HAL Prachand - Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)

[abingdonboy]

Not yet! It’s quite weird that they haven’t integrated them as yet (even though they had a practice run on Rudra!).

Eagerly awaiting seeing LCH with DIRCMs as it’s supposed to have.

Yes Rudra and ALH to an extent have been useful test beds for SDS for LCH but still needs to be validated on lch and with LSP now ongoing that’s weird

I have a feeling that Sant will become standard on LCH/Rudra.
Sant has better range and more importantly doesn’t need the ‘launch tubes’ that add extra weight penalty!!
Sant is rail launched like ALL other heli/aircraft launched ATGMs. Helina always seemed like a stop-gap adoption of Nag onto aerial platforms!

PARS 3 and Mistral ATGMs aren’t rail mounted either but I agree, SANT with longer range and rail launching is a much better option than HELINA.

 

[Enquirer]

Eagerly awaiting seeing LCH with DIRCMs as it’s supposed to have.

Yes Rudra and ALH to an extent have been useful test beds for SDS for LCH but still needs to be validated on lch and with LSP now ongoing that’s weird


PARS 3 and Mistral ATGMs aren’t rail mounted either but I agree, SANT with longer range and rail launching is a much better option than HELINA.

Didn't know that Mistral could be used as an ATGM - thought it was for Air-to-Air role only! Mistral's so called tube is just 3 rings on a rod - not as complete and heavy as Helina's.

You're right about Pars 3. Other than the Germans no other European country seems excited about this missile.

 

[indiatester]

Yesterday there was one LCH doing rounds here. When I was in my car, I could not even hear that thing and it was not too far off.
When I got home too, it was not too noisy. Not sure if improvements are being made there.

 

[Kshithij]

PARS 3 and Mistral ATGMs aren’t rail mounted either but I agree, SANT with longer range and rail launching is a much better option than HELINA.

Pars 3 is tube/box launched missile:

 

[Alfalfa]

Eurocopter has flight ceiling of 4km only which makes it clearly inferior to LCH which has flight ceiling of 6+km. I don't understand why you are fascinated with it. LCH does not have MMR radar yet and it will get it soon. But avionics wise, I don't see why you claim Eurocopter as any better. India is not a novice in making avionics. Tejas and Su30 MKI avionics is made in India. india also made avionics or Jaguar, MiG29 etc even before that. India also made avionics for Rudra and ALH helicopters. I would not discount India on avionics capability.

The only drawback of LCH is that it is lightly armoured due to its lightweight configuration. An attack helicopter must be a bit more armoured and heavier with minimum empty weight of 6ton and MToW of about 10 ton. LCH has empty weight of 2600kg and MToW of 5800kg at sea level and carries a payload of 1.2ton at sea level. The armour of LCH is only resistant upto 7.62NATO. 50BMG guns can pierce through LCH.

I myself don't understand the rationale behind making a light attack helicopter. But other than the fact that it is light, it does not have any more defects


Is HAL responsible for not making Tejas which was ordered in 2006 (20 numbers order)? In this case, not 1 was delivered till 2014. But at the same time, HAL was making Su30 MKI. Isn't it ironic? So, what is the actual problem? HAL or something else? @Pulkit

You cant get a heavy attack helicopter to operate at the altitudes the LCH is mandated to, at an MTOW of 10tons the LCH regardless of powerplant would simply be unable to operate at the desired altitude envelope.. thats why the lack of armor

 

[Kshithij]

You cant get a heavy attack helicopter to operate at the altitudes the LCH is mandated to, at an MTOW of 10tons the LCH regardless of powerplant would simply be unable to operate at the desired altitude envelope.. thats why the lack of armor

YOU ARE RIGHT IN GENERAL. Apache has lower ability than LCH as Apache has twin 1260kW engines now upgraded to 1410kW engines. LCH on the other hand, has 1040kW engines. So, the power of Apache becomes significantly low to be able to fly properly at 6000 metre. It is difficult to place twin 2000kW engine in Apache as the size will be big. So, lowering armour is the only way of flying at 6000metres.

Also, with MANPADs, it becomes easier for enemy to take out helicopters even with armour. But, when doing a CAS role, it is generally done in plateau or flat terrain. There one will need a bit more armour so as to make it difficult for enemies to attack with simpler weapons like 50BMG guns

 

[Chinmoy]

^^ LCH armour plate withstood 12.7 mm round.

 

[binayak95]

^^ LCH armour plate withstood 12.7 mm round.

True. But AA fire will be 20 mm at the very least. But then, we are getting Apaches to support our armored columns. We need more than 28 though. Like ~ 50

 

[Chinmoy]

True. But AA fire will be 20 mm at the very least. But then, we are getting Apaches to support our armored columns. We need more than 28 though. Like ~ 50

Even Apache could not withstand 20 and 30 mm cannon rounds.

The Apache is heavily armored on all sides. Some areas are also surrounded by Kevlar soft armor for extra protection. The cockpit is protected by layers of reinforced armor and bulletproof glass. According to Boeing, every part of the helicopter can survive 12.7-mm rounds, and vital engine and rotor components can withstand 23-mm fire.

https://science.howstuffworks.com/apache-helicopter6.htm

 

[Kshithij]

True. But AA fire will be 20 mm at the very least. But then, we are getting Apaches to support our armored columns. We need more than 28 though. Like ~ 50

Apache can't fly in Siachen or himalayas as easily as LCH can. The load of Apache at 6000m will be as much as LCH and not more if it wants to even fly.

Buying Apache appears more or less wasteful and will make India dependent on USA spare parts which will be hard to get by in war. The upside to buying Apache is that they have made some investment in India to make Apache fuselage which will give back some of the foreign exchange to India, Any further buying of Apache should be based on economic and political consideration rather than for defence.

^^ LCH armour plate withstood 12.7 mm round.

LCH can't stand 12.7mm. Apache has that limit. LCH limit is 7.62NATO or may be .338 resistant. The army wanted to have 12.7mm protection like the Apache but the panels were too heavy for LCH to be light anymore. So, the protection is owered to 7.62NATO level.

AA fire is not something one must worry about as regardless of helicopter or plane, 20mm will punch through the armour.

 

[Chinmoy]

Apache can't fly in Siachen or himalayas as easily as LCH can. The load of Apache at 6000m will be as much as LCH and not more if it wants to even fly.

Buying Apache appears more or less wasteful and will make India dependent on USA spare parts which will be hard to get by in war. The upside to buying Apache is that they have made some investment in India to make Apache fuselage which will give back some of the foreign exchange to India, Any further buying of Apache should be based on economic and political consideration rather than for defence.


LCH can't stand 12.7mm. Apache has that limit. LCH limit is 7.62NATO or may be .338 resistant. The army wanted to have 12.7mm protection like the Apache but the panels were too heavy for LCH to be light anymore. So, the protection is owered to 7.62NATO level.

AA fire is not something one must worry about as regardless of helicopter or plane, 20mm will punch through the armour.

Go couple of pages back in this very thread.

 

[Kshithij]

Go couple of pages back in this very thread.

Your words a few pages back:

There is a reason why .50cal are called anti material round. They were designed to take down tank armour. Now you can't have a Light Combat Helicopter with tank armour in it. Could you?

Though there was also news that armour for 12.7x108mm was also tested. But I also read that it will make the empty weight very high. Also, considering that Apache is resistant upto 12.7mm, I have concluded that a smaller helicopter like LCH can't have empty weight of 2500-2800kg and still have same protection as Apache. The weight is the limiting factor.

 

[Chinmoy]

Your words a few pages back:


Though there was also news that armour for 12.7x108mm was also tested. But I also read that it will make the empty weight very high. Also, considering that Apache is resistant upto 12.7mm, I have concluded that a smaller helicopter like LCH can't have empty weight of 2500-2800kg and still have same protection as Apache. The weight is the limiting factor.

Good........... You have read that, but conveniently left behind the posts followed thereafter. Anyway, have a look at this.

 

[Kshithij]

Good........... You have read that, but conveniently left behind the posts followed thereafter. Anyway, have a look at this.

View attachment 24563

I am just saying that the 12.7mm protection will increase the weight drastically. LCH has to fly at 6000-6500 metres. With the 12.7mm protection, the empty weight may be 3100kg. So, there is a chance that the final armour may be reduced to just be enough for 7.62NATO to reduce the empty weight to 2.5-2.6tons.

The MToW with full maneuvering at 6500m is >5 tons. The empty weight includes all the fitments like cannon, racks, pods etc and the payload will include weight of 2 pilots (200kg), weight of 8 SANT missiles on both sides (60kg each) , the weight of two dozen 70mm rockets, weight of ammunition for the cannon and fuel.

The weight of 8 SANT is 500kg, weight of 24 rockets is 300kg, weight of pilots is 200kg, weight of fuel is 800kg. The 20mm cannon ammunition, weighing 500 grams each will be limited to 400. For LCH to operate at optimal load with 1000 x 20mm rounds, it is important to reduce empty weight by at least 300kg and upto 500kg to keep reserve weight to fit further equipments like MMR radars.

 

[Chinmoy]

I am just saying that the 12.7mm protection will increase the weight drastically. LCH has to fly at 6000-6500 metres. With the 12.7mm protection, the empty weight may be 3100kg. So, there is a chance that the final armour may be reduced to just be enough for 7.62NATO to reduce the empty weight to 2.5-2.6tons.

The MToW with full maneuvering at 6500m is >5 tons. The empty weight includes all the fitments like cannon, racks, pods etc and the payload will include weight of 2 pilots (200kg), weight of 8 SANT missiles on both sides (60kg each) , the weight of two dozen 70mm rockets, weight of ammunition for the cannon and fuel.

The weight of 8 SANT is 500kg, weight of 24 rockets is 300kg, weight of pilots is 200kg, weight of fuel is 800kg. The 20mm cannon ammunition, weighing 500 grams each will be limited to 400. For LCH to operate at optimal load with 1000 x 20mm rounds, it is important to reduce empty weight by at least 300kg and upto 500kg to keep reserve weight to fit further equipments like MMR radars.

Homogenous Armour plating needn't essentially increase the overall weight drastically. It all comes down to metallurgy and design.

For instance take the case of Apache. It does have extra armour in its Rotor and engine portion for protection against 23 mm rounds. This type of extra armour at specific places does result in weight increment. Now when talking about LCH, you can't have the privilege of having extra armour in cockpit and leave the tail portion underweight. You would have to take care of whole body in weight perspective.

 

[rkhanna]

My two Paisa

The Apache is a heavy attack Helo. Every Attach Helo has its pluses and minuses

The KEY of the Apache is is that it is the King of Attack Helo's when it comes to Networked Warfare. UAV's and Other ISR assets can be slaved into the cockput of an Apache.

The Apache in Indian Service will be used in a C&C role guiding in Rudra's and LCH (whether doing Covering force duties or Assault Duties). They will become the Nodal Recon Element for Armoured Thrusts networking in Smerch/Pinaka Fires + Other Attach Helos and Fixed WIng CAS.

The Apache in Indian Service Will ALWAYS be a Combined Arms Weapon. While the LCH will be used in a Classic Attack Helo Role specially in High Altitude and Over our Eastern Forests. AFAIK in terms of tech and experience the Apache has probably the best survivalist in a SEAD/DEAD role of any other attach helo (specially in the desert)

Don't Forget we are Getting AH-64D/E's Longbows: The Airforce has bought 22 Airframes and the Army has a requirement for 39 (of which 6 have been ordered).

The LCH will be deployed in independent combat roles to persecute timely tactically missions across our northern and north western border plus COIN. The Apache will always be used as part of our integrated Strike Corp's

Imagine
An Air Assault Force Lead by Apaches with LCH's on the flanks moving an Infantry Battalion in Mi-17s with SOF in Rudra's for Support and Chinooks in the Rear to bring in Artillery / Setting up FARPs WITH Jaguars and LCA flying Top Cover would be a fearsome sight.

 

[Kshithij]

Homogenous Armour plating needn't essentially increase the overall weight drastically. It all comes down to metallurgy and design.

For instance take the case of Apache. It does have extra armour in its Rotor and engine portion for protection against 23 mm rounds. This type of extra armour at specific places does result in weight increment. Now when talking about LCH, you can't have the privilege of having extra armour in cockpit and leave the tail portion underweight. You would have to take care of whole body in weight perspective.

The reason why only certain places are armoured more heavily is because the homogenous armour is too heavy. The armour resistance depends on the thickness of the plates for the same metallurgy and design. So, thicker a plate, higher the resistance but also higher the weight. So, by armouring only key parts with heavy armour while rest is armoured with 7.62NATO resistant armour, the weight is reduced.

 

[Chinmoy]

The reason why only certain places are armoured more heavily is because the homogenous armour is too heavy. The armour resistance depends on the thickness of the plates for the same metallurgy and design. So, thicker a plate, higher the resistance but also higher the weight. So, by armouring only key parts with heavy armour while rest is armoured with 7.62NATO resistant armour, the weight is reduced.

Look at the DRDO newsletter. They have designed a single armour plate for 7.62 as well as 12.7 mm. Its not like we are we are strengthening armour at one place and leaving alone the other. So overall its weight is not going to get increased by the armour.

 

[Kshithij]

Look at the DRDO newsletter. They have designed a single armour plate for 7.62 as well as 12.7 mm. Its not like we are we are strengthening armour at one place and leaving alone the other. So overall its weight is not going to get increased by the armour.

The weight of armour per square metre is higher for 12.7mm resistant armour than 7.62NATO resistant armour. So, the more square metres covered with heavier armour, the heavier the total weight.

DRDO has made the armour for various protection. But, it is not yet made public as to which armour is being used. The armour selection will also include weight limitations and trade-offs

 

[Chinmoy]

The weight of armour per square metre is higher for 12.7mm resistant armour than 7.62NATO resistant armour. So, the more square metres covered with heavier armour, the heavier the total weight.

DRDO has made the armour for various protection. But, it is not yet made public as to which armour is being used. The armour selection will also include weight limitations and trade-offs

Do you think LCH got its IOC and received RFP without this vital element?