What's new

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

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

CIZ9lF9UMAAUQHZ.jpg:large

LCH%2Bhot%2Band%2Bhighlatitude%2Btrials%2B1.jpg
LCH%2Bhot%2Band%2Bhighlatitude%2Btrials%2B2.jpg
Nice. Congrats!

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

CIZ9lF9UMAAUQHZ.jpg:large

LCH%2Bhot%2Band%2Bhighlatitude%2Btrials%2B1.jpg
LCH%2Bhot%2Band%2Bhighlatitude%2Btrials%2B2.jpg
Nice. Congrats!
 
How is 2700 , 1100 greater than 2860.
Plz read the parts of your original post that I Quoted

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

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

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

Which suggest the possibility there is no 2,860 shp but rather just 1,600 shp and 2,700-1,600=1,100
 
Nice thread ,Keep it running
And it would be better to ignore the thread than to troll in it
 


6.1 Thermal Power(1) – All Engines Operative kW

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

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

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

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

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

I'm confused by that 'all engines operative':
"These variants are approved for use on multi-engined civil rotorcraft""
"
The ARDIDEN 1H and ARDIDEN 1H1 engines are approved for use on twin-engine helicopters
"
Does that mean kW per engine or for the pair?
 
The difference in 'peak power' and 'continuous power' seem consistent with the differences in power output I qouted (i.e. the more conservative Janes' and Airforce Technology numbers).

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

I'm confused by that 'all engines operative':
"These variants are approved for use on multi-engined civil rotorcraft""
"
The ARDIDEN 1H and ARDIDEN 1H1 engines are approved for use on twin-engine helicopters
"
Does that mean kW per engine or for the pair?
I would understand per engine. But let me ask a friend who works in a related field to go through the ESA sheet.
I'll reply here.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom