What's new

IDN TAKE: HAL LCH Vs Changhe Z-10

the iaf cheetal is a very light chopper the lama's/cheetah's and the alouette's are very light single engined choppers which made them perfect for mountain rescue. i dont see what your trying to get at here. i can take a hunch and say the engine on the cheetah is the same on the lch and the cheetah flew very high so that would mean the lch can fly high too. but the cheetah weighs a fraction of what the lch is
the lch max take of weight is 5800kg whilst the cheetah is 2300kg at max take of mass. see the difference?

I am not very conversant with the specifics of the engines and am a layman for all purposes in terms of engines ..... however, I meant the Cheetals (and not Cheetah) have 01 x TM-333 2M2 engines and the older versions of Dhruv had 02 x TM-333 2B2 since upgraded to Shakti . Would that be of any significant difference in terms of relative performances keeping in mind that Dhruv carries 03 x men excluding the pilots (with the TM-333 2B2 in its compliment at the same altitude there in comparison to the cheetals 01 and cheetah's nil?) if we extrapolate to LCH instead of Dhruv?

Both the Dhruv and Cheetals have been flying over 24000 ft (above Bana post) in Siachen Glacier with the Cheetals having vastly superior performance in comparison to the Cheetah (although the airframe is same; however the load capacity obviously is significantly improved as whereas a cheetah literally drops on to the helipad and off it while flying at that altitude with max 20 kgs as cargo weight; the cheetal in excess of 125 kgs for same location)

There was only one non-fatal loss of ALH in Siachen in 2013 on May 13 due to sudden opening up of a gigantic crevasse adjacent to helipad which caused development of a severe air pocket ... not very sure of the specifics what led to it hanging nose down 70 ft in the crevasse though. Both pilots were extracted safely with only one having a fracture of arm due to harness entanglement...

z-10 with the wz-9 has a ceiling of 6400 meters of 20997.38ft to be precise

Fair enough ... we have been moving our helis at around 24000 ft ... so they should easily reach that without any major issue except for requirement of check sorties in the areas they shall be flying in ....
 
.
I am not very conversant with the specifics of the engines and am a layman for all purposes in terms of engines ..... however, I meant the Cheetals (and not Cheetah) have 01 x TM-333 2M2 engines and the older versions of Dhruv had 02 x TM-333 2B2 since upgraded to Shakti . Would that be of any significant difference in terms of relative performances keeping in mind that Dhruv carries 03 x men excluding the pilots (with the TM-333 2B2 in its compliment at the same altitude there in comparison to the cheetals 01 and cheetah's nil?) if we extrapolate to LCH instead of Dhruv?

Both the Dhruv and Cheetals have been flying over 24000 ft (above Bana post) in Siachen Glacier with the Cheetals having vastly superior performance in comparison to the Cheetah (although the airframe is same; however the load capacity obviously is significantly improved as whereas a cheetah literally drops on to the helipad and off it while flying at that altitude with max 20 kgs as cargo weight; the cheetal in excess of 125 kgs for same location)

There was only one non-fatal loss of ALH in Siachen in 2013 on May 13 due to sudden opening up of a gigantic crevasse adjacent to helipad which caused development of a severe air pocket ... not very sure of the specifics what led to it hanging nose down 70 ft in the crevasse though. Both pilots were extracted safely with only one having a fracture of arm due to harness entanglement...



Fair enough ... we have been moving our helis at around 24000 ft ... so they should easily reach that without any major issue except for requirement of check sorties in the areas they shall be flying in ....
indeed my arguement is that yes your cheetahis very good at high altitude. i have not seen the dhruvs at 22000ft+ can you share pics. sites are saying its ceiling is 21000ft. i have not looked to much into the dhruv much as i feel theres no need to. actually since your a sane guy perhaps you can sort somthing out. why is it that dhruvs from ecuador crash left right and centre but other dhruvs dont? the turks and the maldives are not complaining some indian dhruvs have crashed too but i will gloss over that.

. the lch is an intresting bird as its made from the lessons of 1999 but what about its amour? its a light bird yes, so would that mean the pakistanis would make swiss cheese of it. they are testing the t129 which is a light chopper but heavier than the lch and they say its amour is no good so the lch must be even worse.
 
.
i have not seen the dhruvs at 22000ft+ can you share pics.

The pics won't be of use as there is no relative landmark to co-relate to.

A link for some idea

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rajiv

The height as given is less than 22000 ft for Bana post .. or the old Pakistani Qaid post. However, GPS readings have given slightly higher reading crossing 22000 ft. And the ACs that is ALH and Cheetals overfly this post easily (as do our older Mi-17s before 0730 hrs)


why is it that dhruvs from ecuador crash left right and centre but other dhruvs don't?

The beautiful chics in the pic???? Maybe????

Jokes apart, there were some initial teething problems with mk 1 but with mk 4 things are going along fine.

I am quote unsure why they keep crashing their aircrafts....

We lost majority of aircrafts in Mk 1 and high altitude trials due to invariable hydraulic failure .... thats what majority of reports have suggested, although some may be due to pilot error.


the lch is an intresting bird as its made from the lessons of 1999 but what about its amour? its a light bird yes, so would that mean the pakistanis would make swiss cheese of it. they are testing the t129 which is a light chopper but heavier than the lch and they say its amour is no good so the lch must be even worse.

Not very sure either ....

But with the aviation brigades coming up at every corps and if the development of ALH is an indicator, we can expect things to improve only

We have been using the weaponised version of Cheetah - the Lancer and it has been performing quite well ...

This is one area where IA is still evolving to fully integrate the air land battle doctrine ... LCH is an enigma yet for me too.
 
.
LCH_Vs_Z-10_Attack_Helicopters.jpg

India's Advanced Light Attack Helicopter & China's Z-10 Attack Helicopter

Both China and India, despite being the world’s largest military helicopter markets, did not have a suitable dedicated attack helicopter of their own in their inventory till very recently. In the early Seventies, while the Indian military had a limited number of Chetak helicopters armed with TOW anti-tank missiles, the Chinese, in their modernization thrust, had procured eight French Gazelle helicopters equipped with HOT anti–tank guided missiles. Over the years, the Chinese military has made deliberate and concerted efforts to acquire a state-of-the-art Attack Helicopter (AH) ex-import. Their efforts to acquire the Italian A129 Mangusta and subsequently the US AH-1 Huey Cobra came to naught, mainly due to the Tiananmen Square incident resulting in sanctions by the Western nations. Subsequent efforts by China to acquire the Russian MI-25/MI-35 AH from the erstwhile USSR also did not fructify. This led it, in 2003, to finally embark on a development project for a combat helicopter of its own. The result is the development of the new Chinese AH Z-10 which was displayed for the first time at China’s International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition in Zhuhai in 2012.

The Z-10 today is one of the newest, modern, state-of-the-art AH in the world. According to data available, China has around 60-70 operational Z-10 AHs with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), equipping about 3-4 aviation units. Reports suggest that the Z-10 is in the same class as the South African Rooivak and Italian Mangusta but falls much below the capabilities of the US Apache.

Chinese_WZ_10_Attack_Helicopter.jpg

Chinese Z-10 Attack Helicopter

The Indian military, on the other hand, was able to replace its old and vintage Chetak armed helicopters with the Russian MI-25/MI-35 AHs acquired in the late Eighties and early Nineties to equip two squadrons of the Indian Air Force (IAF). However, the Kargil conflict was the trigger for the development of a dedicated AH, capable of operating in the mountains, including in high altitudes.

The inability of the MI-25/MI-35 and even the armed MI-17 to operate at these heights resulted in a critical weapon system being left out of the battle, for which India paid a heavy price in terms of casualties. Accordingly, the government approved the development of the Light Combat Helicopter (LCH) by the state owned Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) in 2006. The LCH is presently undergoing development flights and is expected to enter service by the end of 2016. The LCH is stated to be a multi-role combat helicopter with the unique and distinct capability to operate in high altitudes – an advantage over other attack helicopters in the world today. Even the Z-10, though capable of operating in the mountains, has no stated capability of high altitude operations. Once operational, the LCH will form part of the Indian Air Force and Army inventories.

Design and Development

LCH_Attack_Helicopter.jpg


The LCH is a derivative of the HAL Dhruv, which is already in service with both the Army and Air Force; in fact, the weaponed version of the Dhruv christened ‘RUDRA’ has recently entered service with the Indian Army with the first unit under raising. While the Rudra basically is an armed helicopter/ gunship, the LCH is being developed as a dedicated attack helicopter, capable of operating at high altitudes – it will have the same weapon package as the Rudra. The LCH development being based on an existing helicopter is expected to greatly reduce project costs. As per HAL, the projected requirement for the Air Force and Army is 65 and 114 respectively.

China_Z10_Attack_Helicopter_1.jpg


The LCH has a maximum weight of 5.5 tonnes, and service ceiling of 6,500 m (21,300 ft). The design features a narrow fuselage with stealth profiling, armour protection and the helicopter will be equipped to conduct day-and-night combat operations. According to reports, the LCH will also feature a digital camouflage system. The LCH has a two-crew cockpit. It will be equipped with helmet-mounted targeting systems, electronic warfare systems and advanced weapon systems. The project involves the development of three Technology Demonstrators (TDs) of which two have already been developed and put through various tests related to flight performance, including high altitude operations and weapons integration. The third prototype of the LCH is about to be delivered and is expected to be different from the LCH-1 and LCH-2. The third prototype is said to be significantly lighter than its predecessors and is expected to be as real as the actual LCH.

LCH_Attack_Helicopter_1.jpg


The development of the Z-10 began in the mid-1990s. The prototype of the Z-10 made its maiden flight in 2003. The Z-10 helicopter has a standard gunship configuration with a narrow fuselage and stepped tandem cockpits. The gunner is seated at the front and the pilot at the rear. The fuselage has sloped sides to reduce radar cross-section. All vital areas are believed to be protected by armour plates. The Z-10 attack helicopter was developed by the Changhe Aircraft Industries Group (CHAIG) and China Helicopter Research and Development Institute (CHRDI) for the PLA. The helicopter is being manufactured by Changhe Aircraft Industries Corporation (CAIC). The Z-10 helicopter took to the skies for the first time in April 2003. The first helicopter was delivered to the PLA in 2009.

The Z-10 was displayed for the first time at the 9th China International Aviation and Aerospace Exhibition in Zhuhai in November 2012 –it weighs 5.5 tonnes and has a stated service ceiling of 6,000 m. While initially it was thought that this project had received extensive technical assistance from Eurocopter and Agusta, it was revealed during the 2012 China air show that the design and development of the Z-10 had been secretly assisted by the Russian Kamov helicopter design bureau with the help of a program known as Project 941. However, irrespective of the above, the reality is that the Z-10 is operational and in service in the PLA today, while the LCH is still in the developmental stage.

LCH Main Features

Like the ‘Dhruv’, the LCH too adheres to the following FAR/MILSPEC Standards:

US Army Aeronautical Design Standard-33E (ADS-33E)
Flaw-Tolerant Rotor System: FAR/JAR 29.571, AM 29-28
Crashworthy Fuel System: FAR/JAR 29.952, AM 29-35
Flaw-Tolerant Drive Train with Over Torque Certification: FAR/JAR 29.952, AM 29-28
Turbine Burst Protection: FAR/JAR 29.901, AM 29-36
Composite Spar Main & Tail Rotor Blades with Lightning Strike Protection: FAR/JAR 1309(h), AM 29-40
Engine Compartment Fire Protection: FAR/JAR 29.1193
Redundant Hydraulics & Flaw Tolerant Flight Controls: FAR/JAR 29.571, AM 29-28
Aircraft-Wide Bird Strike Protection: FAR/JAR 29.631, AM 29-40
Crashworthiness Standard: NATO’s MIL-STD-1290
Crashworthy Seats Conforming to MIL-STD-1472B
Cockpit Instrumentation Lighting Conforming to MIL-STD-85762A
Avionics Databus: MIL-STD-1553B or ARINC-429
Autopilot Accuracy: MIL-F-9490D
The LCH's HOGE is estimated to be 3,500 metres, or 11,483 feet when it has an all-up weight of 5.5 tonnes
Embedded MIL-STD-188-141B ALE Link Protection
Embedded MIL-STD-188-110B data modem


Armaments and Weapons

LCH_Rocket_Trials.jpg

After completion of basic performance flight testing and outstation trials, LCH in March 2016 test fired Rockets (70 mm) from its prototype, TD-3 in weaponized configuration

Due to their modular design concept, both the LCH and Z-10 can be armed with a wide variety of weaponry. These could be in terms of machine-guns, cannons, rockets and missiles, both air-to-ground and air-to-air. Weapons of the Z-10 consist of the 14.5mm heavy machine-gun, 30-mm cannon, HJ-9/9A anti-tank guided missiles (comparable to the TOW-2A), newly developed HJ-10 anti-tank missiles (comparable to the AGM-114 Hellfire) and TY-90 air-to-air new engine with enhanced horse power is under development and will finally power the Z-10 to enable carriage of 16 missiles.

Power Plant

Turbomeca_Shakti_Engine.jpg

Turbomeca Shakti turboshaft used in the LCH

The LCH will be powered by two Turbomeca Shakti turbo shaft engines [1,430 shaft horse power (shp) each] driving a four-blade main rotor and four-blade tail rotor. The same engines are also fitted on the Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH) (Dhruv) and Rudra helicopters. In fact, the Shakti engine has already been tested for its performance in high altitude operations (the Shakti engine is being jointly developed by the French Turbomeca and HAL).

TURBOMECA-AVIC WZ-16 Turboshaft

On the other hand, numerous engines were used during the design and development stage of the Z-10, to include the Canadian Pratt & Whitney PT6C-67C, Russian Klimov VK-2500 from the Mi-17 and Ukrainian Motor-Sich TV3-117. However, with Pratt & Whitney coming under the adverse observation of US federal agencies regarding violation of the arms export control Act transfer regime, the Canadians withdrew from the project.

The Chinese thereafter, with Russian and Ukrainian help, managed to develop their own engine, the WZ-9. Two of these engines producing 1,350 shp each, presently power the Z-10 driving a five-blade main rotor and two-blade twin tail rotors. However, this engine has proved to be too weak for the 5.5 tonne helicopter. With the aid of the French manufacturer Turbomeca, a new engine has been developed recently and designated the WZ-16. The new engine, with enhanced horse power of 2.000, will allow carrying of 16 HJ-10 missiles compared to the 8 earlier.
Zavran, what's wrong dude ,, what you are comparing . Chinese Z10 way too advance and doesn't even fall Indian Helo category. Its insult of Z10.
 
.
The pics won't be of use as there is no relative landmark to co-relate to.

A link for some idea

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rajiv

The height as given is less than 22000 ft for Bana post .. or the old Pakistani Qaid post. However, GPS readings have given slightly higher reading crossing 22000 ft. And the ACs that is ALH and Cheetals overfly this post easily (as do our older Mi-17s before 0730 hrs)
thats in 1987, the dhruvs were not even there then. im asking for pics of the dhruv at 20000+ft


The beautiful chics in the pic???? Maybe????
im guessing you meant this pic
DhruvChopper-Ladies.jpg

Jokes apart, there were some initial teething problems with mk 1 but with mk 4 things are going along fine.

I am quote unsure why they keep crashing their aircrafts....

We lost majority of aircrafts in Mk 1 and high altitude trials due to invariable hydraulic failure .... thats what majority of reports have suggested, although some may be due to pilot error.
so they got mk1 which were crap and the turks and the other export clients got the mk2 and so on


Not very sure either ....

But with the aviation brigades coming up at every corps and if the development of ALH is an indicator, we can expect things to improve only

We have been using the weaponised version of Cheetah - the Lancer and it has been performing quite well ...

