HAL Prachand - Light Combat Helicopter (LCH)

SilentKiller

New Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2013
Messages
799
Likes
377
Country flag
Would there be any conflict putting IRDE-DRDO's new long range pod?






Going to go on Rustom 2 eventually.
picture says it all, application is for Rustom 2, Aerostat and IL38, no where mentioned that LCH will carry this.
 

Shaitan

Zandu Balm all day
New Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
4,654
Likes
8,370
Country flag
picture says it all, application is for Rustom 2, Aerostat and IL38, no where mentioned that LCH will carry this.
I know that, but asking if there is any conflict fitting it along with the Israeli helmet targeting system, etc.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
Army requirement wants it to carry guided bombs ..

All correct, except that I haven't heard of laser guided bombs or smart munitions in conjunction with LCH - although one might think it would be possible. Dropping bombs may not be LCH's primary role.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
Not seen yet on public portal, I assume in future it might publish photos ..

Haven't seen Rudra or LCH carrying guided bombs. Has Rudra/LCH been tested with these any of the guided bombs? Should be fairly easy if they wanted to.
 

Scrutator

New Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
345
Likes
289
Not seen yet on public portal, I assume in future it might publish photos ..
It's got all the right ingredients (like a laser designating pod etc.) to launch guided munitions, not sure how often it would take on that role though - especially given that Rudra/LCH have quite limited payload carrying capacity.
But Rudra/LCH adopting this role does free the army from some dependence on the air force, in extenuating circumstances!
 

Scrutator

New Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
345
Likes
289
Army requirement wants it to carry guided bombs ..
It's got all the right ingredients (like a laser designating pod etc.) to launch guided munitions, not sure how often it would take on that role though - especially given that Rudra/LCH have quite limited payload carrying capacity.
!
It's got all the right ingredients BUT, I think it's NOT RIGGED CORRECTLY to drop laser guided munitions! GPS guided munitions may still be an option.

I'll have to refer back to my peeve about how the EO pod on the Rudra/LCH is not mounted in the right orientation (the pod should have been pointing downwards and not upwards) !! If laser guided munitions (like GBU-12 Paveway II) are dropped, they'll fall pretty much below and close to the helo (given the speed and altitude of the helo are much lesser than a fighter jet, the range of the munition is considerably reduced). Now Rudra/LCH EO pod orientation is such that it can (laser) designate a target ahead of it but not below.

Using physics as my guide I can conclusively say that Rudra/LCH cannot drop laser guided bombs; GPS guided bombs may still be an option!
 
Last edited:

Flame Thrower

New Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
1,675
Likes
2,731
@Kunal Biswas

Kunal sir, Dropping LGBs was not in the earlier requirements I believe, can you please confirm on it....

Helos dropping bombs was gone with Mi 25, why do we need a slow moving platform to drop bombs which may not fall more than 5 km radius...

Out of topic qn sir, do any of our bunkers/posts at border withstand more than 3 direct hits from Milan/Helina missiles....

Can you please explain a scenario where we might want to drop using helos...

Thanks
 

Scrutator

New Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
345
Likes
289
@Kunal Biswas

Out of topic qn sir, do any of our bunkers/posts at border withstand more than 3 direct hits from Milan/Helina missiles....
(Hope it's ok if I grabbed this question.....Kunal can still weigh in).

Neither Milan nor Helina are ideal for hitting at the bunkers. Both these missiles have shaped charges as warheads that eject a stream of molten copper - that is ideal for boring a hole into thick metal (like that of a tank or other armored vehicles); the molten copper may not be that effective on concrete/granite bunker walls. What you need is blast fragmentation warhead which both Milan and Helina do not have. It would be conceivable that Helina, in future, could come with blast fragmentation or incendiary warheads too.

Milan could at least be directed towards a bunker (since it's wire guided), Helina is not ideal to even direct it at bunkers because it has an IR seeker. The best seeker for busting bunkers/posts are laser seekers (which Helina does not have).

Net-net, both of those missiles are ideally not suited for bunker busting both from a warhead perspective and from a seeker perspective. Of course, you can always lob a few of them and by blunt force inflict some damage!

To make the long story short - yes, a well fortified bunker could take few hits from Milan/Helina and not be that badly damaged.
 

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
New Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
32,663
Likes
151,106
Country flag
(Hope it's ok if I grabbed this question.....Kunal can still weigh in).

Neither Milan nor Helina are ideal for hitting at the bunkers. Both these missiles have shaped charges as warheads that eject a stream of molten copper - that is ideal for boring a hole into thick metal (like that of a tank or other armored vehicles); the molten copper may not be that effective on concrete/granite bunker walls. What you need is blast fragmentation warhead which both Milan and Helina do not have. It would be conceivable that Helina, in future, could come with blast fragmentation or incendiary warheads too.

Milan could at least be directed towards a bunker (since it's wire guided), Helina is not ideal to even direct it at bunkers because it has an IR seeker. The best seeker for busting bunkers/posts are laser seekers (which Helina does not have).

