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

[Stag112]

No I read it ... however, sorry to bust your bubble a lot of indian threads or stories etc are BS just to show how mighty your armed forces are so things must be set straight if they are not true nor correct.

By making troll posts or by debunking the analyses on an attempted technical evaluation by pointing out the mistakes, wrong assumptions or methods used?

 

[Basel]

OP sharing his knowledge regarding both helo.. at least he is not making funny assumption like I am sure we might got secret induction programme.... secret weapon... if you don't have input here just read the thread like am doing... otherwise you are free to walkway... how come this thread is troll thread? because they are discussing something which you don't understand...

Is verses threads allowed on PDF???

Mister before poking your nose kindly try to understand what someone trying to say. And we don't claim super secret vedic weapons as Indians does, also we are not in superiority complex like most Indian on PDF are.

You are one of those who always support Indian troll poster, and non relevant comparison.

This tread is comparing Apples with Oranges, two machines built for totally primary role as per requirements.

 

[zebra7]

Is verses threads allowed on PDF???

Mister before poking your nose kindly try to understand what someone trying to say. And we don't claim super secret vedic weapons as Indians does, also we are not in superiority complex like most Indian on PDF are.

You are one of those who always support Indian troll poster, and non relevant comparison.

This tread is comparing Apples with Oranges, two machines built for totally primary role as per requirements.

Dear Basel Sir,
With due respect

1. If it would have been verses thread, than other factor such as weapons used, radar, armour, would have been considered. If you read the article, its only the aerodynamic characteristic is been considered and evaluated on the technical basis using Computational method to determine its performance at the high altitude for which LCH is been designed. To know whether it fulfills its role, the comparison has been made to judge whether LCH design justify its own existense, otherwise IA could have bought the helicopter which is already developed from other source. So how do you see its a A VS B. If you have

2. Z-10 is neither designed by Pakistan nor have any partnership with China on its R&D, so why is it provoking you and many Pakistani member is out of understanding.

3. Other than discussing the advantages of such characteristic under certain conditions and payload, ROH why should we argue on whether A will distroy B or B will A. The main point is the agility and the altitude which LCA can attain on the high himalayan region, which IA needed as per their requirement.

Thanks and regard

 

[Water Car Engineer]

LCH is India's first attempt at a dedicated attack helicopter platform, I dont think it'll be the world beater by any means, but it and Rudra does give India a capability which was given to a very few MIs.

 

[kṣamā]

2. Z-10 is neither designed by Pakistan nor have any partnership with China on its R&D, so why is it provoking you and many Pakistani member is out of understanding.

3. Other than discussing the advantages of such characteristic under certain conditions and payload, ROH why should we argue on whether A will distroy B or B will A. The main point is the agility and the altitude which LCA can attain on the high himalayan region, which IA needed as per their requirement.

Thanks and regard

Dude I appreciate your effort but at the end of the day you are still asking rhetoric questions.

A question to few knowledgeable members around here, will the performance parameters like ROC, VMAX, Max Ceiling etc increase by changing the rotor blade geometry (Like adding a wing tip) and rotor blade Materials (Like carbon laminates reinforced by titanium leading edges). Also with such remarkable high attitude performance can it have greater payload for CAS /Anti armor /anti infantary roles in planes?

 

[vsdave2302]

Check out my other thread started today on LCA preminary analysis based on fluid Mechanic software

Provide the link

Some fluid dynamic studies have really hurt Hyper charged Hollow chinese and some cher leaders. Now they are out to denounce the fact, Their doubled weigh low power Z 10 is still better than LCH. By chance if they face off in Himalayas, LCH shall fire from a great hight on Z 10 where it can not climb or reach.

 

[AugenBlick]

Dear Basel Sir,
With due respect

1. If it would have been verses thread, than other factor such as weapons used, radar, armour, would have been considered. If you read the article, its only the aerodynamic characteristic is been considered and evaluated on the technical basis using Computational method to determine its performance at the high altitude for which LCH is been designed. To know whether it fulfills its role, the comparison has been made to judge whether LCH design justify its own existense, otherwise IA could have bought the helicopter which is already developed from other source. So how do you see its a A VS B. If you have

2. Z-10 is neither designed by Pakistan nor have any partnership with China on its R&D, so why is it provoking you and many Pakistani member is out of understanding.

3. Other than discussing the advantages of such characteristic under certain conditions and payload, ROH why should we argue on whether A will distroy B or B will A. The main point is the agility and the altitude which LCA can attain on the high himalayan region, which IA needed as per their requirement.

Thanks and regard

Dear Rahul Gandhi,
1. Vedic Computational method is not considered.
2. China and Pak are brothers.. What Pak has China owns, what China has China owns.

3. Because DF21 will vaporize Indians before the helicopters face off.

I mean what did you expect. Now a days chinese posters try to shame India on "Hindutva" They can't even say it right and have the audacity to call india out. You think the 50cent trolls fed on "Chinese Nationalism" and "High IQ Hans" will ever accept that their Z10 is inferior. They will bend the laws of Math and assume 1>2 to put you down. I love your articles as I am in such a field myself but try not to waste your breath.

 

[black-hawk_101]

often get asked the question: “Is the Indian LCH better than the Chinese Z-10?” An attempt to answer such a question verbally is difficult. It is preferable that one sees the numbers themselves. The Z-10 is two times heavier than the LCH when carrying the same payload in weapons, fuel and crew. The Z-10’s empty weight is 5,540 kg and the LCH even in its current overweight mode is about 2,800-3,000 kg. And yet the Z-10 is powered by the same net total power as the LCH (~2,000 KW for the Z-10 versus ~1,700 KW for the LCH). That’s a nasty combination in terms of performance, both at sea-level and at high altitudes. The effect of additional weight versus power required is non-linear for rotary flying machines.

But just how bad is it really for the Z-10?

(L to R): The Indian HAL LCH, Chinese Changhe Z-10 and the Russian Mi-35 (in Indian colors)
To answer that question, I present here a comparison study. We will take the LCH and the Z-10 and put an identical payload of 500 kg on them. We will run both helicopters through a simulation model where we subject them to altitude variations and see how it affects their rate-of-climb capabilities while in hover, out of Ground Effect conditions. The rate-of-climb (ROC, measured here in meters/second) is a true measure of the maneuvering capability of an attack helicopter. Typically, a ROC of 0.5 m/sec is used to evaluate service ceiling conditions. A ROC of 2.5 m/sec is typically the bare minimum for combat conditions. For a helicopter in high mountains to be truly maneuverable, it may need somewhere in the range of 2.5 to 8 m/sec vertical ROC equivalent in power capacity. Of course, beyond a certain altitude, the helicopter may not be able to fly with the 500 kg payload, let alone providing additional power for high ROC. So we will also see where those limits are for the LCH and the Z-10.
The focus of this analysis is on a preliminary aerodynamic and propulsive standpoint. The analysis is done using simulation tools that integrate payload capacities and typical rate-of-climb requirements with a preliminary rotary aerodynamics model and a simple propulsion module. When coupled with an atmospheric simulator for the Himalayas, the performance of each helicopter type can be predicted and compared. Furthermore, the models allow for the performance analysis in Ground Effect conditions. The Ground Effect conditions are encountered when the helicopters are hovering very close to the ground and serves to work as a performance multiplier with regard to power needed in lifting a certain payload.
The models do not compensate for transmission limitations for the power, which means that the analysis is idealized wherein power generated is power available. This is, of course, not encountered in practice, but works well for high-altitude conditions where power available is almost always less than the transmission limits. At lower altitudes, the performance of the various designs must be assumed to be ideal, rather than restricted from transmission and structural limitations. For example, the maximum rate-of-climb (ROC) values obtained from this simulator for sea-level (SL) conditions will typically be higher than what is allowed by other limitations. However, such removal of limitations is required in order to compare the various contenders at the same performance benchmarks.
Data for this analysis is obtained from the manufacturers via open-sources. No proprietary information is shared here. Unless where cited, the analysis results are to be considered proprietary of the author. See remarks for details.
LCH versus the Z-10:
The hover performance is evaluated at altitudes varying from 0 ft (SL) to 25,000 ft. Altitudes in the Himalayan Mountains regularly require flights above 10,000 ft and often up to 22,000 ft. The data is presented for the LCH and the Z-10 for payload and available maximum ROC capability versus altitude. A threshold ROC line is shown for the reference 8 m/sec combat ROC.

Notice how the sea-level performance of the LCH and the Z-10 are significantly different. The Z-10, with a 500 kg payload (not counting weapons and fuel) is able to generate a maximum vertical ROC capability of 3.6 m/sec. By comparison, at sea-level, the LCH is able to carry the 500 kg and is able to provide a power excess for a theoretical max ROC of 21 m/sec! Of course, this will not be allowed in reality. The LCH powertrain transmission limitations will bring that max ROC to about ~10 m/sec for structural safety reasons. Both helicopters are able to lift the 500 kg requirement at sea-level.
Now consider how the change in altitude affects both helicopters. The Z-10, trying to maintain the 500 kg payload, begins to tail-off its ROC capability from 3.6 m/sec at sea-level to 0 m/sec ROC at ~8,000 ft. Beyond 8,000 ft altitude, the Z-10 also cannot carry its 500 kg payload and the tail-off in that capacity is dramatic. The Z-10 cannot operate beyond 10,000 ft under any conditions.
The LCH, on the other hand, utilizes its light-weight structure to great effect. It can not only maintain the 500 kg payload for all altitudes from sea-level to the Himalayan mountain tops, the tail-off in the ROC does not drop below 8 m/sec until ~12,000 ft. The tail-off does not drop below the minimum 2.5 m/sec until ~19,000 ft. The LCH can fly, and fight, at all altitudes in the Himalayas.
Z-10 versus the Mi-35: The Pakistani Insight
You will notice that I put the Mi-35 performance numbers in the plot above for identical conditions. The reason for doing so is to illustrate why the Pakistanis went for the Mi-35 option when the spanking-new Z-10s were on the table. The Mi-35 performance for high-altitude conditions is dismal. This is a fact known in Indian Air Force circles for many years and has led to the genesis of the LCH. But as bad as the performance for the Mi-35 is in the mountains, it is still better than the Z-10. At sea-level, the Mi-35 can completely outperform the Z-10 for ROC capability. Its ROC tail-off at high altitude is at ~9,500 ft. Its payload tail-off is at ~12,500 ft. Both these numbers are better than that of the Z-10. Coupled with lower operating costs and generally rugged reliability, the Pakistani decision to pursue the Mi-35 becomes clearer. Additional geo-political and economic constraints may also apply, but are not discussed here.

Dr. Vivek Ahuja

If that's true that PAA should allow only Free Z-10s to arrive in Pakistan.

And go for:
30-50 Vipers
30 Tigers
30 A-129s

 

[vsdave2302]

Is verses threads allowed on PDF???

Mister before poking your nose kindly try to understand what someone trying to say. And we don't claim super secret vedic weapons as Indians does, also we are not in superiority complex like most Indian on PDF are.

You are one of those who always support Indian troll poster, and non relevant comparison.

This tread is comparing Apples with Oranges, two machines built for totally primary role as per requirements.

FOr any of the role, LCH will beat Z 10 by a huge margine. LCH is a almost half of the weight of Z 10 and having more powerful engine. Now 20% more powerful engine is coming up. LCH is simply unbeatable by any chinese Chopper in near future. Infact they are nowher near where even remote comparision is possible.

 

[Penguin]

often get asked the question: “Is the Indian LCH better than the Chinese Z-10?” An attempt to answer such a question verbally is difficult. It is preferable that one sees the numbers themselves. The Z-10 is two times heavier than the LCH when carrying the same payload in weapons, fuel and crew. The Z-10’s empty weight is 5,540 kg and the LCH even in its current overweight mode is about 2,800-3,000 kg. And yet the Z-10 is powered by the same net total power as the LCH (~2,000 KW for the Z-10 versus ~1,700 KW for the LCH). That’s a nasty combination in terms of performance, both at sea-level and at high altitudes. The effect of additional weight versus power required is non-linear for rotary flying machines.

But just how bad is it really for the Z-10?

(L to R): The Indian HAL LCH, Chinese Changhe Z-10 and the Russian Mi-35 (in Indian colors)
To answer that question, I present here a comparison study. We will take the LCH and the Z-10 and put an identical payload of 500 kg on them. We will run both helicopters through a simulation model where we subject them to altitude variations and see how it affects their rate-of-climb capabilities while in hover, out of Ground Effect conditions. The rate-of-climb (ROC, measured here in meters/second) is a true measure of the maneuvering capability of an attack helicopter. Typically, a ROC of 0.5 m/sec is used to evaluate service ceiling conditions. A ROC of 2.5 m/sec is typically the bare minimum for combat conditions. For a helicopter in high mountains to be truly maneuverable, it may need somewhere in the range of 2.5 to 8 m/sec vertical ROC equivalent in power capacity. Of course, beyond a certain altitude, the helicopter may not be able to fly with the 500 kg payload, let alone providing additional power for high ROC. So we will also see where those limits are for the LCH and the Z-10.
The focus of this analysis is on a preliminary aerodynamic and propulsive standpoint. The analysis is done using simulation tools that integrate payload capacities and typical rate-of-climb requirements with a preliminary rotary aerodynamics model and a simple propulsion module. When coupled with an atmospheric simulator for the Himalayas, the performance of each helicopter type can be predicted and compared. Furthermore, the models allow for the performance analysis in Ground Effect conditions. The Ground Effect conditions are encountered when the helicopters are hovering very close to the ground and serves to work as a performance multiplier with regard to power needed in lifting a certain payload.
The models do not compensate for transmission limitations for the power, which means that the analysis is idealized wherein power generated is power available. This is, of course, not encountered in practice, but works well for high-altitude conditions where power available is almost always less than the transmission limits. At lower altitudes, the performance of the various designs must be assumed to be ideal, rather than restricted from transmission and structural limitations. For example, the maximum rate-of-climb (ROC) values obtained from this simulator for sea-level (SL) conditions will typically be higher than what is allowed by other limitations. However, such removal of limitations is required in order to compare the various contenders at the same performance benchmarks.
Data for this analysis is obtained from the manufacturers via open-sources. No proprietary information is shared here. Unless where cited, the analysis results are to be considered proprietary of the author. See remarks for details.
LCH versus the Z-10:
The hover performance is evaluated at altitudes varying from 0 ft (SL) to 25,000 ft. Altitudes in the Himalayan Mountains regularly require flights above 10,000 ft and often up to 22,000 ft. The data is presented for the LCH and the Z-10 for payload and available maximum ROC capability versus altitude. A threshold ROC line is shown for the reference 8 m/sec combat ROC.

Notice how the sea-level performance of the LCH and the Z-10 are significantly different. The Z-10, with a 500 kg payload (not counting weapons and fuel) is able to generate a maximum vertical ROC capability of 3.6 m/sec. By comparison, at sea-level, the LCH is able to carry the 500 kg and is able to provide a power excess for a theoretical max ROC of 21 m/sec! Of course, this will not be allowed in reality. The LCH powertrain transmission limitations will bring that max ROC to about ~10 m/sec for structural safety reasons. Both helicopters are able to lift the 500 kg requirement at sea-level.
Now consider how the change in altitude affects both helicopters. The Z-10, trying to maintain the 500 kg payload, begins to tail-off its ROC capability from 3.6 m/sec at sea-level to 0 m/sec ROC at ~8,000 ft. Beyond 8,000 ft altitude, the Z-10 also cannot carry its 500 kg payload and the tail-off in that capacity is dramatic. The Z-10 cannot operate beyond 10,000 ft under any conditions.
The LCH, on the other hand, utilizes its light-weight structure to great effect. It can not only maintain the 500 kg payload for all altitudes from sea-level to the Himalayan mountain tops, the tail-off in the ROC does not drop below 8 m/sec until ~12,000 ft. The tail-off does not drop below the minimum 2.5 m/sec until ~19,000 ft. The LCH can fly, and fight, at all altitudes in the Himalayas.
Z-10 versus the Mi-35: The Pakistani Insight
You will notice that I put the Mi-35 performance numbers in the plot above for identical conditions. The reason for doing so is to illustrate why the Pakistanis went for the Mi-35 option when the spanking-new Z-10s were on the table. The Mi-35 performance for high-altitude conditions is dismal. This is a fact known in Indian Air Force circles for many years and has led to the genesis of the LCH. But as bad as the performance for the Mi-35 is in the mountains, it is still better than the Z-10. At sea-level, the Mi-35 can completely outperform the Z-10 for ROC capability. Its ROC tail-off at high altitude is at ~9,500 ft. Its payload tail-off is at ~12,500 ft. Both these numbers are better than that of the Z-10. Coupled with lower operating costs and generally rugged reliability, the Pakistani decision to pursue the Mi-35 becomes clearer. Additional geo-political and economic constraints may also apply, but are not discussed here.

Dr. Vivek Ahuja

Isn't this comparing apples and oranges? Better comparison would be LCH and Z-19

LCH
Max. takeoff weight: 5,800 kg
Range: 700 km (297 nmi, 342 mi)
Maximum speed: 280 km/h (145 knots, 167 mph)

Z-19
Max takeoff weight: 4,500 kg
Range: 700 km (435 mi; 378 nmi)
Maximum speed: 280 km/h (174 mph; 151 kn)

Z-10
Max. takeoff weight: 7,000+ kg
Range: 800+ km
Maximum speed: 300+ km/h

 

[danger007]

Is verses threads allowed on PDF???

Mister before poking your nose kindly try to understand what someone trying to say. And we don't claim super secret vedic weapons as Indians does, also we are not in superiority complex like most Indian on PDF are.

You are one of those who always support Indian troll poster, and non relevant comparison.

This tread is comparing Apples with Oranges, two machines built for totally primary role as per requirements.

Z 10 is not in Pakistan inventory... no one blaming anyone it just you... who feel offensive... there are huge number vs created by pak member.... if you have prob just report to mods...

 

[Basel]

Isn't this comparing apples and oranges? Better comparison would be LCH and Z-19

LCH
Max. takeoff weight: 5,800 kg
Range: 700 km (297 nmi, 342 mi)
Maximum speed: 280 km/h (145 knots, 167 mph)

Z-19
Max takeoff weight: 4,500 kg
Range: 700 km (435 mi; 378 nmi)
Maximum speed: 280 km/h (174 mph; 151 kn)

Z-10
Max. takeoff weight: 7,000+ kg
Range: 800+ km
Maximum speed: 300+ km/h

That is what I m saying in my posts that you are comparing Apples and Oranges, but look how Indian members are jumping here n there just to prove themselves right.

@waz @Horus @Oscar please look into it specially the posts of Indian members.

Z 10 is not in Pakistan inventory... no one blaming anyone it just you... who feel offensive... there are huge number vs created by pak member.... if you have prob just report to mods...

You are the one of those who change context of discussion to prove themselves right. China has sent 3 Z-10s to battle test them and world knows that, where I said that Pakistan have inducted them??

 

[Penguin]

That is what I m saying in my posts that you are comparing Apples and Oranges, but look how Indian members are jumping here n there just to prove themselves right.

Moi? I am not comparing apples and oranges ;-)

 

[Basel]

Moi? I am not comparing apples and oranges ;-)

I know, I was referring to your first line comments which I also agree with.

 

[Skywalker]

Z-10 is going through an extensive evaluation under the capable hands of PA aviation pilots in real war scenario with experience of flying Cobras thousands of hours, imagine the valuable info they gather about the short comings of this chopper and when they over come that, how bigger beast it would become.

What better opportunity you can have than testing it in a real war. Same can't be said about lch...my two pennies.