This is one area where IA is still evolving to fully integrate the air land battle doctrine ... LCH is an enigma yet for me too.
well its somthing to keep an eye out for remember manpads. the mil-35 can take heavy gun shots but i doubt the lch can take it.
an armed version of the cheetah would be good but i suspect it would be an armed with machine guns only
 
.
Zavran, what's wrong dude ,, what you are comparing . Chinese Z10 way too advance and doesn't even fall Indian Helo category. Its insult of Z10.
I am not comparing I just posted the article
 
. . .
If only looks were so important ....... And besides LCH is sleak than the Chinese one , between why is a Pakistani feels insulted?
Because Pakistani going to fly Z10 ....Do you think a smart looking guy like to face ugly lookin chubby women.....nnnaaa
 
.
Because Pakistani going to fly Z10 ....Do you think a smart looking guy like to face ugly lookin chubby women.....nnnaaa
I fail to understand ..... U are user not a manufacturer . What is the big insult in for u?
So your understanding is that LCH and Z10 ia gonna have Arieal dual ? Or are u saying since ( according to u ) LCH is ugly u will leave ur troops to LCH ?
Funny guy..
 
.
I fail to understand ..... U are user not a manufacturer . What is the big insult in for u?
So your understanding is that LCH and Z10 ia gonna have Arieal dual ? Or are u saying since ( according to u ) LCH is ugly u will leave ur troops to LCH ?
Funny guy..
Weapon bought or manufacture for dual not for decoration ....at any point of border skirmish ....its reality. Indian bought SU30 for decoration , Indian openly oppose PakUS F16 deal ...because Indian feel threaten of 8 very high F16. Which can destroy the whole Indian fleet in few minutes.....lollllll
 
.
In the words adapted of Jerry maguire.. " You lost me at IDN'
 
.
thats in 1987, the dhruvs were not even there then. im asking for pics of the dhruv at 20000+ft


LOL!!!

I know that, I have travelled in it quite often!!!!!!!!

I gave a reference of height of the post so you can extrapolate ... there is absolutely no way that a picture, if any, of ALH overflying that feature will come on net ...

I will see if something I can find ...


so they got mk1 which were crap and the turks and the other export clients got the mk2 and so on

Not crap, the Mk 1 had initial teething problem .. you will have to ask them why they keep crashing them ... ours worked fairly well



well its somthing to keep an eye out for remember manpads. the mil-35 can take heavy gun shots but i doubt the lch can take it.
an armed version of the cheetah would be good but i suspect it would be an armed with machine guns only

MANPADs in high altitude are a bane even for fighters ... so there is absolutely no contest on that! On the other hand, dual engines and the enhanced thermal bloom by counter measures in the low temp environs will definitely perform better in terms of confusing the IR seeker in high altitude

In Plains, it is anybody's guess. As a pilot you have to be lucky every time in a MANPAD environment but as an operator, you have to score only once!!!!
 
.
Weapon bought or manufacture for dual not for decoration ....at any point of border skirmish ....its reality. Indian bought SU30 for decoration , Indian openly oppose PakUS F16 deal ...because Indian feel threaten of 8 very high F16. Which can destroy the whole Indian fleet in few minutes.....lollllll
so you think LCH is fat and ugly good for us in a way :D
 
.
LOL!!!

I know that, I have travelled in it quite often!!!!!!!!

I gave a reference of height of the post so you can extrapolate ... there is absolutely no way that a picture, if any, of ALH overflying that feature will come on net ...

I will see if something I can find ...
so i shall await for the pics

Not crap, the Mk 1 had initial teething problem .. you will have to ask them why they keep crashing them ... ours worked fairly well
so does that mean i have to go all the way to india to ask? why dont you ask since you have been in one.


MANPADs in high altitude are a bane even for fighters ... so there is absolutely no contest on that! On the other hand, dual engines and the enhanced thermal bloom by counter measures in the low temp environs will definitely perform better in terms of confusing the IR seeker in high altitude

In Plains, it is anybody's guess. As a pilot you have to be lucky every time in a MANPAD environment but as an operator, you have to score only once!!!!
ahh yes a mig21 and 27 was brought down via manpad.
were these counter measures in place last time?
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom