Attack Helicopters of IAF - LCH Prachand, AH-64E Apache : Updates & Discussions

[Ankit Kumar]

LCH already has SPS and ATGM Integrated to it...

https://hal-india.co.in/Product_Details.aspx?Mkey=54&lKey=&CKey=63

It is supposed to have it. Just like LCA is supposed to have a functional canon. As of today the LCH yet doesn't have a certified ATGM and neither it's SPS.

This is the only reason why IA is not placing bigger orders.

Both these things seems easy, but hey it's 10 years and we are still struggling to get the canon certified on LCA.

 

[Ashwin]

This is the only reason why IA is not placing bigger

Wrong, Only after limited series production (15 airframes) they will place bigger order.

On the LSP they will certify all the remaining service specific requirements which is part of FOC.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Wrong, Only after limited series production (15 airframes) they will place bigger order.

On the LSP they will certify all the remaining service specific requirements which is part of FOC.

So what's wrong? as of now these two critical systems are yet to be integrated. And untill that happens IA won't place bigger orders beyond the LSP.

 

[_Anonymous_]

So what's wrong? as of now these two critical systems are yet to be integrated. And untill that happens IA won't place bigger orders beyond the LSP.

Don't go about believing everything PKS posts. I recall he insisted that once cannons were installed on the LCA , ADA / HAL would have to redo the vibration tests from scratch & recertify it which would take an inordinate amount of time ( IIRC he said 2 yrs in 2016 ) money & resources ( we didn't have many prototypes to play with ) which I cross checked with @Milspec who laughed it off .

 

[Ashwin]

So what's wrong? as of now these two critical systems are yet to be integrated. And untill that happens IA won't place bigger orders beyond the LSP.

Wrong because this is not the reason for the lack of bigger order.

IA or IAF did not ask EW or ATGM as part of IOC (ATGM was probably removed from the list because of delay on Helina). It will be for FOC.

Both features are already tested/deployed on Rudra. Thus it's a drop-in addition. None in the services or HAL indicated is as a concern.

IA has a fleet of 50+ Rudra without ATGM while still ordering more. Thus the entire argument does not stand.

 

[Vicky]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1412218508281364481

HAL LCH gets first export customer....

Nigeria to buy LCH....

Random tweet with less trustability. No one will order an heli which is not in service with Indian Air Force. Plus it's main weapons ATGM integration is incomplete. First let's ask the GoI to DAC clearance for 15 helis after which IAF and IA will place orders. After that 160 plus orders.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Don't go about believing everything PKS posts. I recall he insisted that once cannons were installed on the LCA , ADA / HAL would have to redo the vibration tests from scratch & recertify it which would take an inordinate amount of time ( IIRC he said 2 yrs in 2016 ) money & resources ( we didn't have many prototypes to play with ) which I cross checked with @Milspec who laughed it off .

The canon has been added to the FOC aircrafts but they are yet not certified for firing. Had there been any such progress we would have heard a big hoophola from HAL.

Wrong because this is not the reason for the lack of bigger order.

IA or IAF did not ask EW or ATGM as part of IOC (ATGM was probably removed from the list because of delay on Helina). It will be for FOC.

Both features are already tested/deployed on Rudra. Thus it's a drop-in addition. None in the services or HAL indicated is as a concern.

IA has a fleet of 50+ Rudra without ATGM while still ordering more. Thus the entire argument does not stand.

All I can say is that I hope and wish that agencies delivers on time.

 

[Milspec]

The canon has been added to the FOC aircrafts but they are yet not certified for firing. Had there been any such progress we would have heard a big hoophola from HAL.

All I can say is that I hope and wish that agencies delivers on time.

ho-hoopla from HAL? The same company that stays mum on nonpayment of two years of revenue? HAL's top brass is 10 times more subservient than PMO's chaprasis.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

ho-hoopla from HAL? The same company that stays mum on nonpayment of two years of revenue? HAL's top brass is 10 times more subservient than PMO's chaprasis.

I am all for all kinds of payments to be made on time. It won't happen but I do wish that those responsible for this delay be expelled from Government services.

 

[Milspec]

I am all for all kinds of payments to be made on time. It won't happen but I do wish that those responsible for this delay be expelled from Government services.

"expelled from Government services". - this phrase would be a classic oxymoron.

 

[Milspec]

It is supposed to have it. Just like LCA is supposed to have a functional canon. As of today the LCH yet doesn't have a certified ATGM and neither it's SPS.

This is the only reason why IA is not placing bigger orders.

Both these things seems easy, but hey it's 10 years and we are still struggling to get the canon certified on LCA.

Do you remember f4 went into service with usaf without a cannon, and then a gun pod was later integrated. Now USAF is no novice at aircombat, they did not have to ground all of the f4's to certify the aircraft. Maybe IAF's rigor for paperwork outweighs its combat needs.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Do you remember f4 went into service with usaf without a cannon, and then a gun pod was later integrated. Now USAF is no novice at aircombat, they did not have to ground all of the f4's to certify the aircraft. Maybe IAF's rigor for paperwork outweighs its combat needs.

Wasn't the F-4 designed to be w/o a gun or cannon on the grounds that the Gun / Cannon was a WW-2 concept ? It's only when they got plastered by the MiG-21 & it's antiquated cousins like the MiG-19 & MiG-17 that they had to insert an external gun pod .

 

[Milspec]

Wasn't the F-4 designed to be w/o a gun or cannon on the grounds that the Gun / Cannon was a WW-2 concept ? It's only when they got plastered by the MiG-21 & it's antiquated cousins like the MiG-19 & MiG-17 that they had to insert an external gun pod .

Yupp, external gun pod, no certification, a gun whether in a bay or in a pod will have same reaction forces, if the cannon is internal it has better anchor points to the fusealage.

coming back to LCH, I remember it firing a2a missile or something, Is IAF/HAL not able to procure the Anti tank missiles for testing?

 

[Milspec]

Yupp, external gun pod, no certification, a gun whether in a bay or in a pod will have same reaction forces, if the cannon is internal it has better anchor points to the fusealage.

coming back to LCH, I remember it firing a2a missile or something, Is IAF/HAL not able to procure the Anti tank missiles for testing?

If there are vibration concers , it takes what 2 hrs to do modal testing and another 3 for running flight testing with a daq stuck in the cockpit? this trivial non-sense just pisses me off.
In two flights all of the gun nonsense can be resolved.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

Do you remember f4 went into service with usaf without a cannon, and then a gun pod was later integrated. Now USAF is no novice at aircombat, they did not have to ground all of the f4's to certify the aircraft. Maybe IAF's rigor for paperwork outweighs its combat needs.

The agencies should maybe then convey their inability to certify the canon. Then that internal space could be better utilised. And maybe then the IAF will come to terms at it.

 

[Ankit Kumar]

coming back to LCH, I remember it firing a2a missile or something, Is IAF/HAL not able to procure the Anti tank missiles for testing?

The IAF indents to use LCH as against incoming aerial targets including UAVs, therefore the A2A missiles are useful for IAF's perspective. They do not have pressing need for ATGMs. It's the primary requirement for the Army. And Army has from time to time tried to buy interim solutions but the development agencies failed that attempt.

 

[zinswinsin]

Wasn't the F-4 designed to be w/o a gun or cannon on the grounds that the Gun / Cannon was a WW-2 concept ? It's only when they got plastered by the MiG-21 & it's antiquated cousins like the MiG-19 & MiG-17 that they had to insert an external gun pod .

This is a pretty common F-4 Phantom myth. The issue was the missile and training. US Navy pilots w/o a gun after Top Gun performed much better than airforce pilots who added a gun later. Once added, the gun/pod accounted for only like 15 kills.

 

[randomradio]

It is supposed to have it. Just like LCA is supposed to have a functional canon. As of today the LCH yet doesn't have a certified ATGM and neither it's SPS.

This is the only reason why IA is not placing bigger orders.

Both these things seems easy, but hey it's 10 years and we are still struggling to get the canon certified on LCA.

Right now, it has both HELINA and SAAB's SPS.

It's the MoD's fault for not starting the LCH program early on. The IA has been asking for the IOC version for the last 4 years in fact. They were fine with just the rockets and gun.

coming back to LCH, I remember it firing a2a missile or something, Is IAF/HAL not able to procure the Anti tank missiles for testing?

LCH has the Mistral 2 integrated. But it's stuck in red tape. The MoD failed to benchmark the cost correctly and the actual cost was too high, so such deals are reviewed again. Although MBDA has quoted a lower price now, it looks like negotiations will restart again with new a benchmark quote.

The IA wanted the Spike integrated until HELINA became available, but DRDO shot it down. The integration of both HELINA and Mistral have taken too long though.

 

[_Anonymous_]

This is a pretty common F-4 Phantom myth. The issue was the missile and training. US Navy pilots w/o a gun after Top Gun performed much better than airforce pilots who added a gun later. Once added, the gun/pod accounted for only like 15 kills.

You're taking the entire post out of context. The issue here is the LCA hasn't had the certification of the cannon which a reputed blogger in his blog had argued would be a time consuming process apart from requiring a whole battery of tests on the airframe with possible modifications & would in all probability be a sub optimal weapons package .

We aren't debating the performance or lack thereof of retrofitting the cannon onto the F-4 but referring to it as a possible example of how such retrofitting was carried out in the past too without in any way comproming the structural integrity of the said plane or it consuming a lot of time or even observing a sub optimal performance .Trust this clarifies the issue.

 

[Tatvamasi]

HAL set to deliver first batch of 3 Light Combat Helicopters to IAF​

​

These are part of 15 Limited Series Production helicopters approved for Army and IAF​

Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is gearing up to deliver the first batch of three Light Combat Helicopters (LCH) to the Indian Air Force (IAF) once acceptance tests are completed. These are part of the 15 Limited Series Production (LSP) helicopters approved for the Army and the IAF.
“HAL has received Letter of Intent for five Air force and five Army LCH for delivery pending contract finalisation of 15 Limited Series Production (LSP) LCH. HAL has produced and signalled out three LSP LCH for the IAF. Same will be subjected to customer acceptance and training shortly,” a HAL source said.
On the remaining helicopters of the LSP series, the source added, “In the current year we are producing four LCH for Army and two for the Air Force. Remaining six LCH will be produced next year.”

Delayed deal​

The deal for the 15 LCH was expected to have been signed in the first quarter of 2021 but has been delayed due to the second wave of the pandemic.
The IAF has put forward a requirement for 65 LCH and the Army for 114 helicopters. Of the 15 LSP helicopters, 10 are for the IAF and five for the Army. The LCH, the lightest attack helicopter in the world weighing 5.5 tonnes, has been designed and developed by the HAL to meet the specific and unique requirements of the Indian armed forces and can operate at heights of 12,000 feet.
The Army Aviation operates smaller utility helicopters but does not have attack helicopters in its fleet and has for sometime pitched for attack helicopters of its own to operate with its strike Corps. The attack helicopter fleet is operated by the Air Force which provides close air support to the Army.
The IAF operates the older Mi-25 and Mi-35 Russian attack helicopters which are in the process of being phased out and has inducted 22 AH-64E Apache attack helicopters from the U.S. The Army will also start receiving the Apache attack helicopters from early 2023 onwards, six of which have been contracted under an estimated $800 mn deal from the U.S. in February 2020.
Presently, the Army has 90 Advanced Light Helicopters (ALH) and 75 Rudra, weaponised ALH, helicopters in service which are indigenously designed and developed by the HAL in addition to around 160 older Cheetah and Chetak utility helicopters which are in need of urgent replacement.
Last August, amid the ongoing standoff with China in Eastern Ladakh, two LCH were deployed for operations at high altitude in Leh at short notice to support IAF missions, validating their capability.