# Attack Helicopter Match-Ups: India vs. Pakistan



## HAIDER

by Rich Thomas 


Specialized attack helicopters have proven useful in providing valuable ground support for infantry and armored vehicles. While they are slower and therefore more vulnerable to ground fire than jet aircraft, attack helicopters can also easily liner in battlefield areas, so they can work
much more closely with troops on the ground.

Pakistan

Pakistan's Army is in possession of a number of AH-1 Cobra gunships. A development of the venerable Bell UH-1 Huey transport helicopter, the AH-1 Cobra was first introduced in 1967 for the Vietnam War, it is the original purpose-built helicopter gunship. The Pakistanis use the AH-1S and F models of this proven design, which have seen use against insurgents in the Northwest Frontier since the 1980s.

Paradoxically, the older upgrade of the Cobra is the S model. The main improvement was putting in a 1,800 hp engine, and all subsequent upgrades were based on this model. The F version includes a laser range finder and infrared suppression on the engine and exhaust, making the helicopter much harder for IR-guided missiles (such as the Stinger) to track. These helicopters have a maximum speed of 172 mph, a range of 274 miles, a maximum climb rate of 1,620 ft/min, and a service ceiling of 12,200 feet. They come armed with a 3 barreled 20mm cannon, and can carry either 2.75" rocket pods or TOW anti-tank missiles on 4 external hard points.

India

The Indian Air Force uses the Russian-built Mi-25 and Mi-35 Hind helicopters. The Hind is a combination attack helicopter and light transport, derived from the Mi-8 transport helicopter. It is the most heavily used combat helicopter in the world, having seen action in at least 19 different conflicts.
The helicopter has two engines capable of delivering 2,200 hp each, a maximum speed of 208 mph, a range of 280 miles, and a service ceiling of 14,500 feet. The helicopter typically carries a multi-barrelled 12.7mm heavy machine gun in the nose, but can carry a 23mm or 30mm cannon instead.
It also usually comes with door-mounted machine guns. There are 6 external hard points that can carry a plethora of arms in a combined payload of up to 3,300lbs. This can include gun pods, anti-tank missiles, rockets, and heat-seeking anti-aircraft missiles.

Result: INDIA! The AH-1F and S model of Cobras are a reliable design, and they are also smaller and more maneuverable than Hinds. This is not a small consideration, and should be by no means overlooked. However, they are also not the latest version of the AH-1 (that is the AH-1W Super Cobra), which means they are lacking in certain capabilities that the Hinds wield.

The Hinds have greater range and greater lift capacity, as well as a higher service ceiling. This means they can carry more ordinance further, higher, and hang around on the battlefield longer. The maximum service ceiling in particular makes the Hind more useful in places like Kashmir. They also have the ability to engage other helicopters with IR-guided missiles, something the AH-W Super Cobra can do, but not the AH-1F and S models.

Sources: globalsecurity.org; http://indianairforce.nic.in/; Pakarmy.com

(Not necessary you have to be agreed with writer, its just analysis gathered from few websites, your counter arguments is more valuable)

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Super Falcon

it is pretty even if we have new cobra than it is bye bye for hind sir becoz it is too heavy and visible to other agressors but cobra is more agile can hide anywhere and and low cost than hind for sure i pick anyday cobra latest model over old model of hind but true is that hind is my favourite attack helicopter but truth is cobra is better we cant deny it

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## raveolution

Super Falcon said:


> it is pretty even if we have new cobra than it is bye bye for hind sir becoz it is too heavy and visible to other agressors but cobra is more agile can hide anywhere and and low cost than hind for sure i pick anyday cobra latest model over old model of hind but true is that hind is my favourite attack helicopter but truth is cobra is better we cant deny it



I think its unfair for you to compare a new cobra, which the PAF doesnt have, with an old Hind, which the IAF doesnt have. There is no confirmation that Pakistan is getting Super Cobras. All of IAF's Hinds have been upgraded by IAI of Israel and field all latest technologies. In addition to that the IAF already field 40 MI-17-5 attack helos and have placed an order for 80 more. There is also a tender out for 22 attack helicopters for which the AH-64 Apache is the frontrunner. Additionally the LCH is also in development.

I think until the PAF ramps up its fleet either with the Super Cobras or other attack helos is larger numbers, the balance in this particular area will be heavily tilted towards the IAF. Just my 2 cents. Cheers

Indian Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Super Falcon

yes u are right we are not talkin on future acuisations although your hind got upgraded our cobras also have got upgraded not to super cobra but its mid life upgrade the only thing hind lacks is manuvarability which will put hind on mercy of any stinger missile launch but at the other hand cobra is soo much agile and ur hind got upgraded by a country who never operated a hind before who her self uses apaches and cobras how u be sure that ur hind is upgraded welll israelis if upgrade cobra or apache i understand but hind whom they never used one question i have for you if u have a mercedez and u want to repair it where u bring ur car to mercedez showroom not to BMY show room


----------



## HAIDER

Well, the super cobra induction is real. As far as MI17, if i am not wrong it transport helo. Plus both deals for MI17 or Apache are right now only news hype. Nothing real behind that. Its same like US offered India F35, but all in news, no official confirmation.


----------



## Super Falcon

seems like defence market is feeling winter thats why no hot news coming out of them


----------



## navtrek

Pakistan *AH-1 Cobra*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## navtrek

India's* MI 25*











*Mi-35 Hind*

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## zraver

In the Iran-Iraq war the end results were about even, who ever saw the other first won.


----------



## brahmastra

Super Falcon said:


> yes u are right we are not talkin on future acuisations although your hind got upgraded our cobras also have got upgraded not to super cobra but its mid life upgrade the only thing hind lacks is manuvarability which will put hind on mercy of any stinger missile launch but at the other hand cobra is soo much agile and ur hind got upgraded by a country who never operated a hind before who her self uses apaches and cobras how u be sure that ur hind is upgraded welll israelis if upgrade cobra or apache i understand but hind whom they never used one question i have for you if u have a mercedez and u want to repair it where u bring ur car to mercedez showroom not to BMY show room



Its not about Israel got no experience using 'Hind'.You are right that if you got mercedez than you should go to mercedez showroom to upgrade.but how about putting better brakes or if you want to add N2O bottle then you can surely go to BMW guy if they got better than Mercedese.


----------



## Super Falcon

hahahaha so noz upgrade will make a difference for u any way ur Hind in afghan war got serious probleum by stingers. do u remember sir but cobra never shot down by any shoulder fired missles


----------



## Novice09

Super Falcon said:


> the only thing hind lacks is manuvarability which will put hind on mercy of any stinger missile launch but at the other hand cobra is soo much agile and ur hind got upgraded by a country who never operated a hind before who her self uses apaches and cobras how u be sure that ur hind is upgraded welll israelis if upgrade cobra or apache i understand but hind whom they never used one question i have for you if u have a mercedez and u want to repair it where u bring ur car to mercedez showroom not to BMY show room



Our Hind lacks maneuverability but your COBRA lacks lethality that Indian Hind have  Also, stinger missile will not miss its target just by watching PAF roundel on an old cobra 

Also Indian Hinds are not repaired by Israel they are upgraded by them 

Further, If I need Bridgestone tyres for better grip, it doesn't matter whether I go to Mercedes, BMW or Bridgestone's showroom. It should be the most reliable one.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Novice09

Super Falcon said:


> hahahaha so noz upgrade will make a difference for u any way ur Hind in afghan war got serious probleum by stingers. do u remember sir but cobra never shot down by any shoulder fired missles



Might be Russian were having other options more lethal and accurate than Afghans


----------



## Super Falcon

who said cobra is not lethal it is lethal with precision hind is lethal but not prcesion half of its ammo use to be wasted when comes to precision sir


----------



## Kompromat

Super hind

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Novice09

Black blood said:


> Super hind










*IAF's Hind*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Super Falcon

without a doubt HIND is Best and its my personal loving bird too but the probleum sir is that it is not agile tough it has a lot space for arms to carry but at the cost of manuverability and precasion


----------



## Super Falcon

The Mi-24 went from drawing board in 1968 to first test-flights in less than eighteen months. The first models were delivered to the armed forces for evaluation in 1971. The Hind-A did have a number of problems: lateral roll, weapon sighting problems, and limited field of view for the pilot. A heavy redesign of the aircraft front section solved most of these problems.

V-24 &#8212; The first version, twelve prototypes and development aircraft. The first V-24 mockup resembled the Bell UH-1A Huey. Later models resembled the future Hind-A, one of which was modified in 1975 as A-10 for speed record attempts with wings removed and faired over and with inertia-type dampers on the main rotor head. The A-10 reached a speed of 368 km/h. 
Mi-24 (Hind-A) &#8212; Other early versions were the armed assault helicopter, which could carry eight combat troops and three crew members. It could also carry four 57-mm rocket pods on four underwing pylons, four MCLOS 9M17 Phalanga (AT-2 Swatter) anti-tank missiles on two underwing rails, free-fall bombs, plus one 12.7-mm machine-gun in the nose. The Mi-24 was the first production model. 
Mi-24B (Hind-A) &#8212; Experimental series of Hind-A, one of which was used to test the Fenestron tail rotor. 
Mi-24F (Hind-A) &#8212; Modified Hind-A with seven reinforcing ribs on the port fuselage aft of the wing and the SRO-2M Khrom ("Odd Rods") IFF antenna relocated from the canopy to the oil cooler. The APU exhaust was also extended and angled downwards. The designation may be unofficial. 
Mi-24A (Hind-B) &#8212; The Mi-24A was the second production model. Both the Mi-24 and Mi-24A entered Soviet Air Force service in 1972. Lacks the four-barrel Yak-B 12.7mm machine gun under the nose. 
Mi-24U (Hind-C) &#8212; Training version without nose gun and wingtip stations. 
Mi-24BMT - Small number of Mi-24s converted into minesweepers. 
Mi-24D (Hind-D) &#8212; The Mi-24D was a purer gunship than the earlier variants. It entered production in 1973. The Mi-24D has a redesigned forward fuselage, with two separate cockpits for the pilot and gunner. It is armed with a single 12.7-mm four-barrel Yak-B machine-gun under the nose. It can carry four 57-mm rocket pods, four SACLOS 9M17 Phalanga anti-tank missiles (a significant enhancement compared to the MCLOS system found on the Mi-24A), plus bombs and other weapons. One Mi-24D was sold to Poland in January 1996 and was used by the WTD 61 in Manching during 1994 for tests with the head of a Hawk missile in place of the chin-mounted gun. This version also had an unidentified modification in the rear cabin window on the starboard side. 
Mi-24PTRK &#8212; This version was the Mi-24D modification that was used for testing the Shturm V missile system for the Mi-24V. 
Mi-24DU &#8212; Small numbers of Mi-24Ds were built as training helicopters with doubled controls. 
Mi-24V (Hind-E) &#8212; Later development led to the Mi-24V which entered production in 1976 and was first seen by the west in the early 1980s. It armed with the more advanced 9M114 Shturm (AT-6 Spiral). Eight of those missile are mounted on four outer wing pylons. It was the most widely produced version with more than 1500 made. In Polish service this aircraft is designated Mi-24W. One Mi-24V was referred to as Mi-24T for unknown reasons. 
Arsenal Mi-24V upgrade &#8212; Ukrainian upgrade for Mi-24V 
Mi-24P (Hind-F) &#8212; The gunship version, which replaced the 12.7-mm machine-gun with a fixed side-mounted 30-mm GSh-30K twin-barrel cannon. 
Mi-24P-2 &#8212; Upgraded Mi-24P. 
Mi-24G (Hind-F) &#8212; Custom Mi-24P with a gun on the starboard side 
Mi-24TECh-24 "Mobile Repair Shop" &#8212; Experimental Hind-F to test abilities for recovery of downed aircraft. 
Mi-24VP (Hind-E Mod) &#8212; Development of Mi-24V made in 1985 which replaced the machine-gun with twin 23-mm cannons in a movable turret. Entered service in 1989, but only 25 were made before production ended the same year.[1] One Mi-24VP flew with the Delta-H tail rotor of the Mi-28. 
Mi-24VU (Hind-E) &#8212; Indian training version of Mi-24V "Hind-E". 
Mi-24VD &#8212; This version was produced in 1985 to test a rear defensive gun. 
Mi-24RKhR (Hind-G1) &#8212; NBC reconnaissance model, which is designed to collect radiation, biological and chemical samples. It was first seen during the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Also known as the Mi-24R, Mi-24RK and Mi-24RKh (Rch). 
Mi-24RA (Hind-G1 Mod) &#8212; New version of the Mi-24V. 
Mi-24RR &#8212; Radiation reconnaissance model derived from the Mi-24R. 
Mi-24K (Hind-G2) &#8212; Army reconnaissance, artillery observation helicopter. 
Mi-24M &#8212; Upgraded model of the Mi-24. 
Mi-24VM &#8212; upgraded Mi-24V with updated avionics to improve night-time operation, new communications gear, shorter and lighter wings, and updated weapon systems to include support for the Ataka, Shturm and Igla-V missiles and a 23-mm main gun. Other internal changes have been made to increase the aircraft life-cycle and ease maintenance. The Mi-24VM is expected to operate until 2015 
Mi-24VN (Hind-E) &#8212; (Mi-35O "Hind-E") A night-attack version based on an Mi-24V in Mi-24VM Stage 1 configuration. 
Mi-24PM &#8212; Upgraded Mi-24P using same technologies as in Mi-24VM. 
Mi-24PN &#8212; The Russian military has selected this upgraded Mi-24 to be their primary attack helicopter. The PN version has a TV and a FLIR camera located in a dome on the front of the aircraft. Other modifications include using the rotor blades and wings from the Mi-28 and fixed rather than retractable landing gear. The Russians received 14 Mi-24PNs in 2004 and plan on eventually upgrading all of their Mi-24s.[2] 
Mi-24PS &#8212; Civil police or paramilitary version, equipped with a FLIR, searchlight, loudspeaker PA system and attachments for rappelling ropes. 
Mi-24E &#8212; Environmental research version, also called the Mi-24 Ecological Survey Version. 
Mi-25 &#8212; The export version of the Mi-24D. 
Mi-35 &#8212; The export version of the Mi-24V. 
Mi-35M &#8212; Export night attack version, is fitted with western sensors and avionics. Also known as Mi-35M1. 
Mi-35M2 &#8212; Updated version of the Mi-35M for the Venezuelan Army. 
Mi-35M3 &#8212; Export Mi-24VM. 
Mi-35P &#8212; The export version of the Mi-24P. 
Mi-35U &#8212; Unarmed training version of the Mi-35. 
Mi-24 SuperHind Mk.II &#8212; Modern western avionics upgrade produced by South African company Advanced Technologies and Engineering (ATE).[3] 
Mi-24 SuperHind Mk.III/IV &#8212; Extensive operational upgrade of the original Mi-24 including weapons, avionics and counter measures.[4] 
Mi-24 SuperHind Mk.V &#8212; Newest version of the "SuperHind" with fully redesigned front fuselage and cockpit. 
Mi-24 Afghanistan field modifications &#8212; Passenger compartment armour and exhaust suppressors were often removed. Due to accidental firing while switching sides, the door gunner was given both a port and starboard gun. Extra rounds for the rocket pods to allow self-reloading near the battlefield and also heavy weapons for self defense were often carried.[5] 
Tamam Mi-24 HMOSP &#8212; Israeli upgrade. 
Early Mi-28 mockups &#8212; First, an early production Mi-24 (probably Hind-A with wings removed) was fitted with an air data boom as an early test for the Mi-28's technologies. Later, a few Mi-24Ds were fitted up with the Mi-28's radome mount for testing the sighting-flight-navigational complex's abilities, and others had redesigned fuselages that closely resemble the future Mi-28, but with rounded cockpits. [6] 
[edit] References
^ Yefim Gordon & Dmitry Komissarov


----------



## Super Falcon

The AH-1 Cobra (company designation: Bell 209) is a two-bladed, single engine attack helicopter manufactured by Bell. It shares a common engine, transmission and rotor system with the older UH-1 Iroquois. The AH-1 is also referred to as the HueyCobra or Snake.

The AH-1 was the backbone of the United States Army's attack helicopter fleet, but has been replaced by the AH-64 Apache in Army service. Upgraded versions continue to fly with the militaries of several other nations. The AH-1 twin engine versions remain in service with United States Marine Corps as the service's primary attack helicopter. Surplus AH-1 helicopters have been converted for fighting forest fires. The United States Forest Service refers to their program as the Firewatch Cobra. Garlick Helicopters also converts surplus AH-1s for forest firefighting under the name, FireSnake.[2]

Contents [hide]
1 Development 
1.1 Background 
1.2 Bell 207 Sioux Scout 
1.3 AAFSS 
1.4 Model 209 
1.5 Into production 
2 Operational history 
2.1 United States 
2.2 Israel 
2.3 Pakistan 
2.4 US Forest Service 
3 Variants 
3.1 Single-engine 
3.2 Twin-engine 
4 Operators 
4.1 Current operators 
4.2 Former operators 
5 Specifications 
5.1 AH-1G HueyCobra 
5.2 AH-1F "Modernized" Cobra 
6 See also 
7 References 
8 External links 


[edit] Development
[edit] Background
Closely related with the development of the Bell AH-1 is the story of the Bell UH-1 Iroquois &#8212; predecessor of the modern helicopter, icon of the Vietnam War and still one of the most numerous helicopter types in service today.

The UH-1 made the theory of air cavalry practical, as the new tactics called for US forces to be highly mobile across a wide area. Unlike before, they would not stand and fight long battles, and they would not stay and hold positions. Instead, the plan was that the troops carried by fleets of UH-1 Hueys would range across the country, to fight the enemy at times and places of their own choice.[3]

It soon became clear that the unarmed troop helicopters were vulnerable against ground fire from Vi&#7879;t C&#7897;ng and North Vietnamese troops, particularly as they came down to drop their troops in a landing zone. Without friendly support from artillery or ground forces, the only way to pacify a landing zone was from the air, preferably with a machine that could closely escort the transport helicopters, and loiter over the landing zone as the battle progressed. By 1962 a small number of armed UH-1As were used as escorts, armed with multiple machine guns and rocket mounts.[4]

The massive expansion of American military presence in Vietnam opened a new era of war from the air. The linchpin of US Army tactics were the helicopters, and the protection of those helicopters became a vital role.[5]

[edit] Bell 207 Sioux Scout

Bell Model 207 Sioux ScoutMain article: Bell 207
Bell had been investigating helicopter gunships since the late 1950s, and had created a mockup of its D 255 helicopter gunship concept, named "Iroquois Warrior". In June 1962, Bell displayed the mockup to Army officials, hoping to solicit funding for further development. The D 255 Iroquois Warrior was planned to be a purpose-built attack aircraft based on the UH-1B components with a new, slender airframe and a two-seat, tandem cockpit. It featured a grenade launcher in a ball turret on the nose, a 20 mm belly-mounted gun pod, and stub wings for mounting rockets or SS-10 anti-armor missiles.[6]

The Army was interested and awarded Bell a proof of concept contract in December 1962. Bell modified a Model 47 into the sleek Model 207 Sioux Scout which first flew in July 1963.[7] The Sioux Scout had all the key features of a modern helicopter gunship &#8211; a tandem cockpit, stub wings for weapons, and a chin-mounted gun turret. After evaluating the Sioux Scout in early 1964, the Army was impressed, but also believed the Sioux Scout was too small, underpowered, unsophisticated, and fragile to be of practical use.[7]

[edit] AAFSS
Army's solution to the shortcomings of the Sioux Scout was to launch the Advanced Aerial Fire Support System (AAFSS) competition.[7] The AAFSS requirement would give birth to the Lockheed AH-56 Cheyenne &#8211; a heavy battlefield helicopter that would prove to be over-ambitious, over-complex and over-budget, before being canceled 10 years later in 1972.[7] The Cheyenne program developed future technology and demonstrated some impressive performance, but was never made to work as a functional gunship. It served to underline an important rule of the combat helicopter &#8211; survival would be ensured only by the right mix of speed, agility and weapons.

[edit] Model 209

Bell 209 prototype of the AH-1 Cobra series, with skids retracted (FAA no. N209J).At the same time, despite the Army's preference for the AAFSS &#8211; for which Bell Helicopter was not selected to compete &#8211; Bell stuck with their own idea of a smaller and lighter gunship.[7] In January 1965 Bell invested $1 million to proceed with a new design.

Mating the proven transmission, the "540" rotor system of the UH-1C augmented by a Stability Control Augmentation System (SCAS), and the T53 turboshaft engine of the UH-1 with the design philosophy of the Sioux Scout, Bell produced the Model 209.[7] Bell's Model 209 largely resembled its "Iroquois Warrior" mockup.[8]

In Vietnam, events were also advancing in favor of the Model 209. Attacks on US forces were increasing, and by the end of June 1965 there were already 50,000 US ground troops in Vietnam.[7]

1965 was also the deadline for AAFSS selection, but the program was stuck in technical difficulties and political bickering. The U.S. Army needed an interim gunship for Vietnam and it asked five companies to provide a quick solution. Submissions came in for armed variants of the Boeing-Vertol ACH-47A, Kaman HH-2C Tomahawk, Piasecki 16H Pathfinder, Sikorsky S-61, and the Bell 209.[7]

On 3 September 1965 Bell rolled out the prototype, and four days later it made its maiden flight, only eight months from the go-ahead. In April 1966, the Model 209 won an evaluation against the other rival helicopters. Then the Army signed the first production contract for 110 aircraft.[7]

The Bell 209 demonstrator was used for the next six years to test weapons and fit of equipment. It had been modified to the match AH-1 production standard by the early 1970s. The demonstrator was retired to the Patton Museum at Fort Knox, KY and converted to approximately its original appearance.[8]

[edit] Into production
The Bell 209 design was modified for production. The retractable skids were replaced by simpler fixed skids. A new wide-blade rotor was featured. For production, a plexiglass canopy replaced the 209's armored glass canopy which was heavy enough to harm performance.[8] Other changes were incorporated after entering service. The main one of these was moving the tail rotor from the helicopter's left side to the right for improved effectiveness of the rotor.[9]

The U.S. Marine Corps was interested in the Cobra and ordered an improved twin-engined version in 1968 under the designation AH-1J. This would lead to more twin-engine variants.[10] In 1972, the Army sought improved anti-armor capability. Under the Improved Cobra Armament Program (ICAP), trials of eight AH-1s fitted with TOW missiles were conducted in 1973. After passing qualification tests the following year, Bell was contracted with upgrading AH-1Gs to the TOW-capable AH-1Q configuration. A more powerful T53 engine and transmission was added from 1976 resulting in the AH-1S version. The AH-1S was upgraded in three steps, culminating with the AH-1F.[11][7]

[edit] Operational history
For AH-1J, AH-1T, AH-1W, AH-1Z and other twin-engine variants, see AH-1 SuperCobra.

Bell AH-1G in Vietnam 
AH-1Q Cobra in Fort Hood, Texas 
A late-model AH-1 Cobra at ILA 2006 in Berlin[edit] United States
By June 1967, the first AH-1G HueyCobras had been delivered. Originally designated as UH-1H, the "A" for attack designation was soon adopted and when the improved UH-1D became the UH-1H, the HueyCobra became the AH-1G.[7] The AH-1 was initially considered a variant of the H-1 line, resulting in the G series letter.

AH-1 Cobras were in use by the Army during the Tet offensive in 1968 and through the end of the Vietnam War. Huey Cobras provided fire support for ground forces, escorted transport helicopters and other roles, including aerial rocket artillery (ARA) battalions in the two Airmobile divisions. They also formed "hunter killer" teams by pairing with OH-6A scout helicopters. A team featured one OH-6 flying slow and low to find enemy forces. If the OH-6 drew fire, the Cobra could strike at the then revealed enemy.[8] Bell built 1,116 AH-1Gs for the US Army between 1967 and 1973, and the Cobras chalked up over a million operational hours in Vietnam.[7] Approximately 300 AH-1s were lost to combat and accidents during the war.[8]

The US Marine Corps used AH-1G Cobras in Vietnam for a short time before acquiring twin-engine AH-1J Cobras.

AH-1 Cobras were deployed for Operation Urgent Fury, the invasion of Grenada in 1983, flying close-support and helicopter escort missions. Army Cobras participated in the US invasion of Panama in 1989, during Operation Just Cause.[8]

During Operation Desert Shield (1990) and Operation Desert Storm (Jan-Feb 1991), the Cobras and SeaCobras deployed in a support role. The USMC deployed 91 SeaCobras and the US Army 140 Cobras, generally fitted with engine inlet sand filters and operating from forward, dispersed sites in the desert. Three AH-1s were lost in accidents during fighting and afterward.[8] Cobras destroyed hundreds of Iraqi armored vehicles and other targets in the fighting, though the Army relegated the Cobra to the patrol and scout roles.

Army Cobras provided support for the US humanitarian intervention during Operation Restore Hope in Somalia in 1993. They were also employed during the US invasion of Haiti in 1994. US Cobras were also used in operations throughout the 1990s.[8] In December 1995, Cobras deployed to Bosnia with the U.S. Army's 1st Armored Division as a part of Operation Joint Endeavor.[citation needed]

The US Army phased out the AH-1 during the 1990s and retired the AH-1 from active service in March 1999, offering them to NATO allies.[7][12] The Army retired the AH-1 from reserves in September 2001. The retired AH-1s have been passed to other nations and to the USDA Forest Service.[7] AH-1 Cobras continue to be in service with the US military, by the US Marine Corps, which operate twin-engine AH-1 SuperCobras.

[edit] Israel
The Israeli Air Force named its Cobras as the "Tzefa" (&#1510;&#1508;&#1506, Hebrew for Viper.[13] Since the mid-1970s Lebanon has been Israel's most active front. The Cobra helicopter's unique abilities and its precision weapons have made it perfect for the Lebanese theatre and IAF Cobras have been a constant feature of the fighting for more than 20 years. The first Cobra attack took place on 9 May 1979, near Tyre. Having crossed the border over the Mediterranean at dusk, two AH-1s scored direct hits with 2 missiles fired by each helicopter.

Cobra helicopter gunships were also used widely by the Israeli Air Force in the 1982 Lebanon War to destroy Syrian armor and fortification. IAF Cobras destroyed dozens of Syrian armored fighting vehicles, including many of the modern Soviet T-72 tanks. As part of their service in southern Lebanon the Cobras were very active in Israel's major operations against Hezbullah in operations "Accountability" and "Grapes of Wrath".

[edit] Pakistan
Pakistan was supplied with around 20 AH-1F gunships in 1983, these were later upgraded with the C-NITE thermal imaging package. Prior to that Iran had donated some AH-1 helicopters to Pakistan in mid 1970s, which Pakistan used as its main gunship helicopters against insurgents during the Balochistan conflict.[14] The recent insurgencies in the Waziristan regions have seen Pakistani AH-1 gunships in action against Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters as well as their tribal allies. Pakistani gunships have also been used in operations against tribal uprisings in the Balochistan province, supporting the Pakistan Army against well-armed Bugti and Marri tribesmen under the late Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti and the Balochistan Liberation Army, since the mid-2000s.[15]

[edit] US Forest Service
In 2003, the US Forest Service acquired 25 retired AH-1Fs from the US Army.[7] These have been designated Bell 209 and are being converted into Firewatch Cobras with infared and low light sensors and systems for real time fire monitoring.[16][17] The Florida Department of Forestry has also acquired 3 AH-1Ps from US Army. These are called Bell 209 "Firesnakes" and are equipped to carry a water/fire retardant system.[7]


----------



## Super Falcon

Pakistan was supplied with around 20 AH-1F gunships in 1983, these were later upgraded with the C-NITE thermal imaging package. Prior to that Iran had donated some AH-1 helicopters to Pakistan in mid 1970s, which Pakistan used as its main gunship helicopters against insurgents during the Balochistan conflict.[14] The recent insurgencies in the Waziristan regions have seen Pakistani AH-1 gunships in action against Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters as well as their tribal allies. Pakistani gunships have also been used in operations against tribal uprisings in the Balochistan province, supporting the Pakistan Army against well-armed Bugti and Marri tribesmen under the late Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti and the Balochistan Liberation Army, since the mid-2000s


----------



## Super Falcon

[url="http://

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

zraver said:


> In the Iran-Iraq war the end results were about even, who ever saw the other first won.



Helicopter arn't made to fight each other. Their sole purpose is ground attack. However, there was one confirmed air to air kill by a helicopter and it was an MI-25 shooting down a AH-1J SeaCobra. (Iran Iraq War)





Super Falcon said:


> hahahaha so noz upgrade will make a difference for u any way ur Hind in afghan war got serious probleum by stingers. do u remember sir but cobra never shot down by any shoulder fired missles



Atleast 3 SuperCobras were shot down in Iraq, one was shot down with an RPG. Most of the stinger the US provided to the Afghans were returned, the ones that didn't arn't functional because of battery life. The Cobra is not magical, if the enemy has a stinger the Cobra is in trouble.



Super Falcon said:


> who said cobra is not lethal it is lethal with precision hind is lethal but not prcesion half of its ammo use to be wasted when comes to precision sir



That's not true.



Super Falcon said:


> it is pretty even if we have new cobra than it is bye bye for hind sir becoz it is *too heavy and visible to other agressors but cobra is more agile can hide anywhere* and and low cost than hind for sure i pick anyday cobra latest model over old model of hind but true is that hind is my favourite attack helicopter but truth is cobra is better we cant deny it



Both the Cobra and the Hind will be visible, and if not their sound will give them away, also are you sure the Cobra is more agile? I knew a Hind pilot, and from his accounts it is a very agile helicopter, it's even able to perform a loop. Its Powerful engines are like the ruber band on a sling shot, but agility has little benifits because once a stinger locks on you arn't arn't getting away unless you use counter measures.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PAFAce

Are we talking about helicopter dogfights or are we talking about air support? In air support, it should be more-or-less even going by the stats (which is, according to *zraver*, a battleproven theory). If we're talking helicopter dogfights, then I guess we're mssing the point of these helicopters in the first place.

Advantage definitely goes to India, no doubt, but by a small margin. Frankly, Pakistan Army is more focused on acquiring utility aircraft right now, Mi-17s seem to be priority number one (with good reason). Army Aviation has shown interest in the Apache and the Tiger, but it's never really gone for it. A small detachment of Army Aviation pilots went to the joint German-French Tiger school to have a look at the Tiger, but I think it was deemed too expensive and risky a venture. The Cobra seems to be to the AA what the F-16 is to the PAF, they believe they can do anything with it.

So if Army Aviation isn't too worried about it, why lose sleep over it?

*Edit*
I forgot to mention, I watched a doc not too long ago on US Army and Marine Corps aviation branches. Turns out, Pak Army isn't the only one in love with the Cobra, the Marine Corps loves it too. They've got the SuperCobras now.


----------



## brahmastra

I personally like Cobra bit more than the Hinds.
they are rear chance that these birds will see face-to-face fight.

At high altitude like Kashmir, Hind will perform better cause they can fly higher.(If I'm not wrong)

on the terrain like Punjab,Rajasthan and Gujarat Cobra will be better than the Hind if we conceder maneuverability. But, will IAF or IA will need to use 'Hind' as IAF got large number of Mig-27 and Jaguars which are 'Big guys' for the ground support role where PA armored regiment cannot find anything to 'hide' as Gujarat,Punjab and Rajasthan are 'open area'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## beckham

Mil Mi-25 / Mi-35 [Hind] - _Akbar_





*IAF currently operates two Mi-25/35 Helicopter Squadrons (No.104 Firebirds and No.125 Gladiators)*. IAF Mi-25s and 35s have now been painted in a low visibility paint scheme

The wake-up call to Mi-24 export operators (as many as 600 Mi-24/25/35 export types are deemed suitable for various scales of upgrade) came from Israel Aircraft Industries. It's mission 24 Mi-24 upgrade proposal was selected by the Indian Air Force in an order comprising 25 upgrade kits under a $US20 million contract signed in 1998. It proved to be a good advertisement with which to convince potential customers that a cost-effective alternative upgrade proposal exists, and was viewed as highly competitive to those offered by Russian and French companies. With an affordable and rapid integration of observation/sighting, navigation, self-defense and self-protection equipment proven in real-world operational conditions, the helicopter could perform well in the demanding CAS/AA role in the 21'st century battlefield, including at night and in adverse weather.

IAI's Tamam electro-optical division was quick to offer an affordable upgrade package for the Mi-24 that required reduced development time and risk. The Indian Air force contract covered prototype manufacture and testing in Israel, with production conversion to be undertaken at the customer's facilities. No airframe, flight control system, autopilot, power plant, transmission or rotor system changes have been made by Tamam due to the complexity and costs of such rework and any subsequent required qualifications.

The Mission 24 upgrade package as sold to the Indian Air Force is built around a 1553B digital databus. The heart of the upgrade is a single mission computer developed with IAI MLM; it is a derivative of the model used in the US Air Force T-38 upgrade program, in which IAI is the principal subcontractor.

*Mission 24 utilizes Tamam's proven helicopter multi-mission optronic stabilized payload HMOSP, which weighs around 30 kg (66 lbs). It is an improved turret ball mounted derivative of the combat proven IAI Tamam night targeting system installed in the US marine corps AH-1W super cobra and Israeli DF/AF Cobra attack helicopters FoV (between 2.4 deg and 29.2 deg on the FLIR).* 

*The HMOSP can incorporate two types of FLIR*: a scanning array 4 x 480 Cadmium-mercury-telluride detectors, operating in the low-wavelength band, and a 320x 240- element indium-antimony focal plane array functioning at the middle wavelengths.* Monochrome or color CCD TV cameras are included, together with a laser rangefinder, designator and pointer, plus a built in auto-tracking unit that uses centroid and edge-tracking techniques.*

*The cockpits are NVG compatible, and both crew members have the option to use IAI's advanced NVG set built-in monocular display on which all necessary navigation and targeting information can be presented. Both cockpits feature a single multi-function display (MFD) for TV, FLIR and targeting information, in addition to a keyword and display unit for navigation and communication control.* *The CPG has control grips borrowed from the AH-1W, with all necessary sensor/weapons control switches and knobs; such devices when combined with the MFD, can dramatically change work practices and reduce workload.*

*The HMOSP has been integrated with the Shturm-V ATGM SLOC guidance system through an IR goniometer and interface unit designed by IAI Tamam engineers, which has fully replaced the original old and bulky Raduga-F sighting/ATGM optical tracking system. The unit weighs more than 200 kg (440 lb). The Raduga-F 's role for targeting and tracking both the target and missile was taken over by HMOSP, with guidance commands being produced and transmitted to the missiles through the existing equipment*. Russian sources indicated in 2002 that Tamam experienced some guidance problems during Shtrum-V test firings using the HMOSP system in place of the Raduga-F. In order to solve the sensitive missile guidance problems, IAI contacted the Russian design authority for the Shtrum, the KBP company of Tula, which provided important technical assistance. The contact was arranged through the Russian arms export agency Rosvoorouzhenie predecessor of Rosoboronexport.






KBP help is believed to have been instrumental in solving the software/hardware, guidance and control problems associated with the HMOSP/Shtrum-V assimilation on India's upgraded Mi-24s. There are other types of ATGMs on offer for the Mission 24 system, such as Rafael's Spike-ER that has a maximum range of 7 km (3.8 nm) and employs 'fire-and-update' fibre optic guidance. However the Indian Air Force, which has ample stocks of Shtrum-V missiles, preferred to limit the guided weapons integration work on it's upgraded choppers to the relatively cheap and well-proven Russian made supersonic ATGM. *The Shtrum-V is still considered to be highly effective against older generation MBT's, such as the Chinese made Type-59/69, the chief potential targets for Indian 'Hinds' in a future war with Pakistan. Integration of the Indigenous Nag ATGM is known to have been earmarked for IAF Mission 24 machines at a later stage.*

Navigation improvements introduced by IAI include a GPS receiver integrated into the existing DISS-15D Doppler sensor, and a three-dimensional digital map display. Both the HMOSP and YakB-12.7 gun are slaved to the pilot's line of sight through the use of a helmet-mounted sensor; the machine gun can also be slaved to the HMOSP. IAI chaff/flare dispenser units and Elta radar/laser/missile warning systems have provided a self-defense capability. The total weight of these new systems is about 50 kg.

It was reported that the production phase of the Indian Air force mi-35 was successfully running in 2001 or 2002. During the contract implementation phase, the IAF was tight lipped about the upgrade details, and IAI has also been reluctant to disclose the details of the launch customer for its Mission 24 package. The upgraded helicopters, in overall light grey camouflage, were displayed publicly for the first time during the Aero India 2003 air show in Feb 2003 in Bangalore.

*In a nutshell, the package includes:

*A day-night sight with TV and FLIR.






*A mission computer.

*NVG-compatible cockpit with MFDs and moving-map display.

*Support for helmet-mounted sights.





The HMOSP and the 12.7mm four-barrel machine gun are slaved to the pilot's line of sight.

*A countermeasures suite.

*Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite navigation network receiver.

*Support for the AT-6 Spiral and Rafael Spike antitank missiles.*

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## beckham




----------



## DaRk WaVe

*AH-1W / AH-1Z Super Cobra Attack Helicopter​*
​
The AH-1W Super Cobra is the US Marines' attack helicopter. It is supplied by Bell Helicopter Textron, and entered service in 1985. As well as the US Marine Corps, the Super Cobra is operational with the Turkish Land Forces and the armed forces of Taiwan. The AH-1W was deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003.
Super Cobra known as the H-1 programme is underway.

*Super Cobra upgrade programme*
The programme calls for the remanufacture of the US Marine Corps fleet of 180 AH-1W Super Cobra and 100 UH-1N utility helicopters to an advanced four-bladed configuration.

The existing two-bladed semi-rigid, teetering rotor system is being replaced with a four-bladed, hingeless, bearingless rotor

The improvement in flight characteristics provided by the four-bladed configuration has led to increases in flight envelope, maximum speed, vertical rate-of-climb, payload and rotor vibration level.

The USMC subsequently decided on new-build rather than remanufactured UH-1Y helicopters and, in February 2008, awarded Bell a contract for the new build of 40 of the proposed 180 AH-1Z helicopters. Four additional helicopters were ordered in September 2008. The new-build AH-1Z will be fitted with the uprated T700-401C engines, also fitted on the UH-1Y.

First flight of the AH-1Z took place in December 2000. The AH-1W entered low-rate initial production (LRIP) in October 2003. Five AH-1W helicopters were remanufactured to AH-1Z standard and took part in flight testing at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland. Sea trials in May 2005 included the first shipboard landing on USS Bataan, Wasp Class amphibious assault ship.

Developmental testing was completed in February 2006 and two test aircraft began operational evaluation (OPEVAL) with the USMC in May 2006. The first production AH-1Z helicopter was delivered to the USMC in January 2007. Phase II of OPEVAL began in February 2008. A full-rate production decision is expected in 2009. Initial operating capability is scheduled for July 2011.

The Turkish Army selected the AH-1Z King Cobra in July 2000 with a request for 50 out of a total requirement for 145 helicopters. In May 2004, it was announced that the acquisition was to be cancelled. The helicopters were to be built in Turkey by Tusas Aerospace Industries (TAI). 

*Cockpit*

Northrop Grumman has developed the integrated avionics systems for the AH-1Z. The systems include two mission computers and an automatic flight control system with four-axis stability control augmentation system. Each crew station has two 8in&#215;6in multifunction displays and one 4.2in&#215;4.2in dual function display, based on active matrix liquid crystal colour technology.

The displays are supplied by L-3 Ruggedised Command and Control Solutions. Smiths Aerospace supplied the weapon stores control and data transfer system.

The communications suite combines the new US Navy RT-1824 integrated radio, UHF/VHF, COMSEC and modem in a single unit. The navigation suite includes an embedded GPS inertial (EGI), a low-airspeed air data subsystem, which allows weapons delivery when hovering and a digital map. 

In June 2002, Thales Avionics' TopOwl helmet-mounted display system was chosen for the USMC AH-1Z. The first system was delivered in January 2003. TopOwl, also fitted on Tiger, NH90 and Rooivalk helicopters, has integrated Gen IV image intensifier and FLIR capability and provides transition from day to night use at the push of a button.

*Weapons and missiles*

*The Super Cobra can carry both TOW and Hellfire anti-armour missiles and is being qualified to carry the Maverick missile.* The Raytheon BGM-71 TOW missile has a range of more than 3km and semi-automatic command-to-line-of-sight guidance. The AGM-114 Hellfire missile is manufactured by Lockheed Martin. It is equipped with a semi-active laser seeker and has a range of 7km. The Super Cobra has fire-and-forget capability when firing the Hellfire missile in co-operative mode with laser target illumination. 

The Super Cobra was the first attack helicopter to qualify both the Sidewinder air-to-air missile and the Sidearm anti-radiation missile. Both missiles can use the same LAU-7 rail launcher. Sidearm has a range of more than 15km. AIM-9L Sidewinder is an all-aspect, short-range, air-to-air missile produced by Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. The missile has a range of 15km. 

The Super Cobra can fire the Hydra family of unguided 70mm rockets or the larger 127mm Zuni rocket bombs. From 2008, it will be armed with the advanced precision kill weapon system (APKWS), a guided version of the Hydra. The US Army re-opened the competition for the APKWS in September 2005 and a decision on contractor is expected in March 2006.

The Super Cobra carries a three-barrel, 20mm Gatling gun for close range (up to 2km) engagement and 750 rounds of ammunition. With the gun in a fixed forward position, the pilot can aim by manoeuvring the helicopter. Either crew member can slave the turret to the helmet-mounted sight and aim the gun by looking at the target.

*The AH-1Z for the USMC will be armed with: 16 Hellfire missiles, six AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, 70mm rocket pods (7- and 19-shot), and a 20mm gun.*

*Sensors*

Targeting for the AH-1W is provided by the night targeting system (NTS), jointly produced by Tamam Division of Israel Aircraft Industries Ltd and Kollsman.

NTS integrates a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) which provides automatic target tracking with a laser designator / rangefinder and video recorder. 

Lockheed Martin has developed a longer range AN/AAQ-30 target sight system (TSS) for the AH-1Z to replace the NTS. TSS includes a third-generation four field-of-view FLIR based on a 3-5-micron staring array, CCD colour TV, Kollsman eyesafe laser rangefinder / designator and multi-target autotracker. L-3 Communications Wescam supplies the turret assembly. Lockheed Martin was awarded a contract to supply the first 16 systems to the USMC in March 2008.

Longbow International (a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman) is developing the Cobra Radar System for the AH-1Z, based on the Longbow millimetre wave radar on the AH-64D Apache. Cobra is a pod-based radar that can be mounted on a wingtip or in a stores position. Cobra can automatically search, detect, classify and prioritise multiple moving and stationary targets. It has a range of 8km against moving and 4km against stationary targets.

*Countermeasures*

The H1 Super Cobra upgrade includes provision of a new electronic warfare suite. A new radar warner, the AN/APR-39(XE2) from Lockheed Martin, replaces the Lockheed Martin AN/APR-39(V)2 pulse radar warner and the AEL Industries AN/APR-44 continuous-wave radar warner.

The ATK AN/AAR-47 missile warning system has been included in the upgrade suite. AN/AAR-47 uses infrared detectors to detect the missile plume. The Goodrich (formerly Raytheon) AN/AVR-2A laser warning receiver has also been added. The infrared countermeasures system is the AN/ALQ-144A developed by BAE Systems IEWS (formerly Sanders, a Lockheed Martin company).

The helicopter is also equipped with the AN/ALE-39 chaff and infrared flare dispenser manufactured by BAE Systems Integrated Defense Solutions (formerly Tracor) and Lockheed Martin Tactical Defense Systems.

*Engines*

Twin General Electric T700-GE-401 turboshaft engines provide a total of 2,410kW or 3,380shp.
In standard conditions, with an air-to-air ordnance load, the SuperCobra can take off and climb out at more than 4.1m/s on only one engine. It can hover out of ground effect (OGE) at 914m, with a load of four TOW and four Hellfire missiles, full turret ammunition and rockets.


----------



## beckham

emo_girl said:


> *AH-1W / AH-1Z Super Cobra Attack Helicopter​*
> ​
> The AH-1W Super Cobra is the US Marines' attack helicopter. It is supplied by Bell Helicopter Textron, and entered service in 1985. As well as the US Marine Corps, the Super Cobra is operational with the Turkish Land Forces and the armed forces of Taiwan. The AH-1W was deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom in March 2003.
> Super Cobra known as the H-1 programme is underway.
> 
> *Super Cobra upgrade programme*
> The programme calls for the remanufacture of the US Marine Corps fleet of 180 AH-1W Super Cobra and 100 UH-1N utility helicopters to an advanced four-bladed configuration.
> 
> The existing two-bladed semi-rigid, teetering rotor system is being replaced with a four-bladed, hingeless, bearingless rotor
> 
> The improvement in flight characteristics provided by the four-bladed configuration has led to increases in flight envelope, maximum speed, vertical rate-of-climb, payload and rotor vibration level.
> 
> The USMC subsequently decided on new-build rather than remanufactured UH-1Y helicopters and, in February 2008, awarded Bell a contract for the new build of 40 of the proposed 180 AH-1Z helicopters. Four additional helicopters were ordered in September 2008. The new-build AH-1Z will be fitted with the uprated T700-401C engines, also fitted on the UH-1Y.
> 
> First flight of the AH-1Z took place in December 2000. The AH-1W entered low-rate initial production (LRIP) in October 2003. Five AH-1W helicopters were remanufactured to AH-1Z standard and took part in flight testing at NAS Patuxent River, Maryland. Sea trials in May 2005 included the first shipboard landing on USS Bataan, Wasp Class amphibious assault ship.
> 
> Developmental testing was completed in February 2006 and two test aircraft began operational evaluation (OPEVAL) with the USMC in May 2006. The first production AH-1Z helicopter was delivered to the USMC in January 2007. Phase II of OPEVAL began in February 2008. A full-rate production decision is expected in 2009. Initial operating capability is scheduled for July 2011.
> 
> The Turkish Army selected the AH-1Z King Cobra in July 2000 with a request for 50 out of a total requirement for 145 helicopters. In May 2004, it was announced that the acquisition was to be cancelled. The helicopters were to be built in Turkey by Tusas Aerospace Industries (TAI).
> 
> *Cockpit*
> 
> Northrop Grumman has developed the integrated avionics systems for the AH-1Z. The systems include two mission computers and an automatic flight control system with four-axis stability control augmentation system. Each crew station has two 8in×6in multifunction displays and one 4.2in×4.2in dual function display, based on active matrix liquid crystal colour technology.
> 
> The displays are supplied by L-3 Ruggedised Command and Control Solutions. Smiths Aerospace supplied the weapon stores control and data transfer system.
> 
> The communications suite combines the new US Navy RT-1824 integrated radio, UHF/VHF, COMSEC and modem in a single unit. The navigation suite includes an embedded GPS inertial (EGI), a low-airspeed air data subsystem, which allows weapons delivery when hovering and a digital map.
> 
> In June 2002, Thales Avionics' TopOwl helmet-mounted display system was chosen for the USMC AH-1Z. The first system was delivered in January 2003. TopOwl, also fitted on Tiger, NH90 and Rooivalk helicopters, has integrated Gen IV image intensifier and FLIR capability and provides transition from day to night use at the push of a button.
> 
> *Weapons and missiles*
> 
> *The Super Cobra can carry both TOW and Hellfire anti-armour missiles and is being qualified to carry the Maverick missile.* The Raytheon BGM-71 TOW missile has a range of more than 3km and semi-automatic command-to-line-of-sight guidance. The AGM-114 Hellfire missile is manufactured by Lockheed Martin. It is equipped with a semi-active laser seeker and has a range of 7km. The Super Cobra has fire-and-forget capability when firing the Hellfire missile in co-operative mode with laser target illumination.
> 
> The Super Cobra was the first attack helicopter to qualify both the Sidewinder air-to-air missile and the Sidearm anti-radiation missile. Both missiles can use the same LAU-7 rail launcher. Sidearm has a range of more than 15km. AIM-9L Sidewinder is an all-aspect, short-range, air-to-air missile produced by Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. The missile has a range of 15km.
> 
> The Super Cobra can fire the Hydra family of unguided 70mm rockets or the larger 127mm Zuni rocket bombs. From 2008, it will be armed with the advanced precision kill weapon system (APKWS), a guided version of the Hydra. The US Army re-opened the competition for the APKWS in September 2005 and a decision on contractor is expected in March 2006.
> 
> The Super Cobra carries a three-barrel, 20mm Gatling gun for close range (up to 2km) engagement and 750 rounds of ammunition. With the gun in a fixed forward position, the pilot can aim by manoeuvring the helicopter. Either crew member can slave the turret to the helmet-mounted sight and aim the gun by looking at the target.
> 
> *The AH-1Z for the USMC will be armed with: 16 Hellfire missiles, six AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, 70mm rocket pods (7- and 19-shot), and a 20mm gun.*
> 
> *Sensors*
> 
> Targeting for the AH-1W is provided by the night targeting system (NTS), jointly produced by Tamam Division of Israel Aircraft Industries Ltd and Kollsman.
> 
> NTS integrates a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) which provides automatic target tracking with a laser designator / rangefinder and video recorder.
> 
> Lockheed Martin has developed a longer range AN/AAQ-30 target sight system (TSS) for the AH-1Z to replace the NTS. TSS includes a third-generation four field-of-view FLIR based on a 3-5-micron staring array, CCD colour TV, Kollsman eyesafe laser rangefinder / designator and multi-target autotracker. L-3 Communications Wescam supplies the turret assembly. Lockheed Martin was awarded a contract to supply the first 16 systems to the USMC in March 2008.
> 
> Longbow International (a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman) is developing the Cobra Radar System for the AH-1Z, based on the Longbow millimetre wave radar on the AH-64D Apache. Cobra is a pod-based radar that can be mounted on a wingtip or in a stores position. Cobra can automatically search, detect, classify and prioritise multiple moving and stationary targets. It has a range of 8km against moving and 4km against stationary targets.
> 
> *Countermeasures*
> 
> The H1 Super Cobra upgrade includes provision of a new electronic warfare suite. A new radar warner, the AN/APR-39(XE2) from Lockheed Martin, replaces the Lockheed Martin AN/APR-39(V)2 pulse radar warner and the AEL Industries AN/APR-44 continuous-wave radar warner.
> 
> The ATK AN/AAR-47 missile warning system has been included in the upgrade suite. AN/AAR-47 uses infrared detectors to detect the missile plume. The Goodrich (formerly Raytheon) AN/AVR-2A laser warning receiver has also been added. The infrared countermeasures system is the AN/ALQ-144A developed by BAE Systems IEWS (formerly Sanders, a Lockheed Martin company).
> 
> The helicopter is also equipped with the AN/ALE-39 chaff and infrared flare dispenser manufactured by BAE Systems Integrated Defense Solutions (formerly Tracor) and Lockheed Martin Tactical Defense Systems.
> 
> *Engines*
> 
> Twin General Electric T700-GE-401 turboshaft engines provide a total of 2,410kW or 3,380shp.
> In standard conditions, with an air-to-air ordnance load, the SuperCobra can take off and climb out at more than 4.1m/s on only one engine. It can hover out of ground effect (OGE) at 914m, with a load of four TOW and four Hellfire missiles, full turret ammunition and rockets.




Emo, Pakistan doesn't operates *AH-1 Z Viper *or *AH-1 Super Cobra.* (Correct me If I am wrong )

As of January 2009 Pakistan only operates *18 baseline AH-1S* and *8 AH-1F Cobras.*

I am not sure if cobra's has undergone any upgradation programme sine their introduction in 1983, other than the addition of thermal imaging package.


----------



## beckham




----------



## Super Falcon

brahmastra said:


> I personally like Cobra bit more than the Hinds.
> they are rear chance that these birds will see face-to-face fight.
> 
> At high altitude like Kashmir, Hind will perform better cause they can fly higher.(If I'm not wrong)
> 
> on the terrain like Punjab,Rajasthan and Gujarat Cobra will be better than the Hind if we conceder maneuverability. But, will IAF or IA will need to use 'Hind' as IAF got large number of Mig-27 and Jaguars which are 'Big guys' for the ground support role where PA armored regiment cannot find anything to 'hide' as Gujarat,Punjab and Rajasthan are 'open area'.






hahahahaha when ur jaquars and mig 27 perfom attck on our infantry and tanks we were like sitting ducks to get killed and our F 16 JF 17 thunder willl be playing cricket in airbases of pakistan is that u think or our sam system will not work at that time before ur Mig 27 arrive in pakistan they will be history sir open your eyes.


----------



## Super Falcon

[url="http://




Cobra of pakistan will go upgraddition processs soon


----------



## Super Falcon

[url="http://


----------



## Super Falcon

first Attack helicopter father of all helicopter when it comes to attack most succesfull in the history of human era attack helicopter seen all the wars vietnam war when first attack helicopter idea came to mind and at that time AH 1 cobra came to world and than russian followed and pakistan have this baby im not saying hind is not good but cobra is not bad too i respect hind i love hind but cobra is equal match when come to firpower hellfire , TOW ets guns


----------



## Super Falcon

[url="http://


----------



## Super Falcon

both are good and most killers of tanks in the world but cobra and hind have only one difference one is small venmous snake and and other is heavy duty crocodile both can killl tanks with ease

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nightcrawler

http://www.*******.com/file/198527720/6f9d6f72/Comanche_versus_Hokum.html



the most comprehensive that i can find


----------



## Super Falcon

good one KA black shark it is i think and MI 28 behind it am i right friend. or may be my eye sight is bad


----------



## MPPK

Good evening.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Pakistan needs 80 Helicopters 

Euro Copters or Apache Types 

So it can be on even terms with India they have solid backbone of Helicopters .....

Its no contest sadly , and this is why we need 80 helicopters ASAP


----------



## leoberetta

zraver said:


> In the Iran-Iraq war the end results were about even, who ever saw the other first won.



In Iran -iraq war...Iraqi hinds were killing iranian cobras much more frequently....and the ratio was tilted in favour of iraqis who had much better experiance with hinds...


----------



## brahmastra

how could you forget this baby?


----------



## S-A-B-E-R->

brahmastra said:


> how could you forget this baby?



easily...lol


----------



## PLAextream

noticeplz ignore my spell ,as my browser don't support spellcheck). 

i dont know why the hell cobra has only 2 roter blades where basic physics tells that more the blades,more the lift ,less the noise(my theory),may be super cobra has 4roter blades?.
long time ago i got my hands into a book titled "the bear trap"(jung publications) by "Usuf akdin"former director of ISI(hope i spelled him rightly), where he told about the fear of hind choppers in the mind of afgan mujahids as in the start of its introduction in afganistan it was almost invinsible to ground fire by rebels due to its heavely armored belly ,but situation turned dramatically after arrival of american stinger SAM's that forced soviet helos to fly out of range of stinger as much as possible & also forced soviet designer to further do some modification to hind's exaust's to reduce heat signature.
It is also stated in that book that Pakistan sucessfully got 1 hind (I dont exectly rember if it was a hind or some mig ) by getting a afgan pilot to ditch there soviet handler & land it into pakistan ,later it was transfered to U.S to analyze that beast. 
that book was fun to read & get an over view of afgan war,american involvement,ISI's role,Soviet counter measures etc.......


----------



## saurabh

PLAextream said:


> noticeplz ignore my spell ,as my browser don't support spellcheck).
> 
> *i dont know why the hell cobra has only 2 roter blades where basic physics tells that more the blades,more the lift ,less the noise(my theory),may be super cobra has 4roter blades?.*



Nope, only increasing the number of blades do not increase lift or reduce he noise. Many factors, including wing design, dimensions, rpm etc decide the overall performance. You can achieve better results with two blades compared to four or more, by enhancing other parameters.


----------



## illuminatidinesh

> good one KA black shark it is i think and MI 28 behind it am i right friend. or may be my eye sight is bad


U r Bang on target


----------



## illuminatidinesh

The Hind were nicknamed as flying tanks.... This forum has already discussed that i think. There r instances that soviet pilots brought back the hellos after being hit by the stingers ...
Cobra do any one need to say? The name it self speaks for that.


----------



## PLAextream

illuminatidinesh said:


> The Hind were nicknamed as flying tanks.... This forum has already discussed that i think. There r instances that soviet pilots brought back the hellos after being hit by the stingers ...
> Cobra do any one need to say? The name it self speaks for that.



ya your su30mki is also called" flying truck"  .
as far as geting a hit by a sam & still able to land it is just a good luck of that pilot ,as the warhead of most of man pod sam specially stinger is capable enough to blow it apart(specially a copter).in iraq even a pvt cargo airline survived a SAM hit ,as the stinger damaged just one engine & luckly that palne han 4of them
The twin engine may help a bit in case a copter survive a direct hit but cobra lacks twin engine so if one engine goes out then its assured RIP .
& as far as hind is concerned i dont regard it as true attack helo,it is its mixed capability(weapons payload + utility) that made it popular with 3rd world countries.
cobra was never intended to be heavy weight attack choper (just like jf17 is not like j10)
later american's changed there war doctrine & replaced cobra with Apcahe.
Pakistan army relay on fighters for this role as copters are tempting targets for man pod SAM's.

any way india can now boast of having a flying tank(hind) & flying truck(su30) in its inventry as their orignal tanks like arjun are too heavy to move.


----------



## illuminatidinesh

> ya your su30mki is also called" flying truck"


And U r the truck driver?
I thought the PLAF uses the same truck and tanks.........
The Hind got that name flying tanks U know Y? It has got bloody strong Armour.
And u better read what context i posted the message.
(SU 30 MKI = truck?? ---Off topic Come open a topic if u want to discuss about it)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PLAextream

illuminatidinesh said:


> And U r the truck driver?
> I thought the PLAF uses the same truck and tanks.........
> The Hind got that name flying tanks U know Y? It has got bloody strong Armour.
> And u better read what context i posted the message.
> (SU 30 MKI = truck?? ---Off topic Come open a topic if u want to discuss about it)



"BLOODY STRONG ARMOUR" ,dude if a missile make a direct hit on the engine or roter(or even tail stabilizer) then your bloody armour cant save your bloody pilots.
altough small arms fire could be sustained by hind.
lets go by facts:
stronger armour= more weight =require power full engine= more heat generated by engine =tempting target for HEAT SEEKING missiles.
& hinds dont have effective heat supressers .(as proved in afganistan 80% kill ratio made by stinger on hind).
Thats 1of the reasion your country's HAL trying a hell to reduce as much as weight from its on developement LAH.


----------



## illuminatidinesh

> "BLOODY STRONG ARMOUR" ,dude if a missile make a direct hit on the engine or roter(or even tail stabilizer) then your bloody armour cant save your bloody pilots.
> altough small arms fire could be sustained by hind.
> lets go by facts:
> stronger armour= more weight =require power full engine= more heat generated by engine =tempting target for HEAT SEEKING missiles.
> & hinds dont have effective heat supressers .(as proved in afganistan 80&#37; kill ratio made by stinger on hind).
> Thats 1of the reasion your country's HAL trying a hell to reduce as much as weight from its on developement LAH.
> PLAextream is offline Report Post Reply With Quote


The most kill as far as the Hind were concerned were not from stingers..... Check the facts. Instead they were made by attacks while on ground.
the soviets adapted very quickly.(engine armour were improved, they kept away from the range, extensively used flares(very minimal effect though).... so on)
Ur 80% kills were against the fixed wing aircraft's sir.
I like this kind of argument.


----------



## illuminatidinesh

Many bad experiences in Afghanistan (333 helicopters were lost in the ten years of Soviet occupation) prompted an upgrade pack for the Hind-D with various countermeasure modifications, including a radar-warning receiver (RWR), a chaff/flare dispenser and an infrared jammer (all this was fitted as standard to the Hind-E). Also, those hot exhausts were covered up with boxy filtration systems and the intakes with dust filters, making a Hind more difficult to hit with a heat-seeking missile like the Stinger. 


Despite the overall failure of the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan and the Hind's high rate of attrition, the design seems to have fared reasonably. Mujahadin rebels were apparently terrified of the helicopter, calling it "Shaitan-Arba", or "Satan's Chariot". One source notes that pilots were often able to scare Mujahadin soldiers off by simply manoeuvring aggressively at them. Useful if they were out of ammunition. Pilots became highly proficient, performing manoeuvres and attacks that even the designers considered impossible. The poor suitability of the Mi-24 for night operations was not a deterrent to the pilots, who were trained to fly at night unassisted, using flares to illuminate suspicious targets.
During the 1980s an encounter between the two sides' helicopters graphically showed a serious flaw in the design of the Hind. An American AH-1 Huey Cobra met one while flying along the border between East and West Germany; the Hind had been ordered to intercept the Cobra and the pilots chased one another along the border for a while, the American pilot constantly pulling up sharply to force his faster opponent to overshoot. Apparently trying to duplicate this manoeuvre, the Russian pilot eventually pulled up too hard and stalled his aircraft. When attempting to pull out of the dive that followed, the main rotor blades of the Hind hit its tail boom and the helicopter crashed, killing everyone aboard.
I think the members will like this!!!!!!!!


----------



## PLAextream

of the topic, if we look at the physical structure of apache ,we see unlike cobra or hind's exaust it has a patient design module to cool the hot gases before leaving it's exaust .Even comanche model displayed a method to pass on the exaust gases of engine to tail section where it cooled before leaving out.These technique's reduce the heat signature of copter considerably.

i wonder if cobra's canopy could sustain Heavy machine gun fire (12mm) as they have huge visibility compared to hindered view of hind.


----------



## gambit

> PLAextream said:
> 
> 
> 
> i dont know why the hell cobra has only 2 roter blades where basic physics tells that more the blades,more the lift ,less the noise(my theory),may be super cobra has 4roter blades?.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> saurabh said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, only increasing the number of blades do not increase lift or reduce he noise. Many factors, including wing design, dimensions, rpm etc decide the overall performance. You can achieve better results with two blades compared to four or more, by enhancing other parameters.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Increasing the numbler of rotor blades *DO* increase lift but could be cancelled out by not increasing the performance levels of other factors such as rpm or blade shaping.

Blades and Dissymetry of lift


> The weight of a helicopter is divided evenly between the rotor blades on the main rotor system. If the helicopter weighs 5000 lbs and it has two blades, then each blade must be able to support 2500 lbs and so on. The more blades a helicopter has then the lower the weight that is carried on each blade compared to the same helicopter with less blades.



In order to understand why the two-blade configuration is so popular one must delve into the history of the helicopter itself. The above link has this paragraph...



> All rotor systems are subject to *Dissymetry of lift in forward flight*. At a hover, the lift is equal across the entire rotor disk. As the helicopter gains airspeed, the advancing blade develops greater lift because of the increased airspeed (for example, if your blades at a hover move at 300 knots and you fly forward at 100 knots, your advancing blade is now moving at a relative speed of 400 knots and your retreating blade is moving at 200). This has to be compensated for in some way, or the helicopter would corkscrew through the air doing faster and faster snap rolls as airspeed increased.
> 
> *Dissymetry of lift* is compensated for by BLADE FLAPPING . Because of the increased airspeed (and corresponding lift increase) on the advancing blade, it flaps upward. Decreasing speed and lift on the retreating blade causes it to flap downward. This INDUCED FLOW through the rotors system changes the angle of attack on the blades and causes the upward-flapping advancing blade to produce less lift, and the downward-flapping retreating blade to produce a corresponding lift increase. Kinda spooky, huh? Anyway, it all balances out and the lift is equal across the disk.



Dissymetry of lift was discovered by a Spaniard...

Juan de la Cierva - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> Juan De la Cierva (21 September 1895 &#8211; 9 December 1936) was a Spanish Civil Engineer and pilot. His most famous accomplishment was the invention in 1920 of the Autogiro, a single-rotor type of aircraft that came to be called autogyro in the English language. After four years of experimentation, De la *Cierva developed the articulated rotor* which resulted in the world's first successful flight of a stable rotary-wing aircraft in 1923 with his C.4 prototype.



Dissymmetry of lift - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> Dissymmetry of lift in rotorcraft aerodynamics refers to an *uneven amount of lift on opposite sides of the rotor disc*. It is a phenomenon that affects single-rotor helicopters in lateral flight, whether the direction of flight be forwards, sideways or in reverse.


To put Cierva's discovery in simpler language...

A rotor system consist of a central hub and the rotor blades. Assume two blades for now. When in motion we have one blade moving into the airflow but the other blade actually retreating from the same airflow. Cierva attended a 1922 Madrid _Don Quixote_ production with an operating windmill on stage. He noticed that the windmill's blades flapping slightly through each revolution. At that time, all autogyro rotor systems were rigid, in blades and in how they attach to the hub. Cierva decided to hinge them and the result: When one blade is moving into the airflow it would flap upward, losing some lift. The other blade which is in retreat from the airflow would flap downward, producing lift. The laws of physics took over and both blades would balance each other out. Cierva's discovery and how to compensate for the autogyro's unique aerodynamics allowed the helicopter to hover *AND* to have forward speed greater than two-digit mph. The 'articulated rotor' was that hinge system to allow the blades to flap, or to be flexible in their motions.

As helicopter development improve in performance over time, thanks to Cierva, loading weight inevitably increases and that led to the addition of additional blades to improve lift capability but because of the rotor hinge system, the entire rotor assembly itself increases in mechanical complexity and weight. Increased mechanical complexity increases manufacturing and maintenance costs. To keep manufacturing and maintenance costs under control, keep the two-blade configuration but increase engine power and blade length. There has to be balances for all factors, from economics to mechanical engineering, and they all must comply with the laws of physics such as a variable rotor length development...

Helicopter Blade Technology - Variable Length Rotor - Video - Breakthrough Awards - Popular Mechanics


> Helicopter performance depends on the length of the rotor blades. For heavy lifting, a large rotor works best, but short blades reduce drag and ultimately allow for higher maximum speeds. Farhan Gandhi, a Penn State University professor of aerospace engineering, has devised an elegant, simple way to achieve both configurations in the same aircraft, using the same rotor.
> 
> *A rotor blade that changes length* has been a long-contemplated, never-achieved goal.
> 
> It may be counterintuitive, but higher helicopter speeds require fewer rpms, so conventional rotorcraft&#8212;such as this Black Hawk&#8212;could also benefit. The rotor would be 54 ft. at 258 rpm (maximum engine power). But the blades could be shortened to 40 ft., allowing the helicopter to fly through urban areas or land in tight quarters.



So preference for a two-blade rotor system over three- or four- is not about lift, which greater blade count do provide, but about mechanical complexity and commensurate costs. Proof of this is in the AH-1Z Super Cobra model...

AH-1Z Viper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> The AH-1Z's new bearingless, hingeless rotor system has 75&#37; fewer parts than that of *four-bladed* articulated systems.



...And many other four-blade rotor systems out there...

Aircraft in Detail - Helicopter Rotorhead Image Gallery Index


> Eurocopter AS365N Dauphin 2
> Four-blade *hingeless main rotor*, Starflex glass-fiber/carbon-fiber hub.
> 
> Eurocopter EC155B (AS365N4)
> Five-blade *hingeless main rotor*, Spheriflex glass-fiber/carbon-fiber hub.
> 
> Eurocopter EC665 Tiger
> Four-blade *hingeless FEL main rotor* consisting of only 24 parts (w/o bolts and bushings).
> 
> Hindustan Dhruv (ALH)
> Four-blade FEL *hingeless main rotor* head with fiber-elastomeric bearings sandwiched between two CFRP star plates (same technology as EC665). Blades are manually foldable.
> 
> Sikorsky H-53 Sea Stallion (S-65)
> Six-blade fully *articulated main rotor* with titanium and steel hub. Hydraulically folding blades.
> 
> Sikorsky H-60 Blackhawk / Seahawk (S-70)
> Four-blade *articulated main rotor* with one-piece forged titanium head and elastomeric blade retention bearings.


Notice the difference between the two Sikorskys and the rest?

What is this hingeless rotor system when there is a need for each blade to have some independent flexing and the blades balance each other out as the laws of physics demands to eliminate 'dissymetry of lift' phenomenon?

The laws of physics does not say there must be a hinge system. The laws of physics say that if we want to eliminate the 'dissymetry of lift' phenomenon, we must allow each blade to have independent flexing movement. How to do that is our problem. Cierva created the hinged rotor blades. Modern materials science give us -- *COMPOSITE*. Both solutions applied to the same problem. Composite materials allowed rotor blades to flex as the laws of physics demands, reduces hub mechanical complexity which reduces manufacturing and maintenance costs and allow greater than two-blades rotors.

The AH-1Z Cobra model is a four-blade rotor system and is %75 mechanically less complex than its predecessors. We could have remained with a two-blade system but be hingeless and composites but why should we when a hingeless composited four-blade system give us additional performance benefits at minimum mechanical complexity increase? Improved performance, reduction in mechanical complexity out in the field and still obey the laws of physics.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Chanakyaa

Breaking News is that India has tested its own Combat Helicopter : LCH.

Now we will certainly have no issue with numbers as it will be cheap, easy to repair and more over 'made in india'

Jai Ho.


----------



## desiman

Black Blood said:


> Super hind



man that thing looks mean, russians really know how to make some eye candy lol


----------



## PLAextream

desiman said:


> man that thing looks mean, russians really know how to make some eye candy lol




how would front seat pilot will see if that bulky thing remains in front .


----------



## Bull

IAF Fighter vs PAF fighter and Tank Vs Tank is udnerstandble as it might occur in a war, but when is Heli going to take on a heli.

Anyways IAF helis arnt dedicated attack helis but utility helis with combat roles.


----------



## Chanakyaa

@bull
India has Indegenious LCH.


----------



## Iggy

XiNiX said:


> @bull
> India has Indegenious LCH.



Mate its just a protype..long way to go buddy long way to go ..let them evaluate it..correct the problems..remembers its our first attack heli...so problems can occur ..


----------



## AchtungSpitfire

So wait the majority of the Indian helo fleet comes under the InAF? Surprised the Army lost that turf war.

If the Apache ever enters the mix it'll be game over for the opponent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PLAextream

AchtungSpitfire said:


> So wait the majority of the Indian helo fleet comes under the InAF? Surprised the Army lost that turf war.
> 
> If the Apache ever enters the mix it'll be game over for the opponent.



untill unless russian black shark come's to the seen .

apache is just a hype made by americans by killing old t72 of 3rd wold country like iraq.


----------



## Luftwaffe

sorry apache is not a hype its the most superb machine out there ready to be deployed anywhere. take a look at the history of apache against any other gunship's history. we'll see when black shark comes into action.


----------



## sergente rehan

Didn't Pakistan ordered Mi-35 from South Africa? and currently evaluating also Eurocopter and turkish one?


----------



## PLAextream

sergente rehan said:


> Didn't Pakistan ordered Mi-35 from South Africa? and currently evaluating also Eurocopter and turkish one?



they need russia's aprovel for that & you no there reaction


----------



## PLAextream

luftwaffe said:


> sorry apache is not a hype its the most superb machine out there ready to be deployed anywhere. take a look at the history of apache against any other gunship's history. we'll see when black shark comes into action.




reamber what had happen in the war with argentena. apache fared poorly .
in the history the apachi fared well only under the cover of absolute air superority other wise these are nothing better than mi35 .
apachi is diffiren among others bcas of its mounted radars ,but black shark is a combo of speed ,radars,payload etc


----------



## sergente rehan

PLAextream said:


> they need russia's aprovel for that & you no there reaction



I think Russia will not oppose if indians don't start crying! anyway there are lot of platforms where to look at and maybe better then Mi-35!

What about chinese chopers? i heard that China has come out with it's new stealth heli...have you got any info about it?


----------



## Peregrine

Hi,
what about z9c can it be used for land attacks as well


----------



## Peregrine

sergente rehan said:


> I think Russia will not oppose if indians don't start crying! anyway there are lot of platforms where to look at and maybe better then Mi-35!
> 
> What about chinese chopers? i heard that China has come out with it's new stealth heli...have you got any info about it?


HI,
i think you are talking about this one Z-10


----------



## Luftwaffe

PLAextream...so according to you Apache is a poor machine because it did not perform well in Argentina war?
So if a few helicopters fall you address it as a failure? by your words J-10 has crashed too do u call it a failed machine? I leave rest to you I think you've already gotten my point lets just keep it indirect.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

XiNiX said:


> Breaking News is that India has tested its own Combat Helicopter : LCH.
> 
> Now we will certainly have no issue with numbers as it will be cheap, easy to repair and more over 'made in india'
> 
> Jai Ho.



How much indian is it? LCH uses almost every other system in ALH

let me elaborate.

*Foreign Involvement in the ALH*

From the design to the provision of components and ammunition the involvement of foreign companies in the development of the ALH is considerable. At least 29 companies in nine countries across four continents have been involved with the development, licensed production or supply of components or munitions for the ALH. Ten of these companies are based in six EU Member States (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the UK). Other companies involved include a number based in Israel and the USA. Since its inception, the ALH has been a collaborative effort between the German company Messerschmitt-Bölkow Blohm (now Eurocopter Deutschland) and HAL:

"One thing should be clear. Though it is India's, if not Asia's, first de novo designed helicopter, it is not 'indigenous' in the Indian sense of the term, but a collaborative effort of HAL and specialists from Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm, who built the Eurocopter, which the Advanced Light Helicopter resembles."11

It is not clear what configuration of armaments and components will be incorporated into the variants of any ALHs that might eventually be exported to Myanmar, but it is incumbent on governments to ensure that components produced or otherwise originating from within their jurisdiction are not incorporated into military helicopters transferred to Myanmar. The section below provides illustrative examples of key foreign involvement in the development of the ALH.

Core foreign components for the ALH include helicopter engines and rotor blades, as well as hydraulics, cockpit displays, vibration dampers and other "mission-critical parts". In addition, European firms have contributed to the offensive military capability of the attack helicopter version: variants of the ALH have incorporated rocket launchers of Belgian origin, and machine guns and missiles of French origin.

European and US firms have been involved in designing and developing the aircraft and its components. As a consequence not least with major structural components like engines and rotors it would be difficult, if not impossible, for HAL to source adequate alternative components from non-European or non-US suppliers. Similarly it may be difficult for HAL to manufacture such components itself without technical support from those firms.

Letters were faxed to each of the companies mentioned in this report, noting the reports that the Government of India was in negotiations with the Government of Myanmar to supply the ALH, and requesting information about their involvement in the development of the ALH through the manufacture and supply of components, technology and/or assistance. The letters also asked about the terms of the licences under which such transfers were made, including any restrictions applied to re-export.

Many of the companies' responses summarised below specifically state that the contracts conform to their government's requirements. Nevertheless, should such transfers of the ALH from India go ahead over the coming months, it is likely that military equipment, components and technology supplied from EU and US manufacturers incorporated into the ALH will end up in an embargoed destination. There is no suggestion that these companies will have broken current laws or regulations or deliberately violated the EU arms embargo on Myanmar. However, in almost all of these cases, the exports would not have been permitted from the country where the controlling company is based if they were supplied direct to Myanmar.

The following section illustrates the scale of involvement of non-Indian companies in the design.
*
The European Union

Belgium*

Forges de Zeebrugge FZ

Variants of the ALH have incorporated rocket launchers produced by the Belgiam company, Forges de Zeebrugge FZ.

For example, the photo below shows the FZ nameplate on the rocket launcher mounted on ALH on display at Farnborough International, UK on 14 August 2006.

[Photo Caption] © Robin Ballantyne

Forges de Zeebrugge FZ confirmed that they have contracts with both HAL and the Indian Army, which have been approved by the Belgian authorities and are subject to end-use agreements. Confidentiality clauses contained within the contract prevented fuller disclosure of any details surrounding the nature of the deal.12

*France*

Turbomeca

The French company Turbomeca (now part of the Safran Group) has undertaken both the direct export of engines from France to India but has also established licensed production and technology transfer arrangements with HAL to produce engines for the ALH. In February 2003, it was announced that Turbomeca and HAL had signed three major contracts. These included a contract for the supply of TM 333 2B2 engines for application on the HAL helicopter; and another contract for the repair and overhaul licence for the TM 333 2B2.13 The HAL website states that the ALH continues to use the "Turbomeca TM 333-2B2 Twin Turbo-shaft Engine 746 kw (1000 SHP)".14

Turbomeca confirmed that it has three contracts with HAL, two of which cover the supply, repair, servicing and overhaul of the TM333-2B2 engines for the ALH. The company also stated that all its contracts were regulated by the appropriate French export licensing authorities.15 However in its response to our enquiries the French Government stated that the engines in question are not classified as war material by the French regulations and do not appear in the list of items subject to the Myanmar embargo. In our view, this interpretation is wrong because non-listed items in the EC Dual Use Regulation if incorporated into military items bound for embargoed destinations become licensable, that is subject to the embargo (for more on this see the section on EU export controls on re-exports over military equipment below).16 It would therefore appear that the French Government places no restrictions on the transfer of equipment fundamental to the operation of the ALH notwithstanding the fact that it is clearly also used as a military aircraft.

GIAT Industries (Nexter) and MBDA

In July 2006 defence news service Shepherd Rotorhub quoted Hindustan

Aeronautics' chairman Ashok Baweja describing a weaponisation programme was under way for the ALH. This was to include a 20mm gun from the French company GIAT and rockets from European missile manufacturer MBDA.17 In December 2006, GIAT (now renamed Nexter) announced that it had been awarded a contract by HAL for:

"the supply of 20 THL 20 turrets that will equip the Indian Armed Forces' Advanced Light Helicopter. The order covers the development phase of 20 turrets. The first deliveries will take place in 2008...."18

In March 2007 Jane's Information Group reported that HAL signed a deal with MBDA in July 2006 for the supply of air-to-air Mistral missiles for armed versions of the ALH.19

Nexter has confirmed that it does supply products to HAL for the ALH. This currently includes twenty 'THL 20' 20mm Helicopter turrets. The company also stated that all of its exports are regulated and approved by the appropriate French export licensing authorities and that any additional contracts to supply the ALH that were not stipulated in the original contract would require a further export licence.20

*Germany*

Eurocopter Deutschland (formerly MBB) and now wholly owned by Eurocopter

Eurocopter has been involved (originally as MBB) with the development of the ALH since at least July 1984.21 In November 1995, it was reported that Eurocopter had submitted a proposal to the Indian Defence Ministry to "co-produce the ALH designed by HAL. It plans to set up production facilities in India to manufacture the ALH for both local and export markets."22 In 2006 both companies were advertising their mutual co-operation: Eurocopter noting that it was supplying rotor blades for the ALH,23 and HAL announcing that "Eurocopter, the helicopter manufacturer owned by EADS, has been cooperating with HAL for over four decades.... India was the first nation with which Eurocopter signed a licence agreement for technology transfer."24 Amnesty International wrote to Eurocopter in March 2007 asking for clarification over its role in the development of the ALH. As of 25 June 2007, the company had not responded.

SITEC Aerospace

SITEC Aerospace manufactures a range of components and complete assemblies for flight/engine controls for various types of aircraft.25 According to company literature on display at Farnborough International 2006, SITEC provides components for the ALH.

SITEC Aerospace confirmed that they supply parts for the ALH, but that they do not export these directly to HAL, but supply them to another unnamed German manufacturer who subsequently incorporates these items into other systems for the ALH.26

*Italy*

Elettronica Aster SpA

The Italian company Elettronica Aster SpA on its website describes HAL as a major customer. According to the "Company and Program Overview", Elettronica Aster SpA has produced and supplied the ALH with a brake system.27

Amnesty International wrote to Elettronica Aster SpA in March 2007 to ask for clarifications as to its involvement in the development of the ALH. In its reply dated 15 March, the company had no comment on the specifics of its supply of components for the ALH, stating only that Elettronica Aster SpA's "export activity is regulated by the rules called out in the Italian Law no.185/'90 (with amendment DDL 1927), establishing the regulation for weapons import/export/transit."28

*Sweden*

Saab AB

Saab Avitronics, the South African joint venture company owned by Saab AB (Sweden) and Saab Grintek (South Africa, itself part owned by Saab AB), has been awarded a multi-million dollar export contract from HAL for the supply of self-protection equipment for installation on the ALH for the Indian Armed Forces.29

Amnesty International wrote to Saab AB on 1 June 2007 asking for clarification over its involvement with the ALH. Saab AB replied saying: "All export approvals from the concerned authorities are in place. The export licences are supported by an end-user certificate."30
*
The United Kingdom*

APPH Precision Hydraulics

At the 2004 Farnborough arms fair, the UK company APPH Precision Hydraulics Ltd displayed its Hydraulic Package as the following:

"HAL Advanced Light Helicopter Hydraulic Package designed and manufactured by APPH Ltd"

Amnesty International wrote to in March 2007 to ask for clarifications as its involvement in the development of the ALH. As of 25 June 2007, the company had not responded.

FPT Industries Ltd

In 1993 it was reported that FPT Industries Ltd had been awarded a contract to supply floatation equipment for the ALH under development by HAL.31 FTP Industries is part of GKN Aerospace Services Ltd. In 1997, it was reported that FPT Industries' self-sealing fuel tank systems were being used in the ALH.32 In 2007, the FPT Industries website stated that: "FPT equipment is fitted to a range of helicopters including ALH".33

In 1997, the then GKN Westland Aerospace Ltd (renamed GKN Aerospace Services Ltd in 2001) was awarded a contract to supply the internal gearbox BR715 for HAL's ALH.34

GKN Aerospace Services Ltd confirmed that they have supplied fuel tanks, floatation equipment and related gaskets and seals for the ALH, but that these are subject to end-use certificates stipulating that they would not be re-exported. The company stated that future supplies for the ALH would be for components and kits for fuel tanks that would be assembled locally in India, but would again be subject to similar end-use undertakings.35 However, while the UK Government normally requires the presentation of end-use documentation as part of the licensing process, it does not as a rule then include explicit end-use restrictions as a condition on the export licence . If this is the case in this instance, what force those end-use undertakings have is unclear.

Other third-country involvement in the ALH:

*The United States*

It should be noted that the US embargo on Myanmar does not specifically mention indirect supplies, nor does it place controls on civilian components that are incorporated into military systems. However, indirect supplies of US military components or other controlled items are subject to re-export controls under the US International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) system which specifically states that re-export of US-controlled content can only take place with the express permission of the US Government. Section 123.9 "Country of ultimate destination" provides that:

"(a) The country designated as the country of ultimate destination on an application for an export licence, or on a shipper's export declaration where an exemption is claimed under this subchapter, must be the country of ultimate end-use. The written approval of the Department of State must be obtained before reselling, diverting, transferring, transshipping, or disposing of a defense article in any country other than the country of ultimate destination as stated on the export licence, or on the shipper's export declaration in cases where an exemption is claimed under this subchapter. Exporters must ascertain the specific end-use and end-user prior to submitting an application to the Office of Munitions Control or claiming an exemption under this subchapter. End-use must be confirmed and should not be assumed."36

However, it is not clear whether components supplied by US companies for the ALH have been specifically designed or adapted for military use. If not, they may fall outside this specification.

Aitech Systems Ltd

In September 2005, it was reported that Aitech Systems Ltd, a US company, had announced it had "received the first production order from the Lahav Division of Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) for Display & Mission Computers" for inclusion in the glass cockpit of the ALH. The Lahav Division of IAI is under contract to HAL to develop and provide the avionics system for the HAL.37

Deliveries for the first production of Display and Mission Computers were due to be completed by May 2006:

"Aitech will build 400 Display & Mission Computers for the ALH program, to be delivered over the next several years. In addition, Aitech is under contract to IAI to provide the next generation of Display & Mission Computer." 38

Amnesty International wrote to the company in March 2007 asking for clarifications over its involvement with the ALH, but has yet to receive a reply (as of 25 June 2007).

Lord Corporation

In January 2004, it was reported that Lord Corporation had announced that it had been "awarded the first production contract for its active vibration control system" for the ALH. Lord Corporation had been supplying other parts (such as elastomeric bearings) for the main tail rotor and parts for various "isolators", which together formed part of an anti-resonance isolator system aimed at reducing vibrations in the aircraft." The report also stated that "Lord would supply the vibration dampers for these aircraft with user approvals."39

The Lord Corporation wrote to Amnesty International on 9 March 2007 saying that contractual obligations of confidentiality prevented any disclosure of the Lord Corporation's involvement in military products, other than information currently in the public domain. The company also stipulated that it was fully aware of government compliance issues and "strives to be in full compliance with all applicable regulations."40

UNHCR | Refworld | Indian helicopters for Myanmar: making a mockery of the EU arms embargo?



I have not even mentioned Isreali contribution. 

so how much indian is it? The paint job and few nuts?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Chanakyaa

Mr Growler,.

1. All the so called 'foreign parts' are available to every nation including pakistan, then why dont they come up with even a 'paper' model of a simple helicopter?

2. When LCH fires on AlKhalid, will u defend by showing a list of 'foreign components in LCH'?

Grow up. F16 , if u r the enemy be more bothered about the 'threat' of the weapon, and means to counter it rather researching on source of its nuts and bolts.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Dark Angel

You know what man once it is inducted we will not have to beg diplomatically and face any sanctions cause then u will be sitting with the list of things foreign in it and we will have HAL banglore making them in case of a conflict but will be pleading to the U.S ......get a life and make a paper helicopter first


----------



## illuminatidinesh

Foreign parts in the home grown chopper...............? Is that how u compare ? For ur kind information a product has to be potent even if it means it uses some of the components made by other firms. No platform according to u can be entirely home grown. U go for each part each specialized firm to get quality. That doesnt make it belongs to some one else.... 
REGARDS.... Dude am tired of this


----------



## gowthamraj

@ growler

what it going to do with this thread . 

it is very sad that you did't even make paper copter.

for dhruv there is thread running in India defence section , come and post here


----------



## gowthamraj

btw India also evaluate Apache, it surely a masterpiece


----------



## Chanakyaa

Today, India can buy anything from any body except F22 and Tridents.

But, we must continue to persue the indegenious path... Upgrade LCH and come up with something more advanced than Apache.

The Right to do 'first in a field' or develop 'most advanced' is not the birth right of west.

China has demonstrated it, 
India is following it and today or tomorrow Pakistan will realize this.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

XiNiX said:


> Mr Growler,.
> 
> 1. All the so called 'foreign parts' are available to every nation including pakistan, then why dont they come up with even a 'paper' model of a simple helicopter?
> 
> 2. When LCH fires on AlKhalid, will u defend by showing a list of 'foreign components in LCH'?
> 
> Grow up. F16 , if u r the enemy be more bothered about the 'threat' of the weapon, and means to counter it rather researching on source of its nuts and bolts.




My reply was towards your misleading post which was "indigenous" helicopter well it is not because it is using more then 95% of foreigner systems. LCH probably has more then 5 years to go clear FOC. by then PA AD will be upgraded. mobilized AD as well as MANPADs will provide short range cover while AF is their if things get too hot. Oh wait i forget. its a stealth chopper which can not be brought down by IR or BVR missile.


----------



## Chanakyaa

Mr. Growler,
I heartily admire ur intention of not allowing false info of 'ingeniousness' to be propagated.

But i highly doubt ur intentions, as i am sure u have no guts to open a thread and say 'jf17 is not indegenious' where u will try to convince ur country men'who mostly think ...
jf17=made in pakistan...
and its indegenious.

If u wanna prove my perception wrong just do the experiment.

a handful of nations can purchase rd93 and convert it to JF17... It never means its not indegenious to chinese.


A painter is concerned only with his art and design.. Not the source of colous..when u want to paint u 'buy' readymade colous... 

But u will understand it only if u know that not every one can paint though colour shop is open for all.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

XiNiX said:


> Mr. Growler,
> I heartily admire ur intention of not allowing false info of 'ingeniousness' to be propagated.
> 
> But i highly doubt ur intentions, as i am sure u have no guts to open a thread and say 'jf17 is not indegenious' where u will try to convince ur country men'who mostly think ...
> jf17=made in pakistan...
> and its indegenious.
> 
> If u wanna prove my perception wrong just do the experiment.
> 
> a handful of nations can purchase rd93 and convert it to JF17... It never means its not indegenious to chinese.




I am not one of them. I have never said jf-17 is pakistan's 100% indigenous fighter because i dont satisfy my ego with false claims because i am not indian. 




> A painter is concerned only with his art and design.. Not the source of colous..when u want to paint u 'buy' readymade colous...
> 
> But u will understand it only if u know that not every one can paint though colour shop is open for all.


this is such a bad worst cr@p analogy.


----------



## gowthamraj

Growler said:


> My reply was towards your misleading post which was "indigenous" helicopter well it is not because it is using more then 95% of foreigner systems. LCH probably has more then 5 years to go clear FOC. by then PA AD will be upgraded. mobilized AD as well as MANPADs will provide short range cover while AF is their if things get too hot. Oh wait i forget. its a stealth chopper which can not be brought down by IR or BVR missile.



of-course it is "indigenous" , because we produce it on our own and now itself we export it to 9 countries. we beat eurocopter in turkey competition , that those who helped us to make some parts of dhuruv

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

gowthamraj said:


> of-course it is "indigenous" , because we produce it on our own and now itself we export it to 9 countries. we beat eurocopter in turkey competition , that those who helped us to make some parts of dhuruv



you are a great part time joker and full time fool. Pakistan will also produce and market its JF-17 and AL-khaild so according to your analogy these products are indigenous? or it only imply for india to satisfy your indian ego?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gowthamraj

Growler said:


> you are a great part time joker and full time fool. Pakistan will also produce and market its JF-17 and AL-khaild so according to your analogy these products are indigenous? or it only imply for india to satisfy your indian ego?



r u senior member i don't expect this type of reply from you .any way "yes" dhuruv is our indigenious but AK and JF-17 are sell only by china like now they sold k-8


----------



## bumbgola

PLAextream said:


> if a missile make a direct hit on the engine or roter



Thats a big if. What if anybody that could launch the missile is long dead?


----------



## Iggy

Growler said:


> My reply was towards your misleading post which was "indigenous" helicopter well it is not because it is using more then 95% of foreigner systems. LCH probably has more then 5 years to go clear FOC. by then PA AD will be upgraded. mobilized AD as well as MANPADs will provide short range cover while AF is their if things get too hot. Oh wait i forget. its a stealth chopper which can not be brought down by IR or BVR missile.



Sir most of the weapons used by western countries are also using foreign components..F-18's uses parts from Indian HAL..is that doesnt make them indegenous??What about Eurofighter and Raphel..some of the components are of US orgin..and also same goes with Chinas helicopter and figher aircrafts..some of them using French and Russian engine..(correct me if am wrong)......dont wanna tell about JF-17 because you already know..what about Al-Khalid?that Tank is chinese all the way...I hope you got what i meant ..


----------



## Myth_buster_1

gowthamraj said:


> r u senior member i don't expect this type of reply from you .any way "yes" dhuruv is our indigenious but AK and JF-17 are sell only by china like now they sold k-8



Your comprehension level is that of an ant. Go and read my previous post on this page and i clearly stated all the western equipments that are on board Dhruv and Dhruv itself is a german designed chopper not Indian. Unfortunately you indians are big time deluded pathological lairs thats why its quite hard for you to accept reality. 
AK and JF-17s are indeed CHinese desing and we dont steal credit to satisfy our ego like you loser indians. however AK and JF-17 is of our specification produced in pakistan and will be exported by pakistan just like Dhruv LCA etc. 



seiko said:


> Sir most of the weapons used by western countries are also using foreign components..F-18's uses parts from Indian HAL..is that doesnt make them indegenous??What about Eurofighter and Raphel..some of the components are of US orgin..and also same goes with Chinas helicopter and figher aircrafts..some of them using French and Russian engine..(correct me if am wrong)......dont wanna tell about JF-17 because you already know..what about Al-Khalid?that Tank is chinese all the way...I hope you got what i meant ..



 are you in your senses? HAL exporting R&D indigenous systems for USAF F-18? I seriously dont know what has penitrated your indian brains. all you guys are acting weird these days with the most ridiculous posts on forums. what about EF? its a joint collaboration effort by top european countries who have indigenous produced this aircraft. and first of all its not "raphel" rafale which is French indigenous planes. get one thing in your thick head. These countries are in differnt league of R&D then India so better not even mention your indian name with them. 
And last.
Your knowledge is very limited to your surroundings. AK is using mix systems of western Chinese and Ukrainian parts as well as domestic modified parts. Just like in the case of Arjunk tank. Arjunk is designed by Germans which is more like a variant of German LEO-II but not a copy.


----------



## gowthamraj

Growler said:


> Your comprehension level is that of an ant. Go and read my previous post on this page and i clearly stated all the western equipments that are on board Dhruv and Dhruv itself is a german designed chopper not Indian. Unfortunately you indians are big time deluded pathological lairs thats why its quite hard for you to accept reality.
> AK and JF-17s are indeed CHinese desing and we dont steal credit to satisfy our ego like you loser indians. however AK and JF-17 is of our specification produced in pakistan and will be exported by pakistan just like Dhruv LCA etc.
> 
> 
> 
> are you in your senses? HAL exporting R&D indigenous systems for USAF F-18? I seriously dont know what has penitrated your indian brains. all you guys are acting weird these days with the most ridiculous posts on forums. what about EF? its a joint collaboration effort by top european countries who have indigenous produced this aircraft. and first of all its not "raphel" rafale which is French indigenous planes. get one thing in your thick head. These countries are in differnt league of R&D then India so better not even mention your indian name with them.
> And last.
> Your knowledge is very limited to your surroundings. AK is using mix systems of western Chinese and Ukrainian parts as well as domestic modified parts. Just like in the case of Arjunk tank. Arjunk is designed by Germans which is more like a variant of German LEO-II but not a copy.



oh dhuruv and arjun are german designs 

now who is sacrificing their ego with lieing 

its my fault to reply a person like you, bye


----------



## Myth_buster_1

gowthamraj said:


> oh dhuruv and arjun are german designs
> 
> now who is sacrificing their ego with lieing
> 
> its my fault to reply a person like you, bye



Because you are speechless and sorry if i have broken your fragile heart with reality facts.

more facts.

NOTE: Arjun and Dhruv are *not copy*, but further development or a variant of a existing platform like BK-117 and LEO-II. 

MBB (now Eurocopter) Bk-117






Dhruv a further development for Indian requirements. 


Leo II





Arjun


----------



## Storm Force

You can only use attack helicopters in a scenario where you have Air Superiority... 

PAF will not based on their current inventory BE ABLE to get this state in any near future war thats a FACT. 

WHICH MEANS ANY COBRA heli flying over a indo pak battlefield is likely to get blown to peices by one of THE estimated 250 SU30MKI,MIG29SMT OR MIRAGE2000 fighters carrying BVRs such as R77. R27 OR MATRA 530.. 

And yes i know PAF has 50 F16 & 10 Thunders BUT THEY ARE OUTNUMBERED 4-1 in 4th generation fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Iggy

Growler said:


> are you in your senses? HAL exporting R&D indigenous systems for USAF F-18? I seriously dont know what has penitrated your indian brains. all you guys are acting weird these days with the most ridiculous posts on forums. what about EF? its a joint collaboration effort by top european countries who have indigenous produced this aircraft. and first of all its not "raphel" rafale which is French indigenous planes. get one thing in your thick head. These countries are in differnt league of R&D then India so better not even mention your indian name with them.
> And last.
> Your knowledge is very limited to your surroundings. AK is using mix systems of western Chinese and Ukrainian parts as well as domestic modified parts. Just like in the case of Arjunk tank. Arjunk is designed by Germans which is more like a variant of German LEO-II but not a copy.



may be its you who lost the senses..read my post again where did i said HAL exporting R&D indigenous systems for USAF F-18? i said F-18's using HAL made parts..and also as you said the countries in Europe like Britain and France are miles ahead of my country is R&D still they are using US components in their aircrafts like Eurofighter and Rafale. do some research before projecting yourself as highly intelligent personal.it will help you from further embarssment..I agre with my knowlegde in this subject is limited..but still you just jumping in to the guns before comprehending what i am trying to say...every countrys weapon system has some kind of foreign parts in it..but is that means its not indegenous..your argument is just flawed Growler


----------



## gowthamraj

Growler said:


> Because you are speechless and sorry if i have broken your fragile heart with reality facts.
> 
> more facts.
> 
> NOTE: Arjun and Dhruv are *not copy*, but further development or a variant of a existing platform like BK-117 and LEO-II.
> 
> MBB (now Eurocopter) Bk-117
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dhruv a further development for Indian requirements.
> 
> 
> Leo II
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arjun



mr.lier if it is eurocopter means why turkey and euquador choose dhruv over EC . dont derail this thread for sacrifice ur ego , come and post ur lies in dhruv thread in india defence section


----------



## Myth_buster_1

seiko said:


> may be its you who lost the senses..read my post again where did i said HAL exporting R&D indigenous systems for USAF F-18? i said F-18's using HAL made parts..and also as you said the countries in Europe like Britain and France are miles ahead of my country is R&D still they are using US components in their aircrafts like Eurofighter and Rafale. do some research before projecting yourself as highly intelligent personal.it will help you from further embarssment..I agre with my knowlegde in this subject is limited..but still you just jumping in to the guns before comprehending what i am trying to say...every countrys weapon system has some kind of foreign parts in it..but is that means its not indegenous..your argument is just flawed Growler



Again you lack a brain to comprehend anything and over glorify it to satisfy your ego. Pak was contracted back in 2004 to assemble some Boeing 737 777 parts, does that mean Boing is not a american jet? 99% of the electronics we use on daily bases are assembled in CHINA! Does that mean its Chinese "indigenous" products? NO. as for HAL making parts. I am not aware of it but i can tell you with my common sense HAL may have been contracted to produce few minor spare parts that would cost less for USN or any concern party to operate. HAL may have been contracted for limited amount of parts that are already delivered. Another thing. Like i said. their is practically no comparision of Western Indigenous R&D heck even Chinese with Super skhti bharat! All their products are 100% R&D by foreigner firms and sold to India where they assemble them with their own name. Same is the case with Pakistan. 




gowthamraj said:


> mr.lier if it is eurocopter means why turkey and euquador choose dhruv over EC . dont derail this thread for sacrifice ur ego , come and post ur lies in dhruv thread in india defence section



What Mr. Deluded pathological lair? Try to improve your interpretation skills because you dont make any sense. Turkey Equador chose few Dhruvs for civilian use only which are "CHEAPER" and effective because its practically made in EUROPE! EC are expensive thats why they probably lost. At least try to use those 2 brain cells left in you. please kindly.


----------



## Iggy

Growler said:


> Again you lack a brain to comprehend anything and over glorify it to satisfy your ego. Pak was contracted back in 2004 to assemble some Boeing 737 777 parts, does that mean Boing is not a american jet? 99&#37; of the electronics we use on daily bases are assembled in CHINA! Does that mean its Chinese "indigenous" products? NO. as for HAL making parts. I am not aware of it but i can tell you with my common sense HAL may have been contracted to produce few minor spare parts that would cost less for USN or any concern party to operate. HAL may have been contracted for limited amount of parts that are already delivered. Another thing. Like i said. their is practically no comparision of Western Indigenous R&D heck even Chinese with Super skhti bharat! All their products are 100% R&D by foreigner firms and sold to India where they assemble them with their own name. Same is the case with Pakistan.
> 
> .



lolz mate ..You said Indian helicopter uses western parts so its not indegenous..Then I showed you how western countries also use differnt parts in their weapons and then you are saying I am comparing India with western nations??are you arguing in the sake of arguing ..did you tried to read what i am posting here.??Let me try it again.Western Nations uses different equipments from different nations other than their country in their weapons that doesnt make them less indegenous..Even China is using russian engine for aircrafts and french engine for their helicopters,also from one post of the Taimi ,he said french give some wital parts to Chines navy too..is that make their weapons also not indegenous??We are getting some parts from European countries..but the helicopter is fully built here and its indegenous..if by your argument no country has indegenous weapons..everybody is assembling different parts from different countries..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

seiko said:


> lolz mate ..You said Indian helicopter uses western parts so its not indegenous..Then I showed you how western countries also use differnt parts in their weapons and then you are saying I am comparing India with western nations??are you arguing in the sake of arguing ..did you tried to read what i am posting here.??Let me try it again.Western Nations uses different equipments from different nations other than their country in their weapons that doesnt make them less indegenous..Even China is using russian engine for aircrafts and french engine for their helicopters,also from one post of the Taimi ,he said french give some wital parts to Chines navy too..is that make their weapons also not indegenous??We are getting some parts from European countries..but the helicopter is fully built here and its indegenous..if by your argument no country has indegenous weapons..everybody is assembling different parts from different countries..



You are the biggest deluded pathological lair of highest order! you cant comprehend anything which is just beyond your level. 

let me put it short words.

Lets take Rafale for instance.

Designed by Dassualt "FRANCE"
avionics R&D in "France"
Engine "french"
Armaments "French"
their might be just few very few parts that may have been bought from European countries. 

on the other hand lets take Indian Dhrv

Designed by MBB Germany now Eurocopter

Give me a list of Indian Indigenous input not some name changed product that was non-indian R&D and sold to india.

and here are all the western technology involved in this project

Foreign Involvement in the ALH

From the design to the provision of components and ammunition the involvement of foreign companies in the development of the ALH is considerable. At least 29 companies in nine countries across four continents have been involved with the development, licensed production or supply of components or munitions for the ALH. Ten of these companies are based in six EU Member States (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and the UK). Other companies involved include a number based in Israel and the USA. Since its inception, the ALH has been a collaborative effort between the German company Messerschmitt-Bölkow Blohm (now Eurocopter Deutschland) and HAL:

"One thing should be clear. Though it is India's, if not Asia's, first de novo designed helicopter, it is not 'indigenous' in the Indian sense of the term, but a collaborative effort of HAL and specialists from Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm, who built the Eurocopter, which the Advanced Light Helicopter resembles."11

It is not clear what configuration of armaments and components will be incorporated into the variants of any ALHs that might eventually be exported to Myanmar, but it is incumbent on governments to ensure that components produced or otherwise originating from within their jurisdiction are not incorporated into military helicopters transferred to Myanmar. The section below provides illustrative examples of key foreign involvement in the development of the ALH.

Core foreign components for the ALH include helicopter engines and rotor blades, as well as hydraulics, cockpit displays, vibration dampers and other "mission-critical parts". In addition, European firms have contributed to the offensive military capability of the attack helicopter version: variants of the ALH have incorporated rocket launchers of Belgian origin, and machine guns and missiles of French origin.

European and US firms have been involved in designing and developing the aircraft and its components. As a consequence not least with major structural components like engines and rotors it would be difficult, if not impossible, for HAL to source adequate alternative components from non-European or non-US suppliers. Similarly it may be difficult for HAL to manufacture such components itself without technical support from those firms.

Letters were faxed to each of the companies mentioned in this report, noting the reports that the Government of India was in negotiations with the Government of Myanmar to supply the ALH, and requesting information about their involvement in the development of the ALH through the manufacture and supply of components, technology and/or assistance. The letters also asked about the terms of the licences under which such transfers were made, including any restrictions applied to re-export.

Many of the companies' responses summarised below specifically state that the contracts conform to their government's requirements. Nevertheless, should such transfers of the ALH from India go ahead over the coming months, it is likely that military equipment, components and technology supplied from EU and US manufacturers incorporated into the ALH will end up in an embargoed destination. There is no suggestion that these companies will have broken current laws or regulations or deliberately violated the EU arms embargo on Myanmar. However, in almost all of these cases, the exports would not have been permitted from the country where the controlling company is based if they were supplied direct to Myanmar.

The following section illustrates the scale of involvement of non-Indian companies in the design.

The European Union

Belgium

Forges de Zeebrugge FZ

Variants of the ALH have incorporated rocket launchers produced by the Belgiam company, Forges de Zeebrugge FZ.

For example, the photo below shows the FZ nameplate on the rocket launcher mounted on ALH on display at Farnborough International, UK on 14 August 2006.

[Photo Caption] © Robin Ballantyne

Forges de Zeebrugge FZ confirmed that they have contracts with both HAL and the Indian Army, which have been approved by the Belgian authorities and are subject to end-use agreements. Confidentiality clauses contained within the contract prevented fuller disclosure of any details surrounding the nature of the deal.12

France

Turbomeca

The French company Turbomeca (now part of the Safran Group) has undertaken both the direct export of engines from France to India but has also established licensed production and technology transfer arrangements with HAL to produce engines for the ALH. In February 2003, it was announced that Turbomeca and HAL had signed three major contracts. These included a contract for the supply of TM 333 2B2 engines for application on the HAL helicopter; and another contract for the repair and overhaul licence for the TM 333 2B2.13 The HAL website states that the ALH continues to use the "Turbomeca TM 333-2B2 Twin Turbo-shaft Engine 746 kw (1000 SHP)".14

Turbomeca confirmed that it has three contracts with HAL, two of which cover the supply, repair, servicing and overhaul of the TM333-2B2 engines for the ALH. The company also stated that all its contracts were regulated by the appropriate French export licensing authorities.15 However in its response to our enquiries the French Government stated that the engines in question are not classified as war material by the French regulations and do not appear in the list of items subject to the Myanmar embargo. In our view, this interpretation is wrong because non-listed items in the EC Dual Use Regulation if incorporated into military items bound for embargoed destinations become licensable, that is subject to the embargo (for more on this see the section on EU export controls on re-exports over military equipment below).16 It would therefore appear that the French Government places no restrictions on the transfer of equipment fundamental to the operation of the ALH notwithstanding the fact that it is clearly also used as a military aircraft.

GIAT Industries (Nexter) and MBDA

In July 2006 defence news service Shepherd Rotorhub quoted Hindustan

Aeronautics' chairman Ashok Baweja describing a weaponisation programme was under way for the ALH. This was to include a 20mm gun from the French company GIAT and rockets from European missile manufacturer MBDA.17 In December 2006, GIAT (now renamed Nexter) announced that it had been awarded a contract by HAL for:

"the supply of 20 THL 20 turrets that will equip the Indian Armed Forces' Advanced Light Helicopter. The order covers the development phase of 20 turrets. The first deliveries will take place in 2008...."18

In March 2007 Jane's Information Group reported that HAL signed a deal with MBDA in July 2006 for the supply of air-to-air Mistral missiles for armed versions of the ALH.19

Nexter has confirmed that it does supply products to HAL for the ALH. This currently includes twenty 'THL 20' 20mm Helicopter turrets. The company also stated that all of its exports are regulated and approved by the appropriate French export licensing authorities and that any additional contracts to supply the ALH that were not stipulated in the original contract would require a further export licence.20

Germany

Eurocopter Deutschland (formerly MBB) and now wholly owned by Eurocopter

Eurocopter has been involved (originally as MBB) with the development of the ALH since at least July 1984.21 In November 1995, it was reported that Eurocopter had submitted a proposal to the Indian Defence Ministry to "co-produce the ALH designed by HAL. It plans to set up production facilities in India to manufacture the ALH for both local and export markets."22 In 2006 both companies were advertising their mutual co-operation: Eurocopter noting that it was supplying rotor blades for the ALH,23 and HAL announcing that "Eurocopter, the helicopter manufacturer owned by EADS, has been cooperating with HAL for over four decades.... India was the first nation with which Eurocopter signed a licence agreement for technology transfer."24 Amnesty International wrote to Eurocopter in March 2007 asking for clarification over its role in the development of the ALH. As of 25 June 2007, the company had not responded.

SITEC Aerospace

SITEC Aerospace manufactures a range of components and complete assemblies for flight/engine controls for various types of aircraft.25 According to company literature on display at Farnborough International 2006, SITEC provides components for the ALH.

SITEC Aerospace confirmed that they supply parts for the ALH, but that they do not export these directly to HAL, but supply them to another unnamed German manufacturer who subsequently incorporates these items into other systems for the ALH.26

Italy

Elettronica Aster SpA

The Italian company Elettronica Aster SpA on its website describes HAL as a major customer. According to the "Company and Program Overview", Elettronica Aster SpA has produced and supplied the ALH with a brake system.27

Amnesty International wrote to Elettronica Aster SpA in March 2007 to ask for clarifications as to its involvement in the development of the ALH. In its reply dated 15 March, the company had no comment on the specifics of its supply of components for the ALH, stating only that Elettronica Aster SpA's "export activity is regulated by the rules called out in the Italian Law no.185/'90 (with amendment DDL 1927), establishing the regulation for weapons import/export/transit."28

Sweden

Saab AB

Saab Avitronics, the South African joint venture company owned by Saab AB (Sweden) and Saab Grintek (South Africa, itself part owned by Saab AB), has been awarded a multi-million dollar export contract from HAL for the supply of self-protection equipment for installation on the ALH for the Indian Armed Forces.29

Amnesty International wrote to Saab AB on 1 June 2007 asking for clarification over its involvement with the ALH. Saab AB replied saying: "All export approvals from the concerned authorities are in place. The export licences are supported by an end-user certificate."30

The United Kingdom

APPH Precision Hydraulics

At the 2004 Farnborough arms fair, the UK company APPH Precision Hydraulics Ltd displayed its Hydraulic Package as the following:

"HAL Advanced Light Helicopter Hydraulic Package designed and manufactured by APPH Ltd"

Amnesty International wrote to in March 2007 to ask for clarifications as its involvement in the development of the ALH. As of 25 June 2007, the company had not responded.

FPT Industries Ltd

In 1993 it was reported that FPT Industries Ltd had been awarded a contract to supply floatation equipment for the ALH under development by HAL.31 FTP Industries is part of GKN Aerospace Services Ltd. In 1997, it was reported that FPT Industries' self-sealing fuel tank systems were being used in the ALH.32 In 2007, the FPT Industries website stated that: "FPT equipment is fitted to a range of helicopters including ALH".33

In 1997, the then GKN Westland Aerospace Ltd (renamed GKN Aerospace Services Ltd in 2001) was awarded a contract to supply the internal gearbox BR715 for HAL's ALH.34

GKN Aerospace Services Ltd confirmed that they have supplied fuel tanks, floatation equipment and related gaskets and seals for the ALH, but that these are subject to end-use certificates stipulating that they would not be re-exported. The company stated that future supplies for the ALH would be for components and kits for fuel tanks that would be assembled locally in India, but would again be subject to similar end-use undertakings.35 However, while the UK Government normally requires the presentation of end-use documentation as part of the licensing process, it does not as a rule then include explicit end-use restrictions as a condition on the export licence . If this is the case in this instance, what force those end-use undertakings have is unclear.

Other third-country involvement in the ALH:

The United States

It should be noted that the US embargo on Myanmar does not specifically mention indirect supplies, nor does it place controls on civilian components that are incorporated into military systems. However, indirect supplies of US military components or other controlled items are subject to re-export controls under the US International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) system which specifically states that re-export of US-controlled content can only take place with the express permission of the US Government. Section 123.9 "Country of ultimate destination" provides that:

"(a) The country designated as the country of ultimate destination on an application for an export licence, or on a shipper's export declaration where an exemption is claimed under this subchapter, must be the country of ultimate end-use. The written approval of the Department of State must be obtained before reselling, diverting, transferring, transshipping, or disposing of a defense article in any country other than the country of ultimate destination as stated on the export licence, or on the shipper's export declaration in cases where an exemption is claimed under this subchapter. Exporters must ascertain the specific end-use and end-user prior to submitting an application to the Office of Munitions Control or claiming an exemption under this subchapter. End-use must be confirmed and should not be assumed."36

However, it is not clear whether components supplied by US companies for the ALH have been specifically designed or adapted for military use. If not, they may fall outside this specification.

Aitech Systems Ltd

In September 2005, it was reported that Aitech Systems Ltd, a US company, had announced it had "received the first production order from the Lahav Division of Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) for Display & Mission Computers" for inclusion in the glass cockpit of the ALH. The Lahav Division of IAI is under contract to HAL to develop and provide the avionics system for the HAL.37

Deliveries for the first production of Display and Mission Computers were due to be completed by May 2006:

"Aitech will build 400 Display & Mission Computers for the ALH program, to be delivered over the next several years. In addition, Aitech is under contract to IAI to provide the next generation of Display & Mission Computer." 38

Amnesty International wrote to the company in March 2007 asking for clarifications over its involvement with the ALH, but has yet to receive a reply (as of 25 June 2007).

Lord Corporation

In January 2004, it was reported that Lord Corporation had announced that it had been "awarded the first production contract for its active vibration control system" for the ALH. Lord Corporation had been supplying other parts (such as elastomeric bearings) for the main tail rotor and parts for various "isolators", which together formed part of an anti-resonance isolator system aimed at reducing vibrations in the aircraft." The report also stated that "Lord would supply the vibration dampers for these aircraft with user approvals."39

The Lord Corporation wrote to Amnesty International on 9 March 2007 saying that contractual obligations of confidentiality prevented any disclosure of the Lord Corporation's involvement in military products, other than information currently in the public domain. The company also stipulated that it was fully aware of government compliance issues and "strives to be in full compliance with all applicable regulations."40

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Myth_buster_1

seiko said:


> .Even China is using russian engine for aircrafts and french engine for their helicopters,also from one post of the Taimi ,he said french give some wital parts to Chines navy too..is that make their weapons also not indegenous??.



THe fact is China atleast modifies the platform by them self and a new design is formed without anyone's input. such as 
A russian Mig-21 copied with the name of F-7 and over the years few changes were done and now they have a variant with two air inlets, a longer nose, cranked delta wings and few changes to the air frame.


----------



## bumbgola

Growler said:


> a new design is formed without anyone's input.. over the years few changes were done and now they have a variant with two air inlets, a longer nose, cranked delta wings and few changes to the air frame



Are you saying they have introduced 2 air inlet design, long nose etc etc to the world? Or would you agree that they have been "inspired" by designs already prevailing in the world? BTW how can a new design come about without any1's input?


----------



## Iggy

Growler said:


> You are the biggest deluded pathological lair of highest order! you cant comprehend anything which is just beyond your level. {
> 
> }
> The Lord Corporation wrote to Amnesty International on 9 March 2007 saying that contractual obligations of confidentiality prevented any disclosure of the Lord Corporation's involvement in military products, other than information currently in the public domain. The company also stipulated that it was fully aware of government compliance issues and "strives to be in full compliance with all applicable regulations."40



Again ignoring your personal insults..I am not saying that Dhruv is not having any foreign components..i am showing you that every countrys weapons has some kind of foriegn parts..I dont know what you are reading from my post because you are getting exactly opposite of what i am saying here..Let me ask you if any country can make helicopters by assembling foreign parts only??then why most of the countries dont have their own helicopters including your own..its easy na just order some parts and assemble it together..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

seiko said:


> Again ignoring your personal insults..I am not saying that Dhruv is not having any foreign components..i am showing you that every countrys weapons has some kind of foriegn parts..I dont know what you are reading from my post because you are getting exactly opposite of what i am saying here..Let me ask you if any country can make helicopters by assembling foreign parts only??then why most of the countries dont have their own helicopters including your own..its easy na just order some parts and assemble it together..



again either my posts are too much hurting you or you are just too deluded.

Listen. Dhruv does not just have "SOME" foreigner parts but infact the entire chopper is based on western systems R&D and designs sold to india. this is also the case with rest of the weapons claimed to be indian. And i am not saying pakistan is building tanks ships or aircrafts with their own R&D. 
give me a list of Indian indigenous R&D input that is not some foreigner system with indian name assembled in india. 
If Pakistan had the economy like india then they would be asking western companies firms etc to develop a platform of their requirements such as ships tanks aircraft heli etc.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

bumbgola said:


> Are you saying they have introduced 2 air inlet design, long nose etc etc to the world? Or would you agree that they have been "inspired" by designs already prevailing in the world? BTW how can a new design come about without any1's input?



Can you comprehend anything? 

I am just taking F-7 and JL-9 for example of how China has modified the platform with their indigenous systems on their own. They may not have introduced such modification to the world but my point is they have done it on their own. No kits were provided to them for these modification by foreigner countries.


----------



## Iggy

Growler said:


> again either my posts are too much hurting you or you are just too deluded.
> 
> Listen. Dhruv does not just have "SOME" foreigner parts but infact the entire chopper is based on western systems R&D and designs sold to india. this is also the case with rest of the weapons claimed to be indian. And i am not saying pakistan is building tanks ships or aircrafts with their own R&D.
> give me a list of Indian indigenous R&D input that is not some foreigner system with indian name assembled in india.
> If Pakistan had the economy like india then they would be asking western companies firms etc to develop a platform of their requirements such as ships tanks aircraft heli etc.




No your posts are not hurting me..in the end i am here to learn too..about the Indian R&D..my knowledge to this area is limited but i will share some of it..as you know the composite material used in building LCA is also used in PAK-FA aircraft too..and also the sonar USHUS is also devaloped by Indian defence establishments..its the one uses in our Arihant nuclear submarine..I will PM some Indian members here who has more knowledge in this field ..i am sure that they will give you answer..and also i was not pointing not only Pakistan there are many countries who has the money ..why cant they just assemble a helicopter ??


----------



## Myth_buster_1

seiko said:


> No your posts are not hurting me..in the end i am here to learn too..about the Indian R&D..my knowledge to this area is limited but i will share some of it..as you know the composite material used in building LCA is also used in PAK-FA aircraft too..and also the sonar USHUS is also devaloped by Indian defence establishments..its the one uses in our Arihant nuclear submarine..I will PM some Indian members here who has more knowledge in this field ..i am sure that they will give you answer..and also i was not pointing not only Pakistan there are many countries who has the money ..why cant they just assemble a helicopter ??



Like i said earlier.

Western R&D in indian hands with a different name and some test labs to give the world a illusion that these products are "indigenously" made in india, got it? If IAF PAK-FA is going to use LCA composites then its ram ram for PAK-FA lol. no offense but same is the case with LCA what i have proved about Dhruv.
Its just going to be point less if you bring more indians and i would have to start the subject from square 1 again.


----------



## Iggy

Growler said:


> Like i said earlier.
> 
> Western R&D in indian hands with a different name and some test labs to give the world a illusion that these products are "indigenously" made in india, got it? If IAF PAK-FA is going to use LCA composites then its ram ram for PAK-FA lol. no offense but same is the case with LCA what i have proved about Dhruv.
> Its just going to be point less if you bring more indians and i would have to start the subject from square 1 again.



composite materials used in Tejas is advanced and thats why sukhoi selected it..i dont think they are that stupid to select a composite material in the name partnership...


----------



## Myth_buster_1

seiko said:


> composite materials used in Tejas is advanced and thats why sukhoi selected it..i dont think they are that stupid to select a composite material in the name partnership...



i need a source for this lol. 

SO which aircraft is going to be more stealtheir? PAK-FA with Indian "indigenous" composite materials or LCA with the same composite materials? seriously stop making a mockery out of yourself.


----------



## Iggy

Growler said:


> i need a source for this lol.
> 
> SO which aircraft is going to be more stealtheir? PAK-FA with Indian "indigenous" composite materials or LCA with the same composite materials? seriously stop making a mockery out of yourself.



if you belive in wiki

Sukhoi/HAL FGFA - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indian participation in FGFA to be formalized

India to develop 25 pc of fifth generation fighter: Rediff.com Business

Some extract :

But the newcomer wants its due. Bangalore-based HAL has negotiated firmly to get a 25 percent share of design and development work in the FGFA programme. HAL's work share will include critical software, including the mission computer (the Su-30MKI mission computer is entirely Indian); navigation systems; most of the cockpit displays; the counter measure dispensing systems; and modifying Sukhoi's single-seat prototype into the twin-seat fighter that the Indian Air Force wants.
*
India will also contribute its expertise in aircraft composites, developed while designing the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft. 
*

hope you will get some satisfaction now..before thinking yourself as an oversmart..i suggest to do some research otherwise its you who will make a mockery of yourself here..

BTW i didnt see links of your lenghty posts about the components of DHRUV,,


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> Like i said earlier.
> 
> Western R&D in indian hands with a different name and some test labs to give the world a illusion that these products are "indigenously" made in india, got it? If IAF PAK-FA is going to use LCA composites then its ram ram for PAK-FA lol. no offense but same is the case with LCA what i have proved about Dhruv.
> Its just going to be point less if you bring more indians and i would have to start the subject from square 1 again.



Ok Growler lets talk, knowledge is good but bits and pieces knowledge is worse than having no knowledge. You have almost no knowledge of how procurement, production or R & D is done so please do not comment on it but let me enlighten you on how the whole system works. 

1.	The need for domestically developed platform&#8217;s was originally felt during the early 1990&#8217;s when India was going through a touch economic period. Acquiring foreign made technologies is expensive and at that moment it seemed a bit tough to do that. The armed forces were asked in terms of what they need to maintain a credible deterrence and as well as keep cost down. In reply the Army asked for a new MBT and a attack helicopter, the navy asked for better ships, submarines and a naval attack helicopter and the Air force came back with a request of good multi role aircraft, a possible stealth aircraft as well an attack helicopter. Now keep in mind these are just the major request and do not include the minor or secondary request that were also made. Conventional development such as missiles are not part of this. 

2.	The MOD came into action and issued a Request for information to the DRDO and HAL, inquiring whether all this can be done. In reply the MOD was told that it can be done but the time scale will be longer as such technologies take a long time to research specially when financial constraints exist. DRDO and HAL then set up separate teams for each of these projects then headed by the respective directors of the organizations. 

3.	The project were taken quite lightly until the Pokran test when the government pushed the MOD again in the light of the sanctions that were put on India. The results of that push can be seen today with the LCA, LCH, Project 15A, 17, Arjun, Naval LCA, PAKFA coming into light. The full BOM&#8217;S and drawings for all these projects were completed in the late 1990&#8217;s but took a long time for them to come down to the production levels. 
Now lets talk about how production is done in the defense industry as its obvious you have no idea how it works. Let take the LCA for example &#8211; 


1.	Initially the major BOM is issued for the full product and it is put under a job number such as J-100. Keep in mind that job number is only for 1 jet not all the LCA&#8217;s. Then that one job number is split into further jobs by which type of production it is. Production is not like lego growler where you just have to put everything together. For example J-100-1 could just be the sheet metal involved in the inner frames of the LCA while J-100-2 could be the assembly for turning mechanism. Normally one jet is spilt into almost 20 jobs before it call comes together at the assembly plants. 

2.	You argument that some parts of the LCA or Indian products are not Indian is stupid and immature. When these jobs are split further, individual BOM&#8217;s are issued to the Procurement Department which are organized as per the type of procurement they specialize in. In general engineers only issue a requirement based upon the drawings and the function needed. For example there is safety switch that goes on the cockpit of the LCA so that if by any chance it opens, the pilot would be alerted right away and appropriate counter measure can be taken. This switch is normally supplied by Honeywell but purchasers can buy the same thing form vendors such as Panasonic, Baumer or Tecspan. Indian purchasers are known to buy external parts because they come with a solid customer service and are high in quality as well. The BOM&#8217;s as well as the drawing are Indian, parts purchasing is done from all over the world. 

3.	Parts for thee F-22 are bought from everywhere, from Germany to Japan, now does that make the F-22 Japanese ? Think before you talk the next time. 

What is really funny is that the JF-17&#8217;s BOM&#8217;s and drawings are all Chinese, so how its it become a Pakistani product is anyone guess. The LCA composites your making fun off are manufactured with the best quality control in the world. From what I have heard, everybody at the MOD is highly impressed with its quality and the price that is comes with. Your India bashing attitude is clearly seen here as you fail to even research anything even one bit before you come up with big accusations. The LCA,LCH, MCA etc etc are all totally &#8220;Made In India&#8221; whether you like it or not. Case closed.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## bumbgola

Growler said:


> example of how China has modified the platform with their indigenous systems



No, I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying that Chinese will forgo a better western product/part and hope to win a war with second grade technology?


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> again either my posts are too much hurting you or you are just too deluded.
> 
> Listen. Dhruv does not just have "SOME" foreigner parts but infact the entire chopper is based on western systems R&D and designs sold to india. this is also the case with rest of the weapons claimed to be indian. And i am not saying pakistan is building tanks ships or aircrafts with their own R&D.
> give me a list of Indian indigenous R&D input that is not some foreigner system with indian name assembled in india.
> If Pakistan had the economy like india then they would be asking western companies firms etc to develop a platform of their requirements such as ships tanks aircraft heli etc.



Prove it properly then talk. Your jealous arguments do not prove anything. R & D is not all about money, its also about a favorable research environment and the availability of qualified professionals. Something that Pakistan has lacked since 1948.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Frankenstein

I really wish that Apache comes in our possession, then this heli issue will be over for at least 10 years


----------



## raveolution

Frankenstein said:


> I really wish that Apache comes in our possession, then this heli issue will be over for at least 10 years



Not likely. It is competing in the IAF's Attack Chopper Tender.


----------



## Mahakaya

Growler said:


> you are a great part time joker and full time fool. Pakistan will also produce and *market its JF-17 and AL-khaild so according to your analogy these products are indigenous?* or it only imply for india to satisfy your indian ego?



And when do you PLAN TO DO THAT?

First build them for your own military - remember the 42 JF-17s are on soft loans from China. The Al-Khalid has been around for so long so how come despite trials by a few countries no one ordered them?

Well if I go by your logic then I must make an inference that no one thought of it as an impressive tank other than the Pakistani's themselves. My inference is further strengthened by the fact the the Type 90 i.e. UR AL-KHALID was REJECTED by the PLA and same is the case with the JF-17, is it not!

So buddy rather than showing someone down look at yourself first and then start yapping.


----------



## Mahakaya

Growler said:


> again either my posts are too much hurting you or you are just too deluded.
> 
> Listen. Dhruv does not just have "SOME" foreigner parts but infact the entire chopper is based on western systems R&D and designs sold to india. this is also the case with rest of the weapons claimed to be indian. And i am not saying pakistan is building tanks ships or aircrafts with their own R&D.
> give me a list of Indian indigenous R&D input that is not some foreigner system with indian name assembled in india.
> If Pakistan had the economy like india then they would be asking western companies firms etc to develop a platform of their requirements such as ships tanks aircraft heli etc.



Ok Yes it does so what?

Did any country sue us for using their parts and calling the chopper indigenous.

Guys Mr. growler here does not understand the concept of comparative advantage. 

We will buy the parts from other countries till the time we do not have a sufficiently strong industrial base to come up with high quality parts in large numbers. We will continue to buy because it is cheaper to buy than to produce on your own with the same level of quality. The industrial base for choppers is still developing.

So, in light of the above new information it would now make sense for your thick head to understand that once we develop our own industrial base there will be no basis for your INHERENTLY FLAWED CONCLUSIONS.


----------



## Mahakaya

Growler said:


> i need a source for this lol.
> 
> SO which aircraft is going to be more stealtheir? PAK-FA with Indian "indigenous" composite materials or LCA with the same composite materials? seriously stop making a mockery out of yourself.



Again your arguments are at best VERY WEAK. Composite Materials are used to REDUCE the RCS. It is one of the aspects of achieving stealth. Of course you cannot compare PAK-FA and LCA as the latter was not designed as a stealth plane.

As for LCA - Tejas can hold 200 Kg more payload than the JF-17 with its LIGHT WEIGHT (COMPOSITE) WINGS. So again your ARGUMENTS look like PREP MATERIAL FOR HIGH SCHOOL DEBATE COMPETITIONS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ramu

Growler said:


> again either my posts are too much hurting you or you are just too deluded.
> 
> Listen. *Dhruv does not just have "SOME" foreigner parts but infact the entire chopper is based on western systems R&D and designs sold to india. this is also the case with rest of the weapons claimed to be indian.* And i am not saying pakistan is building tanks ships or aircrafts with their own R&D.
> give me a list of Indian indigenous R&D input that is not some foreigner system with indian name assembled in india.
> *If Pakistan had the economy like india then they would be asking western companies firms etc to develop a platform of their requirements such as ships tanks aircraft heli etc. *



You make this thread unbelievable. Well done.

About if Pakistan economy like India comment : I can see why Pakistan's economy is in bad shape.


----------



## rideto_live

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Pakistan needs 80 Helicopters
> 
> Euro Copters or Apache Types
> 
> So it can be on even terms with India they have solid backbone of Helicopters .....
> 
> Its no contest sadly , and this is why we need 80 helicopters ASAP



There u go window shopping again !


----------



## imran iqbal

Growler said:


> What Mr. Deluded pathological lair? Try to improve your interpretation skills because you dont make any sense. Turkey Equador chose few Dhruvs for civilian use only which are "CHEAPER" and effective because its practically made in EUROPE! EC are expensive thats why they probably lost. At least try to use those 2 brain cells left in you. please kindly.



Yes Dhruv is cheaper. Only retarded Pakistanis like yourself wouldn't have the brains to assemble locally or easily available parts into a helicopter. Why do you go for expensive american or european stuff if its easy to assemble and acquire few kits and come up with flying machine ? Don't you want to take off strain from your vibrant economy ? Why don't imitate Indian Dhruv and export to other countires to earn quick buck. Application of Scientific theory is called Engineering, Forget about R&D. I am proud that we have brilliant Engineers if not scientists. 

Last time i checked, your indigenous POF was about to default.

ONLINE - International News Network

And regrading indigenous components in HAL Dhruv, you have already been beaten back in this thread

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/51278-foreign-components-indias-alh-dhruv-3.html

But nonetheless, you keep on reciprocating with half baked rhetoric and then run in exile after your myths are busted , BRAVO 





Growler said:


> Again you lack a brain to comprehend anything and over glorify it to satisfy your ego. Pak was contracted back in 2004 to assemble some Boeing 737 777 parts, does that mean Boing is not a american jet? 99% of the electronics we use on daily bases are assembled in CHINA! Does that mean its Chinese "indigenous" products? NO. as for HAL making parts. I am not aware of it but i can tell you with my common sense HAL may have been contracted to produce few minor spare parts that would cost less for USN or any concern party to operate. HAL may have been contracted for limited amount of parts that are already delivered. Another thing. Like i said. their is practically no comparision of Western Indigenous R&D heck even Chinese with Super skhti bharat! All their products are 100% R&D by foreigner firms and sold to India where they assemble them with their own name. Same is the case with Pakistan.



Seriously, I have read few pages of LCA thread and same foreign components bullmanure was paddled over there. Then some Indians came back with long list of Indian R&D and Pakistanis left the thread like putting fingers in the ears. 

And whats up with Shakti Bharat ? LAME attempt to flame. World won't run according to your comprehension of stuff. You are demonize India for pursuing self reliance and indigenous developments which means closing eyes and its going to hurt you in long run. So if your Pakistan ek ishq ek junoon can apply science and make a workable model, you would then earn the right to drag us down to your level ( In terms of tech)

And if you spend 10% of time in digging out details of Chinese choppers as compared to Indian choppers, it would surprise you with the level of R&D or Copy and paste that they have.

31 years of R&D coupled with billions of yuan wasted on WZ-10

*Propulsion*


> *The modular design of WZ-10 enables it to adopt a number of turboshaft engines. However, the multiple choices of engines have much more to do with the inability of Chinese industry to provide the necessary power plants for WZ-10 in time than the success of modular design concept. At least three type of turboshaft engines have been successfully tested for WZ-10, all of them foreign built. Russian Klimov VK-2500 turboshaft engine that powers Mil Mi-17s sold to China is among the ones used, and so are the Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6C-67C that powers civilian helicopters of western origin in Chinese service. Ukrainian Motor-Sich TV3-117 that powers Mil Mi-28 has also successfully tested, and Ukrainians are helping Chinese to develop its own indigenous turboshaft engine. Its rumored that European MTR390 that powers Eurocopter Tiger has also been selected, but this cannot be confirmed. Due to the delay in the developing of Chinese domestic engines, all prototypes and pre-production series of WZ-10 are powered by foreign engines.*
> 
> *Under this ostensibly civilian program, various key western helicopter manufacturers provided considerable technical assistance to the later WZ-10 development program, including Eurocopter (rotor installation design consultancy), Pratt & Whitney Canada (PT6C turboshaft engine) and Agusta Westland (transmission)
> Some foreign assistance from South Africa has been confirmed, which provided limited help in the area of flight stability based on the experience from designing the Denel AH-2 Rooivalk. South Africa refused further Chinese requests for assistance and no contact was made after 2001.*




Don't want to ruin whole thread, more here

CAIC WZ-10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mahakaya

Growler said:


> Once a pathological lair indian always remain a deluded indian. You guys just fall blindly in love with anything that satisfy your fake indian ego with false claims.
> 
> Their is no point in telling you thick skulls how deluded you are being in this thread like in many just to satisfy your ego. *Its just like a typical hindu indian being deluded about drinking cow urine and worshiping animals. *
> 
> Look at the course of this thread. I brought up the issue that indians are lying about "indigenous" developed dhruv because it is not "indigenous" other then foreigner R&D sold to India with a hindu name tag to give blind sheeps indians a illusion that they have developed this product..
> 
> 
> Here is a list of Foreigner Input in ALH
> 
> *Belgium*
> - rocket launchers
> 
> * France *
> -Engines (licensed production and technology transfer)
> - 20mm gun
> - rockets from European missile manufacturer MBDA.
> 
> *Germany*
> -Involved in the original development.
> -India was the first nation with which Eurocopter signed a licence agreement for technology transfer.
> - complete assemblies for flight/engine controls.
> 
> *Italy*
> - brake system
> Sweden/South Africa
> -self-protection equipment for installation on the ALH for the Indian Armed Forces.
> 
> *UK
> *- Hydraulic Package
> - floatation equipment
> -self-sealing fuel tank systems
> - internal gearbox
> - gaskets and seals
> - fuel tanks
> 
> *US/Isreal*
> -MFD
> - Mission Computers
> - active vibration control system
> -elastomeric bearings
> - Avionics
> 
> Ya now i believe it. PAK-FA is indeed using indian "indigenous" systems.
> 
> bunch of pathological lair indians satisfying their ego with HAL DRDO false claims.




YES WE HAVE A FALSE AND BIG EGO - SO Y ARE YOU SO JEALOUS AND PERTURBED BY IT?

AND WATCH YOUR MOUTH YOU F*** F*** by barking out loud your points will not become true!

WATCH WHAT YOU IMPLY ON HINDUS AND OTHER RELIGIONS - THERE IS NO NEED FOR THAT.

THE POINT IS SIMPLE YOU HAVE BEEN WATCHING TOO MANY ZH SHOWS THAT YOUR BRAIN HAS BEEN RENDERED USELESS TO UNDERSTAND BASIC ECONOMICS AND YOU JUST WANT TO TALK **** JUST LIKE YOUR MENTOR Mr. ZH.


----------



## imran iqbal

Mahakaya said:


> YES WE HAVE A FALSE AND BIG EGO - SO Y ARE YOU SO JEALOUS AND PERTURBED BY IT?
> 
> AND WATCH YOUR MOUTH YOU F*** F*** by barking out loud your points will not become true!
> 
> WATCH WHAT YOU IMPLY ON HINDUS AND OTHER RELIGIONS - THERE IS NO NEED FOR THAT.
> 
> THE POINT IS SIMPLE YOU HAVE BEEN WATCHING TOO MANY ZH SHOWS THAT YOUR BRAIN HAS BEEN RENDERED USELESS TO UNDERSTAND BASIC ECONOMICS AND YOU JUST WANT TO TALK **** JUST LIKE YOUR MENTOR Mr. ZH.



Man, no need to reply to such posts. Just report them.

To understand his outburst, you have to step into his shoes and feel the inferiority complex and insecurities. He ignored my post and went on his copy and paste rant. The way India is growing is causing immense pain and jealously to haters. Our motto is to remain calm and develop our nation, more faster than ever before. And that will be your revenge.

Just ignore the bait and refuse to go down to his level.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mahakaya

imran iqbal said:


> Man, no need to reply to such posts. Just report them.
> 
> To understand his outburst, you have to step into his shoes and feel the inferiority complex and insecurities. He ignored my post and went on his copy and paste rant. The way India is growing is causing immense pain and jealously to haters. Our motto is to remain calm and develop our nation, more faster than ever before. And that will be your revenge.
> 
> Just ignore the bait and refuse to go down to his level.



I know - I understand but the guy just refuses to talk in plain simple language - He has to bad mouth Indians in all his posts. I mean I have seen so many senior members but this guy is a BIG SPOT ON the Defence.PK community. He just keeps talking nonsense without proper understanding of anything.

Anyhow thanks for the useful posts above brother!


----------



## Myth_buster_1

imran iqbal said:


> Man, no need to reply to such posts. Just report them.
> 
> To understand his outburst, you have to step into his shoes and feel the inferiority complex and insecurities. He ignored my post and went on his copy and paste rant. The way India is growing is causing immense pain and jealously to haters. Our motto is to remain calm and develop our nation, more faster than ever before. And that will be your revenge.
> 
> Just ignore the bait and refuse to go down to his level.



Your points have already been answered before in this thread so no point of answering it again. At the end of the day. No matter how much you portray india to be a super power it still remains to be the largest slum place with 700 million people living on a dollar or a little penny more a day. and oh. I am just joking about hindus drinking cow urine and worshiping Cow and other animals such as rats and monkeys. sorry about it guys.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Mahakaya said:


> I know - I understand but the guy just refuses to talk in plain simple language - He has to bad mouth Indians in all his posts. I mean I have seen so many senior members but this guy is a BIG SPOT ON the Defence.PK community. He just keeps talking nonsense without proper understanding of anything.
> 
> Anyhow thanks for the useful posts above brother!



Ya its a common symptoms of a pathological lair like you indians to be deluded about *facts* and reality. The fact still remains 99% of indian products are nothing but foreigner TOT of R&D sold to India and to and a punch line fact to satisfy indian ego they give them illusion of the product being indian with a hindu name tag. 
So a BK-117 improved variant R&D and TOT sold to india becomes DHRUV.


----------



## Join

Growler said:


> Ya its a common symptoms of a pathological lair like you indians to be deluded about *facts* and reality. The fact still remains 99% of indian products are nothing but foreigner TOT of R&D sold to India and to and a punch line fact to satisfy indian ego they give them illusion of the product being indian with a hindu name tag.
> So a BK-117 improved variant R&D and TOT sold to india becomes DHRUV.



Dhruv means Pole Star in sanskrit, nothing to do with Hinduism, but you showed whats being preached to u, Iam not surprised...


----------



## ramu

Growler said:


> ******
> Look at the course of this thread. I brought up the issue that indians are lying about "indigenous" developed dhruv because it is not "indigenous" other then foreigner R&D sold to India with a hindu name tag to give blind sheeps indians a illusion that they have developed this product..
> 
> 
> Here is a list of Foreigner Input in ALH
> 
> *Belgium*
> - rocket launchers
> 
> * France *
> -Engines (licensed production and technology transfer)
> - 20mm gun
> - rockets from European missile manufacturer MBDA.
> 
> *Germany*
> -Involved in the original development.
> -India was the first nation with which Eurocopter signed a licence agreement for technology transfer.
> - complete assemblies for flight/engine controls.
> 
> *Italy*
> - brake system
> Sweden/South Africa
> -self-protection equipment for installation on the ALH for the Indian Armed Forces.
> 
> *UK
> *- Hydraulic Package
> - floatation equipment
> -self-sealing fuel tank systems
> - internal gearbox
> - gaskets and seals
> - fuel tanks
> 
> *US/Isreal*
> -MFD
> - Mission Computers
> - active vibration control system
> -elastomeric bearings
> - Avionics
> 
> Ya now i believe it. PAK-FA is indeed using indian "indigenous" systems.
> 
> bunch of pathological lair indians satisfying their ego with HAL DRDO false claims.



****** [Deleted] 

Considering that you have clearly no idea how a product is built, let us explain how a product is built in today's world. 

If I am building a machine tool, I wont start making Servo motors, ball screws or bearings. 







A company or for that matter a country that produces anything will look for a partners to source components with a competitive edge over other avenues. A make or buy decision is based solely on feasibility and economic considerations. 


The above is a vertical machining centre from Mazak. The machine tool consists of specialised components one of them being the controller. 

Siemens, Fanuq, etc are the leading controllers available in the market. Based on requirement, Mazak machines use various controllers.






It is foolish for the machine tool manufacturer to think that every component can be designed and manufactured by companies in his own country let alone his own firm.







Many of the parts of Boeing dream liner is sourced from a company in India. That does not imply the ownership and credit DOES NOT GO TO Boeing. Boeing is just sourcing its parts from the best place it thinks it can get a competitive advantage.



HOPE YOU UNDERSTOOD. IF YOU CONTINUE YOUR SENSELESS POSTS, CONSIDER THIS AS MY LAST REPLY.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Join said:


> Dhruv means Pole Star in sanskrit, nothing to do with Hinduism, but you showed whats being preached to u, Iam not surprised...



The legend of Dhruv &#2343;&#2381;&#2352;&#2369;&#2357; is a Hindu story in the Bhagavata Purana and the Vishnu Purana. The story of Dhruv helps illustrate fundamental religious beliefs through the triumph of a 5-year old, in the spiritual field. It is written that those who read or listen to the story of Dhruv will achieve devotion and their sorrows will be destroyed.

 you are dodging your own religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Join

Growler said:


> The legend of Dhruv &#2343;&#2381;&#2352;&#2369;&#2357; is a Hindu story in the Bhagavata Purana and the Vishnu Purana. The story of Dhruv helps illustrate fundamental religious beliefs through the triumph of a 5-year old, in the spiritual field. It is written that those who read or listen to the story of Dhruv will achieve devotion and their sorrows will be destroyed.
> 
> you are dodging your own religion.



BTW , did we name the helicopter DHRUV or DHRUVA????
There is a Lot of Difference between Dhruv and Dhruva buddy.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ramu said:


> ****** [Deleted]
> 
> Considering that you have clearly no idea how a product is built, let us explain how a product is built in today's world.
> 
> If I am building a machine tool, I wont start making Servo motors, ball screws or bearings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A company or for that matter a country that produces anything will look for a partners to source components with a competitive edge over other avenues. A make or buy decision is based solely on feasibility and economic considerations.
> 
> Many of the parts of Boeing dream liner is sourced from a company in India. That does not imply the ownership and credit to Boeing.
> 
> 
> The above is a vertical machining centre from Mazak. The machine tool consists of specialised components one of them being the controller.
> 
> Siemens, Fanuq, etc are the leading controllers available in the market. Based on requirement, Mazak machines use various controllers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is foolish for the machine tool manufacturer to think that every component can be designed and manufactured by companies in his own country let alone his own firm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOPE YOU UNDERSTOOD. IF YOU CONTINUE YOUR SENSELESS POSTS, CONSIDER THIS AS MY LAST REPLY.



Already been answered before. You indians are being desperate to save your face with ridiculous analogies. Dhruv has 99% of foreigner systems technology given under R&D TOT.

Like i said before. Even Pakistan was given order to produce Boeing parts because they were cheaper to use as spare parts. Same is the case with india. However the "TECHNOLOGY" still remains AMERICAN! not pakistani or indian. Just like latest electronics. They may be all 100% built or assembled in China but the technology still remains Japanese American or european etc. 

Now stop embarrassing yourself guys. admit it. that Dhruv is not a Indian R&D at all. but once a deluded pathological lair always remains one like indians.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Join said:


> BTW , did we name the helicopter DHRUV or DHRUVA????
> There is a Lot of Difference between Dhruv and Dhruva buddy.



buddy you need to read the stories of Dhruv.


----------



## Join

Growler said:


> buddy you need to read the stories of Dhruv.



Buddy, let me tell you, a language as old as Sanskrit has given Dhruv Name for what we today call pole staar, just because it resembles Hindu mythology dosent mean you criticize it..... It says that Dhruva was given a boon to shine like a star, and hence the birth of pole star... But what is pole star called "DHRUV" All our weapons have sanskrit names.. So what problem do u have in us choosing sanskrit names, pakistan has Hindus, sikhs, but why do u always choose Muslim names?? Atleast we are neutral


----------



## ramu

Growler said:


> Already been answered before. You indians are being desperate to save your face with ridiculous analogies. Dhruv has 99% of foreigner systems technology given under R&D TOT.
> 
> Like i said before. Even Pakistan was given order to produce Boeing parts because they were cheaper to use as spare parts. Same is the case with india. However the "TECHNOLOGY" still remains AMERICAN! not pakistani or indian. Just like latest electronics. They may be all 100% built or assembled in China but the technology still remains Japanese American or european etc.
> 
> Now stop embarrassing yourself guys. admit it. that Dhruv is not a Indian R&D at all. but once a deluded pathological lair always remains one like indians.



Your bird brain will never understand. 
*
I am closely associated with HAL, did my course projects in HAL and know people who have actually designed Dhruv. My father has spent 34 years of his life in HAL. I know more about this project that you can dream off. * 

You are a typical fan boy who thinks everything you hear about India from your biased sources is true. 

Now


----------



## IceCold

imran iqbal said:


> Man, no need to reply to such posts. Just report them.
> 
> To understand his outburst, you have to step into his shoes and feel the inferiority complex and insecurities. He ignored my post and went on his copy and paste rant. The way India is growing is causing immense pain and jealously to haters. Our motto is to remain calm and develop our nation, more faster than ever before. And that will be your revenge.
> 
> Just ignore the bait and refuse to go down to his level.



I just did not wanted to enter into this thread because its already derailed enough but your comment made me do it, can you elaborate on these insecurites and inferiority complex that we Pakistanis possess?

Everytime there is a talk about JF-17 you guys are the first ones to jump in and ruin almost every thread whether its about issuing an MRCA type contract, or Pakistans input on the JF-17 we see Indians telling us where is the money and the infrastructure to handle such. heck you guys even cant stop from poking your noses into systems which India never had in the 1st place such as making comparisions between the JF-17 and F-16 and telling us how inferior JF-17 is to F-16 to satisfy some hollow egos. 
Seriously before calling us insecure and inferior, how about have a look in the mirror, maybe you realize who has this inferiority complex more. I have seen you Indians bashing Pakistan on Indian forums, the difference between you guys and us is every evident from the fact that you guys are allowed to run your mouth as you wish on a Pakistani forum, are we given the same privilege on any Indian forum? 

And one more thing no Pakistani ever called JF-17 to be indigenous unlike you Indians calling every thing indigenous rightly pointed out by Growler, we always call it a joint venture between two countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ramu said:


> Your bird brain will never understand.
> *
> I am closely associated with HAL, did my course projects in HAL and know people who have actually designed Dhruv. My father has spent 34 years of his life in HAL. I know more about this project that you can dream off. *
> 
> You are a typical fan boy who thinks everything you hear about India from your biased sources is true.
> 
> Now



You are being a pathological lair. please stop being one. HAL did not design Dhruv, its a German design all the way while some testings in labs etc were done in india. Almost all the major components are exported under R&D TOT and some are either imported directly and integrated in the chopper or assembled in India with a Indian name tag to give deluded indians an illusion that the chopper is made in India. 
Just because you saw a Dhruv model in a wind tunnel does not mean it was designed by india. 

remeber another thing. Without West support HAL and DRDO is nothing but a shubzi mehndhi.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

IceCold said:


> t you guys are allowed to run your mouth as you wish on a Pakistani forum, are we given the same privilege on any Indian forum?



Exactly. And these indians think we have inferiority complex. Us pakistanis are not even allowed to post anything that is good for pakistan other wise they will call you names and insult your religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Donatello

ramu said:


> Your bird brain will never understand.
> *
> I am closely associated with HAL, did my course projects in HAL and know people who have actually designed Dhruv. My father has spent 34 years of his life in HAL. I know more about this project that you can dream off. *
> 
> You are a typical fan boy who thinks everything you hear about India from your biased sources is true.
> 
> Now





I am sure you are an equal fanboy,

Your father worked for 34 years? Then maybe he can/you can provide us with source and credible information on why the LCA has been so delayed.......and continues to be.


----------



## deesu

Growler said:


> You are being a pathological lair. please stop being one. HAL did not design Dhruv, its a German design all the way while some testings in labs etc were done in india. Almost all the major components are exported under R&D TOT and some are either imported directly and integrated in the chopper or assembled in India with a Indian name tag to give deluded indians an illusion that the chopper is made in India.
> Just because you saw a Dhruv model in a wind tunnel does not mean it was designed by india.
> 
> remeber another thing. Without West support HAL and DRDO is nothing but a shubzi mehndhi.



thanks for your valuable information.... you opened my eyes...


----------



## gogbot

Growler said:


> You are being a pathological lair. please stop being one. HAL did not design Dhruv, its a German design all the way while some testings in labs etc were done in india. Almost all the major components are exported under R&D TOT and some are either imported directly and integrated in the chopper or assembled in India with a Indian name tag to give deluded indians an illusion that the chopper is made in India.
> Just because you saw a Dhruv model in a wind tunnel does not mean it was designed by india.
> 
> remeber another thing. Without West support HAL and DRDO is nothing but a shubzi mehndhi.



lol 

What else , you must have the inside scoop on everything.

You were the self proclaimed expert on the PAk-fa
Now the HAL-Dhurv

what's next.

And seriously how can you accuse so many of being a pathological liar.(self denial perhaps.)

So if i understand correctly, anyone who contradicts the world according to you, is Pathological liar, all else are truth seekers such as you self. Am i right ?


----------



## Join

penumbra said:


> I am sure you are an equal fanboy,
> 
> Your father worked for 34 years? Then maybe he can/you can provide us with source and credible information on why the LCA has been so delayed.......and continues to be.



It isnt easy for any country to jump 2 gen ahead..... We had a second gen aircraft marut, then LCA which is meant to be 4+ gen aircraft... Now let me give u a small example, France as we all know Is a well experienced producer of aircrafts, but what took them 25+ years to develop Dassault Rafale and make it fully operational?


----------



## Myth_buster_1

gogbot said:


> lol
> 
> What else , you must have the inside scoop on everything.
> 
> You were the self proclaimed expert on the PAk-fa
> Now the HAL-Dhurv
> 
> what's next.
> 
> And seriously how can you accuse so many of being a pathological liar.(self denial perhaps.)
> 
> So if i understand correctly, anyone who contradicts the world according to you, is Pathological liar, all else are truth seekers such as you self. Am i right ?




Again you indians are having hard not just hard but very very hard time excepting the reality that hurts your ego. I have already given you the list of foreigner input in HAL Dhruv which means india hardly had 5% input in the entire project indigenous product. The technology is all the way 100% not indian.


----------



## harrymohan

Growler said:


> Again you indians are having hard not just hard but very very hard time excepting the reality that hurts your ego. I have already given you the list of foreigner input in HAL Dhruv which means india hardly had 5% input in the entire project indigenous product. The technology is all the way 100% not indian.



guys why fighting over on which u have no control whether its JF 17 or LCA or ACH yahan subah ho rahe hain, thand rakho (here its dawn time, so pls be in peace mode)


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Join said:


> It isnt easy for any country to jump 2 gen ahead..... We had a second gen aircraft marut, then LCA which is meant to be 4+ gen aircraft... Now let me give u a small example, France as we all know Is a well experienced producer of aircrafts, but what took them 25+ years to develop Dassault Rafale and make it fully operational?



 LCA indian? The reasion why i chose Dhruv to point out that all indian products that are claimed to be indian are not indian. only Dhruv could be exposed because of the export deal with Myanmar which was making a mockery of EU export ban on Myanmar. 
And oh. LOL Marut was designed by a German scientist who moved to india and the technology provided were mostly from Gnat and related developments by foreigners not indian. 

When it comes to ego satisfaction no one can be matched by deluded pathological lair indians.


----------



## harrymohan

Growler said:


> LCA indian? The reasion why i chose Dhruv to point out that all indian products that are claimed to be indian are not indian. only Dhruv could be exposed because of the export deal with Myanmar which was making a mockery of EU export ban on Myanmar.
> And oh. LOL Marut was designed by a German scientist who moved to india and the technology provided were mostly from Gnat and related developments by foreigners not indian.
> 
> When it comes to ego satisfaction no one can be matched by deluded pathological lair indians.



Ok sir we are pathological liar and other Indian defense forums don't allow Pakistanis pls accept my apologies for it! but please stop this fighting. I have seen historically on this forum, no other party is willing to accept what other party is claiming to be, so why are you wasting your time. Enjoy life till it last and share knowledge and information simple. No need of fighting with a person who is behind a computer screen. Why increase ur BP.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Join

Growler said:


> You indians are funnier then circus jokers. LCA indian? The reasion why i chose Dhruv to point out that all indian products that are claimed to be indian are not indian. only Dhruv could be exposed because of the export deal with Myanmar which was making a mockery of EU export ban on Myanmar.
> And oh. LOL Marut was designed by a German scientist who moved to india and the technology provided were mostly from Gnat and related developments by foreigners not indian.
> 
> When it comes to ego satisfaction no one can be matched by deluded pathological lair indians.



Well No one claimed that HF marut was designed hy us, it was designed by kurt tank, and was manufactured in HAL and for your kind info, Kurt tank was an employee of hindustan aeronotics before he left for berlin.... and If LCA would not have been Indian, it would have been flying by now, we are making ech and every component of its, But certain things like engines and radars, we wanted foreign support and that too only after we tried making it, We have tried making kaveri and Multi mode RADAR FOR IT.... AND CAN YOU TELL ME HOW DO U SEE LCA NOT INDIAN??.. AND I can see you are over heated, relax and answer... no need to use abusive language if u are speaking the truth


----------



## Bull

Growler said:


> How much indian is it? LCH uses almost every other system in ALH
> 
> I have not even mentioned Isreali contribution.
> 
> so how much indian is it? The paint job and few nuts?



I guess thats the way now. Every manufacturer sources components, have a look at how much swedish gripen is actually.


----------



## imran iqbal

Growler said:


> Your points have already been answered before in this thread so no point of answering it again. At the end of the day. No matter how much you portray india to be a super power it still remains to be the largest slum place with 700 million people living on a dollar or a little penny more a day. and oh. I am just joking about hindus drinking cow urine and worshiping Cow and other animals such as rats and monkeys. sorry about it guys.



Yeah, Apology accepted. I pity on Hindus of Pakistan and feel proud how India keeps Pakistan and bananadesh under its thumb. You can rant, whine, cry but won't show your face on border. 

Maybe its something wrong in you that you are now at bottom of food chain or called epicenter of terrorism or migraine of the world and India is on progressing path, IT superpower, BRIC or G20 member and soon to be UNSC seat holder with veto power.

And don't pity on our poor, pity on your citizens getting killed daily in bomb blasts and that's the reason you access Internet all day because you like millions are afraid to go out

India, China lift millions out of slums


----------



## Mahakaya

Growler said:


> Ya its a common symptoms of a pathological lair like you indians to be deluded about *facts* and reality. The fact still remains 99% of indian products are nothing but foreigner TOT of R&D sold to India and to and a punch line fact to satisfy indian ego they give them illusion of the product being indian with a hindu name tag.
> So a BK-117 improved variant R&D and TOT sold to india becomes DHRUV.



Do you have a 100% indigenous BK-117? NO right - But we DO HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA!

Pitty you man can't even assemble a chopper.....YES INDIANS A PATHALOGICAL LIARS. WE MAKE VERY GOOD PLANES AND CHOPPERS AND YOU ARE NOWHERE TO BE SEEN IN THIS RACE!

BAHAHAHAHHA!


----------



## imran iqbal

Mr Growler, very simple question.

If all parts of ALH and LCH are cheaply and easily available and has no Indian innovation and invention, then why are you not building your own chopper ?

LCH costs 25% of Apache and thus you can build 4 times in the intended budget.

Why wasting money on imported western fully build units and giving more money to manufacturers ?


----------



## IceCold

imran iqbal said:


> Mr Growler, very simple question.
> 
> If all parts of ALH and LCH are cheaply and easily available and has no Indian innovation and invention, then why are you not building your own chopper ?
> 
> LCH costs 25% of Apache and thus you can build 4 times in the intended budget.
> 
> *Why wasting money on imported western fully build units and giving more money to manufacturers *?



Thats a stupid question to ask in the first place. We are not waisting any money. Different countries have different requirements. For now Pakistans requirements are fulfilled with Cobras. 
By the way India also does not operate LCH alone nor will it continue to do even after its induction, so why is India waisting money on foreign stuff?


----------



## ramu

imran iqbal said:


> Mr Growler, very simple question.
> 
> If all parts of ALH and LCH are cheaply and easily available and has no Indian innovation and invention, then why are you not building your own chopper ?
> 
> LCH costs 25% of Apache and thus you can build 4 times in the intended budget.
> 
> Why wasting money on imported western fully build units and giving more money to manufacturers ?



Imran, he is beyond repair. He knows everything about what happens in defence establishments in India sitting in Pakistan. He has a crystal ball you see. Ignore the pathological addicted liar.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IceCold

ramu said:


> Imran, he is beyond repair. He knows everything about what happens in defence establishments in India sitting in Pakistan. He has a crystal ball you see. Ignore the pathological addicted liar.



Hypocrisy at best beacuse some how the super shaki bhartis knows each and everything about Pakistan sitting in India, whether its about the JF-17 or perhaps Pakistans infrastructure not able to handle the number of jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ramu

IceCold said:


> Hypocrisy at best beacuse some how the super shaki bhartis knows each and everything about Pakistan sitting in India, whether its about the JF-17 or perhaps Pakistans infrastructure not able to handle the number of jets.



Ice cold, you jumped in between. Mr.Growler has called everyone here pathological liars. I have said nothing about JF-17 and your logic sounds like 2 wrongs make things right ?


----------



## imran iqbal

IceCold said:


> Thats a stupid question to ask in the first place. We are not waisting any money. Different countries have different requirements. For now Pakistans requirements are fulfilled with Cobras.
> By the way India also does not operate LCH alone nor will it continue to do even after its induction, so why is India waisting money on foreign stuff?



My question was not stupid, your answer is.

How come your requirements are fulfilled by a chopper made in west according to their conditions. Can you operate your choppers in leh like Indian army ?

LCH is light combat helicopter while hind is heavy combat heli. Both are of different classes.

If you can get Cobras in 25% of quoted price, would you leave that offer and go for full price ? Why don't you assemble your own chopper and save considerable amount of money ?

WZ-10 was also made from foreign collaboration and imported parts. So ditch the Cobra deal and come up with your own design to save 75% cost.


----------



## Mahakaya

*@GROWLER*

I mean even my 5 year old Nephew will be able to tell the difference between the above two choppers. But I believe your brains is less that that of a 5 year old.

As for the point on technology being from somewhere - YES THE DESIGN OF THE CHOPPER WAS DONE IN INDIA - THE WEAPONIZED VERSION OF DHRUV WAS ALSO DESIGNED IN INDIA.

THE LCH - WHICH LOOKS MUCH MORE MODERN WAS ALSO DESIGNED IN INDIA.

NOW IF THE SONY VAIO IS DESIGNED IN A CONSUMER CENTER IN THAILAND AND THE PARTS ARE SOURCED FROM CHINA - DOES THAT MEAN IT IS NOT JAPANESE?

AND PLEASE IF WE CAN BUILD THE LCA FROM GROUND UP THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE WHY WE CANNOT MAKE A CHOPPER BASED ON OUR OWN INTELLECT. 

SO your conclusion there should rest now!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ramu

penumbra said:


> I am sure you are an equal fanboy,
> 
> Your father worked for 34 years? Then maybe he can/you can provide us with source and credible information on why the LCA has been so delayed.......and continues to be.



Thanks for your comments. Has LCA got anything to do with this discussion ? In any case, the world knows about the problems we have had about Kaveri Engine anf the changing requirements. 

It is a learning exercise and even with assistance from Russia and a good understanding of composites, we have slipped deadlines. India had no home grown defence ecosystem manufacturing / design infrastructure in the 80s and to build and support a project of the scale of a LCA was a challenge. 

The constant changes in requirements by Airforce and constraing requirements from Navy did not help. Do you want to know more ?

Links are all over the internet. Google.


----------



## imran iqbal

penumbra said:


> I am sure you are an equal fanboy,
> 
> Your father worked for 34 years? Then maybe he can/you can provide us with source and credible information on why the LCA has been so delayed.......and continues to be.



Why don't you go and ask PAPA China how did it took 31 years to design WZ-10 and still continuing test flights of prototype using foreign build engines?

Hint: No country sold its attack chopper to China for reverse engineering.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Join said:


> It isnt easy for any country to jump 2 gen ahead..... *We had a second gen aircraft marut*, *then LCA which is meant to be 4+ gen aircraft.*.. Now let me give u a small example, France as we all know Is a well experienced producer of aircrafts, but what *took them 25+ years to develop Dassault Rafale *and make it fully operational?



First of all marut wasnt indian.It was liscene produced or assembled watever.
LCA which is meant to be a 4+ gen arcraft is taking almost 6 decades and immense russian,israeli .european help and still it aint nowhere to induct in active service while the french made a 100% indegenous jet in just 25 years.And Pakistan and China made a jet in record time and now are looking at Block 2?


----------



## IceCold

imran iqbal said:


> My question was not stupid, your answer is.
> 
> *How come your requirements are fulfilled by a chopper made in west according to their conditions. Can you operate your choppers in leh like Indian army *?
> 
> LCH is light combat helicopter while hind is heavy combat heli. Both are of different classes.
> 
> If you can get Cobras in 25% of quoted price, would you leave that offer and go for full price ? Why don't you assemble your own chopper and save considerable amount of money ?
> 
> WZ-10 was also made from foreign collaboration and imported parts. So ditch the Cobra deal and come up with your own design to save 75% cost.



Your question was indeed stupid and now you have come up with even more stupid analogy but then again it suits you. Leaving aside your usual BS, for the bold part there is something called evaluation something India is right now doing for their MRCA, we evaluated and found the product to be in match with our requirements. By the way just for the information Pakistan is operating Cobras for a long time now and we have the infrastructure to fully support it and hence their is no need for us to initiate another program as of now.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

imran iqbal said:


> Why don't you go and ask PAPA China how did it took 31 years to design WZ-10 and still continuing test flights of prototype using foreign build engines?
> 
> Hint: No country sold its attack chopper to China for reverse engineering.



Why dont u go and ask BAPU russian and Step daddy israel why wwith all there help MAM india isnt ready to fly the super doper LCA since 6 decades?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ramu

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> First of all marut wasnt indian.It was liscene produced or assembled watever.
> LCA which is meant to be a 4+ gen arcraft is taking almost 6 decades and immense russian,israeli .european help and still it aint nowhere to induct in active service while the french made a 100% indegenous jet in just 25 years.And Pakistan and China made a jet in record time and now are looking at Block 2?



Congrats to China and Pakistan. Now don't derail the thread.


----------



## imran iqbal

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Why dont u go and ask BAPU russian and Step daddy israel why wwith all there help MAM india isnt ready to fly the super doper LCA since 6 decades?



Because BAPU Russia was supplying RD-33 to PAPA China for Pakistan's (Ek ishq Ek Junoon) JF-17

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IceCold

ramu said:


> Ice cold, you jumped in between. Mr.Growler has called everyone here pathological liars. I have said nothing about JF-17 and your logic sounds like 2 wrongs make things right ?



Did i? The trend is followed by Indians everywhere and at every time. You reply to one and then there are 10 more waiting to get a piece of you. 
As for jumping in, i never wanted too, i knew where this thread was heading but one of your trash talkers Mr.Imran over stepped the line by insulting every Pakistani and that includes me.


----------



## ramu

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Why dont u go and ask BAPU russian and Step daddy israel why wwith all there help MAM india isnt ready to fly the super doper LCA since 6 decades?





The topic of this thread is 

*Attack Helicopter Match-Ups: India vs. Pakistan*


----------



## Join

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> First of all marut wasnt indian.It was liscene produced or assembled watever.
> LCA which is meant to be a 4+ gen arcraft is taking almost 6 decades and immense russian,israeli .european help and still it aint nowhere to induct in active service while the french made a 100% indegenous jet in just 25 years.And Pakistan and China made a jet in record time and now are looking at Block 2?



HF marut was designed by kurt tank, who at that time was working for Hindustan aeronotics. India has developed engines and radars for LCA, which we have given it to those experianced in the field for correcting our mistakes in it and untill they get rectified we have nothing but to look for foreign engines and radars.... Its difficult for you to understand unless u google it... and france made it in 25 yrs because it has experiance in that field, and still took 25 years.... And Pakistans contribution to JF-17? if Iam allowed to ask that question in this forum


----------



## ramu

IceCold said:


> Did i? The trend is followed by Indians everywhere and at every time. You reply to one and then there are 10 more waiting to get a piece of you.
> As for jumping in, i never wanted too, i knew where this thread was heading but one of your trash talkers Mr.Imran over stepped the line by insulting every Pakistani and that includes me.



 OK ow chill 


Join, lets stick to the topic please.


----------



## IceCold

This thread has indeed turned to trash. Mods kindly close it.


----------



## imran iqbal

IceCold said:


> Your question was indeed stupid and now you have come up with even more stupid analogy but then again it suits you. Leaving aside your usual BS, for the bold part there is something called evaluation something India is right now doing for their MRCA, we evaluated and found the product to be in match with our requirements.By the way just for the information Pakistan is operating Cobras for a long time now and we have the infrastructure to fully support it and *hence their is no need for us to initiate another program as of now.*



Like if Pakistan decides to come up with Home build Chopper, they will do it in seconds without any effort. * Buddy, there is no AQ Khan in aviation industry*.

I will rest my case by quoting AQ Khan's words.

*"The speed of our work and our achievements surprised our worst enemies and adversaries and the West stood helplessly by to see a Third World nation, unable even to produce bicycle chains or sewing needles, mastering the most advanced nuclear technology in the shortest possible span of time," *

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ramu

IceCold said:


> This thread has indeed turned to trash. Mods kindly close it.




Why not delete the trash and let the thread be ???


----------



## Join

ramu said:


> OK ow chill
> 
> 
> Join, lets stick to the topic please.



Ok buddy....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Join said:


> HF *marut was designed by kurt tank*, who at that time was working for Hindustan aeronotics. *India has developed engines and radars for LCA*, which we have given it to those experianced in the field for correcting our mistakes in it... Its difficult for you to understand unless u google it... and france made it in 25 yrs because it has experiance in that field, and still took 25 years.... And *Pakistans contribution to JF-17*? if Iam allowed to ask that question in this forum



The Marut was designed by the famed German designer Kurt Tank, but never realised its full potential due to insufficient power
Which engine are u talking about?
I heard u were still in testing tht kaveri engine and tht it was almost impossiable for use till next decade and u were looking for some other engine coz its under powered ??
Even with 6 decades and tons of russian and israeli help what?
Here by some indian journalist


> By Siva Govindasamy
> 
> India's Tejas light combat aircraft could use a foreign powerplant until the middle of the next decade, due to ongoing problems with the development of an indigenous engine. The LCA is scheduled to enter service with the Indian air force in 2011,
> 
> The state-owned Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) has spent Rp20 billion ($411 million) developing the indigenous Kaveri engine since 1989, but the powerplant is still overweight and does not have the 21,000-22,500lb of thrust (93-100kN) that its customer requires.
> 
> The difficulties led to the Aeronautical Development Agency, which is developing the Tejas, ordering General Electric F404-IN20 engines last year to power the aircraft. These will ensure that the fighter, which has also been plagued by other delays, achieves initial operational capability by the end of next year and enters service in 2011.
> 
> 
> © Aeronautical Development Agency
> 
> Now, the agency is likely to place an order for GE F414 engines this year to power another 20 fighters, says M Natarajan, secretary of India's Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), which oversees the ADA. "The first two LCA squadrons, consisting of 20 jets each, will be fitted with General Electric engines. The subsequent squadrons could fly with an upgraded version of [the] Kaveri engine," he says.
> 
> The ADA is working with the GTRE and the air force to improve the Kaveri. Natarajan reiterates that the programme will not be scrapped. "A team of air force engineers is working with GTRE and ADA in addressing the issues. As an ongoing project, the air force will be involved at the point of integrating the upgraded version of the engine with the aircraft," he adds.
> 
> The GTRE is also likely to work with French engine manufacturer Snecma on the Kaveri, although the two sides have yet to reach an agreement for joint development and testing, and for the transfer of technology and manufacturing. "Discussions with Snecma have been going on for two years," says Natarajan. "Development and flight-testing of the new engine will take at least five to six years."
> 
> Separately, a higher-thrust version of the Kaveri will also power India's proposed medium combat aircraft development. The ADA is working with the air force to develop the model, which it hopes will eventually replace Dassault Mirage fighters and Sepecat Jaguar strike aircraft. It will also supplement the service's Sukhoi Su-30MKIs, Tejas and new medium multirole combat aircraft that India will order in the next few years


About JF-17 we arent crying 100% indegenous jet we built.Are we?
Try avionics,design,\DSI design etc.


----------



## ramu

Mahakaya said:


> *@GROWLER*
> 
> I mean even my 5 year old Nephew will be able to tell the difference between the above two choppers. But I believe your brains is less that that of a 5 year old.
> 
> As for the point on technology being from somewhere - YES THE DESIGN OF THE CHOPPER WAS DONE IN INDIA - THE WEAPONIZED VERSION OF DHRUV WAS ALSO DESIGNED IN INDIA.
> 
> THE LCH - WHICH LOOKS MUCH MORE MODERN WAS ALSO DESIGNED IN INDIA.
> 
> NOW IF THE SONY VAIO IS DESIGNED IN A CONSUMER CENTER IN THAILAND AND THE PARTS ARE SOURCED FROM CHINA - DOES THAT MEAN IT IS NOT JAPANESE?
> 
> AND PLEASE IF WE CAN BUILD THE LCA FROM GROUND UP THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE WHY WE CANNOT MAKE A CHOPPER BASED ON OUR OWN INTELLECT.
> 
> SO your conclusion there should rest now!



For some reason, some of the people think we got a ready made kit where each of the components were catalogued alphabetically and came with a how to assemble manual.

The effort has put into this project is a few thousand man years and the work done is commendable. No one can take that away from India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> Once a pathological lair indian always remain a deluded indian. You guys just fall blindly in love with anything that satisfy your fake indian ego with false claims.
> 
> Their is no point in telling you thick skulls how deluded you are being in this thread like in many just to satisfy your ego. Its just like a typical hindu indian being deluded about drinking cow urine and worshiping animals.
> 
> Look at the course of this thread. I brought up the issue that indians are lying about "indigenous" developed dhruv because it is not "indigenous" other then foreigner R&D sold to India with a hindu name tag to give blind sheeps indians a illusion that they have developed this product..
> 
> 
> Here is a list of Foreigner Input in ALH
> 
> *Belgium*
> - rocket launchers
> 
> * France *
> -Engines (licensed production and technology transfer)
> - 20mm gun
> - rockets from European missile manufacturer MBDA.
> 
> *Germany*
> -Involved in the original development.
> -India was the first nation with which Eurocopter signed a licence agreement for technology transfer.
> - complete assemblies for flight/engine controls.
> 
> *Italy*
> - brake system
> Sweden/South Africa
> -self-protection equipment for installation on the ALH for the Indian Armed Forces.
> 
> *UK
> *- Hydraulic Package
> - floatation equipment
> -self-sealing fuel tank systems
> - internal gearbox
> - gaskets and seals
> - fuel tanks
> 
> *US/Isreal*
> -MFD
> - Mission Computers
> - active vibration control system
> -elastomeric bearings
> - Avionics
> 
> Ya now i believe it. PAK-FA is indeed using indian "indigenous" systems.
> 
> bunch of pathological lair indians satisfying their ego with HAL DRDO false claims.



Please Growler dont embarrass yourself atleast read my post once before posting. Please this whole post of yours is still just plain stupid, yous posting things without the slightest knowledge of aviation related production and procurement. Please stop, your making me fall of my chair at work laughing lol


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> Ya its a common symptoms of a pathological lair like you indians to be deluded about *facts* and reality. The fact still remains 99% of indian products are nothing but foreigner TOT of R&D sold to India and to and a punch line fact to satisfy indian ego they give them illusion of the product being indian with a hindu name tag.
> So a BK-117 improved variant R&D and TOT sold to india becomes DHRUV.



     this is just getting really stupid now


----------



## desiman

growler is here just to satisfy his own ego, please dont pay any attention to him guys.


----------



## Capt.Popeye

HAIDER said:


> by Rich Thomas
> 
> 
> Specialized attack helicopters have proven useful in providing valuable ground support for infantry and armored vehicles. While they are slower and therefore more vulnerable to ground fire than jet aircraft, attack helicopters can also easily liner in battlefield areas, so they can work
> much more closely with troops on the ground.
> 
> Pakistan
> 
> Pakistan's Army is in possession of a number of AH-1 Cobra gunships. A development of the venerable Bell UH-1 Huey transport helicopter, the AH-1 Cobra was first introduced in 1967 for the Vietnam War, it is the original purpose-built helicopter gunship. The Pakistanis use the AH-1S and F models of this proven design, which have seen use against insurgents in the Northwest Frontier since the 1980s.
> 
> Paradoxically, the older upgrade of the Cobra is the S model. The main improvement was putting in a 1,800 hp engine, and all subsequent upgrades were based on this model. The F version includes a laser range finder and infrared suppression on the engine and exhaust, making the helicopter much harder for IR-guided missiles (such as the Stinger) to track. These helicopters have a maximum speed of 172 mph, a range of 274 miles, a maximum climb rate of 1,620 ft/min, and a service ceiling of 12,200 feet. They come armed with a 3 barreled 20mm cannon, and can carry either 2.75" rocket pods or TOW anti-tank missiles on 4 external hard points.
> 
> India
> 
> The Indian Air Force uses the Russian-built Mi-25 and Mi-35 Hind helicopters. The Hind is a combination attack helicopter and light transport, derived from the Mi-8 transport helicopter. It is the most heavily used combat helicopter in the world, having seen action in at least 19 different conflicts.
> The helicopter has two engines capable of delivering 2,200 hp each, a maximum speed of 208 mph, a range of 280 miles, and a service ceiling of 14,500 feet. The helicopter typically carries a multi-barrelled 12.7mm heavy machine gun in the nose, but can carry a 23mm or 30mm cannon instead.
> It also usually comes with door-mounted machine guns. There are 6 external hard points that can carry a plethora of arms in a combined payload of up to 3,300lbs. This can include gun pods, anti-tank missiles, rockets, and heat-seeking anti-aircraft missiles.
> 
> Result: INDIA! The AH-1F and S model of Cobras are a reliable design, and they are also smaller and more maneuverable than Hinds. This is not a small consideration, and should be by no means overlooked. However, they are also not the latest version of the AH-1 (that is the AH-1W Super Cobra), which means they are lacking in certain capabilities that the Hinds wield.
> 
> The Hinds have greater range and greater lift capacity, as well as a higher service ceiling. This means they can carry more ordinance further, higher, and hang around on the battlefield longer. The maximum service ceiling in particular makes the Hind more useful in places like Kashmir. They also have the ability to engage other helicopters with IR-guided missiles, something the AH-W Super Cobra can do, but not the AH-1F and S models.
> 
> Sources: globalsecurity.org; http://indianairforce.nic.in/; Pakarmy.com
> 
> (Not necessary you have to be agreed with writer, its just analysis gathered from few websites, your counter arguments is more valuable)



Two Questions- to put the above comparison in clear perspective:
How many engines on the Cobra? does'nt it affect survivability?
Apart from the crew, can it carry any additional men? does'nt it affect versatility?


----------



## Capt.Popeye

Growler said:


> Already been answered before. You indians are being desperate to save your face with ridiculous analogies. Dhruv has 99% of foreigner systems technology given under R&D TOT.
> 
> Like i said before. Even Pakistan was given order to produce Boeing parts because they were cheaper to use as spare parts. Same is the case with india. However the "TECHNOLOGY" still remains AMERICAN! not pakistani or indian. Just like latest electronics. They may be all 100% built or assembled in China but the technology still remains Japanese American or european etc.
> 
> Now stop embarrassing yourself guys. admit it. that Dhruv is not a Indian R&D at all. but once a deluded pathological lair always remains one like indians.



i like you. you are an extremely FUNNY GUY!


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Join said:


> Well No one claimed that HF marut was designed hy us, it was designed by kurt tank, and was manufactured in HAL and for your kind info, Kurt tank was an employee of hindustan aeronotics before he left for berlin....



Learn and educate yourself.

Like i said. HF was designed by a German aeronautical engineer who previously designed Fw-190 in Germany. Post WWII he wantted to work for British China or USSR but was rejected and finally accepted by aeronautical institute of Argentina. Their he designed few fighter jets and late left the country to due to crisis. Later on he moved to India to work for Hindustan aeronautics. Thats where the the HF-24 came in which was using most of British technology such as the orpheus engine used on Gnat as well and the main gun used by the Hunter aircraft and its most likely the air craft used Hunter and gnat other systems such as cockpit instruments, Hydraulics, armaments etc. And then it was a victim of 71 war, saw very little action and couple of them were destroyed. 



> and If LCA would not have been Indian, it would have been flying by now, we are making ech and *every component of its*, But certain things like engines and radars, we wanted foreign support and that too only after we tried making it, We have tried making kaveri and Multi mode RADAR FOR IT.... AND CAN YOU TELL ME HOW DO U SEE LCA NOT INDIAN??.. AND I can see you are over heated, relax and answer... no need to use abusive language if u are speaking the truth


 Its not to be the indian its not the urs its the foreigner as well.  stop playing around with your mind lol. 
Its the engine, its the avionics, engine, EW suites, cockpit instruments, FBW technology etc are all foreigner R&D sold to india with a HAL name tag. In the first place LCA is designed by Dassualt France not HAL who have no expertise in delta wing designs but Dassault. They designed it for india and sold the R&D and indians were very quick to give it a hindu name tag. 

The 1998 Nuclear test by India gave LCA program such a set back that after couple of years it almost seemed that it would never ever fly because it was basically being designed by Europe who placed sanctions on india. Later on when the sanctions were lifted so were the hopes for LCA and HAL. you see how much influence West has on indian projects? Like i said before. Without Foreigner input Indian projects are non existent.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Bull said:


> I guess thats the way now. Every manufacturer sources components, have a look at how much swedish gripen is actually.



The engine is non Swedish as well as few systems which are supplied by BAE and other then that the aircraft is entirely Swedish technology.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Mahakaya said:


> Do you have a 100% indigenous BK-117? NO right - But we DO HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA!
> 
> Pitty you man can't even assemble a chopper.....YES INDIANS A PATHALOGICAL LIARS. WE MAKE VERY GOOD PLANES AND CHOPPERS AND YOU ARE NOWHERE TO BE SEEN IN THIS RACE!
> 
> BAHAHAHAHHA!



looks like i just gave you a brain seizure with all the indian ego busting facts.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

imran iqbal said:


> Mr Growler, very simple question.
> 
> If all parts of ALH and LCH are cheaply and easily available and has no Indian innovation and invention, then why are you not building your own chopper ?
> 
> LCH costs 25% of Apache and thus you can build 4 times in the intended budget.
> 
> Why wasting money on imported western fully build units and giving more money to manufacturers ?



I have never undermined ALH or LCH as i see it a very capable aircrafts for its role. the reason because the entire project is based on western proven technologies. 
Pakistan does not have enough money thus they do not have as much influences in european market as much as india does. 

You can not simply compare LCH and Apache as they are both build for their own required roles. Their are simply many many things LCH cant do that Apache is build for. Even if you put 20 LCH on one side and one Apache on the other, LCA will still not be able to match Apache roles and the missions it can do. and i am not talking about if they go against each others. LCH is matchable with AH-1 roles however LCH will have the advantage of superior systems that will help to conduct the mission more effectively. LCH has the air-air advantage but thats not i am talking about.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

imran iqbal said:


> My question was not stupid, your answer is.


Yes your posts are stupid of highest order. let me elaborate. 


> How come your requirements are fulfilled by a chopper made in west according to their conditions. Can you operate your choppers in leh like Indian army ?



What do you mean? Are you trying to say why we only rely on foreigner helis and not build ours? buddy at the moment IAF highly relies on foreigner combat choppers and foreigner choppers will still remain to be the high tech product even in your forces. 
AH-1Z is what PA is asked for which is part of US arms package for Pakistan for 2014 which are more then capable enough to operate in any battle zone in pak indo context.



> If you can get Cobras in 25% of quoted price, would you leave that offer and go for full price ? Why don't you assemble your own chopper and save considerable amount of money ?



Seriously are you that stupid? Are you trying to say if you build a cobra style chopper at home you will save 75% of the price? This is the most ridiculous S1ttt i have ever heard today. 



> WZ-10 was also made from foreign collaboration and imported parts. So ditch the Cobra deal and come up with your own design to save 75% cost.


Just to add one thing in your limited small narrow minded world knowledge, China is under arms export ban by the west. exceptional case is Canada providing engines because which is not classified as war materials as the chopper engines could be used on civil choppers as well.


----------



## Mahakaya

Growler said:


> looks like i just gave you a brain seizure with all the indian ego busting facts.



No loser - You just fed my FALSE EGO even more!

Hahahhahaha!

GUYS LET GROWLER BE IN HIS DELUSIONS! HE WILL KEEP DEBATING ABOUT THE FOREIGN SOURCES IN DHRUV AND WE WILL KEEP EXPORTING IT.

NO ONE LISTENS TO PEOPLE LIKE GROWLER IN THIS WORLD AS THEY CANNOT PUT FORTH AN ARGUMENT IN A RATIONAL WAY! THEY ARE BRUSHED ASIDE IN ONE CORNER FROM WHERE THEIR VOICE CANNOT BE HEARD.

JUST LIKE THE ARTICLE WHICH DID NOT CFREATE AS MUCH HYPE AS IT INTENDED TO CREATE.

BROTHERS - THERE WILL BE PEOPLE WHO WILL TRY TO BOG US DOWN, BUT STEP BACK AND REALIZE THAT THEY ARE JUST TRYING TO FEED THEIR OWN EGOS AND PLACATE THEMSELVES!


----------



## Bull

Growler said:


> The engine is non Swedish as well as few systems which are supplied by BAE and other then that the aircraft is entirely Swedish technology.



What if i prove you wrong ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## desiman

Bull said:


> What if i prove you wrong ?



your a true Elite Bull


----------



## desiman

Bull said:


> What if i prove you wrong ?



Not to mention the screens on there are made by Cutler Hammer which is owned by Eaton which is American Firm. The Safety switches are from Weidmuller and the connectors are from G and D (Griddings and Lewis) which are German companies, so does that make the Griphen German growler ????????? lol


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Bull said:


> What if i prove you wrong ?



This is a export variant however minor foreigner components still remains their in Swedish variant but not to extent as shown in this pic. for instance. Sweden is not using any south african ammunition at all infact its for south african air force gripen. India is a potential costumer so they are willing to give permission of integrating Isreali air to air missiles. Brazil is also one potential customer so they are willing to co develop for Brazil air force only with their systems. 
I am not well aware of Gripen development but i will be more then happy to elaborate you and give me some time as i will ask few swedish members from WAFF to give me some info.
Gripen is more Swedish then LCA or ALH or LCH will be indian.


----------



## ramu

Growler said:


> This is a export variant however minor foreigner components still remains their in Swedish variant but not to extent as shown in this pic. for instance. Sweden is not using any south african ammunition at all infact its for south african air force gripen. India is a potential costumer so they are willing to give permission of integrating Isreali air to air missiles. Brazil is also one potential customer so they are willing to co develop for Brazil air force only with their systems.
> *I am not well aware of Gripen development but i will be more then happy to elaborate you and give me some time as i will ask few swedish members from WAFF to give me some info.
> Gripen is more Swedish then LCA or ALH or LCH will be indian. *



Here comes the soft confession of how ignorant you are. You claim one thing and back track. You say you are not well aware of Gripen and in the same breath make a comparison quantifying how Swedish it is.

Growler, grow up.


----------



## Bull

Growler said:


> This is a export variant however minor foreigner components still remains their in Swedish variant but not to extent as shown in this pic. for instance. Sweden is not using any south african ammunition at all infact its for south african air force gripen. India is a potential costumer so they are willing to give permission of integrating Isreali air to air missiles. Brazil is also one potential customer so they are willing to co develop for Brazil air force only with their systems.
> I am not well aware of Gripen development but i will be more then happy to elaborate you and give me some time as i will ask few swedish members from WAFF to give me some info.
> Gripen is more Swedish then LCA or ALH or LCH will be indian.



That map of grippen is from the official presenatation about gripen NG given by SAAB. You cant claim to to know more than what they know.

Sony is made in China, buy i wont call it chineese. Hyundai 120 is made in India and expoted but it isnt Indian but Korean.

These are new world economy synchronisation.


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> This is a export variant however minor foreigner components still remains their in Swedish variant but not to extent as shown in this pic. for instance. Sweden is not using any south african ammunition at all infact its for south african air force gripen. India is a potential costumer so they are willing to give permission of integrating Isreali air to air missiles. Brazil is also one potential customer so they are willing to co develop for Brazil air force only with their systems.
> I am not well aware of Gripen development but i will be more then happy to elaborate you and give me some time as i will ask few swedish members from WAFF to give me some info.
> Gripen is more Swedish then LCA or ALH or LCH will be indian.



give up Growler, you are going nowhere with your argument. In this new age of supply Chain management, its hard to say who makes what, Do you know where the computer you use is made ? this argument is as stupid as that.


----------



## Bull

Coming back to the topic, Pakistan has dedicated attack helis while as India's are more utility ones with combat capabilities.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ramu said:


> Here comes the soft confession of how ignorant you are. You claim one thing and back track. You say you are not well aware of Gripen and in the same breath make a comparison quantifying how Swedish it is.
> 
> Growler, grow up.



you are indeed being confused sell shocked what ever way you wanna portray yourself but the illustration of Gripen NG is a "EXPORT" variant for Brazil. 
SU-30MK"I" is using mostly French and IAI systems because it is specifically designed for indian requirements. However the Russian SU-30 in limited numbers are usuing all 100% "RUSSIAN". 

Learn and educate yourself before you portray yourself with lame punch lines and make a mockery out of yourself.


----------



## ramu

Growler said:


> you are indeed being confused sell shocked what ever way you wanna portray yourself but the illustration of Gripen NG is a "EXPORT" variant for Brazil.
> SU-30MK"I" is using mostly French and IAI systems because it is specifically designed for indian requirements. However the Russian SU-30 in limited numbers are usuing all 100% "RUSSIAN".
> 
> Learn and educate yourself before you portray yourself with lame punch lines and make a mockery out of yourself.



Who talked about SU-30 MKI pathological liar ? Refer to your own contradictory, confused statement. 

And I second what Desiman said ... saves me some tying. It is waste replying to you anyway.


----------



## Mahakaya

Bull said:


> What if i prove you wrong ?



HAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!

HHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH!!

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS POST SIR JI!!

*@ GROWLER:* - HAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!



YOU SHOULD  YOURSELF!!


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> you are indeed being confused sell shocked what ever way you wanna portray yourself but the illustration of Gripen NG is a "EXPORT" variant for Brazil.
> SU-30MK"I" is using mostly French and IAI systems because it is specifically designed for indian requirements. However the Russian SU-30 in limited numbers are usuing all 100&#37; "RUSSIAN".
> 
> Learn and educate yourself before you portray yourself with lame punch lines and make a mockery out of yourself.



Common Growler even the famed Mig-21 isnt 100% Russian, where are you getting all this from ??????? The Su-30 is put together in Russia, the Sukhoi Corporation uses parts from even America in its planes now. Its easy to see that you have no Idea on how things are manufactured nowdays. All your arguments are totally flawed. If you want i can name exact part names and numbers of the products used in the Russian SU-30 that are not made in Russia. I would know buddy, i have worked with Sukhoi on a contract basis for 6 months. So be careful when you counter this one


----------



## Myth_buster_1

desiman said:


> Not to mention the screens on there are made by Cutler Hammer which is owned by Eaton which is American Firm. The Safety switches are from Weidmuller and the connectors are from G and D (Griddings and Lewis) which are German companies, so does that make the Griphen German growler ????????? lol



Few minor components does not change the origin of an aircraft. In case of LCA and Dhruv everything is foreigner.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Guys here we have few example of brain seizure symptoms. More will be generated by people like such.



ramu said:


> Who talked about SU-30 MKI pathological liar ? Refer to your own contradictory, confused statement.
> 
> And I second what Desiman said ... saves me some tying. It is waste replying to you anyway.





Mahakaya said:


> HAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!
> 
> HHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH!!
> 
> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS POST SIR JI!!
> 
> *@ GROWLER:* - HAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
> 
> 
> 
> YOU SHOULD  YOURSELF!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

desiman said:


> Common Growler even the famed Mig-21 isnt 100% Russian, where are you getting all this from ??????? The Su-30 is put together in Russia, the Sukhoi Corporation uses parts from even America in its planes now. Its easy to see that you have no Idea on how things are manufactured nowdays. All your arguments are totally flawed. If you want i can name exact part names and numbers of the products used in the Russian SU-30 that are not made in Russia. I would know buddy, i have worked with Sukhoi on a contract basis for 6 months. So be careful when you counter this one



desiman stop being a laughing stock. You are just being very desperate. Su-30 is RUssian all the way and i am not talking about "export" variants that russia does not even use. Mig-21 not 100% russian? what about 99%? 
Even after working for SU, you have very limited knowledge in this field.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Dhruv is still indigenous indian right? how many percent? 100? NO... 50? NO..... 25? NO.... 10? NO.... 5%? maybe.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ramu

Growler ... Is your crystal ball still working ?


----------



## ptldM3

Growler said:


> you are indeed being confused sell shocked what ever way you wanna portray yourself but the illustration of Gripen NG is a "EXPORT" variant for Brazil.
> *SU-30MK"I" is using mostly French and IAI systems *because it is specifically designed for indian requirements. However the Russian SU-30 in limited numbers are usuing all 100&#37; "RUSSIAN".
> 
> Learn and educate yourself before you portray yourself with lame punch lines and make a mockery out of yourself.



Wrong! The MKI is mostly made of Russian avionics closely followed by Israeli avionics, there is very little French, in fact there are more Indian avionics than French. Here is just some Indian systems:

The Hindu : Front Page : First home-built Sukhoi-30 MKI handed over to Air Force



> Though assembled mainly from the Russian-supplied knocked-down kit, the Su-30 MKI is *fitted with major Indian avionics such as mission computer, radar computer and radar warning system *developed by the Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE).
> 
> *Its communication system and Identify Friend or Foe (IFF) are from the HAL's Hyderabad Division*. Mr. Mohanti told reporters later that HAL was to produce 140 Su-30 MKIs for the Indian Air Force in four phases. While the aircraft building during the first three phases would be primarily out of the Russian kits, the indigenous component would progressively increase and the fourth phase would be out of raw material.


----------



## Koga Ryu

Growler said:


> Dhruv is still indigenous indian right? how many percent? 100? NO... 50? NO..... 25? NO.... 10? NO.... 5%? maybe.


.
-------------------------------
lol That shut Indian mouth

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ptldM3 said:


> Wrong! The MKI is mostly made of Russian avionics closely followed by Israeli avionics, there is very little French, in fact there are more Indian avionics than French. Here is just some Indian systems:
> 
> The Hindu : Front Page : First home-built Sukhoi-30 MKI handed over to Air Force



opps. i meant to say the foreigner input is mostly French and Isreali.
some indians are saying that some russian planes are using US parts? and that Mig-21 is not 100% russian? what do you say about that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ptldM3 said:


> Though assembled mainly from the Russian-supplied knocked-down kit, the Su-30 MKI is fitted with major Indian avionics such as mission computer, radar computer and radar warning system developed by the Defence Avionics Research Establishment (DARE).
> 
> Its communication system and Identify Friend or Foe (IFF) are from the HAL's Hyderabad Division. Mr. Mohanti told reporters later that HAL was to produce 140 Su-30 MKIs for the Indian Air Force in four phases. While the aircraft building during the first three phases would be primarily out of the Russian kits, the indigenous component would progressively increase and the fourth phase would be out of raw material.



So how indigenous are these indian systems? for instance the Dhruv is using Isreali/American mission computer which are assembled in india with a different name tag.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ramu said:


> Growler ... Is your crystal ball still working ?



is your brain still functional after all the indian ego busting facts? 
SO i guess you have learned Dhruv was not designed by india and has 95+% of foreigner input.


----------



## ptldM3

Growler said:


> opps. i meant to say the foreigner input is mostly French and Isreali.



Jammers and targeting pod are Israeli, there is still some confusion with who make the lcd's and HUD some say it's French but others say it's Israeli, the French contributed the Sigma-95 global possitioning system, the Rest of the avionics are Russian and Indian.



Growler said:


> some indians are saying that some russian planes are using US parts? and that Mig-21 is not 100&#37; russian? what do you say about that.



Russian aircraft don't use US avionics but i wouldn't be suprised if they import microprocessors or material from the US which would not be a big deal considering the US buys Russian engines to send it's satelites into space, regarding the Mig-21 it does use some Israeli avionics, the same avionics the Israelis use in their fighters.



Growler said:


> So how indigenous are these indian systems? for instance the Dhruv is using Isreali/American mission computer which are assembled in india with a different name tag.



I don't know the answer to that.


----------



## dekho

Well, I say _ki hum hindustani aam khane se matlab rakhte hain, naa ki is se ki aam kis ped ke hain.....bas aam meethe hone chahiye._

Also I like fruit salads....the best of every fruit is in there and it tastes great.

these two examples will make the points made by every indian on this thread obvious.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

dekho said:


> Also I like fruit salads....the best of every fruit is in there and it tastes great.
> these two examples will make the points made by every indian on this thread obvious.



I made a similar point when i said without foreigner help indian DRDO and HAL are nothing but subzi mehndi.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ptldM3 said:


> Russian aircraft don't use US avionics but i wouldn't be suprised if they import microprocessors or material from the US which would not be a big deal considering the US buys Russian engines to send it's satelites into space, regarding the Mig-21 it does use some Israeli avionics, the same avionics the Israelis use in their fighters.


US and Russia may exchange non military systems. 
Only *export *variants of russian planes are using some foreigner parts the point that i am trying to get through indian heads. 
Same with American planes.


----------



## dekho

> I made a similar point when i said without foreigner help indian DRDO and HAL are nothing but subzi mehndi.


in a sabji mandi you only purchase the fresh and most juicy vegetables which you pick from different vendors.

but at the end of the day you have to make the dish yourself...a dish that suits your diet and taste. You cannot eat hotel food forever, its expensive.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ramu

Growler said:


> Dhruv is still indigenous indian right? how many percent? 100? NO... 50? NO..... 25? NO.... 10? NO.... 5%? maybe.



Nice ms-paint work ... keep it up. You can come up with n things but can't deny India has managed to make Dhruv, and sell it too. We have the capacity to now move on to the next step and reducing the degree of foreign collaboration and consultation.


----------



## Kinetic

Growler said:


> opps. i meant to say the foreigner input is mostly French and Isreali.
> some indians are saying that some russian planes are using US parts? and that Mig-21 is not 100&#37; russian? what do you say about that.



LOL First you said that "SU-30MK"I" is using mostly French and IAI systems" but when given appropriate answers you ae running away!!! SU-30 MKI has more Indian and ussian systems than Israeli or French.


----------



## Kinetic

Growler said:


> Dhruv is still indigenous indian right? how many percent? 100? NO... 50? NO..... 25? NO.... 10? NO.... 5&#37;? maybe.



Funny!!!  Nice paint!!! But does not make the truth!! ALH had many European systems earlier but now most of the systems are Indian. Wake up from dreams and update yourself.



Growler said:


> I made a similar point when i said without foreigner help indian DRDO and HAL are nothing but subzi mehndi.



Dream onnnn....... Grapes are sour!!!


----------



## imran iqbal

Growler said:


> Yes your posts are stupid of highest order. let me elaborate. .



First you need to tone down your rhetoric and quit spewing your jealously here. No need to get worked up if you are not able to manufacture sweing machines and bicycle chains in words of AQ Khan.




Growler said:


> What do you mean? Are you trying to say why we only rely on foreigner helis and not build ours? buddy at the moment IAF highly relies on foreigner combat choppers and foreigner choppers will still remain to be the high tech product even in your forces.
> AH-1Z is what PA is asked for which is part of US arms package for Pakistan for 2014 which are more then capable enough to operate in any battle zone in pak indo context..



Its not Pak Indo conflict, throw your 2 bit mentality out of the window. Its Indo Pak conflict, you are not now or will be in future act as reference point.

Okay, which heli has Pak manufactured? As per you it must be walk in the park or piece of cake. Yeah we still depend on foreign manufacturers, so does PAPA China for WZ-10 but we are getting rid of that dependency. Its still not even 10 years since India became wealthy and directed funds on R&D. That makes you pissed.

I don't know what AH-1Z is capable of the most but seems to me " Sanctions" by Uncle sam.




Growler said:


> Seriously are you that stupid? Are you trying to say if you build a cobra style chopper at home you will save 75% of the price? This is the most ridiculous S1ttt i have ever heard today.



That's because you live on your dad's corrupt income and never stepped into an industry to break your sweat. Indian R&D, design using CAD/CAM and manufacturing cost would definately be lower than that of US for Cobra which evolved in 1975. Tech gets cheaper with time, wonder if this is most absurd comment you have ever heard.




Growler said:


> Just to add one thing in your limited small narrow minded world knowledge, China is under arms export ban by the west. exceptional case is Canada providing engines because which is not classified as war materials as the chopper engines could be used on civil choppers as well.



BS, WZ-10 or ALH or LCH main objective is to get lift and sustain payload. Accessories or missile sytems can be incorporated later. Arms act doesn't stop china to fly WZ-10 on foreign components under disguise of civilian aircraft. Reality is available for you to read on wiki.

LCA, Arjun, LCH, ALH, Agni, Bhramos, PSLV, GSLV, Insas, Prithwi, Akash, NAG, Helina etc etc.. man you Pakistani's have got long list to prove them failed project first and then as foreign R&D later. Delude yourself, Our ordinance factories aren't defaulting like yours.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IndianNuke

dekho said:


> in a sabji mandi you only purchase the fresh and most juicy vegetables which you pick from different vendors.
> 
> but at the end of the day you have to make the dish yourself...a dish that suits your diet and taste. You cannot eat hotel food forever, its expensive.



They don't know about expensive stuff. They get their stuff from foreign aid, Arab countries and China. Can't choose when getting free lunch. lolzz


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> desiman stop being a laughing stock. You are just being very desperate. Su-30 is RUssian all the way and i am not talking about "export" variants that russia does not even use. Mig-21 not 100% russian? what about 99%?
> Even after working for SU, you have very limited knowledge in this field.



    its no use arguing with you, i cant explain everything to you when you dont want to learn. Case Rested, continue living in your dream world.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Myth_buster_1

ramu said:


> Nice ms-paint work ... keep it up. You can come up with n things but can't deny India has managed to make Dhruv, and sell it too. We have the capacity to now move on to the next step and reducing the degree of foreign collaboration and consultation.



Keep being deluded, a trait that is found in every pathological liar indian. At the end of the day India is just assembling foreigner systems in india and giving them mythical hindu names giving fanboys like you an illusion that india produces almost everything on its own.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Kinetic said:


> LOL First you said that "SU-30MK"I" is using mostly French and IAI systems" but when given appropriate answers you ae running away!!! SU-30 MKI has more Indian and ussian systems than Israeli or French.



Running away? Look kid, i know more stuff about this subject then you do. Su-30 is basically a russian export product that has been exported much much more planes then they have domestically used. Su-30 is modified with foreigner systems according to costumers requirements. RUSSIAN domestic version of Su-30 do not use any forigner parts at all. 
And then as for MKI using mostly "indigenous" indian systems is merely a myth for indians who are always brought up in a mythical society. Now i can understand the delusional here.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Kinetic said:


> Funny!!!  Nice paint!!! But does not make the truth!! ALH had many European systems earlier but now most of the systems are Indian. Wake up from dreams and update yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> Dream onnnn....... Grapes are sour!!!





Are you here to be the laughing stock with ridiculous claims? 

yep dream on kid. Before they were integrating european R&D systems directly from the market and now they are only assembling european technology in india with a mythical indian name to give deluded indians like you an illusion that these products are "indigenous" indian.


----------



## desiman

Growler said:


> Running away? Look kid, i know more stuff about this subject then you do. Su-30 is basically a russian export product that has been exported much much more planes then they have domestically used. Su-30 is modified with foreigner systems according to costumers requirements. RUSSIAN domestic version of Su-30 do not use any forigner parts at all.
> And then as for MKI using mostly "indigenous" indian systems is merely a myth for indians who are always brought up in a mythical society. Now i can understand the delusional here.



r u sure that the Russian Domestic version does not use any foreign parts ???????? R u really really sure lol what did i tell you before, be very sure before you comment on Sukhoi products. Now prove this to me that there are no foreign parts on the plane. Then will show you something. Your turn, lets see what you got.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## KS

Growler said:


> I made a similar point when i said without foreigner help indian DRDO and HAL are nothing but subzi mehndi.



hahaa atleast we have two good subzi-mehndi s in India...Do u have 1 in Pakistan..?


----------



## syntax_error

Growler said:


> Running away? Look kid, i know more stuff about this subject then you do. Su-30 is basically a russian export product that has been exported much much more planes then they have domestically used. Su-30 is modified with foreigner systems according to costumers requirements. RUSSIAN domestic version of Su-30 do not use any forigner parts at all.
> And then as for MKI using mostly "indigenous" indian systems is merely a myth for indians who are always brought up in a mythical society. Now i can understand the delusional here.



Agreed to what you say bout the Russian export model for SU-30's but in India's case the subsystems which can be foreign consist of a lot of indigenous components.Also if all Indian defence development products are assembly jobs well im not gonna argue bcoz one post is not gonna change ur point of view but all ill say is personally im happy as long as we can build (assemble accordind to u) as many as we want and whenever we want break them apart when we want and gift them to sum1 else when we want and not wait for sum1's approval for doing a maybe simple "lube change".
Also one more point your reference to Indians being brought up in a mythological society i hope the word has been used in a random manner without and deeper context because i do like your technical posts specially on one thread about the NAVY and would not like to see a senior member bring things,, which should not be brought into a technical thread 
Regards

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

IndianNuke said:


> They don't know about expensive stuff. They get their stuff from foreign aid, Arab countries and China. Can't choose when getting free lunch. lolzz



Indian NUKE is not even indian technology. lol

Want me to prove it? or are you just too deluded. lol 

I will open a new thread with a non pakistani sources that Indian nukes test were dud and the technology were obtained from russia. lol 

btw India the largest slum place in the world. India receives more foreigner aid then pakistan.


----------



## Myth_buster_1

desiman said:


> r u sure that the Russian Domestic version does not use any foreign parts ???????? R u really really sure lol what did i tell you before, be very sure before you comment on Sukhoi products. Now prove this to me that there are no foreign parts on the plane. Then will show you something. Your turn, lets see what you got.



Does it still change the fact Dhruv is all made by foreigners? lol


----------



## IndianNuke

Growler said:


> Indian NUKE is not even indian technology. lol
> 
> Want me to prove it? or are you just too deluded. lol
> 
> I will open a new thread with a non pakistani sources that Indian nukes test were dud and the technology were obtained from russia. lol
> 
> btw India the largest slum place in the world. India receives more foreigner aid then pakistan.



Yes please do. I am all ears. And if Indian nukes were dud pakistan would have open full scale war during Kargil and knowing that since indian nukes are dud they can fire all the nuke towards India once India started to ram pakistan's a** in conventional war. Since we all know what did happened so save your efforts for something more concrete. You don't know more than Pak armed forces and ISI. 

Since one cannot make any sort of complex systems on aids and money generated by terrorists from drugs so don't even try. 

Now your real competition is with Iran as a leader in military technology in muslim world. They way they are catching up and pakistan having free fall .. soon it gonna happen. However need not worry we got a largest slum in world and you guys perfectly blend in there so accommodation sorted, also large foreign aid so food sorted. Again free lunch .. lucky you


----------



## Myth_buster_1

IndianNuke said:


> Yes please do. I am all ears. And if Indian nukes were dud pakistan would have open full scale war during Kargil and knowing that since indian nukes are dud they can fire all the nuke towards India once India started to ram pakistan's a** in conventional war. Since we all know what did happened so save your efforts for something more concrete. You don't know more than Pak armed forces and ISI.
> 
> Since one cannot make any sort of complex systems on aids and money generated by terrorists from drugs so don't even try.
> 
> Now your real competition is with Iran as a leader in military technology in muslim world. They way they are catching up and pakistan having free fall .. soon it gonna happen. However need not worry we got a largest slum in world and you guys perfectly blend in there so accommodation sorted, also large foreign aid so food sorted. Again free lunch .. lucky you



This is going off topic. I will open a new thread which will expose indian nuclear technology with non pakistani sources.


----------



## Justin Joseph

Growler said:


> a trait that is found in every pathological liar indian. giving them mythical hindu names



No need to show your frustration and using racist remarks.

Why bring religion into everything?????

BTW, this is a thread about attack helicopters

*And i'm breaking your myth by giving you example from this same thread that Indian Attack Helicopter is Mi-35 "Akbar".

Is Akbar a Hindu name??????????*

Go and rant somewhere else.

thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Justin Joseph

Growler said:


> btw India the largest slum place in the world. India receives more foreigner aid then pakistan.



what it has to do with the topic?????

BTW, the largest slum in Asia is in Karachi Pakistan, 

What type of citizen ur u don't know about ur own proud possession????????

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IceCold

desiman said:


> r u sure that the Russian Domestic version does not use any *foreign parts *???????? R u really really sure lol what did i tell you before, be very sure before you comment on Sukhoi products. Now prove this to me that there are no foreign parts on the plane. Then will show you something. Your turn, lets see what you got.



Define parts Desiman? You know In India case (not including the minor parts for now) every major part i.e engine, radar, even the design itself is foreign made, can you say the same about Russian versions even if we take domestic SU-30 for an example?


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Justin Joseph said:


> what it has to do with the topic?????
> 
> BTW, the largest slum in Asia is in Karachi Pakistan,
> 
> What type of citizen ur u don't know about ur own proud possession????????



And what does this has to do with the topic? why bring up the issue when you think its off topic? 

btw 700 million indians live on a dollar a day. you know how many houndered million live in slums in india? 



> The number of people living in slums in India has more than doubled in the past two decades and now exceeds the entire population of Britain, the Indian Government has announced


----------



## deepakclaw

ATTACK HELICOPTER--------COBRA-----------DHURV---------FOREGINERS----------MIG 21-------SU-30--------HUNDU NAMES-------------AND NOW --SLUM.............I THINK THE DISCUSSION IS KIND OF OFF TRACK GUYS.


----------



## sunakaffck

sometimes i really get frustrated by the comments written from both sides come on guy we are comparing our attack helos like we are the supreme users in attack helos league. come on guys india has about 30 to 40 old mi 35 later upgraded and pakistan has about 20 AH-1F which were used by usa in the vietnam conflict then handed over to pakistan . stop fighting like 13 year olds


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Pakistan currently has 54(all upgraded) plus cobras and 24 plus in spares, then we have dozen or 2 fennecs, armed bells etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gowthamraj

finally growler run away


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

gowthamraj said:


> finally growler run away



Dont worry hes only offline... why u asking for him?
Do u need another factual embarassment?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Indiarox

deepakclaw said:


> ATTACK HELICOPTER--------COBRA-----------DHURV---------FOREGINERS----------MIG 21-------SU-30--------HUNDU NAMES-------------AND NOW --SLUM.............I THINK THE DISCUSSION IS KIND OF OFF TRACK GUYS.


It never was on track in the first place


----------



## iron_man

pakistan has any helicopter?


----------



## WAQAS119

iron_man said:


> pakistan has any helicopter?


----------



## nForce

Has Pakistan ever considered the Chinese WZ-10?? 
Pakistan is fighting the taliban in the North where they need good attack helicopters..The Cobras are good,but they are age old AH-1 as far as I know,not the the AH-1Z Super Cobra??An upgrade to AH-1Z or some other better option will be good for the army(correct me if I am wrong,its Pak Army which operates the helis isnt it??).


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

nForce said:


> Has Pakistan ever considered the Chinese WZ-10??
> Pakistan is fighting the taliban in the North where they need good attack helicopters..The Cobras are good,but they are age old AH-1 as far as I know,not the the AH-1Z Super Cobra??An upgrade to AH-1Z or some other better option will be good for the army(correct me if I am wrong,its Pak Army which operates the helis isnt it??).



No we r evaluating T-129 and US has assured us the super cobras.
And no our cobras arent AH-1.
They are AH-1S and AH-1F and all have been upgraded on cost of millions of $$

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thunder rules

iron_man said:


> pakistan has any helicopter?




what a ignorant creature u are from india

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Karakoram8 Eagle

REALLY.....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## Karakoram8 Eagle

gowthamraj said:


> finally growler run away



Do u want more embaressment??huh 
Dnt talk like that??


----------



## Nav

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> No we r evaluating T-129 and US has assured us the super cobras.
> And no our cobras arent AH-1.
> They are AH-1S and AH-1F and all have been upgraded on cost of millions of $$



T-129 was just a prototype. Which crashed after 1st successful flight. So please tell me how pak evaluating ATAK ?


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Navkhan said:


> T-129 was just a prototype. Which crashed after 1st successful flight. So please tell me how pak evaluating ATAK ?



There are many threads running with authentic news and sources.


----------



## Nav

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> There are many threads running with authentic news and sources.



can u please post a link to that post which allobrates how pak is evaluvating Atak. Manana


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Navkhan said:


> can u please post a link to that post which allobrates how pak is evaluvating Atak. Manana



http://www.defence.pk/forums/land-f...tack-helicopter-being-eveluated-pakistan.html


----------



## khurasaan1

i guess everybody is having a fun here.....


----------



## Tshering22

What's the point of such match-ups? It all leads to flame wars from both ends. It is not like Mi-35s would be engaging Cobras in dogfights .


----------



## Super Falcon

well india will soon get apaches or MI 26 havoc no match cobra will be against them but they will be vlaunerable to RBS 70


----------



## zombieland

This MI-35 helicopter looks very heavy ... which would mean lack of agility and therefore prone to hand held missiles like Stingers ... 

we did down a couple of them right in 1999 ... right???


----------



## brahmastra

^^ wrong.....


----------



## ares

zombieland said:


> This MI-35 helicopter looks very heavy ... which would mean lack of agility and therefore prone to hand held missiles like Stingers ...
> 
> we did down a couple of them right in 1999 ... right???



No you din't ..you downed a MI-17 ..that too after it had dogged 3 stingers ..as it did not have Chaff and flare dispenser.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

ares said:


> No you din't ..you downed a MI-17 ..that too after it had dogged 3 stingers ..as it did not have Chaff and flare dispenser.



And 2 jets.

Currently e have 54+ cobras,more than 2 dozen fennecs and accordin to pdf reporter 26 more will be recieved till 2013.........while T-129 is under evaluation n super cobras r promised by us.


----------



## ares

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> And 2 jets.



One Mig-21..the other Mig-27 had an engine stall.


----------



## Srinivas

Mi-35 Hind is a flying tank with deadly ammo. When it comes to attack helis Mi-35 rules all of then.
Design wise Mi-35 is the sexiest bird ever designed and the sole look of it will terrify the enemy.


----------



## Manticore

i think cobras will attack and hide quickly under the radar --- the hind can take a lot of punishement --- 

our cobras being upgraded to what standard?

total number of cobras 50+ or 70+ ?


----------



## Lord Of Gondor

@Antibody-I think that the Hinds will be replaced by the longbows and add to this,the LCH which will receive IOC in 2013 and the numbers of this Helicopter Gunship will be over a 100..............


----------



## Areesh

ares said:


> One Mig-21..the other Mig-27 had an engine stall.


 
PA claims both kills and I agree with them.


----------



## Stealth_fighter

cool picture of t-129


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

ANTIBODY said:


> i think cobras will attack and hide quickly under the radar --- the hind can take a lot of punishement ---
> 
> our cobras being upgraded to what standard?
> 
> total number of cobras 50+ or 70+ ?


 
We have around 54-56+ cobras and more than 2-3 dozen fennec assault helicopters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xMustiiej70

1. longbows
2. super cobras.

battle proven.
and beasts.
all others.. bullshit.. these russian helis are just crap to be honest.
they need agility and techs.
russian products are always.. get in,start it and spam fire the enemy.
tanks,airplanes,helis,missiles.

for pakistan... wait for t-129?
the specs of t-129 looks better then latest longbows.
and its model design is based on a129 which also have some proven hours and battles(correct if battle is wrong).
then its a bye bye for apaches...

these mi-helis and hind helis are good helis.. produced and used ALOT. but are they that good? or do you need to outnumber the opponent to be good?
if you look apache.. its a fat heli but aigan.. easier to hit.
cobra.. super cobra.. i would put this heli on 1.


----------



## Stealth_fighter

which one will get pak army?AH-1W or AH-1Z?


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Stealth_fighter said:


> which one will get pak army?AH-1W or AH-1Z?


 
We have AH-1Fs... Usman shabir of pak def reported tht P.A had order more than a dozen vipers tht will be delivered till 2013........ Now accordint to P.M we will get T-129 with co production(i heard him on PTV during his visit to Turkiye).... And Super cobras r assured by US after 2014.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pak_Sher

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> We have AH-1Fs... Usman shabir of pak def reported tht P.A had order more than a dozen vipers tht will be delivered till 2013........ Now accordint to P.M we will get T-129 with co production(i heard him on PTV during his visit to Turkiye).... And Super cobras r assured by US after 2014.


 
Super Cobras do not have a delivery date and US has to meet the demand of the USMC (United States Marine Corps) before exporting any birds like the Super Cobras. Super Cobras may not be available until 2015-2017. Pakistan should look for alternatives for the short and medium term woth TOT and local assembly and production.


----------



## TOPGUN

With the current bs going on with US & Pakistan wit davis issue & all who knows if we will get the super cobras !


----------



## Luftwaffe

Try to research...and stick to what you say first apache and super cobra are beasts rest crap, now you take t-129 better than longbow? whatup brotha?


----------



## Black Widow

PLAextream said:


> noticeplz ignore my spell ,as my browser don't support spellcheck).
> 
> i dont know why the hell cobra has only 2 roter blades where basic physics tells that more the blades,more the lift ,less the noise(my theory),may be super cobra has 4roter blades?.
> long time ago i got my hands into a book titled "the bear trap"(jung publications) by "Usuf akdin"former director of ISI(hope i spelled him rightly), where he told about the fear of hind choppers in the mind of afgan mujahids as in the start of its introduction in afganistan it was almost invinsible to ground fire by rebels due to its heavely armored belly ,but situation turned dramatically after arrival of american stinger SAM's that forced soviet helos to fly out of range of stinger as much as possible & also forced soviet designer to further do some modification to hind's exaust's to reduce heat signature.
> It is also stated in that book that Pakistan sucessfully got 1 hind (I dont exectly rember if it was a hind or some mig ) by getting a afgan pilot to ditch there soviet handler & land it into pakistan ,later it was transfered to U.S to analyze that beast.
> that book was fun to read & get an over view of afgan war,american involvement,ISI's role,Soviet counter measures etc.......


 
you are completely right, hind was messenger of death for Talibans before they got Stingers. I would like to mention one thing, " Russian helped Vietnam against USA, and USA took the revenge in Afghanistan... 

USA still have the Hind (and German MiG29) in there inventory, they use to train their forces using this deadly machines...


----------



## xMustiiej70

Luftwaffe said:


> Try to research...and stick to what you say first apache and super cobra are beasts rest crap, now you take t-129 better than longbow? whatup brotha?


 
im saying on paper t-129 looks the best heli.
when its done and flying it will proof it.


----------



## Srinivas

No attack heli will match Mi-35 Hind in the indian armoury. This one is a flying tank with deadly weapons and payload.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xMustiiej70

sukhoi_30MKI said:


> No attack heli will match Mi-35 Hind in the indian armoury. This one is a flying tank with deadly weapons and payload.



thats where the russian and russian tech are based on..
firepower.. everything around it they dont have it


----------



## Lord Of Gondor

sukhoi_30MKI said:


> No attack heli will match Mi-35 Hind in the indian armoury. This one is a flying tank with deadly weapons and payload.


 
Wait for the Block-3 Apache's then!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## raveolution

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> We have around 54-56+ cobras and more than 2-3 dozen fennec assault helicopters.



You had 39 cobras originally out of which around 32 are currently servicable, some of which are of 1970 vintage, and no Fennec "Assault Helos". Please check this information on any medium and get your information right.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IamINDIA

this beast,once in service will surely have a profound effect....




[/IMG]


----------



## singhvivek73

Looks nice, I have kind of lost track of the discussion to the point that it seems everything Pak has or will have are no. 1 ! Is it possible to have decent discussion on strength/capabilities please?


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

raveolution said:


> You had 39 cobras originally out of which around 32 are currently servicable, some of which are of 1970 vintage, and no Fennec "Assault Helos". Please check this information on any medium and get your information right.


 
Wiki 
39 were in service 14 more were delivered in 2010... Pakistan had S models upgraded to F status.

A few pics of fennecs in service ....According to world airforces 50 fennecs (im correcting myself)are in service=













Armament

BGM-71 TOW -TOW-2 n maybe Baktar shikan
7 x 2.75in Forges de Zeebrugge or 12 x 68 mm Thales Brandt rockets 
20 mm Giat M621 cannon 20 mm cannon 
Fabrique Nationale de Herstal twin 7.62 mm or 12.7 mm machine gun pods 
..Various types of torpedoes. 



Im not sorry to burst ur bubble..... Get ur info correct............Thank u for ranting.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

The trials for 22 attack helicopters for India has finished recently. I think the Longbow will win..


----------



## Water Car Engineer

*Lockheed In Talks With India To Supply Missile Systems*



> BANGALORE -(Dow Jones)- Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) is in talks with the Indian government on selling it military equipment, including the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missile systems, as it seeks to benefit from the South Asian nation's efforts to modernize its armed forces.
> Lockheed Martin is among several global defense companies that are seeking to sell advance weapon systems, fighter jets and helicopters to India to capture a share of this lucrative market. Lockheed and peer Boeing Co. (BA) have pitched themselves against India's traditional weapons suppliers, Russia, and others such as France and Germany.
> The Indian federal government plans to allocate 1.47 trillion rupees ($32.5 billion) for the defense sector in the fiscal year through March 2011, up from INR1.42 trillion last year. The budget has nearly doubled from INR890 billion in the year ended March 2007.
> Lockheed Martin is in initial talks with the Indian government to sell the Javelin shoulder fire missile system to the Indian Army, Joe L. Garland, vice president for international business development, in charge of missiles and fire control at Lockheed Martin, told Dow Jones Newswires Tuesday.
> "The U.S. government has responded to the letter of request from India for the Javelin [missiles]," Garland said.
> He said the potential contract for supplying 8,000 missiles and 300 command launchers could be valued at more than $1 billion.
> Javelin was developed and produced for the U.S. Army and Marine Corps by a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and defense contractor Raytheon.
> Garland said Lockheed is also in talks with the Indian government to sell its Sniper advanced targeting pods for fixed-wing aircraft. The company said 500 pods are already being used by about a dozen countries and there are pending orders for 850 more.
> "All the contracts involve transfer of technology to India and we are willing to work with an Indian company for any contract," Garland said.
> *The U.S.-based company is also offering its Hellfire Romeo missile and Longbow radar as part of a bid by Boeing to sell 22 Apache AH-64 helicopters to India, Garland said.*
> Lockheed is among six companies that have been chosen to bid for an estimated $10 billion fighter-jet contract of the Indian Air Force, the largest in the world in the last 15 years.
> It has offered the F-16 fighter jet and Chicago-based Boeing has pitched the F/A-18 plane. The other planes that are in the reckoning are Russia's MiG-35, the Saab Gripen, Dassault's(AM.FR) Rafale, and the Eurofighter Typhoon, a joint venture between European Aeronautic Defense & Space Co. NV (EAD.FR), BAE Systems PLC (BA.LN) and Italy's Finmeccanica SpA (FNC.MI).
> Orville Prins, Lockheed's vice president, business development, in charge of India, said the company will deliver the remaining five Super Hercules C-130J military transport planes to India this year.
> Lockheed is implementing an order for supplying six Super Hercules planes in a deal worth about $1 billion. The company sealed the order in February 2008.
> The first plane was delivered to the Indian Air Force late last year and was inducted into the Indian Air Force on Feb. 7.



http://www.automatedtrader.net/real-time-dow-jones/45467/-lockheed-in-talks-with-india-to-supply-missile-systems


----------



## Capt.Popeye

Liquid said:


> The trials for 22 to attack helicopter for India has finished recently. I think the Longbow will win..


 
Am inclined to agree with you. Since the requirement is for the IAF, the choppers will see service in the Western theater; supplanting and then replacing the Mi-35s to support the Strike Corps. Will the Longbow version be selected, or will it be just the AH-64D does'nt seem to be clear to me yet.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Capt.Popeye said:


> Am inclined to agree with you. Since the requirement is for the IAF, the choppers will see service in the Western theater; supplanting and then replacing the Mi-35s to support the Strike Corps. Will the Longbow version be selected, or will it be just the AH-64D does'nt seem to be clear to me yet.


 
Its either that or 22 of these monsters....






I want the Apaches.. 







And slowly these will fill in..


----------



## mautkimaut

Liquid said:


> Its either that or 22 of these monsters....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I want the Apaches..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And slowly these will fill in..


 these look much badass than Apaches


SO may be the Apaches would act as the leaders of the act and LCH will form the attack group


----------



## umair86pk

LCH looks impressive


----------



## raveolution

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Wiki
> 39 were in service 14 more were delivered in 2010... Pakistan had S models upgraded to F status.
> 
> A few pics of fennecs in service ....According to world airforces 50 fennecs (im correcting myself)are in service=
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Armament
> 
> BGM-71 TOW -TOW-2 n maybe Baktar shikan
> 7 x 2.75in Forges de Zeebrugge or 12 x 68 mm Thales Brandt rockets
> 20 mm Giat M621 cannon 20 mm cannon
> Fabrique Nationale de Herstal twin 7.62 mm or 12.7 mm machine gun pods
> ..Various types of torpedoes.
> 
> 
> 
> Im not sorry to burst ur bubble..... Get ur info correct............Thank u for ranting.



The 32 Cobras include the number delivered in 2010. And from which angle do the Fennec's of the PA look like Assault Helos?? Show me a picture of loaded pylons and i may start to believe you. Until then.... peace!!


----------

