The Indian Navy's Helicopters and purchases plans

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,620
9,279
Bangalore
The DAC approval for NMRH will come around the time the contract for 24 is signed.

HAL's IMRH is more than a decade away from a naval variant.
One year for AoN two for RFP and two more for evaluation. By then multiple N-IMRH would be flying. Cancel wait for the full certification like spike, htt-40 etc. Official timeline is 7-8 years. IN version is separate and it would go in parallel. IAF/IA doesn't have an urgent requirement like IN so it could be a priority.

Any casual observerer would understand the pattern by now. Expecting IN to order all helis as import is very unrealistic.

BTW LCA mk2 can be designed and certified in next 6-7 years but a medium hell can't? You should optimize your optimistic viewpoint towards a wider area.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: _Anonymous_

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,620
9,279
Bangalore
And @Ankit Kumar is correct. IN wants H225M sized platform. Which is evident from the RFI.

Thus, N-IMRH is designed to be ~11.5 ton.

The proper mix should have been ~80 MH60 class , and ~50 helos in 12 ton category.

It could be a 24 MH60 and ~100 N-IMRH mix. The RFI will be reissued next year, lets see.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,981
11,626
India
There's a huge difference between a S70 platform vs a H225M or AW101. The payload capacity is almost double.

For helicopters to operate from destroyers/frigates for ASW and SAR roles, MH60 is fine.

But for LHDs, 5 S70s operating at once from the flight deck, vs 5 H225M. Thats a very very big difference.

A Mistral can easily operate 4-5 , 12 ton class heli, but operating a 30 ton CH53, thats not possible without extra strengthening of the flight deck.

The proper mix should have been ~80 MH60 class , and ~50 helos in 12 ton category.

The Mistral can operate the CH-53K. And, IMHO, L&T will win the tender for Juan Carlos anyway.

Also, in case heavier helicopters are necessary, then the requirement will have to be separate from the NMRH tender.
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
5,257
5,106
Bangalore
The Mistral can operate the CH-53K. And, IMHO, L&T will win the tender for Juan Carlos anyway.

Also, in case heavier helicopters are necessary, then the requirement will have to be separate from the NMRH tender.
Mistral has six landing points, out of which only 1 can support a helicopter as heavy as Ch53k.

And no, L&T ain't winning it so simple yet. Juan Carlos is 15 meters longer than what Indian Navy wanted according to RFI. Reducing those 15 meters from will cost it 1 landing spot for sure...

Anyways the AoN expired for LHDs long back, Navy needs a new AoN and clearance from CCS to move forward on this project.
 

sid4587

Active member
Jan 10, 2018
386
189
India
The DAC approval for NMRH will come around the time the contract for 24 is signed.

HAL's IMRH is more than a decade away from a naval variant.
That too no plan to make it for anti submarine warfare. Not sure why are we even relating IMRH with sirkosky kinds.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
17,972
14,189
Mumbai
BTW LCA mk2 can be designed and certified in next 6-7 years but a medium hell can't? You should optimize your optimistic viewpoint towards a wider area.


I've often noticed, @randomradio doesn't mind being labelled superoptimistic over being called out as wrong. The latter simply doesn't happen in his case as with a lot of other cases here.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,981
11,626
India
IAF/IA doesn't have an urgent requirement like IN so it could be a priority.

The IA/IAF version is the priority. The IN won't touch a first time medium helicopter maker, even HAL. HAL will have to prove the IA/IAF version works first.

Expecting IN to order all helis as import is very unrealistic.

That's not how it works though.

BTW LCA mk2 can be designed and certified in next 6-7 years but a medium hell can't? You should optimize your optimistic viewpoint towards a wider area.

The naval design of LCA was take up much, much, much after LCA was proven to be a workable design. Different story that the AF-LCA was very late by itself that it now matches the N-LCA's timeframe. So you can't compare LCA with IMRH.

HAL will take up the IA/IAF version first and will follow that up with the N-IMRH.

I'm not an optimist. I'm a realist. Always have been. This is a 10+ year project. And you can start counting after the HAL actually gets the go-ahead to develop the helicopter. If you think HAL will even get the IA/IAF version ready by 2025, then you are sadly mistaken.

It will be more accurate to say the N-IMRH will be ready for induction about the time NMRH will have delivered half its orders. More prudently, it would make more sense to develop a next gen helicopter for the navy instead of the same old, same old all the way in 2030.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,981
11,626
India
Mistral has six landing points, out of which only 1 can support a helicopter as heavy as Ch53k.

You can increase that to all six landing points. The French merely chose to have 1 landing point capable of handling CH-53K. We don't have to do that.

And no, L&T ain't winning it so simple yet. Juan Carlos is 15 meters longer than what Indian Navy wanted according to RFI. Reducing those 15 meters from will cost it 1 landing spot for sure...

Anyways the AoN expired for LHDs long back, Navy needs a new AoN and clearance from CCS to move forward on this project.

Considering L&T was shortlisted, the IN is obviously happy with the design.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,981
11,626
India
That too no plan to make it for anti submarine warfare. Not sure why are we even relating IMRH with sirkosky kinds.

HAL does plan to make an anti-sub variant, but it's far into the future. The N-IMRH cannot realistically compete with NMRH when it comes to delivery schedule though. And the IN's not going to sit around waiting for the N-IMRH anyway.

As I pointed out before, I would much rather have HAL develop a next gen helicopter for the navy instead. I mean, next gen for all three services. IA/IAF can make do with the IMRH in the meantime since they have to replace a lot of older helicopters.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,620
9,279
Bangalore
The IA/IAF version is the priority. The IN won't touch a first time medium helicopter maker, even HAL. HAL will have to prove the IA/IAF version works first.
Thats just my guess because of the requirement. let's see. I'm bookmarking it.

That's not how it works though.
Money is exactly how it works. Maybe not in your la la land.

The naval design of LCA was take up much, much, much after LCA was proven to be a workable design. Different story that the AF-LCA was very late by itself that it now matches the N-LCA's timeframe. So you can't compare LCA with IMRH.
AF-LCA is a clean sheet design started from 2014-15. IMRH evolved a lot last 2 years and just like mk2 its now entering to the detailed design phase.

No 4th gen Fighter aircraft ever been designed in the country within a respectable timeline. IMRH would be the fourth helicopter under development in the last 30 years. Two successes and third just getting certified as we speak. And somehow IMRH will take the same time as AMCA ?!

Yeah, you are the realist, first of its kind.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,981
11,626
India
Money is exactly how it works. Maybe not in your la la land.

Money is one of the biggest reasons why the NMRH is more realistic than the N-IMRH unicorn. What makes you think the N-IMRH is going to be cheaper?

AF-LCA is a clean sheet design started from 2014-15.

AF-LCA design was made in 1987.

No 4th gen Fighter aircraft ever been designed in the country within a respectable timeline. IMRH would be the fourth helicopter under development in the last 30 years. Two successes and third just getting certified as we speak. And somehow IMRH will take the same time as AMCA ?!

IMRH's design itself hasn't been frozen. Hell, the services are claiming HAL is designing the helicopter without services input.

Yeah, you are the realist, first of its kind.

:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

So you are dreaming about a unicorn and I am the optimist.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,620
9,279
Bangalore
Money is one of the biggest reasons why the NMRH is more realistic than the N-IMRH unicorn. What makes you think the N-IMRH is going to be cheaper?
Then, We should order Gripen E instead of developing Mk2.

AF-LCA design was made in 1987.
MWF

IMRH's design itself hasn't been frozen. Hell, the services are claiming HAL is designing the helicopter without services input.
LCA mk1A design itself hasn't frozen :cry: and going to induct MWF in seven years. :LOL:

So you are dreaming about a unicorn and I am the optimist.
unicorn = LSA/MSA :LOL:

Realist uh :cautious:
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,981
11,626
India
Then, We should order Gripen E instead of developing Mk2.

Mk2 has been derived from the Mk1. IMRH is a brand new design, not just a modification of the ALH.

LCA mk1A design itself hasn't frozen :cry: and going to induct MWF in seven years. :LOL:

Mk1A design has been frozen since a long time ago.

MWF is a derivative design, just like Gripen D to Gripen E or Su-27 to Su-35 etc.

Mixing up all the wrong things.

unicorn = LSA/MSA :LOL:

Realist uh :cautious:

Mixing up all the wrong things again. I didn't create the design or decide the timeframe. Ask Vstol for that.

Making a helicopter for use on land is not difficult, a naval helicopter is an entirely different cup of tea. Look up the development of the S-70. They first built the land version and then built the naval version. This process took the Americans more than 10 years after first flight of the land version. Europe took 12 years to develop the NH90 after first flight. Only in your world a company can work from scratch and induct a naval helicopter in 6 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrueSpirit

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
5,257
5,106
Bangalore
Media/Public Contact:
[email protected]
Transmittal No:
19-15
WASHINGTON, April 2, 2019 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to India of twenty-four (24) MH-60R Multi-Mission helicopters for an estimated cost of $2.6 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale today.
The Government of India has requested to buy twenty-four (24) MH-60R Multi-Mission helicopters, equipped with the following: thirty (30) APS-153(V) Multi-Mode radars (24 installed, 6 spares); sixty (60) T700-GE-401C engines (48 installed and 12 spares); twenty-four (24) Airborne Low Frequency System (ALFS) (20 installed, 4 spares); thirty (30) AN/AAS-44C(V) Multi-Spectral Targeting System (24 installed, 6 spares); fifty-four (54) Embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation Systems (EGI) with Selective Availability/Anti-Spoofing Module (SAASM) (48 installed, 6 spares); one thousand (1,000) AN/SSQ-36/53/62 sonobuoys; ten (10) AGM-114 Hellfire missiles; five (5) AGM-114 M36-E9 Captive Air Training Missiles (CATM); four (4) AGM-114Q Hellfire Training missiles; thirty-eight (38) Advanced Precision Kill Weapons System (APKWS) rockets; thirty (30) MK 54 torpedoes; twelve (12) M-240D Crew Served guns; twelve (12) GAU-21 Crew Served guns; two (2) Naval Strike Missile Emulators; four (4) Naval Strike Missile Captive Inert Training missiles; one (1) MH-60B/R Excess Defense Article (EDA) USN legacy aircraft. Also included are seventy (70) AN/AVS-9 Night Vision Devices; fifty-four (54) AN/ARC-210 RT-1990A(C) radios with COMSEC (48 installed, 6 spares); thirty (30) AN/ARC-220 High Frequency radios (24 installed, 6 spares); thirty (30) AN/APX-123 Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) transponders (24 installed, 6 spares); spare engine containers; facilities study, design, and construction; spare and repair parts; support and test equipment; communication equipment; ferry support; publications and technical documentation; personnel training and training equipment; U.S. Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistics support services; and other related elements of logistical and program support. The total estimated cost is $2.6 billion.
This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to strengthen the U.S.-Indian strategic relationship and to improve the security of a major defensive partner which continues to be an important force for political stability, peace, and economic progress in the Indo-Pacific and South Asia region.
The proposed sale will provide India the capability to perform anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare missions along with the ability to perform secondary missions including vertical replenishment, search and rescue, and communications relay. India will use the enhanced capability as a deterrent to regional threats and to strengthen its homeland defense. India will have no difficulty absorbing these helicopters into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractor will be Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems, Owego, New York. The purchaser typically requests offsets. Any offset agreement will be defined in negotiations between the purchaser and the contractor.
Implementation of this proposed sale will require the assignment of 20-30 U.S. Government and/or contractor representatives to India.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
This notice of a potential sale is required by law and does not mean the sale has been concluded.
All questions regarding this proposed Foreign Military Sale should be directed to the State Department's Bureau of Political Military Affairs, Office of Congressional and Public Affairs, [email protected].
-30-​
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
5,257
5,106
Bangalore
Okay 2 things i noticed

1. We will also be buying 1 extra MH60B/R of ex-USN origin under EDA. Most probably for initial training and then later to be used for spares.

2." Naval Strike Missile " , inert training missile and emulator, but no NSM actually ordered.

@Ashwin
 
  • Informative
Reactions: R!cK

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
5,257
5,106
Bangalore
Plus the closest in terms of numbers, Australia bought 24 MH60R around 10 years back for 2.1 billion. But thats around 10 years back.

But around 1 year back, deal for 8 MH60R approved for Mexico was for around 1.2 billion USD.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Sathya and R!cK

Sathya

Senior member
Dec 2, 2017
2,847
1,713
India
Plus the closest in terms of numbers, Australia bought 24 MH60R around 10 years back for 2.1 billion. But thats around 10 years back.

But around 1 year back, deal for 8 MH60R approved for Mexico was for around 1.2 billion USD.

Aussie deal with NSM ?

~~~~~~

No follow on clause for us , Just MII tender ?
 

Ankit Kumar

Team StratFront
Nov 30, 2017
5,257
5,106
Bangalore
Aussie deal with NSM ?

~~~~~~

No follow on clause for us , Just MII tender ?
DSCA articles for India , like in M777 deal or C130 deal, didn't mentioned any follow on clause, although we know that they did exist.

The previous intended deal was for 16+44 : 60 S70B version.

In my opinion we still will buy the intended 60 MH60R without MII.

The NMRH tender will likely see a S92 vs H225M competition in 12 ton category.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya