India offers to buy more U.S. helicopters, hopes to drive down costs

[sancho]

Finally some common sense Lets hope this sense is also carried to MMRCA deal.

Are you against the increased number of Apaches ???

I am against the Apache at all, but even less for IAF, since there is no operational need for them, when IA has it's own combat helicopters to support their troops and by far not for a $40+ million per unit. The only point IAF has is, that this is a replacement of the Mi 35s that on paper belongs to them and since the former DM and the MoD questioned their need, they came up with totally nonsense claims to justify a need. I really hope the Finance Minister Jaitley can talk some sense into the Defence Minister Jaitley to use the defence budget in a useful manner. We can develop a DRDO or Elta based mast mounted radar for a fraction of the cost of an Apache and would have hardly any operational disadvantages with the LCH. So why bother with dealing of IAF's ego at all? Scrap that deal and insist on indigenous combat helicopters for all forces at lower costs, with no restrictions and the weapons we need, not the once they allow US government us to use.

 

[MilSpec]

Not surprising news....
The extra Apaches would be asked for anyway. Just as there should (and will be) an increase in the options for Chinooks.

Now that IJT is gone, how about this?
Textron AirLand Scorpion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Echo_419]

I reckon you all would get enough information to build the airframe. whether you all want Indian avionics is up to you.
we would probably supply the engines and TADS/PNVS.

When i talked on R&D,i meant that you may offer the co dev of some next gen system from which we Indians can also learn something.You drive the costs down due to Joint R&D & we learn something new,Win Win for both of us

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Apache's are highly network centric fighters whose full utilization will only happen in a complete network of radars, sensors, awacs and other frontline fighters and even ground troops. It isn't a stand alone system by any stretch of imagination. Is this an indication that IA is inclined to go the US army way of war fighting? with more and more US systems come more and more adaptability to their network orientation...does that mean we are consciously adapting US systems in the near future? @gambit.

While that is true, it is simply coincidental for the major part.
Network-centricity was inevitable anyway; just as most of the leading work in that respect has originated in the West-Bloc i.e. USA and NATO.

The advent of network-centricity in the Indian Armed Forces pre-dates all the deals with the USA for hardware, its just the need of warfare in this century. And that need exists even in the Russian Forces.

But some of the American way(s) of War-fighting are definitely finding their way into Indian Tactical thinking. For mainly two reasons: they make optimum use of all the sensors working together, thus increasing effectiveness. And secondly the Indian armed Forces are getting to see all that at close quarters via the medium if the plethora of joint Indo-American Exercises. OTOH, even the American are taking away some ideas from those interactions.

Just to illustrate:- the joint Ind-US studies of the Conflict at Kargil in 1999 has been huge; because nobody (including the US) had envisaged a conflict like that.

 

[Echo_419]

Now that IJT is gone, how about this?
Textron AirLand Scorpion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We should select a IJT which offers us maximum amount of TOT,Offsets & Industrial Partnerships

 

[Sergi]

I am against the Apache at all, but even less for IAF, since there is no operational need for them, when IA has it's own combat helicopters to support their troops and by far not for a $40+ million per unit. The only point IAF has is, that this is a replacement of the Mi 35s that on paper belongs to them and since the former DM and the MoD questioned their need, they came up with totally nonsense claims to justify a need. I really hope the Finance Minister Jaitley can talk some sense into the Defence Minister Jaitley to use the defence budget in a useful manner. We can develop a DRDO or Elta based mast mounted radar for a fraction of the cost of an Apache and would have hardly any operational disadvantages with the LCH. So why bother with dealing of IAF's ego at all? Scrap that deal and insist on indigenous combat helicopters for all forces at lower costs, with no restrictions and the weapons we need, not the once they allow US government us to use.

You know that all the birds will eventully end up under IA flag right ???
GOI has agreed to it in principle. Its only matter of time.
AFAIK its the best platform. We can use it in tandom with our own home grown platforms.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Now that IJT is gone, how about this?
Textron AirLand Scorpion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you can recall: was'nt that talked about (very shortly) in the media some time ago?
I think that was about a year or year and a half ago.

