HAL Prachand - Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)

[Yumdoot]

Now that would be a really interesting experiment.

Zu-23-3 has a 186 gram projectile coming in at a cyclic rate of 2000 rounds out to a range of 2 km and altitude of 2 km. Its deadly accurate within that range. Even without a Fire control system which is going to be regular even in third rate armies. Projectiles will reach you in 2 seconds flat.

vs.

Apache's never exceed speed of 6 km per minute.

Some 372 kg worth of projectiles coming at you in just 1 minute, while you lazily move out of the way at in 4-6 minutes. And if they get something nazuk on the Apache in the first few rounds then you get full 2.2 tons worth of projectile in those 4-6 minutes, for the rest of your sair-sapata.

Oh and if you are anywhere within range then there will be a battery of 6 Zu-23 guns firing away. So no problem with firing rates actually. It can easily be increased.

Sir the only way to keep an Apache safe is to keep it out of the way. Bullet proof wagehra won't help at all.




For those interested and with longer memories, remember Call sign NUBRA-4.

Is that how the Apache was sold. That it will take 23 mm shells easily.

 

[blueblood]

True, just like whenever a person fires AK-47 his target is hit by several kilos worth of 600-700 rounds and the target gets crushed by the sheer weight of the ammo fired.

Man, I should have stayed in school.

 

[Neeraj Mathur]

@Neeraj Mathur

... The helicopter is also fitted with radar and laser warning receivers, a missile approach warning system, countermeasure dispensing systems and a missile jammer.....

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/hallghtcombathelicop/

can you post some pics
i was unable to find one

 

[Yumdoot]

True, just like whenever a person fires AK-47 his target is hit by several kilos worth of 600-700 rounds and the target gets crushed by the sheer weight of the ammo fired.

Man, I should have stayed in school.

Bhai ji aap to lagta hai bura maan gaye. Invariably my posts are not directed at a particular person, unless I address it so. My angst was against the general level at which people are being delibrately misinformed.

Look at it from a slightly different perspective and I hope it bothers you less and you take it less personally.

There are versions of GAU-19 of 12.7 mm that can fire 8000 rounds per minute. Never will I send an LCH anywhere near the area such a gun is.

Su-25 has a titanium protection but effective protection is for even lesser types of rounds probably just agaiinst AK-47s (I may be wrong). But then Su-25 can easily do egress speeds of Mach-1 about 20 km per minute (nearly 3 times faster and at much lower levels than an Apache). The higher speed is the only real protection. Thus even Su-25 wants to "avoid", as the "primary means" of keeping itself safe. It is well known that Su-25 betters A-10 in this regard.

Apache can be taken down even by variants of 12.7 (GAU-19 effective range is just under 2 km) and if LCH is sufficiently away say 5 km from the Zu23 then even it will be safe despite a few hits. Reason being the Zu23 shell would have lost a lot of kinetic energy. IIRC the Zu23 shells easily travel 4 kilometers and only the effective range is 2 km.

So Peace. My anger is against Americanese and not against you or for that matter even against Americans.

Aside - People highly under-estimate the power of chemical explosives.

 

[Chinmoy]

Why the Apache is a brute and LCH is elegant


We will take the LCH and the Apache and put an identical payload of 1,000 kg on them. Note that we have increased the payload here from 500 kg to 1000 kg for this analysis as opposed to that done for the Z-10. The reasoning will simple: both the LCH and the Apache can haul 500 kg through the high Himalayas. However, to get an idea of different performances, we are getting more realistic and putting a higher payload. In reality, with about 200 kg of crew and around 300 kg of fuel, the effective payload of weapons is only 500 kg. We will run both helicopters through a simulation model where we subject them to altitude variations and see how it affects their rate-of-climb capabilities while in hover, out of Ground Effect conditions. The rate-of-climb (ROC, measured here in meters/second) is a true measure of the maneuvering capability of an attack helicopter. Typically, a ROC of 0.5 m/sec is used to evaluate service ceiling conditions. A ROC of 2.5 m/sec is typically the bare minimum for combat conditions. For a helicopter in high mountains to be truly maneuverable, it may need somewhere in the range of 2.5 to 8 m/sec vertical ROC equivalent in power capacity. Of course, beyond a certain altitude, the helicopter may not be able to fly with the 500 kg payload, let alone providing additional power for high ROC. So we will also see where those limits are for the LCH and the Z-10.
The focus of this analysis is on a preliminary aerodynamic and propulsive standpoint. The analysis is done using simulation tools that integrate payload capacities and typical rate-of-climb requirements with a preliminary rotary aerodynamics model and a simple propulsion module. When coupled with an atmospheric simulator for the Himalayas, the performance of each helicopter type can be predicted and compared. Furthermore, the models allow for the performance analysis in Ground Effect conditions. The Ground Effect conditions are encountered when the helicopters are hovering very close to the ground and serves to work as a performance multiplier with regard to power needed in lifting a certain payload.


The models do not compensate for transmission limitations for the power, which means that the analysis is idealized wherein power generated is power available. This is, of course, not encountered in practice, but works well for high-altitude conditions where power available is almost always less than the transmission limits. At lower altitudes, the performance of the various designs must be assumed to be ideal, rather than restricted from transmission and structural limitations. For example, the maximum rate-of-climb (ROC) values obtained from this simulator for sea-level (SL) conditions will typically be higher than what is allowed by other limitations. However, such removal of limitations is required in order to compare the various contenders at the same performance benchmarks.
Data for this analysis is obtained from the manufacturers via open-sources. No proprietary information is shared here. Unless where cited, the analysis results are to be considered proprietary of the author. See remarks for details.

LCH versus the Apache:

The hover performance is evaluated at altitudes varying from 0 ft (SL) to 25,000 ft. Altitudes in the Himalayan Mountains regularly require flights above 10,000 ft and often up to 22,000 ft. The data is presented for the LCH and the Apache for payload and available maximum ROC capability versus altitude. A threshold ROC line is shown for the reference 8 m/sec combat ROC.

http://thebetacoefficient.blogspot.in/2015/04/why-apache-is-brute-and-lch-is-elegant.html

To read further go through the link and please thank Vivek Ahuja for this analysis.
.......................................................................

This analysis however do not include the massive difference in survivability, firepower and avionics to name a few.

Survivability - Apache's crew cabin and rotor blades can survive direct hits from 23mm which is a very powerful cartridge and also one the most widely used in AAA. Same goes for Eurocopter Tiger and A/T-129 which belong to same weight class as LCH.

LCH being a light chopper is not designed for to be in the thick of the AAA fire and can sustain direct hits from 12.7mm which is good but not exactly the world beater. So, it is quite evident that HAL is not yet there in terms of material science.

Firepower - Not counting the quickly expandable missiles and rockets, turret guns are the mainstay weapons of any attack chopper. Apache has huge lead on not just LCH but every single chopper out there.

M230 - 30x113mm, 1200 rounds

M621 - 20x102, estimated 320 rounds

Avionics - Don't just don't............

.................................................................................................

LCH belongs to a different design mindset than Apache or any other chopper out there. It can do high altitude missions with sufficient payload, has decent avionics and firepower and above all, it is cheap and can be procured in large numbers.

Do not foolishly expect an Indian AH-64D at quarter the price.

Well for ease of all, rest of the article is as:
Notice how the sea-level performance of the LCH and the Apache are similar. The Apache, with a 1,000 kg payload is able to generate a maximum vertical ROC capability of 12.77 m/sec. By comparison, at sea-level, the LCH is able to carry the 1,000 kg and is able to provide a power excess for a theoretical max ROC of 15.16 m/sec. It is instantly apparent how the Apache is able to use its outstanding source of power to lift its much heavier mass and still come close to the LCH performance. This heavier bulk involves greater armor and protection for the Apache pilots.
Now consider how the change in altitude affects both helicopters. The Apache, trying to maintain the 1,000 kg payload, begins to tail-off its ROC capability from 12.77 m/sec at sea-level to 0 m/sec ROC at ~18,000 ft. Beyond 18,000 ft altitude, the Apache also cannot carry its 1,000 kg payload and the tail-off in that capacity is visible, although less dramatic than the Z-10 from the previous articles. The Z-10 cannot operate beyond 10,000 ft under any conditions. The Apache, on the other hand, flies and fights up till ~15,000 ft altitude.
The LCH, on the other hand, once again utilizes its light-weight structure to great effect. It can not only maintain the 1,000 kg payload for another 3,000 ft altitude (i.e. up to ~21,000 ft), the tail-off in the ROC does not drop below 8 m/sec until ~11,000 ft. The tail-off does not drop below the minimum 2.5 m/sec until ~15,000 ft.
Conclusions:
The difference between the LCH and Apache at high altitudes is going to be in maneuverability. The LCH will turn out to be more agile and have higher performance in general because it is custom-designed to fight at higher altitudes. The Apache, on the other hand, is a brute-force machine, matching the LCH up to the Himalayas for payload, but losing out in agility. The Apache will be less agile than the LCH but will take more hits and keep flying. Where the LCH will look to evade and survive, the Apache will turn to its armor.

 

[Chinmoy]

Bhai ji aap to lagta hai bura maan gaye. Invariably my posts are not directed at a particular person, unless I address it so. My angst was against the general level at which people are being delibrately misinformed.

Look at it from a slightly different perspective and I hope it bothers you less and you take it less personally.

There are versions of GAU-19 of 12.7 mm that can fire 8000 rounds per minute. Never will I send an LCH anywhere near the area such a gun is.

Su-25 has a titanium protection but effective protection is for even lesser types of rounds probably just agaiinst AK-47s (I may be wrong). But then Su-25 can easily do egress speeds of Mach-1 about 20 km per minute (nearly 3 times faster and at much lower levels than an Apache). The higher speed is the only real protection. Thus even Su-25 wants to "avoid", as the "primary means" of keeping itself safe. It is well known that Su-25 betters A-10 in this regard.

Apache can be taken down even by variants of 12.7 (GAU-19 effective range is just under 2 km) and if LCH is sufficiently away say 5 km from the Zu23 then even it will be safe despite a few hits. Reason being the Zu23 shell would have lost a lot of kinetic energy. IIRC the Zu23 shells easily travel 4 kilometers and only the effective range is 2 km.

So Peace. My anger is against Americanese and not against you or for that matter even against Americans.

Aside - People highly under-estimate the power of chemical explosives.

@Yumdoot and @blueblood I would say that rather then criticising the systems and each other, we should learn from the Apache. Its the top of the line system and could teach us a lot. Only point is that we shouldn't forget about the LCH in the gory and heat of the Apache. Both the system does have its own strength as well as weakness. We need to sort out the weakness of our system and build upon the strength. Pak too have Apache's in their kitty. Hope LCH would someday be able to stand in front of those. :biggrin2:

 

[shankyz]

LCH has good orders from IA n IAF both.

Paks don't have Apaches , they have the AH-1 Cobra gunship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blueblood]

Bhai ji aap to lagta hai bura maan gaye.

Nahi bhai sahab. Bhagwan ne shakl hi aisi di hai.........

Invariably my posts are not directed at a particular person, unless I address it so. My angst was against the general level at which people are being delibrately misinformed.

Look at it from a slightly different perspective and I hope it bothers you less and you take it less personally.

There are versions of GAU-19 of 12.7 mm that can fire 8000 rounds per minute. Never will I send an LCH anywhere near the area such a gun is.

Su-25 has a titanium protection but effective protection is for even lesser types of rounds probably just agaiinst AK-47s (I may be wrong). But then Su-25 can easily do egress speeds of Mach-1 about 20 km per minute (nearly 3 times faster and at much lower levels than an Apache). The higher speed is the only real protection. Thus even Su-25 wants to "avoid", as the "primary means" of keeping itself safe. It is well known that Su-25 betters A-10 in this regard.

Apache can be taken down even by variants of 12.7 (GAU-19 effective range is just under 2 km) and if LCH is sufficiently away say 5 km from the Zu23 then even it will be safe despite a few hits. Reason being the Zu23 shell would have lost a lot of kinetic energy. IIRC the Zu23 shells easily travel 4 kilometers and only the effective range is 2 km.

So Peace. My anger is against Americanese and not against you or for that matter even against Americans.

Aside - People highly under-estimate the power of chemical explosives.

Lets clear up some points, shall we;

• You are reducing complex weapon systems to shields and arrows. Targeting an agile helicopter flying and manuevering at 250 kmph it not really the child's play you are making it out to be.
  
• LCH will detect and engage the enemy AAA first. Doesn't the conventional wisdom dictates that sanitizing the AOO of enemy air defence is the necessary condition for every single kind of op?
  Spoiler: Lessons from history

 

[blueblood]

@Chinmoy , There is a reason I didn't post the entire article from Mr. Ahuja's site and why you shouldn't have done it either. You robbed him of visitors to his site and his other articles. Don't do that again.

 

[guru-dutt]

Indian army has already given a firm order for LCH and they will have it in good numbers but IAF as usual will ask for apache type avionicks and wepons on LCH

 

[Srinivas_K]

Apache can take hits and stay in air, It is like a flying tank with modern sensors, weapons etc...etc.... it takes a pilot atleast 2 years (aprox) to master apache helicopter flying.

LCH is a light weight attach helicopter.

Both have different roles.

we need both of them, LCH's in 100's and Apache's(heavy attack helicopters) may be 5 to 6 squadrons.

 

[Yumdoot]

Lets clear up some points, shall we;

• You are reducing complex weapon systems to shields and arrows. Targeting an agile helicopter flying and manuevering at 250 kmph it not really the child's play you are making it out to be.
  
• LCH will detect and engage the enemy AAA first. Doesn't the conventional wisdom dictates that sanitizing the AOO of enemy air defence is the necessary condition for every single kind of op?
  Spoiler: Lessons from history

#1 But that exactly is the only point worth thinking about. In 2 seconds that Zu23 shell is in the air, how far can the Apache move say in the most difficult to hit direction ie. cross-range.

#2 If there is enemy AAA anywhere then yes both LCA or Apache will have to first ensure that the AAA is done away with otherwise, whatever the level of protection, the helo is going to be mince-meeted. This was the basic lesson that was ignored by both IA gernali and IAF kernali during Kargil - I did hint at Nubra-4.

The youtube video you hold out as a history lesson is exactly the reason these Americans get on my nerves. They have turned our people into repeaters of their fake history. The best kind of propaganda, where the repeater does not even know that he is doing propaganda for somebody else.

Did you find the history of Vietnam helos anywhere in 10 miles of that video. And history records the fate of the Super Power as follows:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_losses_of_the_Vietnam_War:
In total, the United States lost in Vietnam almost 10,000 aircraft and helicopters, excluding number of UAVs. South Vietnam's army lost 2,500 aircraft and helicopters, excluding number of UAVs.

Thats 12500 aircrafts and helos of US origin and supply. Not counting UAVs etc.

Mind you against an enemy that had nothing more than AK-47s and a some random weaponry. That is why everybody agrees that US lost the war and lost its mind.

Mere pyare Bharatiya Bhai what can I do to convince you that Apache-Wapache is all propaganda of the most vile kind. The kind that destroys nations.

Only the fighter who knows how to fight comes out winner and he will not allow himself to live with a dependency in his quiver.

 

[blueblood]

#2 If there is enemy AAA anywhere then yes both LCA or Apache will have to first ensure that the AAA is done away with otherwise, whatever the level of protection, the helo is going to be mince-meeted. This was the basic lesson that was ignored by both IA gernali and IAF kernali during Kargil - I did hint at Nubra-4.

Let's create some order. The very first thing that comes is SEAD and DEAD. After that comes some remaining pockets of AAA. These remaining pockets of AAA will be engaged appropriately. Your assumption that a Zu-23 will see and engage Apache well before it sees the AAA is flawed to say the least.

#1 But that exactly is the only point worth thinking about. In 2 seconds that Zu23 shell is in the air, how far can the Apache move say in the most difficult to hit direction ie. cross-range.

I would say more than enough to be out of the range of a SHORT BURST of unguided and inaccurate AAA fire.

Spoiler

The youtube video you hold out as a history lesson is exactly the reason these Americans get on my nerves. They have turned our people into repeaters of their fake history. The best kind of propaganda, where the repeater does not even know that he is doing propaganda for somebody else.

Did you find the history of Vietnam helos anywhere in 10 miles of that video. And history records the fate of the Super Power as follows:



Thats 12500 aircrafts and helos of US origin and supply. Not counting UAVs etc.

Mind you against an enemy that had nothing more than AK-47s and a some random weaponry. That is why everybody agrees that US lost the war and lost its mind.

Offcourse bro don't let facts get in the way of your bias.

Do you have similar stats for a more recent gulf war or OIF?

Are you challenging the video's authenticity and material?

So in your mind NVA and Viet Cong only had Ak-47s and not tanks and jets. In that case cheers to you.

Mere pyare Bharatiya Bhai what can I do to convince you that Apache-Wapache is all propaganda of the most vile kind. The kind that destroys nations.

Bade Bhai, you don't have to convince me. I am already convinced that you are right.

Only the fighter who knows how to fight comes out winner and he will not allow himself to live with a dependency in his quiver.

True that.....


One final thing, there is no such thing as indestructible. Your assumption that I and others are classifying Apache as one is wrong to the core. It is a weapon system and very good one at that, it is survivable but not against everything. But odds are in the favour of Apache and that is crystal clear.

 

[Yumdoot]

Let's create some order. The very first thing that comes is SEAD and DEAD.

But you were holding out that the Apache took out the Iraqi Radars and brought democracy in.

After that comes some remaining pockets of AAA. These remaining pockets of AAA will be engaged appropriately. Your assumption that a Zu-23 will see and engage Apache well before it sees the AAA is flawed to say the least.

Ok at what range will the Zu-23 see the Apache and vice versa.

I would say more than enough to be out of the range of a SHORT BURST of unguided and inaccurate AAA fire.

Check carefully that video you posted again. The shells get a lot of first burst hits (lofted baloons and floating drums). And that too on targets that are smaller than a standard Apache. That too with an unguided gun. That too when directed at shallow angles.

And those need not necessarily be short bursts. Could be that the HE rounds are separate. In any case there will be more than one such gun around. They do not usually work alone for AD.

Offcourse bro don't let facts get in the way of your bias.

I can calculate and read. I don't need to join you down there.

Do you have similar stats for a more recent gulf war or OIF?

Yeh man. Now you are talking the lingo.

Ok you want the Pakis and Chinese to act like Iraqis and the IAF to act like Americans. And that is because.....?

What do you think the IAF at war would do - send letters asking PAF and PLAAF to roll over and die!

But seriously, do you know the Apaches are not supposed to be flying with their longbow radar in Afghanistan against Taliban. And the state reason is that there are no tanks. But come on there are Zu-23 and Old CIA supplied Stingers still lying around. Now what could be the possible reasons?
Probably the Americans bought back all Stingers.
Probably the Taliban never had Anzas supplied to them. A favour, I guess IAF too could expect from the PAF or PLAAF .
Probably the longbow is ineffective in the mountains for reasons of shadow zones.
Probably they ultimately realized they were fighting not too sophisticated idiots.

Or

Because the Apache is so Rambosque that it does not needs the longbow. Would love to see Dharam Paaji on an Apache - Kutte mein tera klhun pi jaunga wo bhi bina longbow ke.

Sorry man I cannot be serious about this. This is too damn funny.

IIRC only the Apaches meant for some air traffic management duties are the ones with their longbow on, in Afghanistan.

Are you challenging the video's authenticity and material?

The strike is original, only highly unimaginable for a country that had decided to use the Event to advertise its inventory post the collapse of the Soviets. Hell even Hindi newspapers spreading propaganda in an unrelated country - India.

In any case you were just admitting that that - "The very first thing that comes is SEAD and DEAD." Do you want IAF to do SEAD and DEAD in this manner?

Notice today, even the Americans do not dare to show up for similar stunts in Syria. That CNN-war was nothing different from the nuking of Japanese. Only different manners of advertising things.

So in your mind NVA and Viet Cong only had Ak-47s and not tanks and jets. In that case cheers to you.

Cheers indeed. At least they knew how to do it. There is always hope.

Bade Bhai, you don't have to convince me. I am already convinced that you are right.

Yes but by whom?

One final thing, there is no such thing as indestructible. Your assumption that I and others are classifying Apache as one is wrong to the core. It is a weapon system and very good one at that, it is survivable but not against everything. But odds are in the favour of Apache and that is crystal clear.

Sorry but I did not assume anything at the beginning of this discussion. You started this by highlighting how Apache's blades can take 23mm hits. I had a different view. In fact I went on to point out how even in certain circumstances (Apache too requires 'certain circumstances' leeway), even the LCH will be able to take hits from 23 mm. You remove this stupid 'certain circumstances' leeway and Apache can be taken down several ways. You may have failed to notice but both Pakis and Chinese sport some pretty good air-defence set up with the advantage of having to manage much smaller airspaces in the expected theaters of war.

We have just put money down the drain with this extortion business being run under the garb of FMS. We should have enhanced the orders for LCH instead.

 

[Yumdoot]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_AH-64_Apache#Afghanistan_and_Iraq

Afghanistan and Iraq[edit]
U.S. Apaches served in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan from 2001.[101] The Apache was the only Army platform capable of providing accurate CAS duties forOperation Anaconda, regularly taking fire during the intense early fighting, they were typically repaired quickly.[102] U.S. AH-64Ds typically flew in Afghanistan and Iraq without the Longbow Radar in the absence of armored threats.[103] On 21 December 2009, a pair of U.S. Apaches attacked a British-held base in a friendly fire incident, killing one British soldier.[104] In 2006, Thomas Adams noted that Apaches often fought in small teams with little autonomy to react to threats and opportunities, requiring lengthy dialogue with command structures in an effort to centrally micromanage each unit .[105]

In 2003, the AH-64 participated in the invasion of Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom.[106] On 24 March 2003, 31 Apaches were damaged, and one shot down and captured, in an unsuccessful attack on an Iraqi Republican Guard armored brigade near Karbala.[107]Iraqi tank crews had set up a "flak trap" among terrain and effectively employed their guns.[108][109] Iraqi officials claimed a farmer with a Brno rifle shot down the Apache,[110] but the farmer denied involvement.[111] The helicopter came down intact and both the pilot and co-pilot were captured.[108] The AH-64D was destroyed via air strike the following day.[112][113]

By the end of U.S. military operations in Iraq in December 2011, several Apache helicopters had been shot down by enemy fire, and others lost in accidents. In 2006, an Apache was downed by a Soviet-made Strela 2 (SA-7) in Iraq, despite the Apache being typically able to avoid such missiles .[114] In 2007, four Apache helicopters were destroyed on the ground by insurgent mortar fire using web-published geotagged photographs taken by soldiers.[115] Several AH-64s were lost to accidents in Afghanistan as of 2012.[116][117][118][119] Most Apaches that took heavy damage were able to continue their missions and return safely.[109]

 

[punjab47]

One. Nva had world's best air defense system at the time.

Two. Rate of fire is always theoretical, real sustainable rate of fire is not even 1/10th of that usually it's only 2-5%

 

[Lions Of Punjab]

HAL'S LCH INCHES CLOSER TO CERTIFICATION; DEFENCE MINISTER MANOHAR PARRIKAR TAKES A DETAILED LOOK

LCH is the only attack helicopter which can operate above 10000 - 12000 feet altitude with considerable load of armament
BANGALORE: Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar on Friday visited HAL's helicopter complex to have a detailed look on advanced features and armanent fit of Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) prototypes, as the chopper inches closer to certification.
"LCH is the only attack helicopter which can operate above 10000 - 12000 feet altitude with considerable load of armament", said T Suvarana Raju, CMD, HAL. Based on successful completion of remaining flight trials, HAL expects operational clearance from CEMILAC very soon.
LCH has completed performance trials paving way for finalization of basic configuration.
"LCH has completed performance flight trials which involved not only development testing at Bangalore but also trials at extreme environment conditions such as Sea Level at Chennai, Cold weather at Leh, Hot weather at Jodhpur and Hot & high altitude tests at Leh. Accordingly, the helicopter can be cleared for weapon trials. With the finalization of basic configuration, HAL can start production of LCH after the operational clearance," HAL press release said.
G. Gouda, Officiating Chief Executive of CEMILAC (Centre for Military Airworthiness & Certification) handed over a letter on completion of performance flight trials of LCH to Dr. M. Vijaya Kumar, General Manager, HAL in presence of Defence Minister and CMD, HAL.
The LCH is a twin-engine helicopter of 5.8-ton class designed and developed by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) to meet the requirements of Indian defence forces. LCH was proposed to meet IAF's requirement of a dedicated light helicopter for combat operations.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...akes-a-detailed-look/articleshow/49413373.cms

 

[Lions Of Punjab]

HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED-MADE ATTACK HELICOPTER COMPLETES PERFORMANCE TRIALS

HAL's Light Combat Helicopter
BANGALORE: State-run aircraft maker Hindustan Aeronautics Limited today said Light Combat Helicopter, the high-altitude attack helicopter, has completed performance trials paving way for finalisation of basic configuration.
Based on successful completion of remaining flight trials, HAL expects operational clearance from CEMILAC (Centre for Military Airworthiness & Certification) very soon, the company said.
It said officiating Chief Executive of CEMILAC G Gouda handed over a letter on completion of performance flight trials of LCH to HAL General Manager M Vijaya Kumar in the presence of Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and HAL CMD T Suvarana Raju.
The Defence Minister here today visited HAL's helicopter complex and had a detailed look on advanced features and armament fit of LCH prototypes.
"LCH is the only attack helicopter which can operate above 10000-12000 feet altitude with considerable load of armament," CMD Raju said.
LCH has completed performance flight trials which involved not only development testing at Bangalore but also trials at extreme environment conditions such as sea level at Chennai, cold weather at Leh, hot weather at Jodhpur and hot and high altitude tests at Leh, HAL said.
Accordingly, the helicopter can be cleared for weapon trials. With the finalisation of basic configuration, HAL can start production of LCH after the operational clearance, it added.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...s-performance-trials/articleshow/49415847.cms

 

[Lions Of Punjab]

LCH ALL SET FOR FINAL CONFIGURATION

HAL's Light Combat Attack Helicopter
BANGALORE: The completion of performance trials of the Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) has paved the way for finalisation of its basic configuration, said Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar’s during his visit to Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) on Friday.
He was shown the advanced features and armament fit of the LCH prototypes. T Suvarna Raju, CMD of HAL, said it is the only attack helicopter that can operate at an altitude above 10,000-12,000 feet with a load of armament. Based on successful completion of the remaining flight trials, HAL expects operational clearance for the vehicle soon. With the finalisation of basic configuration, HAL can start the production of LCH after operational clearance.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/sta...l-Configuration/2015/10/17/article3084081.ece

 

[Rushil51]

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-pape...final-clearance-this-month/article7848171.ece



LCH set to get final clearance this month

The indigenously designed and built Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) is set to achieve the final clearance any time this month. Thereafter, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will start the serial production of the attack helicopters.

“With all performance trails completed, the final clearance is expected any time soon from the Centre for Military Airworthiness & Certification (CEMILAC) in Bangalore. After that, we will integrate weapons and finalise the configuration as per the requirements of the end users: the Army and the Air Force,” said a senior official at HAL.

LCH is a 5.8-tonne, twin-engine armed helicopter, designed to operate at an altitude of 10,000-12,000 feet. HAL already has a firm order for 65 from the Air Force and 114 from the Army.

This number is expected to go up, given the Army’s plan to have attack helicopters embedded in all formations for close air support. The government had earlier informed Parliament that it was planned to make LCH from 2017-18.

HAL officials said that unlike fixed-wing aircraft which need Initial Operational Clearance (IOC) and Final Operational Clearance (FOC), helicopters usually get the final clearance.

HAL will conduct the maiden flight of Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) in December, coinciding with the company’s 75th year celebrations.

“Efforts are on to have the first flight in December,” one defence official said. The single-engine helicopter, weighing 3.1 tonnes, is powered by the Shakti engine which powers Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH) and is meant to replace the ageing Cheetah and Chetak fleets operated by the three services. HAL intends to build four prototypes by 2017 and start production by 2018.

The Army and the Air Force have committed themselves to buying 187 LUHs.

Given the critical need for utility helicopters, India has recently selected the Russian Kamov 226T helicopter, more than 200 of which will be made in India. The deal is expected to be signed during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Russia in December.


:hippo::hippo::hippo: