten too ambitious in (unachievable) role setting for these helos while sacrificing what is actually important and achievable.
It's like a 'mohalle ka chhora' who has set his eyes ONLY for Scarlett Johansson!! He's never gonna meet Scarlett and refuses to look at 'pados ki chori'!!

Actually I can see with the EO flipped, the FOV will be partially obstructed by protrusions in chasis. Now remember EO ball is not sitting at the same level as the underside of chopper( ref wz-10). Now I think whatever limitation that we see, you must remember in today scenario , UAV's will be used for recce. Ideally comanche like UAV integration capability could also be employed with LCH. That will be much more effective in getting better picture of area of interest

Think of the EO as the sights on a rifle. The rifle's barrel will NEVER obstruct the sights. In case of the helo (especially when it is targeting/shooting), the EO and the cannon move in synchronism. In the case of LCH/Rudra there are no obstructions to the EO (even while downward looking recce) other than a thin barrel that probably obstructs less than 3 degrees in the worst case scenario (as the cannon is mounted way behind the EO pod), and this too can be overcame easily by swinging the barrel to one side! In all cases there will NEVER be an obstruction while aiming and shooting via the cannon!!

 

[Scrutator]

Now I think whatever limitation that we see, you must remember in today scenario , UAV's will be used for recce. Ideally comanche like UAV integration capability could also be employed with LCH. That will be much more effective in getting better picture of area of interest

In a Network-centric environment, the idea is that each entity can see and is able to share that view with everyone else. The idea that one UAV would see while the rest of the helos would be generally blind is quite passe.
Even if LCH is able to control a remote UAV and see through it, it should still be able to see its own environment completely. I feel that HAL/IA/IAF has reassigned some weird role to LCH/Rudra (UAV hunting, that's really not possible) while sacrificing the most vital role (of seeking out ground targets and attacking) - something that no other military has done.
LCH/Rudra's Mistral missiles will only be able to attack a low flying UAV ahead of it (never directly above it); this capability will still be retained with a downward pointing EO pod (which can be rotated up (if not directly up!). If detection of UAV directly above is all that an upward pointing EO pod can provide (and not attack it) then this task is easily accomplished by any light-weight portable ground based radars!

I hope they realize this before a war will slap this reality in the face.

Did you mean Apache (Comanche helicopters are cancelled - but I guess you're referring to the advanced technology)?

 

[abingdonboy]

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!!

Yes it can, it's blindspot is directly below it but it is a very narrow, all the Rudra has to do is place itself at some distance which it would be anyway. You would never employ it in such a means where it was possibly hovering over an enemy- that is very poor tactics and dangerous.

I understand what you are saying but I think it is being overstated how negative the implications are. The Rudra will primarily be operating at some distance from its targets and in a scoot and shoot method from behind terrain which makes the placement of the EO pod almost irrelevent.

 

[abingdonboy]

Mi-35 did do yeoman job in Pathankot (all of which will retire in few years).

Mi-35 is being entirely replaced by the AH-64E anyway.

 

[Scrutator]

Mi-35 is being entirely replaced by the AH-64E anyway.

Thank goodness for that!! We'll have some platform to rely on when another Pathankot like incident happens

 

[abingdonboy]

Thank goodness for that!! We'll have some platform to rely on when another Pathankot like incident happens

Well that (attack helo) is an option of last resort, hopefully the IAF's investments in superior perimeter security systems and greater anti-infiltration measures along the LoC/IB prevent another Pathankot from happening again.

Anyway, for observation, UAVs remain the best option, they have far greater endurance and stealth.

 

[Scrutator]

Yes it can, it's blindspot is directly below it but it is a very narrow, all the Rudra has to do is place itself at some distance which it would be anyway. You would never employ it in such a means where it was possibly hovering over an enemy- that is very poor tactics and dangerous.
I understand what you are saying but I think it is being overstated how negative the implications are. The Rudra will primarily be operating at some distance from its targets and in a scoot and shoot method from behind terrain which makes the placement of the EO pod almost irrelevent.

I hear that a bit: Rudra/LCH won't be deployed this way or that way etc. But Pathankot was a REAL incident when Mi-35 DID HOVER and track the jihadis. If something WILL NEVER get deployed in a certain way, then there's no reason for Mi-35 (frontline attack helo) to do that for nearly 3 days!!!!!

With Rudras/LCHs having forward looking capability only, all that the enemy needs to do is hide behind a boulder or in a small ditch and the chopper will just fly over blindly, while the enemy will be grinning blithely. I've already spoken enough about the mountainous terrain - LCH/Rudra can never see the bottom of the valley unless it flies along the nap of the valley! And it will never see the leeward side of the mountain, unless it turns around!! The issue is not just with the mountainous terrain, even a sand dune, a small boulder, a trench in a plain(who digs a trench on the frontlines anyways, right?) are all easy ways for the enemy to fool the 'attack' helos!!

Rudra/LCH is not a supersonic jet. The standoff distance you keep talking about (during an engagement with the use of cannon) is just around 1-2 kms. When you're that close to the identified enemy, it would be fool hardy to assume that there's no threats/targets emerging right below or behind the helo (the targets Rudra/LCH missed because they hid on the leeward side of a rock/spur)!!!!


Some folks keep reiterating the dogma of how Rudra/LCH will get deployed as if Rudra/LCH were a Nawab/Maharaja that a few dozen of his slaves would run up and pin down a lion; and the Nawab/Maharaja would just stroll up, take aim from a safe distance and shoot the lion!!! Rudra/LCH needs to be a consummate HUNTER in its own stead!!!!

 

[Scrutator]

Well that (attack helo) is an option of last resort, hopefully the IAF's investments in superior perimeter security systems and greater anti-infiltration measures along the LoC/IB prevent another Pathankot from happening again.

Anyway, for observation, UAVs remain the best option, they have far greater endurance and stealth.

I mean WHY?? Why not just flip that darn EO pod like everyone else??
This is like some guy walking around with a shirt that's buttoned from the backside. Sure he may claim that his wife or girlfriend helps him with the buttoning. But it still begs the question WHY???

 

[abingdonboy]

I hear that a bit: Rudra/LCH won't be deployed this way or that way etc. But Pathankot was a REAL incident when Mi-35 DID HOVER and track the jihadis. If something WILL NEVER get deployed in a certain way, then there's no reason for Mi-35 (frontline attack helo) to do that for nearly 3 days!!!!!

With Rudras/LCHs having forward looking capability only, all that the enemy needs to do is hide behind a boulder or in a small ditch and the chopper will just fly over blindly, while the enemy will be grinning blithely. I've already spoken enough about the mountainous terrain - LCH/Rudra can never see the bottom of the valley unless it flies along the nap of the valley! And it will never see the leeward side of the mountain, unless it turns around!! The issue is not just with the mountainous terrain, even a sand dune, a small boulder, a trench in a plain(who digs a trench on the frontlines anyways, right?) are all easy ways for the enemy to fool the 'attack' helos!!

Rudra/LCH is not a supersonic jet. The standoff distance you keep talking about (during an engagement with the use of cannon) is just around 1-2 kms. When you're that close to the identified enemy, it would be fool hardy to assume that there's no threats/targets emerging right below or behind the helo (the targets Rudra/LCH missed because they hid on the leeward side of a rock/spur)!!!!


Some folks keep reiterating the dogma of how Rudra/LCH will get deployed as if Rudra/LCH were a Nawab/Maharaja that a few dozen of his slaves would run up and pin down a lion; and the Nawab/Maharaja would just stroll up, take aim from a safe distance and shoot the lion!!!

Mate, the Rudra and LCH has been designed with the IA and IAF participating at every stage, they will have had a say in the final product and thus I can only but trust the decsions such as these have logic behind them.


Again, the only blindspot will be directly under the Rudra/LCH, even the ground a few metres ahead of the Rudra/LCH will be fully observable with the COMPASS so with an awareness of this the Rudra/LCH can easily be employed in such a way to not put it at risk at all.

The primary purpose of the EO pod on the Rudra/LCH is as a cueing device for the weapons. IMHO the EO pod's postion gives away the fact that the Rudra/LCH are designed as standoff tank busters and not for anti-personel/counter terror operations.

 

[abingdonboy]

I mean WHY?? Why not just flip that darn EO pod like everyone else??
This is like some guy walking around with a shirt that's buttoned from the backside. Sure he may claim that his wife or girlfriend helps him with the buttoning. But it still begs the question WHY???

You say everyone else but that isn't strictly true:

Again, the Rudra/LCH's sensor position is a reflection of their intended roles (anti-tank machines) and also it is clear the IA/IAF want to use the Rudra/LCH in the anti-UAV for which this sensor placement is perfect (allowing them to scan above).

I have full faith in the developers and users to have designed a suitable machine for the requirements started.

 

[Scrutator]

Mate, the Rudra and LCH has been designed with the IA and IAF participating at every stage, they will have had a say in the final product and thus I can only but trust the decsions such as these have logic behind them.
Again, the only blindspot will be directly under the Rudra/LCH, even the ground a few metres ahead of the Rudra/LCH will be fully observable with the COMPASS so with an awareness of this the Rudra/LCH can easily be employed in such a way to not put it at risk at all.

The primary purpose of the EO pod on the Rudra/LCH is as a cueing device for the weapons.

I am impressed with your blind trust. But I have my questions though: when the top 3 armies and top 3 air forces in the world (US, Russia & China) all have their attack helos certain way, I am just dying to know that BIG idea behind the inverted EO pod.

Rudra/LCH can only scan the windward side, as it flies all the leeward sides are fully ignored!!! Gets worse in mountainous/sandy/undulating terrains!!!

IMHO the EO pod's postion gives away the fact that the Rudra/LCH are designed as standoff tank busters and not for anti-personel/counter terror operations.

One of the most expensive components in Rudra/LCH is the pilot's helmet that helps with look-down-shoot-down capability; Rudra/LCH have two of them!!!! If the attack helo was supposed to be just for ATGMs then such expensive helmets (two of them actually) are an unworthy investment!!

 

[abingdonboy]

One of the most expensive components in Rudra/LCH is the pilot's helmet that helps with look-down-shoot-down capability; Rudra/LCH have two of them!!!! If the attack helo was supposed to be just for ATGMs then such expensive helmets (two of them actually) are an unworthy investment!!

Not really, the helmets are also to be used to cue the ATGMs and they can be used for the look-down-shoot-down capability, the Nexter M621 20mm cannon has a range of >4km and thus can be employed at a standoff distance where the helmet cueing will be used.

If you look at the short lip and consider the COMPASS can look down vertically, the blindspot in reality is almost negliable:

 

[Scrutator]

You say everyone else but that isn't strictly true:

Again, the Rudra/LCH's sensor position is a reflection of their intended roles (anti-tank machines) and also it is clear the IA/IAF want to use the Rudra/LCH in the anti-UAV for which this sensor placement is perfect (allowing them to scan above).

I have full faith in the developers and users to have designed a suitable machine for the requirements started.

Dude!! If I had a buck for every time someone here showed me the pic of A129/T129 to justify Rudra/LCH design and the number of times I went on to explain why it's such a poor example, I would probably have my wallet bulging!!!

A129 was designed by the italians decades ago with a non-rotatable FLIR pod (the cylindrical tube you see above the cannon)- it does not have the modern 360 deg rotable EO pod. As such it didn't matter where they put it!!! The Turks took the old platform and replaced the FLIR pod with the modern fully rotatable EO pod. However they did not do any structural changes as such they ended up mounting over the cannon - and it suffers the same fate as Rudra/LCH. It is such a poor example to emulate (Italians have few dozens of these and the turks have about of dozen of these!!!) - when the world is replete with fine examples (thousands of them that were actually battle hardened) like Apache, Mi-35 etc.

Above is the original WSI that was designed. They built a projecting platform at the nose to put some abomination. They probably selected the CoMPASS EO pod later, but stuck with the frame changes made earlier - the same frame extended into LCH. Just a hypethesis!!!

 

[abingdonboy]

+ @Scrutator usually EO pods on helos aren't used to look directly below a helo and no attack helicopter in the world has a helmet mounted cueing system that allows them to look through the floor of their aircraft so the helmet cueing system would be unable to be used in that way no matter what way the EO pod was mounted.

 

[Scrutator]

Not really, the helmets are also to be used to cue the ATGMs and they can be used for the look-down-shoot-down capability, the Nexter M621 20mm cannon has a range of >4km and thus can be employed at a standoff distance where the helmet cueing will be used.

If you look at the short lip and consider the COMPASS can look down vertically, the blindspot in reality is almost negliable:

Well, once you have the expensive cueing helmet then of course information from several other systems will be projected onto it (even that of ATGM and perhaps his text messages too...). But the primary purpose of the helmet is for the cannon. ATGM (fired from about 5-7 kms away) could easily be cued without such an expensive helmet!!! That's why it's called look-down-shoot-down capability!!

I'll repeat: Rudra/LCH good for detecting targets in the windward side. Leeward side no good!!!!

 

[Scrutator]

+ @Scrutator usually EO pods on helos aren't used to look directly below a helo and no attack helicopter in the world has a helmet mounted cueing system that allows them to look through the floor of their aircraft so the helmet cueing system would be unable to be used in that way no matter what way the EO pod was mounted.

There are other display screens on the helos dashboard. The pilot doesn't have to sweep his head in all directions to see things. He can direct the EO pod in any direction and have it displayed on the screen. EO pods also lock onto to targets/target-areas (below/behind/ahead); if such a capability weren't available then proper firing of any missile will require the pilot holding his head still or meticulously tracking a ground or aerial target with his head
If seeing below the helo with an EO pod is not possible, then I wonder how the Mi-35 hovering over Pathankot airbase track the Jihadis......................