Why the LCH is a sports car compared to the lumbering Z-10

[AugenBlick]

You can read, can't you?

How is 2700 , 1100 greater than 2860.
Plz read the parts of your original post that I Quoted

 

[RAMPAGE]

All these images of LCH are old, recent LCH prototype has some small changes.

Nice. Congrats!

All these images of LCH are old, recent LCH prototype has some small changes.

Nice. Congrats!

 

[Penguin]

How is 2700 , 1100 greater than 2860.
Plz read the parts of your original post that I Quoted

Please note

LCH
2 × HAL/Turbomeca Shakti turboshaft, 1,067 kW (1,430 shp) each >>> 2860 shp total
...
Note that Janes article speaks of LCH's 800 shp PM-33B Shakti engines (not 1430 shp) >>> total 1600 shp
India's LCH completes hot weather trials, moves closer to IOC - IHS Jane's 360

Note that Airforce technology says 871kW each
HAL Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) - Airforce Technology

So, for the LCH, there are at least 2 generally reliable sources which indicate a poweroutput of less than 1,067 kW / 1,430 shp.

Which suggest the possibility there is no 2,860 shp but rather just 1,600 shp and 2,700-1,600=1,100

 

[AugenBlick]

Please note


So, for the LCH, there are at least 2 generally reliable sources which indicate a poweroutput of less than 1,067 kW / 1,430 shp.

Which suggest the possibility there is no 2,860 shp but rather just 1,600 shp and 2,700-1,600=1,100

All clear sir.

But ESA sheet of Ardiden 1H says 1032 kWh
https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/f...meca_ARDIDEN_1_series_engines-03-04022010.pdf

 

[45'22']

Nice thread ,Keep it running
And it would be better to ignore the thread than to troll in it

 

[Penguin]

All clear sir.

But ESA sheet of Ardiden 1H says 1032 kWh
https://www.easa.europa.eu/system/files/dfu/EASA-TCDS-E.037_Turbomeca_ARDIDEN_1_series_engines-03-04022010.pdf

6.1 Thermal Power(1) – All Engines Operative kW

Maximum Continuous (unlimited duration)
ARDIDEN 1H = 801
ARDIDEN 1H1 = 863

Take-off (5 minutes)
ARDIDEN 1H = 801
ARDIDEN 1H1 = 863

30-minute AEO
ARDIDEN 1H = 938
ARDIDEN 1H1 = 1032

The difference in 'peak power' and 'continuous power' seem consistent with the differences in power output I qouted (i.e. the more conservative Janes' and Airforce Technology numbers).

Which again goes to show, you can't jump to conclusions in these kinds of comparisons ( added errors aside ;-)

I'm confused by that 'all engines operative':
"These variants are approved for use on multi-engined civil rotorcraft""
"
The ARDIDEN 1H and ARDIDEN 1H1 engines are approved for use on twin-engine helicopters
"
Does that mean kW per engine or for the pair?

 

[AugenBlick]

The difference in 'peak power' and 'continuous power' seem consistent with the differences in power output I qouted (i.e. the more conservative Janes' and Airforce Technology numbers).

Which again goes to show, you can't jump to conclusions in these kinds of comparisons ( added errors aside ;-)

I'm confused by that 'all engines operative':
"These variants are approved for use on multi-engined civil rotorcraft""
"
The ARDIDEN 1H and ARDIDEN 1H1 engines are approved for use on twin-engine helicopters
"
Does that mean kW per engine or for the pair?

I would understand per engine. But let me ask a friend who works in a related field to go through the ESA sheet.
I'll reply here.