(as your signature says: India is open for business now)

 

[illusion8]

While that is true, it is simply coincidental for the major part.
Network-centricity was inevitable anyway; just as most of the leading work in that respect has originated in the West-Bloc i.e. USA and NATO.

The advent of network-centricity in the Indian Armed Forces pre-dates all the deals with the USA for hardware, its just the need of warfare in this century. And that need exists even in the Russian Forces.

But some of the American way(s) of War-fighting are definitely finding their way into Indian Tactical thinking. For mainly two reasons: they make optimum use of all the sensors working together, thus increasing effectiveness. And secondly the Indian armed Forces are getting to see all that at close quarters via the medium if the plethora of joint Indo-American Exercises. OTOH, even the American are taking away some ideas from those interactions.

Just to illustrate:- the joint Ind-US studies of the Conflict at Kargil in 1999 has been huge; because nobody (including the US) had envisaged a conflict like that.

What I see is that there's a point that we can reach where there's no going back to our own routine networks,

apache's, P8I's or chinooks are such systems that aren't stand alone's and depend on a network for their optimum use. These systems if I am not wrong is wholly different than the soviet or the indigenous systems that we adopt. Couple it with Boeing's or LM's or IAI's or BAE's or Northrop's or Raytheon's India operations or their JV's or their factories or research center's in India, we are talking about a whole new adaptability that is in lieu with NATO, Australian, Japanese systems.

 

[sancho]

You know that all the birds will eventully end up under IA flag right ???
GOI has agreed to it in principle. Its only matter of time.
AFAIK its the best platform. We can use it in tandom with our own home grown platforms.

MoD has only issued support in theory to IA having the helicopters, but no decision has been taken so far and IA itself stated, that they have only a requirement or 3 x squads of Apaches, so if they get 3 in addition to the 2 that IAF now gets for the sake of argument, since it's their replacement, they will remain with it, otherwise we simply would only order 2 + 1 squad.

They are good helicopters, but people have a pretty biased point of view about them. The Block 3 has mainly avionic upgrades and much of them, will not be useful for Indian forces, since we use different data links. So while NATO forces might be able to link their Block 3s with UAVs, it's questionable if ours can without adding Israeli techs at extra costs. And how often have we heared about the "heavy" and "light" helicopter differentiation when an LCH will carry the same standard config of 2 x ATGM quad launchers and 2 x rocket pods. The only difference will be the fact that the Apache has integrated bigger rocket pods that the LCH has so far, but if the external hardpoint supports it, we can use bigger once too. So the operational difference will be just a few rockets! Even in anti tank role we are talking about 12 x ATGMs max for LCH and 16 x for the Apache, but those few more missiles can't justify the high costs. In terms of weapons we also will be highly dependent on the US, since we can't integrate Helina, nor use the same weapon pack of Rudra an LCH, which makes it difficult for our forces to use these helicopter together. And most of all, Rudra and LCHs are developed from the start, with the geographical and climate conditions in India in mind. Why restrict oursefls here with a foreign helicopter, that might not offer the same advantages all over India? Dhruv in this case is the perfect example, since it shows good performance in deserts as well as in the high altitude areas.

We keep discussing the need of MMRCA when LCA is coming, while the difference between both is huge, so what's the point in Apaches with a low requirement in numbers, when LCH is the better choice for us in many ways?

 

[Sergi]

@sancho : those birds will go to IA some day.
Today's requirement is 3 Sqd. Correct. Mostly replacement.
What about new Strick corps ??? Wont extra 2/3 go there ???

And I will believe LCH when I hear anything about FOC. Its been years since any one of us knew what happened with latest prototype !!!

Give or take LCH wont be inducted in next 3/4 years. May be more.

Plus : those are not IAF's birds. They are operating them for IA. One day they will have to give up

 

[Capt.Popeye]

What I see is that there's a point that we can reach where there's no going back to our own routine networks,

apache's, P8I's or chinooks are such systems that aren't stand alone's and depend on a network for their optimum use. These systems if I am not wrong is wholly different than the soviet or the indigenous systems that we adopt. Couple it with Boeing's or LM's or IAI's or BAE's or Northrop's or Raytheon's India operations or their JV's or their factories or research center's in India, we are talking about a whole new adaptability that is in lieu with NATO, Australian, Japanese systems.

I do not think that you have got that quite correct. How does an Israeli designed radar, a Russian designed Radar, a Dutch designed (originally) Radar and an Indian designed Sonar talk to an Italian designed Gun, an Israeli designed SAM, a Russian designed ASW rocket system on an Indian warship?
Through systems integration; which is done through certain standardised ways like Link 16 or something equivalent.
So anything can be made to communicate to anything else by use of suitable interfacing.
While the technical part is not my area of expertise; it can be and is made to happen.

 

[trident2010]

Good decision !!

 

[sancho]

Today's requirement is 3 Sqd. Correct. Mostly replacement.
What about new Strick corps ??? Wont extra 2/3 go there ???

No, IA is not replacing anything since they don't "own" combat helicopters yet. The Mi 35 they use are what IAF wants to replace since they are official owned by them. IA stated a requirement of 3 squads, 1 for each of their strike corps, while the normal corps will get Rudras and LCHs anyway. IA even never issued an own request of foreign combat helicopters, they only make use of the procurement of IAF and wants to get them for their own benefits. So we are dealing here with 2 egos of 2 forces, not with propper operational requirements that needs to be met!

And I will believe LCH when I hear anything about FOC. Its been years since any one of us knew what happened with latest prototype !!!

Why? It has a few development issues, but that's, why should there be a big delay when most of the important system will already be inducted now with Rudra? Same engine, avionics EW system, FLIR, gun, rockets, ATGMs and A2A missiles. So all they have to fix is the design and that's what they are doing isn't it?

 

[Sergi]

No, IA is not replacing anything since they don't "own" combat helicopters yet. The Mi 35 they use are what IAF wants to replace since they are official owned by them. IA stated a requirement of 3 squads, 1 for each of their strike corps, while the normal corps will get Rudras and LCHs anyway. IA even never issued an own request of foreign combat helicopters, they only make use of the procurement of IAF and wants to get them for their own benefits. So we are dealing here with 2 egos of 2 forces, not with propper operational requirements that needs to be met!

Correct me if I am wrong. Those Mils IAF replacing belong to IA. IAF is just operating for them.

IA requirement is based on Strike corps. Yes but when they are enough capabilities they will claim back their own assets.

LCH n Rudra will be value addition.

Why? It has a few development issues, but that's, why should there be a big delay when most of the important system will already be inducted now with Rudra? Same engine, avionics EW system, FLIR, gun, rockets, ATGMs and A2A missiles. So all they have to fix is the design and that's what they are doing isn't it?

Thats exactly the reason !!! Last news was TD-2 has rectified drag issues. That was like 2/3 years ago. Our agencies are not known to shut up on something thats going well. Isnt silence odd ???

 

[sancho]

Correct me if I am wrong. Those Mils IAF replacing belong to IA. IAF is just operating for them.

The other way around, they belong to IAF, but IA is operating them:

The Army's claim of ownership of Apaches being inducted is based on the basic premise that the two units (or squadrons) of MI-25/MI-35 AH presently held with the IAF, are Army assets and are also operationally controlled by the Army. In fact a few army aviation pilots are also posted to these units.

..:: India Strategic ::. Army: Army Gets Attack Helicopters

Thats exactly the reason !!! Last news was TD-2 has rectified drag issues. That was like 2/3 years ago. Our agencies are not known to shut up on something thats going well. Isnt silence odd ???

Then you have missed the changes in the meantime. The latest prototypes have new coverings and modifications to reduce drag. Be it at the gun, the gears, or the air intakes. We also saw different modifications of the stubwings, which shows that they are testing which solution is the best for their aims. All this shows that the design is the actuall new part of the development, while the rest is a none issue and that should make the risk of big delays very unlikely.

First prototype:

Later with modified stubwings:

Last version (unless I have missed one), with drag reduction features and new stubwings: