HAL LCH| Updates and Discussions

[Vertiti Scrutator]

"recently Rudra is not very effective" - wow an armchair specialist who wasn't there is going to tell how effective a system is HAHAHAHA!!! ... all i said that frame is not located at that base hence the Mi35. is used. Only a few no. are inducted so far and all are in the western sector, not operating in Kashmir! .. So stop being an idiot and ask why not use them. Second it isn't the worst attack. Do loss of life is regrettable and wish that the outcome was better ! STILL NO aviation Assets were even close to in danger (of which were the main target of the attackers)

What are the earlier variants of the AH-1 called??? isn't almost the same frame as the viper? U need to put ur cone of visibility to your own test !? show us how can an EO mounted very High on nose of VIPER/COBRA!! when is point down over the barrel of the canon??? and behind??? from above the cannon? will your sketch shows us that?! u know how EO works or just assuming?... u are really a total Idiot! Airforce around the world uses drones and dedicated surveillance frames ... BUT na use attack copper!!! ... lol ... funny!.

Guerrilla warfare in Kashmir.... u really an idiot to use the rudra for scouting Thank God the IA is not U when they have other assets to do surveillance

Case and point

This variant can give FAR better field of view than ANY attack copper. The IA is not the US Army to shoot first, shoot some more and then ask questions!

Please do tell why have Kiowas with over the rotor EO pod at all, was in the inventory when the Apache can do all the work??? + i have given many other examples other copper with the EO pod mounted differently why is that so???

And you sketch !!... do Tell everyone here that is a Mountain a 2 dimension object? can you so-called cone of visibility also 100% cover the entire area? or it too would have to move to over the entire mountain to cover it sufficient!y??

The Rudra/ LCH primary role anti armour/ stike and will operate in pairs or more with other frames

You indeed are such a COMPLETE IDIOT to suggest that Rudra will need another helicopter alongside that will have its EO pod pointing downwards!! Why cannot Rudra have its own EO pod oriented that way??? Morons like you (having folded and strapped up one leg), huddle with another moron doing the same and collectively think you then have two legs to walk!!!
Do you even listen to your own self??? Perhaps you should and spare the rest of the world from your stinking breath!!

There were Cobras, then SuperCobras and then Vipers. For morons like you Su-27, Su-30, Su-35 are all the same!! That's right, details don't matter to you; you just like to fling your turds in all directions!!!

In all that incoherent mouth-frothing vituperation you still haven't mentioned how a downward pointing EO pod is detrimental to anything that Rudra/LCH will be tasked with. I am saying that with downward orientation it can do all it can do (with upward pointing orientation ) and MUCH MORE!!! Don't know what your issue is?? Other than some blind faith in something illogical!

In the 'mountain' sketch I provided, a downward pointing EO pod can easily rotate to scan the entire valley - bottom and the sides of the valley (the sketch shows a cross section of the valley - I understand that low IQ folks like you might need better visual aids but I don't have much time for morons like you). The Current Rudra/LCH will just fly over and not be able to see anything in the valley. Instead of hurling all those insults why don't you illustrate how Rudra/LCH will do the job?? Oh right, in your world there will be a separate helo with downward pointing EO, that will be flying alongside Rudra/LCH - but it would a complete sin to orient the pod that way on Rudra/LCH itself.
Can you categorically state that the design of the most-used, most-successful attack helicopters like Apache, Mi-35 etc are all wrong? They were all morons to orient it that way? Would you suggest that Apache, Mi-35, Viper etc should also redo their EO pod mounts to facilitate star gazing and selfie taking?

As regards your question about Kiowas, US Army always wanted a scouting helicopter that would hide below tree line but look over it. Kiowa was not introduced into service despite having Apache - you're completely wrong!! It was introduced in the 60s way before the Apaches. Eventually the Apaches also got their own mast mounted 'on looker' (the Longbow radar). Not sure what any of it has to do with restricting the Rudra/LCH pilot's view to the possible enemy targets below?? Apache Longbow has a mast mounted FCR, and also an EO pod that's pointed downwards!!

With Rudra/LCH, the enemy will simply have to hide behind a boulder or inside a ditch and the helo could approach it from miles away, fly over the target and miss seeing the target completely. The enemy can make use of this weakness immensely!!! It is complete nonsense that targets should always be acquired via drones or satellites. Attack helicopters actively seek out targets and attack.

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

First Not All Attack helicopters have the EO mounted the same

Case and point

(near the rotors)

Above the cannon

Kiowas above the rotors
Its all down to the user

Also, I was being conciliatory earlier and thought it was cute that you produced all these pictures of different helicopters. Now that I know that you're a confirmed moron, I might as well give you an education!!

