Indian Army wants 11 AH-64E Apache for its Army Aviation Corp

[Bhadra]

I too believe majority attack and light helicopters ALH, LCH etc must move to army.
but airforce should retain heavy and medium helicopter with few in attack and light roles.

hope every agrees with this.

Ah for taxi service for their air marshalls....

Hellos are land support systems and there are very limited tasks for hellos for air battles such as, Recce, SAR missions or attacks on enemy air defense system along the borders. On the other side for Army hellos have every conceivable tasks. Right from logistics to defensive, offensive and heliborne operations commitments beside SAR, casevac, surveillance and aid to civil authorites

 

[SilentKiller]

reason why i said medium and heavy lift helicopter must remain with airforce is the logistics and infrastructure needed to maintain these helicopters.

 

[DivineHeretic]

Someone somewhere decided to copy my post onto another forum. (Why, I have no idea). Nevertheless, certain rebuttals were put foreword, which I'd like to counter. (Primarily because I have nothing else to do right now... )

The IA currently has 13 corps, with the goal of inducting the mountain Strike Corps by 2017-19. Thats 14 corps in 2019, unless the Apaches enters service and retire by 2019. So for all practical purposes, the IA has to prepare its inductions keeping in mind the 14 corps.

The idea is then put foreward that the Attack Helis are for the Strike Corps only. It does indeed appear to be the case here, but then it would mean the inductions are being carried out contrary to combat doctrines.

The Army no longer classifies the Non-Strike Corps as Holding Corps. The reason is that unlike earlier, when these corps were tasked with holding the enemy, the current Pivot Corps have a clearly defined offensive responsibility. They are expected to prepare the theatre for the Strike Corps.

Then there comes the IBGs, 8 in all. The usage of the Apache by the US clearly shows that these gunships are typically used at the head of the offensive, which in the case of the IA would be the IBGs. It must be noted here that in the absence of the mass and firepower of the Strike Corps, the IBGs are reliant exclusively on CAS for slicing into enemy territory.

Would it make any sense to have IBGs tasked with initial offensive and not provide them the Apaches while the Strike Corps holds them? The case can be made for LCH here, but if the LCH is capable of leading and controlling the offensive, what is the need for the Apache? Surely if any force needs the networked fighting capability, the lead formations would be first in queue.

Of course though the case can be made for the non requirement of theCorps responsible for mountaineous regions,.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

Apache are very useful in western sector for Army, It is my view that LCH as well as Apache will be doing the work together over a large area..

Apache radar are useful for coordinating with LCH and Rudra for anti - helo and anti-Armour roles..

 

[DivineHeretic]

Apache are very useful in western sector for Army, It is my view that LCH as well as Apache will be doing the work together over a large area..

Apache radar are useful for coordinating with LCH and Rudra for anti - helo and anti-Armour roles..

It is certainly true that the Apaches are being purchased keeping in mind their Command, control and co-ordination capabilities as much as their anti-armour capabilities.

But there are certain concerns that must be addressed for it to be used optimally in concert with other rotary assets

How does the Apache co-ordinate the LCH, the Rudras and other rotary assets within its area of responsibility? Granted the Apache Lonbow radar provides a very biased advantage to the AAC, but how is the data shared amongst the other assets?

Does the co-pilot of the Apache act as an air traffic controller and direct the relevant assets via radio? In simpler terms, here the co-pilot would essentially call out the position of the enemy armour/heli/infantry on the radio, thus directing the LCH/rudras or even own Armour towards the enemy.

This is certainly a form of networked warfare, but has time and again been found to be severely flawed, especially in a crowded radio environment. We have all read about CAS hitting wrong co-ordinates because the pilot heard the co-ordinates wrong. There is also the possibility of redundancy in this set-up.

Or Does the network allow the co-pilot to share radar data with the relevant gunship/mechanised group? In simple terms, here the radar data is shared with the asset nearest to the threat, enabling the LCH/Rudra/Tank commander to essentialy see through the eyes of the Apache longbow.

This is the most preferred option as it removes the possibility of errors in communication. The LCH pilot can see the radar data on his LCD display and understand much better the location of the target and the best approach to target.

But this will require interopability between the Apache with its American network systems and the LCh with its Indian systems. This will require access to the Apache's data sharing architecture which would enable the DRDO/HAL to modify the LCH to accept/send compatible data packets, all the while maintaining data security.

@p2prada, Will CISMOA come in the way of enabling data sharing between the Apache and Indian LCH or will we equip the Apache with our own Communication gear as well?

 

[p2prada]

Can somebody suggest to me as to how the figure for 11 or 22 or 33 was reached?

IAF has some experience with gunships while IA has none.

So they will have to start with small numbers and try to fit it within our doctrine. Once that's done, larger numbers can be made or procured. It won't make sense to induct hundreds now without any experience and then finding out that many were not needed. Time will tell.

11 make a squadron.

How does the Apache co-ordinate the LCH, the Rudras and other rotary assets within its area of responsibility?

Radio. The gunships need to be linked to their own HQs and troops on the ground, not other gunships. Let's see whether UAVs will eventually be linked or not. Radio comm handles the rest.

Will CISMOA come in the way of enabling data sharing between the Apache and Indian LCH or will we equip the Apache with our own Communication gear as well?

CISMOA comes to play everywhere with American goodies. We will have to equip Apaches with our own comm gear, no two ways about it. The P-8s and C-130Js come with our comm equipment too.

@sob

All 22 Apaches are meant for IAF. It seems both IAF and IA will operate gunships.

The contract allows 22 more as options for IAF. I don't know whether this addition of 11 more for IA will be accepted or not.

 

[nimo_cn]

how much difference could 11 helicopters make given the sheer size of Indian army?

Sent from my HUAWEI T8951 using Tapatalk 2

 

[p2prada]

how much difference could 11 helicopters make given the sheer size of Indian army?

Not much.

Like I said earlier, IA is going to have to experiment first. We will see whether the 11 will increase to 111 or 1111 or not in time.

They even need to figure out if combined arms is better or going it alone is better.

 

[datguy79]

Are armaments(such as hellfire missiles) part of the Apache deal or will India modify the system to carry native missiles?

 

[WMD]

Are armaments(such as hellfire missiles) part of the Apache deal or will India modify the system to carry native missiles?

Hellfire(AGM-114L-3 version) missiles and stinger(FIM-92 Block-1 version) will be purchased for AH-64E.
Also T-700 Turboshaft spares.