Net-net, both of those missiles are ideally not suited for bunker busting both from a warhead perspective and from a seeker perspective. Of course, you can always lob a few of them and by blunt force inflict some damage!

To make the long story short - yes, a well fortified bunker could take few hits from Milan/Helina and not be that badly damaged.
what are the examples of bunker busters with the same weapons profile as Milan/Helina?
 

Scrutator

New Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
345
Likes
289
what are the examples of bunker busters with the same weapons profile as Milan/Helina?
Hellfire missile has multiple warheads - blast fragmentation being one of them, that is used for busting bunkers. Hellfire missiles are on order by IAF along with Apache helos (but not sure if the order comprises blast fragmentation warheads).
In the current Indian inventory, I do not know of any 'missile' of the Milan/Helina profile that's ideal for bunker busting; because these are specifically designed as ATGMs.
That said a simple artillery shell or laser guided bomb (in the Indian inventory) could do the job.

I would totally bet that once Helina has proven itself as an ATGM (with it's IR seeker), there will be variants with laser/MMW seekers and blast fragmentation warheads - this would be ideal for launching from UAVs to wreck havoc on terror hideouts across the border/LOC!
 
Last edited:

Prashant12

New Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2014
Messages
3,027
Likes
15,002
Country flag
ANALYSIS: India sets sights on rotorcraft upgrade

The Indian air force operates about 500 military rotorcraft, predominantly Russian Mi-17 V5/Mi-17-IV/Mi-17 variants and a few squadrons of venerable Mi-8s, in addition to about a dozen Mi-25/Mi-35 attack helicopters.

Incredibly, the air force and other services continue to operate substantial numbers of obsolescent Hindustan Aeronautics (HAL) Cheetah and Chetak helicopters; licence-built examples of the Aérospatiale SA315B Lama (Cheetah) and SA316 Alouette III (Chetak).

The army and air force also operate an upgraded version of the Cheetah, called Cheetal, which can operate at altitudes as high as 23,000ft and is powered by a 1,100shp (820kW) Safran Helicopter Engines TM333-2M2 turboshaft.

The air force and army together still have about 280 Cheetah and Chetak helicopters in service, although serviceability rates are thought to be poor and there are growing safety concerns.

By 2020, the air force will have started induction of five new rotorcraft types; the indigenous HAL Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) and Light Utility Helicopter (LUH), Russian Ka-226 T and American Boeing AH-64 E Apache attack helicopters, and CH-47 F (I) Chinook heavy lifters.

More than 500 new rotorcraft will be inducted into the air force alone over the next 10 years.

Light Helicopters

The Kamov Ka-226T Sergei light helicopter emerged as the winner in 2015 of a tortuous procurement process for a new reconnaissance and surveillance helicopter (RSH) type that would replace the outdated Cheetah and Chetak fleets, and 200 Ka-226s (65 air force, 135 army) have now been contracted for. Of those, 140 will be produced under licence by HAL and 60 will be acquired in fly-away condition from Russian Helicopters.

First delivery dates for examples produced under licence are likely to slip because of delays in setting up infrastructure and the finalisation of aircraft specifications. It also now appears that a new engine production facility will be required for the Ka-226T’s Safran Arrius 2G1 engines, as HAL’s existing partnership with Safran to produce TM333-2B2 and Ardiden 1H1 Shakti engines in Bengaluru is already at full capacity.

The LUH is a new 3t single-engined helicopter designed and developed by HAL to meet the RSH requirement. The LUH made its maiden flight in September 2016 and developmental testing is under way.

Series production of the LUH is slated to begin in 2018, at a new manufacturing facility to be built at Tumkur, about 150km (90 miles) from Bengaluru. A production run of 187 LUH rotorcraft has been approved.



Hindustan Aeronautics' light combat helicopter is one of five new types slated to enter air force operation by the end of this decade

Hindustan Aeronautics

The LUH is powered by a Safran HE Ardiden-1U engine developing 750kW. The Ardiden 1U was selected in 2014 and engine certification is planned for 2018. The engine is a derivative of the Ardiden 1H1, which was co-developed by Safran and HAL and is known lokally as the Shakti.

The LUH, design and development of which started in early 2009, has a maximum all-up-weight (AUW) of 3,150kg and a range of 350km. It will carry six passengers and two pilots.

Deliveries of HAL’s Dhruv, a 5t-class helicopter, to the armed forces continues and all 159 on order will be delivered by 2018. Additional orders are likely to keep the production line running into the 2020s. HAL is now building 24 helicopters a year. Dhruv MkIII examples now being delivered are available with an Israeli-built forward-looking infrared (FLIR) pod.

At present the most advanced variant is the Dhruv Mk IV Weapon System Integrated (WSI), also known as Rudra. HAL has plans to develop a MkV which will be an update of the MkIII utility variant with improvements to the main gearbox, updated avionics and improved aerodynamics.

Another aspect that has emerged with the indigenous helicopters such as Dhruv, Rudra and LCH is that the Indian armed forces have now firmly incorporated simulators into their training philosophies for these helicopters.

Simulator training is now being undertaken by all military and paramilitary users of Dhruv.

“We are planning to induct the Rudra WSI cockpit for training in 2018 and we will be bidding for the LCH and LUH simulators,” says Wg Cdr (retd) Krishna, the chief executive of Helicopter Academy to Train by Simulation of Flying (HATSOFF), a joint venture between HAL and CAE of Canada. In the 2016 fiscal year the Dhruv (conventional) Level D simulator at HATSOFF was used for 2,200h.

The LCH is a tandem-seat attack helicopter being designed to stringent air force and army requirements for a high-altitude attack helicopter, and makes extensive use of the experience gained from the Dhruv MkIII and MkIV variants.

“We have proved the basic airframe and we already have the experience of weapons integration which we performed on the Rudra,” says HAL chairman Suvarna Raju. “Now we have declared that the LCH is ready for induction depending on the weapons selection by the individual customer.” The LCH has been designed to operate at 10,000-12,000ft with an armaments load on its weapon stub wing/armament boom.

Commenting on the completion of weapons integration, which also requires the finalisation of the armament load by the user, Raju says: “Instead of waiting for weapons integration and declaration of initial operational capability [IOC], which is specific to Indian services, we went ahead and proved the basic platform at different altitudes and have completed hot and cold weather trials.”

The two weapon stations on either side of the LCH can carry anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), rockets or air-to-air missiles. An MBDA spokesman tells FlightGlobal: “The Mistral ATAM launcher has already been integrated on the Rudra and successful test firings have been carried out. Integration on the LCH is under way and progressing as per schedule.”

The LCH is also fitted with a slewable electro-optical sighting system, helmet pointing system, radar/laser missile warning system and countermeasures dispensing system (CMDS). A Nexter THL20 turret gun is also standard on all LCHs.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-india-sets-sights-on-rotorcraft-upgrade-433433/
 

charlie

New Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
1,151
Likes
1,245
Country flag
@Kunal Biswas

Kunal sir, Dropping LGBs was not in the earlier requirements I believe, can you please confirm on it....

Helos dropping bombs was gone with Mi 25, why do we need a slow moving platform to drop bombs which may not fall more than 5 km radius...

Out of topic qn sir, do any of our bunkers/posts at border withstand more than 3 direct hits from Milan/Helina missiles....

Can you please explain a scenario where we might want to drop using helos...

Thanks
Not really, dumb bomb are still dropped in syria



this documentary how imp is Army Aviation was, and how soviets learned about it after the afghan war. Well for Indian army too lesson were learnt during Kargil war but it took a while for our army to induct helicopters because of the airforce.
 

Kunal Biswas

Member of the Year 2011
New Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
31,122
Likes
41,041
Droping bombs was always a requirement since the project conceived, It just a little modified after Kargil ..

Milan and Helina are very different Anti-tank missiles, Helina at present is pure Tandem HEAT warhead specially design to go through heavy Armour, In future their will be HE warhead along with Anti tank ( Laser guided ) ..

Most of our sangars cannot survive one hit, concrete bunker will be left useless after one hit ..

@Kunal Biswas

Kunal sir, Dropping LGBs was not in the earlier requirements I believe, can you please confirm on it....

Helos dropping bombs was gone with Mi 25, why do we need a slow moving platform to drop bombs which may not fall more than 5 km radius...

Out of topic qn sir, do any of our bunkers/posts at border withstand more than 3 direct hits from Milan/Helina missiles....

Can you please explain a scenario where we might want to drop using helos...

Thanks
 

HariPrasad-1

New Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
9,645
Likes
21,138
Country flag
Droping bombs was always a requirement since the project conceived, It just a little modified after Kargil ..

Milan and Helina are very different Anti-tank missiles, Helina at present is pure Tandem HEAT warhead specially design to go through heavy Armour, In future their will be HE warhead along with Anti tank ( Laser guided ) ..

Most of our sangars cannot survive one hit, concrete bunker will be left useless after one hit ..
I want more lethal explosive in thermobaric form so that damage can be maximized.
 

ezsasa

Designated Cynic
New Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
32,663
Likes
151,106
Country flag
@ezsasa
@Flame Thrower
found this in the US Army's field manual:
(The warhead weight of TOW is somewhat equivalent to that of Helina's; Milan's warhead is somewhat equivalent to that of Dragon's)

View attachment 13734
Your table seems to indicate damage caused when LAW/Dragon/TOW are fired within a structure to the structure, Not when fired at those structures indicated in the table.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-06-11/ch7.htm

added later:

I am beginning to think hellfire/helina/ATGM cannot be used for bunker buster roles.

For bunker busting, minimum 250 kg dumb bombs are needed.

@Bornubus @Kunal Biswas
can you guys weigh in on this.. can Hellfire/ATGMs in general have bunker busting capabilities.
Go thru US army field manual in the link above..
 
Last edited:

Articles

Top