The different 'placements' that you refer to in the attached pictures are not for EO pods. The stuff that you say are placed 'near the rotors' and 'above the rotors' are radars not EO pods. radars have been in existence for several decades, EO pods are of more recent introduction!! And the Agusta A129 helo that shows a FLIR pod above the gun does not rotate/scan in multiple planes!!! As such it does not matter where it gets placed.

But modern helos with newer EO pods, that can rotate in multiple planes, take full advantage of this flexibility and scan in all the directions that's possible (including below!!). Rudra/LCH has a most modern EO, but unfortunately it's not getting the full benefit out of it (because of stupid design).

So my advice to you is: think and understand stuff before you post them on these forums. Posting a tonne of random nonsense will only lower the collective knowledge!! I am new to this forum, but shudder to think what kind of nonsense you've been posting all along and ruining the learning process of other hapless souls here!!!

Also, nobody says 'copper' it's either heli, helo or chopper! Initially I thought it was a typo on your part, but the more I see you make that same moronic mistake I realized everything is really wrong in your top end!!

 

[GuardianRED]

You indeed are such a COMPLETE IDIOT to suggest that Rudra will need another helicopter alongside that will have its EO pod pointing downwards!! Why cannot Rudra have its own EO pod oriented that way??? Morons like you (having folded and strapped up one leg), huddle with another moron doing the same and collectively think you then have two legs to walk!!!
Do you even listen to your own self??? Perhaps you should and spare the rest of the world from your stinking breath!!

There were Cobras, then SuperCobras and then Vipers. For morons like you Su-27, Su-30, Su-35 are all the same!! That's right, details don't matter to you; you just like to fling your turds in all directions!!!

In all that incoherent mouth-frothing vituperation you still haven't mentioned how a downward pointing EO pod is detrimental to anything that Rudra/LCH will be tasked with. I am saying that with downward orientation it can do all it can do (with upward pointing orientation ) and MUCH MORE!!! Don't know what your issue is?? Other than some blind faith in something illogical!

In the 'mountain' sketch I provided, a downward pointing EO pod can easily rotate to scan the entire valley - bottom and the sides of the valley (the sketch shows a cross section of the valley - I understand that low IQ folks like you might need better visual aids but I don't have much time for morons like you). The Current Rudra/LCH will just fly over and not be able to see anything in the valley. Instead of hurling all those insults why don't you illustrate how Rudra/LCH will do the job?? Oh right, in your world there will be a separate helo with downward pointing EO, that will be flying alongside Rudra/LCH - but it would a complete sin to orient the pod that way on Rudra/LCH itself.
Can you categorically state that the design of the most-used, most-successful attack helicopters like Apache, Mi-35 etc are all wrong? They were all morons to orient it that way? Would you suggest that Apache, Mi-35, Viper etc should also redo their EO pod mounts to facilitate star gazing and selfie taking?

As regards your question about Kiowas, US Army always wanted a scouting helicopter that would hide below tree line but look over it. Kiowas was not introduced into service despite having Apache - you're completely wrong!! It was introduced in the 60s way before the Apaches. Eventually the Apaches also got their own mast mounted 'on looker' (the Longbow radar). Not sure what any of it has to do with restricting the Rudra/LCH pilot's view to the possible enemy targets below?? Apache Longbow has a mast mounted FCR, and also an EO pod that's pointed downwards!!

With Rudra/LCH, the enemy will simply have to hide behind a small boulder, inside a ditch and the helo could approach it from miles away, fly over the target and miss seeing the target completely. The enemy can make use of this weakness immensely!!! It is complete nonsense that targets should always be acquired via drones or satellites. Attack helicopters actively seek out targets and attack.

Lol... did u have too much to smoke ??? This is too funny !!!

Certaiin Standard SOP for the Russians, Israel n I'm sure the USA , most attack coppers operate as a pair/Packs n there is plenty of literature to shows this. Approach to any target is always low fast and from a distance , not hover look down n fire .... Oh wait we will do what u want fly at 10,000 feet n fire .... Haha haha

U think the Apache n the mi35 are the only attack copper in the world? What abt the tiger n the mangusta ?? Both have the EO above the cannon ,heck some variants even have it on the mast . Oh wait they can't be used for this because its guerrilla warfare ..lol... So they stay at home?? ... Lololol ... (French have been using their tigers in shad) Oh genius, there R some variants of the mi35 with fix cannons, how is it to hit any target below it ...lol..

Cobra, sea cobra, super cobra n viper ... All them have their EO is the same damn location, though their optics R the different , their field of view remains the same . Using ur stupid example , the su27, su30, su35 they almost share the same design/frame, the location of the FLIR is the same DAMN location .

Coming to ur joke of a 2d mountain . N the rotating EO turret , can it still cover the mountain 360deg 100% coverage ??? .... lol ... Or they would till have to fly around the mountain??? , n wouldnt the enemy cover themselves the same way u mentioned or this is some Houdini EO shit that pass throught all the boulder/ forest cover ...lol ... To add to this how the fsck would the enemy know which type of copper it is from one side of the 2d mountain n they R on the other side , they would still hide immediately no matter which frame it is??? ....lololol

Thank God the IA isnt with ur genius brains , where only u will use an attack copper in a mountainess area for surveillance ...loll.. When u have better suited n dedicated platforms. If u had said desert/ large open area , sure attack coppers can do the job ... But not mountains like ur 2d ...haha haha ... Funny

U need u get it through ur thick uneducated skull that any mission depends on the targets, terrain n opposition weaponry ie heavy MG /SAM, based on which the plan is made with assets best suited for this mission. Not gun ho send in the attack coper lol...

Also, I was being conciliatory earlier and thought it was cute that you produced all these pictures of different helicopters. Now that I know that you're a confirmed moron, I might as well give you an education!!

The different 'placements' that you refer to in the attached pictures are not for EO pods. The stuff that you say are placed 'near the rotors' and 'above the rotors' are radars not EO pods. radars have been in existence for several decades, EO pods are of more recent introduction!! And the Agusta A129 helo that shows a FLIR pod above the gun does not rotate/scan in multiple planes!!! As such it does not matter where it gets placed.

But modern helos with newer EO pods, that can rotate in multiple planes, take full advantage of this flexibility and scan in all the directions that's possible (including below!!). Rudra/LCH has a most modern EO, but unfortunately it's not getting the full benefit out of it (because of stupid design).

So my advice to you is: think and understand stuff before you post them on these forums. Posting a tonne of random nonsense will only lower the collective knowledge!! I am new to this forum, but shudder to think what kind of nonsense you've been posting all along and ruining the learning process of other hapless souls here!!!

Also, nobody says 'copper' it's either heli, helo or chopper! Initially I thought it was a typo on your part, but the more I see you make that same moronic mistake I realized everything is really wrong in your top end!!

LOL ... NOT EO .... hahahaha !!!!

What the F is this then?? LOL.. this is the german variant of the tiger where they wanted the EO pod mount on the Mast . while the french preferred in below .... go home pal!

Another Education pal with NOT EO ...lol

French helicopter Tiger smashing Talibans!

As u can see BOSS. one doesn't have the EO looking down to hit the target!

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

Lol... did u have too much to smoke ??? This is too funny !!!

Certaiin Standard SOP for the Russians, Israel n I'm sure the USA , most attack coppers operate as a pair/Packs n there is plenty of literature to shows this. Approach to any target is always low fast and from a distance , not hover look down n fire .... Oh wait we will do what u want fly at 10,000 feet n fire .... Haha haha

U think the Apache n the mi35 are the only attack copper in the world? What abt the tiger n the mangusta ?? Both have the EO above the cannon ,heck some variants even have it on the mast . Oh wait they can't be used for this because its guerrilla warfare ..lol... So they stay at home?? ... Lololol ... (French have been using their tigers in shad) Oh genius, there R some variants of the mi35 with fix cannons, how is it to hit any target below it ...lol..

Cobra, sea cobra, super cobra n viper ... All them have their EO is the same damn location, though their optics R the different , their field of view remains the same . Using ur stupid example , the su27, su30, su35 they almost share the same design/frame, the location of the FLIR is the same DAMN location .

Coming to ur joke of a 2d mountain . N the rotating EO turret , can it still cover the mountain 360deg 100% coverage ??? .... lol ... Or they would till have to fly around the mountain??? , n wouldnt the enemy cover themselves the same way u mentioned or this is some Houdini EO shit that pass throught all the boulder/ forest cover ...lol ... To add to this how the fsck would the enemy know which type of copper it is from one side of the 2d mountain n they R on the other side , they would still hide immediately no matter which frame it is??? ....lololol

Thank God the IA isnt with ur genius brains , where only u will use an attack copper in a mountainess area for surveillance ...loll.. When u have better suited n dedicated platforms. If u had said desert/ large open area , sure attack coppers can do the job ... But not mountains like ur 2d ...haha haha ... Funny

U need u get it through ur thick uneducated skull that any mission depends on the targets, terrain n opposition weaponry ie heavy MG /SAM, based on which the plan is made with assets best suited for this mission. Not gun ho send in the attack coper lol...


LOL ... NOT EO .... hahahaha !!!!

What the F is this then?? LOL.. this is the german variant of the tiger where they wanted the EO pod mount on the Mast . while the french preferred in below .... go home pal!

Another Education pal with NOT EO ...lol

French helicopter Tiger smashing Talibans!

As u can see BOSS. one doesn't have the EO looking down to hit the target!

You indeed are a nutcase who cannot think, even if you have to protect yourself from repeated public humiliations. My issue was that an EO pod that has full rotational capability should be allowed to see in all directions!! The Germans are not idiots (like yourself), the EO pod in the picture CAN see in ALL directions. They weren't nut jobs like you to put an obstruction plate to block it from seeing below. Don't let those blades fool you, the systems are sophisticated to ignore the video frame where the blade temporarily swings by (even WWII planes could shoot bullets between the propeller blades) That SAGEM pod can be pointed below and backwards!!!!! Not to mention that it gives a 'heads up' view for the helo when hidden behind ridges and tree tops! I have no problem with this design!

Rudra/LCH gets no such benefit (of overhead lookup) and has squandered away the vast visibility that the CoMPASS pod offers by blocking the downward/backwards looking capability!!

You're forever spouting your verbal diarrhea but still haven't answered the simple question: What does Rudra/LCH lose by pointing downwards; I have given you a number of solid benefits for doing so, without losing any benefits of pointing upwards.

Please stop saying 'copper'. Actually, stop talking about helicopters in general. By now you already know that you've made a fool of yourself. Once you're in a hole, stop digging.

Peace out! Buddy!

Lol... did u have too much to smoke ??? This is too funny !!!

Certaiin Standard SOP for the Russians, Israel n I'm sure the USA , most attack coppers operate as a pair/Packs n there is plenty of literature to shows this. Approach to any target is always low fast and from a distance , not hover look down n fire .... Oh wait we will do what u want fly at 10,000 feet n fire .... Haha haha

U think the Apache n the mi35 are the only attack copper in the world? What abt the tiger n the mangusta ?? Both have the EO above the cannon ,heck some variants even have it on the mast . Oh wait they can't be used for this because its guerrilla warfare ..lol... So they stay at home?? ... Lololol ... (French have been using their tigers in shad) Oh genius, there R some variants of the mi35 with fix cannons, how is it to hit any target below it ...lol..

Cobra, sea cobra, super cobra n viper ... All them have their EO is the same damn location, though their optics R the different , their field of view remains the same . Using ur stupid example , the su27, su30, su35 they almost share the same design/frame, the location of the FLIR is the same DAMN location .

Coming to ur joke of a 2d mountain . N the rotating EO turret , can it still cover the mountain 360deg 100% coverage ??? .... lol ... Or they would till have to fly around the mountain??? , n wouldnt the enemy cover themselves the same way u mentioned or this is some Houdini EO shit that pass throught all the boulder/ forest cover ...lol ... To add to this how the fsck would the enemy know which type of copper it is from one side of the 2d mountain n they R on the other side , they would still hide immediately no matter which frame it is??? ....lololol

Thank God the IA isnt with ur genius brains , where only u will use an attack copper in a mountainess area for surveillance ...loll.. When u have better suited n dedicated platforms. If u had said desert/ large open area , sure attack coppers can do the job ... But not mountains like ur 2d ...haha haha ... Funny

U need u get it through ur thick uneducated skull that any mission depends on the targets, terrain n opposition weaponry ie heavy MG /SAM, based on which the plan is made with assets best suited for this mission. Not gun ho send in the attack coper lol...


LOL ... NOT EO .... hahahaha !!!!

What the F is this then?? LOL.. this is the german variant of the tiger where they wanted the EO pod mount on the Mast . while the french preferred in below .... go home pal!

Another Education pal with NOT EO ...lol

French helicopter Tiger smashing Talibans!

As u can see BOSS. one doesn't have the EO looking down to hit the target!

I understand your attack formation....you're absolutely right, this formation has 360 degree visibility and the forward movement looks very beautiful!!! One flying forward, other flying backwards and the third flying inverted sidewards!! BRAVO!!!!

Nice video! Thanks for sharing.

Not sure if your piddly brain picked up all the details from the video, but the helo didn't get all the targeting info from a drone/satellite and then just swoop over the mountain at 300 km/h while simultaneously raining bombs/bullets in 1 sec over the target area. The helos hovered over the terrain, scanned and picked up targets and then shot at them!!! At the time of firing bullets/rockets it always is forward looking. That ridge line is a perfect example of a helo like Rudra flying over it and not being able to see what lay 3m below the ridgeline on the other side (unless the entire helo was turned around!!!).

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

Anyone know the latest status on Helina?

 

[GuardianRED]

You indeed are a nutcase who cannot think, even if you have to protect yourself from repeated public humiliation. My issue was that an EO pod that has full rotational capability should be allowed to see in all directions!! The Germans are not idiots (like yourself), the EO pod in the picture CAN see in ALL directions. They weren't nut jobs like you to put an obstruction plate to block it from seeing below. Don't let those blades fool you, the systems are sophisticated to ignore the video frame where the blade temporarily swings by (even WWII planes could shoot bullets between the propeller blades) That SAGEM pod can be pointed below and backwards!!!!! Not to mention that it gives a 'heads up' view for the helo when hidden behind ridges and tree tops! I have no problem with this design!

Rudra/LCH gets no such benefit (of overhead lookup) and has squandered away the vast visibility that the CoMPASS pod offers by blocking the downward/backwards looking capability!!

You're forever spouting your verbal diarrhea but still haven't answered the simple question: What does Rudra/LCH lose by pointing downwards; I have given you a number of solid benefits for doing so, without losing any benefits of pointing upwards.

Please stop saying 'copper'. Actually, stop talking about helicopters in general. By now you already know that you've made a fool of yourself. Once you're in a hole, stop digging.

Peace out! Buddy!



I understand your attack formation....you're absolutely right, this formation has 360 degree visibility and the forward movement looks very beautiful!!! One flying forward, other flying backwards and the third flying inverted sidewards!! BRAVO!!!!

View attachment 372930



Nice video! Thanks for sharing.

Not sure if your piddly brain picked up all the details from the video, but the helo didn't get all the targeting info from a drone/satellite and then just swoop over the mountain at 300 km/h while simultaneously raining bombs/bullets in 1 sec over the target area. The helos hovered over the terrain, scanned and picked up targets and then shot at them!!! At the time of firing bullets/rockets it always is forward looking. That ridge line is a perfect example of a helo like Rudra flying over it and not being able to see what lay 3m below the ridgeline on the other side (unless the entire helo was turned around!!!).

Lol.... you're definitely supplying the Jokes, for the rest of us to laugh!!

Thank God the IA and the rest of the world when it comes to cHoppers is not the same as your NOT so gifted genius brains!

U need to make up your mind - first, they are NOT EO pods and NOW they are EO pods? pls for very one sake -make up your mind, why this changing the goal post every time!?

Now what u said "The helos hovered over the terrain, scanned and picked up targets and then shot at them!!! At the time of firing bullets/rockets it always is forward looking"

First, you will agree that the System on top of the cockpit of French army tiger is an EO pod yes or NO??
Hopefully, u said Yes, the EO on this cHopper can rotate and this can be clearly seen it in the video and helps in eliminating the Target (if you can sorry can't help your not so gifted genius)

So the cHopper happens to fly by and happened to locate them - What REALLY???? , why didn't (using your words) "The enemy will simply have to hide behind a boulder or inside a ditch and the helo could approach it from miles away, fly over the target and miss seeing the target completely"

The cHopper in this Video was lucky??!!! ...wouldn't the EO on top the cockpit be a hindrance because it can't look down??!!! ...lol

And where is the satellite surveillance you keep talking about ?? I surely didn't bring it up? ... wouldn't a simpler explanation be better??? like the tiger was directed to support ground forces in the area and were given coordinates/location of the enemy and then fired on that ridge? - See doesn't this sound better - "That how the rest of the world work - please do learn from it!"

Here is another video to help your small mind!

Please Note, the Armament for Rudra/LCH is almost identical to the Tiger in the video above. This will help you to increase your knowledge + gives you the type of role they will perform

Coming back to your old argument - the cHopper can't see behind, and yet both the apache and the VIPER can't do the same, (please stop with your 2D drawing it is embarrassing ) - clearly shows you are not an engineering or math student!

Finally, we all thankful (Again) that we all are not blessed with your NOT so Gifted genius and that the Rudra/LCH will play a role they are designed and built for and Seriously Don't need an armchair joker like you to say otherwise

Oh yes

Oh look this attack cHopper is very bad as it can't look down too! ... how sad!!!

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

Lol.... you're definitely supplying the Jokes, for the rest of us to laugh!!

Thank God the IA and the rest of the world when it comes to cHoppers is not the same as your NOT so gifted genius brains!

Dude!! I think I've started liking you - you actually took my advice and dropped the 'copper' word!!! I am so pleased with this improvement in you. The rest of your...whatever, well....we'll keep working on it. There's always hope

U need to make up your mind - first, they are NOT EO pods and NOW they are EO pods? pls for very one sake -make up your mind, why this changing the goal post every time!?

Not sure what this rambling is about. The three pictures you posted initially did not have an EO pod!! Kiowa and Tiger had radars and Agusta had a FLIR pod (that's not 360 deg rotatable). Then you posted a pic of Agusta - that did have an EO pod that was 360 deg flexibility - and the Germans did a good job of taking advantage of that; it can look in ALL directions. So, where's the problem?? Too much fine detail hurting your brain? That's right - for you cobra, supercobra, vipers are all the same!!!

Now what u said "The helos hovered over the terrain, scanned and picked up targets and then shot at them!!! At the time of firing bullets/rockets it always is forward looking"

First, you will agree that the System on top of the cockpit of French army tiger is an EO pod yes or NO??
Hopefully, u said Yes, the EO on this cHopper can rotate and this can be clearly seen it in the video and helps in eliminating the Target (if you can sorry can't help your not so gifted genius)

So the cHopper happens to fly by and happened to locate them - What REALLY???? , why didn't (using your words) "The enemy will simply have to hide behind a boulder or inside a ditch and the helo could approach it from miles away, fly over the target and miss seeing the target completely"

The cHopper in this Video was lucky??!!! ...wouldn't the EO on top the cockpit be a hindrance because it can't look down??!!! ...lol

More drunken rambling!! I never said that the EO on top is bad!! I explained in detail how the EO on top of the helo is able to see in ALL directions. This is a better design than under slung EO pod - as the helo can see over the ridge/tree line AND also see below/behind etc. Read my previous post again.

And where is the satellite surveillance you keep talking about ?? I surely didn't bring it up? ... wouldn't a simpler explanation be better??? like the tiger was directed to support ground forces in the area and were given coordinates/location of the enemy and then fired on that ridge? - See doesn't this sound better - "That how the rest of the world work - please do learn from it!"

I am glad you're saying that the attack helos have other tasks like supporting the ground troops and 'seeking' out ground targets!! And that requires hovering!! You're echoing what I had been saying all along. Seems like you're violently coming to an agreement. Again read my earlier posts! And read the dribble you wrote too that attack helos don't hover!!

Oh look this attack cHopper is very bad as it can't look down too! ... how sad!!!

Here's another example of how you don't THINK and PROCESS information; you're so comfortable with your verbal diarrhea!!! The T129 was not built as a new attack helicopter. They just took the old A129 Mangusta and replaced the FLIR pod with the latest version 360 deg rotatable EO pod!! The earlier FLIR pod wasn't rotatable in all directions (and hence could not look down/behind etc.) and as such the A129 hardware was built such that the FLIR pod rested right over the cannon's turret!!!. The Turks didn't do any major structural changes to the frame (even though they mounted the rotatable EO pod). So, they're losing out on the advantages that the EO pod offers!! But it's understandable because they're doing a retrofit!!! Why would a new design of Rudra/LCH emulate the bad example??
Why would you show all of these poor examples to argue a losing battle? There always will be bad examples - done for whatever constraints that they faced.
Now just because you exist, doesn't mean that everyone should use your existence as an excuse to become like you, right?. We all understand that some weird stuff in your past must have made you into this weird thing; there's no reason for anyone to emulate the bad example you are - just because you exist.

Kapisch?????

 

[Roybot]

Dude!! I think I've started liking you - you actually took my advice and dropped the 'copper' word!!! I am so pleased with this improvement in you. The rest of your...whatever, well....we'll keep working on it. There's always hope



Not sure what this rambling is about. The three pictures you posted initially did not have an EO pod!! Kiowa and Tiger had radars and Agusta had a FLIR pod (that's not 360 deg rotatable). Then you posted a pic of Agusta - that did have an EO pod that was 360 deg flexibility - and the Germans did a good job of taking advantage of that; it can look in ALL directions. So, where the problem?? Too much fine detail hurting your brain? That's right - for you cobra, supercobra, vipers are all the same!!!



More drunken rambling!! I never said that the EO on top is bad!! I explained in detail how the EO on top of the helo is able to see in ALL directions. This is a better design than under slung EO pod - as the helo can see over the ridge/tree line AND also see below/behind etc. Read my previous post again.


I am glad you're saying that the attack helos have other tasks like supporting the ground troops and 'seeking' out ground targets!! And that requires hovering!! You're echoing what I had been saying all along. Seems like you're violently coming to an agreement. Again read my earlier posts! And read the dribble you wrote too that attack helos don't hover!!



Here's another example of how you don't THINK and PROCESS information; you're so comfortable with your verbal diarrhea!!! The T129 was not built as a new attack helicopter. They just took the old A129 Mangusta and replaced the FLIR pod with the latest version 360 deg rotatable EO pod!! The earlier FLIR pod wasn't rotatable in all directions (and hence could not look down/behind etc.) and as such the A129 hardware was built such that the FLIR pod rested right over the cannon's turret!!!. The Turks didn't do any major structural changes to the frame (even though they mounted the rotatable EO pod). So, they're losing out on the advantages that the EO pod offers!! But it's understandable because they're doing a retrofit!!! Why would a new design of Rudra/LCH emulate the bad example??
Why would you show all of these poor examples to argue a losing battle? There always will be bad examples - done for whatever constraints that they faced.
Now just because you exist, doesn't mean that everyone should use your existence as an excuse to become like you, right?. We all understand that some weird stuff in your past must have made you into this weird thing; there's no reason for anyone to emulate the bad example you are - just because you exist.

Kapisch?????

How hard do you think it would be to change the position of the Compass EO pod, from above the chin to below the chin?

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

How hard do you think it would be to change the position of the Compass EO pod, from above the chin to below the chin?

(Even though I don't know the innards of the structural design) I seriously don't think it should be such a hard thing to do. Some structural changes will have to be made - but none should effect the overall design!
I feel that they took the easy way out from a design perspective. I am trying to understand too as to why they had to make such compromises. At one point I gave them the benefit of doubt, but then I hear the nonsense like the DRDO cheif admitting that there was 'lack of communication' between DRDO and the Army that Arjun Mk2 improvements (with additional mine ploughs etc) would add additional weight (of several tonnes) to the tank. I can't believe how IA didn't feel it would, and how DRDO (that was working on it for several years) didn't deem it fit to inform them early on. Given, this level of shit I have to doubt the (crapy) design decisions like the EO mount on Rudra/LCH had any sound reasoning.

 

[Roybot]

(Even though I don't know the innards of the structural design) I seriously don't think it should be such a hard thing to do. Some structural changes will have to be made - but none should effect the overall design!
I feel that they took the easy way out from a design perspective. I am trying to understand too as to why they had to make such compromises. At one point I gave them the benefit of doubt, but then I hear the nonsense like the DRDO cheif admitting that there was 'lack of communication' between DRDO and the Army that Arjun Mk2 improvements (with additional mine ploughs etc) would add additional weight (of several tonnes) to the tank. I can't believe how IA didn't feel it would, and how DRDO (that was working on it for several years) didn't deem it fit to inform them early on. Given, this level of shit I have to doubt the (crapy) design decisions like the EO mount on Rudra/LCH had any sound reasoning.

I am with you on this one. I don't buy this argument of one chopper for attack, and the other assisting it with recon and support, especially when you can get just one chopper to do both the jobs with some small changes in the design.

 

[GuardianRED]

Dude!! I think I've started liking you - you actually took my advice and dropped the 'copper' word!!! I am so pleased with this improvement in you. The rest of your...whatever, well....we'll keep working on it. There's always hope



Not sure what this rambling is about. The three pictures you posted initially did not have an EO pod!! Kiowa and Tiger had radars and Agusta had a FLIR pod (that's not 360 deg rotatable). Then you posted a pic of Agusta - that did have an EO pod that was 360 deg flexibility - and the Germans did a good job of taking advantage of that; it can look in ALL directions. So, where's the problem?? Too much fine detail hurting your brain? That's right - for you cobra, supercobra, vipers are all the same!!!



More drunken rambling!! I never said that the EO on top is bad!! I explained in detail how the EO on top of the helo is able to see in ALL directions. This is a better design than under slung EO pod - as the helo can see over the ridge/tree line AND also see below/behind etc. Read my previous post again.


I am glad you're saying that the attack helos have other tasks like supporting the ground troops and 'seeking' out ground targets!! And that requires hovering!! You're echoing what I had been saying all along. Seems like you're violently coming to an agreement. Again read my earlier posts! And read the dribble you wrote too that attack helos don't hover!!



Here's another example of how you don't THINK and PROCESS information; you're so comfortable with your verbal diarrhea!!! The T129 was not built as a new attack helicopter. They just took the old A129 Mangusta and replaced the FLIR pod with the latest version 360 deg rotatable EO pod!! The earlier FLIR pod wasn't rotatable in all directions (and hence could not look down/behind etc.) and as such the A129 hardware was built such that the FLIR pod rested right over the cannon's turret!!!. The Turks didn't do any major structural changes to the frame (even though they mounted the rotatable EO pod). So, they're losing out on the advantages that the EO pod offers!! But it's understandable because they're doing a retrofit!!! Why would a new design of Rudra/LCH emulate the bad example??
Why would you show all of these poor examples to argue a losing battle? There always will be bad examples - done for whatever constraints that they faced.
Now just because you exist, doesn't mean that everyone should use your existence as an excuse to become like you, right?. We all understand that some weird stuff in your past must have made you into this weird thing; there's no reason for anyone to emulate the bad example you are - just because you exist.

Kapisch?????

Wow changing the narrative ... what a dick move.... first hover isnt above the target but from the distant. never directly over the target

U need to read the stuff you wrote and again chopper look behind.... pal.... apart from the german , the viper and apache can't do the same .

Using your own words !! can the A129 look below? with you all your crazy argument and now you are ok with it !!! another DICK move!

The Compass on the rubra u do know it can rotate in alll direction and not fix one postion or are u that dumb?

T129 with a similar EO as the Rudra . can it look down!? can it look behind?

The BS you talk and say

(Even though I don't know the innards of the structural design) I seriously don't think it should be such a hard thing to do. Some structural changes will have to be made - but none should effect the overall design!
I feel that they took the easy way out from a design perspective. I am trying to understand too as to why they had to make such compromises. At one point I gave them the benefit of doubt, but then I hear the nonsense like the DRDO cheif admitting that there was 'lack of communication' between DRDO and the Army that Arjun Mk2 improvements (with additional mine ploughs etc) would add additional weight (of several tonnes) to the tank. I can't believe how IA didn't feel it would, and how DRDO (that was working on it for several years) didn't deem it fit to inform them early on. Given, this level of shit I have to doubt the (crapy) design decisions like the EO mount on Rudra/LCH had any sound reasoning.

Many Attack frame available that are combat proven say otherwise. Stop making a joke of yourself!

I am with you on this one. I don't buy this argument of one chopper for attack, and the other assisting it with recon and support, especially when you can get just one chopper to do both the jobs with some small changes in the design.

Plenty of literature - SOPs of airforces around the world and how they operate include IA air corp. No attack copper operate independently always as a team. Case and point Iron fist exercises of the IAF and their Mi35s

 

[Roybot]

Plenty of literature - SOPs of airforces around the world and how they operate include IA air corp. No attack copper operate independently always as a team. Case and point Iron fist exercises of the IAF and their Mi35s

SOPs change, and SOPs are made according to the resources that are available and not the other way round.

When you don't have a chopper which can do both the jobs you use two choppers in tandem, but if you can make a chopper which can do both the jobs, wouldn't you rather have that and change the SOP accordingly?

 

[GuardianRED]

SOPs change, and SOPs are made according to the resources that are available and not the other way round.

When you don't have a chopper which can do both the jobs you use two choppers in tandem, but if you can make a chopper which can do both the jobs, wouldn't you rather have that and change the SOP accordingly?

Above all, its all depend on the Mission objectives and yes the resources available and ALSO opposition the mission would likely be faced. It not as simple as that - reason can be from backup, to redundancy to Additional Fire support.

Do answer me to the case of the Atlantic incidence for the IAF, Why send 2 frames to intercept when one is enough??

Unless the mission parameters calls for a single frame - till then tried and tested SOPs will be followed

 

[Vertiti Scrutator]

You still haven't answered the question: What is the downside for flipping the EO pod orientation?? But you keep beating around the bush!!!

Using your own words !! can the A129 look below? with you all your crazy argument and now you are ok with it !!! another DICK move!

T129 with a similar EO as the Rudra . can it look down!? can it look behind?

Not sure how many times I have to explain about the T129 (that's essentially A129). A129 was not designed for a fully rotatable EO pod!!! T129 just replaced the FLIR pod on A129. What is so difficult to understand here?

The Compass on the rubra u do know it can rotate in alll direction and not fix one postion or are u that dumb?

Of course, the CoMPASS on Rudra can rotate fully - that's what I've been saying all along (you don't seem to have an understanding on what's being discussed), But what use is that if the view is obstructed?? That's like saying you have fully functional eyes, but will walk around wearing a blindfold all the time!! It's like buying a Ferrari and then locking up all the top gears and restricting yourself to driving only in the first gear all the time!!!

Plenty of literature - SOPs of airforces around the world and how they operate include IA air corp. No attack copper operate independently always as a team. Case and point Iron fist exercises of the IAF and their Mi35s

You keep talking about choppers (why're you back to 'coppers'??) operating as a 'team', what good is the 'team' if ALL have the same problem. How would a pair (or a trio) of Rudras/LCHs have better visibility unless they fly in the formation that I illustrated (so, you approve that image of 3 Rudras as a legitimate formation?). You seriously don't think that a team of LCHs will be accompanied by a dhruv with under slung EO pod, do you??

There's no point in arguing any further - you're just mouth-frothing nonsense. This is my last response to your posts! Adios!

 

[GuardianRED]

You still haven't answered the question: What is the downside for flipping the EO pod orientation?? But you keep beating around the bush!!!



Not sure how many times I have to explain about the T129 (that's essentially A129). A129 was not designed for a fully rotatable EO pod!!! T129 just replaced the FLIR pod on A129. What is so difficult to understand here?




Of course, the CoMPASS on Rudra can rotate fully - that's what I've been saying all along (you don't seem to have an understanding on what's being discussed), But what use is that if the view is obstructed?? That's like saying you have fully functional eyes, but will walk around wearing a blindfold all the time!! It's like buying a Ferrari and then locking up all the top gears and restricting yourself to driving only in the first gear all the time!!!



You keep talking about choppers (why're you back to 'coppers'??) operating as a 'team', what good is the 'team' if ALL have the same problem. How would a pair (or a trio) of Rudras/LCHs have better visibility unless they fly in the formation that I illustrated (so, you approve that image of 3 Rudras as a legitimate formation?). You seriously don't think that a team of LCHs will be accompanied by a dhruv with under slung EO pod, do you??

There's no point in arguing any further - you're just mouth-frothing nonsense. This is my last response to your posts! Adios!

Thank God the World doesn't operate with such as a Not so gifted genius as u !... plenty of combat proven ops with attack choppers with EO mounted differently

Thank GOD the SOPs of the IA are not operating the way u think !

Please do everyone a favor and DON'T BREED!

Good Day!