AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

[soikot banerjee]

Why dont they incorporate a flat exhaust like the f22 instead of the circular one?

"Why dont they "
This can be best explained by the Scientists and engineers in the lab, it is definately known fact that they too know about F-22, but here it is not USA's requirements, this is India's requirements QRs are India specific hence let's leave those issue to them and not waste time in driving conclusions, there are reasons for everything going inside a aircraft nothing is "Unplanned".

 

[Guest]

Why dont they incorporate a flat exhaust like the f22 instead of the circular one?

Flat TVC nozzles is top secret technology, only USA have mastered It. Russians too have tried by have not been successful till now.

Advantages:

1. Low Observation, due to shape.
2. Better cooling hence low heat signature.
3. 2D TVC.

Disadvantages:

1. Reduces overall thrust of the engine.
2. Only 2D TVC possible.

Since we are already struggling with developing a 90kN engine, Flat nozzles are a luxury we can't afford as of now. However this would have been, significant addition to over all stealth and made the plane invisible from behind as well.

 

[Sancho]

Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an:
Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an:
Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an:

 

[Sancho]

Aeronautical Development Agency Issues EOI to Manufacture NGTD
February 20, 2018

The Next Generation Technology Demonstrator would demonstrate the necessary technology building blocks which would form the base for the AMCA...

More at:
http://forceindia.net/aeronautical-development-agency-issues-eoi-manufacture-ngtd/

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

DRDO is co-operating with Klimov of Russia to develop 3d TVC technology which most probably will find its way to the 110-130 KN engine under developement to power AMCA.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an:
Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an:
Sieh dir den Tweet von @SJha1618 an:

Sjha has stated correct, either gov is willing to invest that much else, another blunder

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[nongaddarliberal]

"Why dont they "
This can be best explained by the Scientists and engineers in the lab, it is definately known fact that they too know about F-22, but here it is not USA's requirements, this is India's requirements QRs are India specific hence let's leave those issue to them and not waste time in driving conclusions, there are reasons for everything going inside a aircraft nothing is "Unplanned".

Flat TVC nozzles is top secret technology, only USA have mastered It. Russians too have tried by have not been successful till now.

Advantages:

1. Low Observation, due to shape.
2. Better cooling hence low heat signature.
3. 2D TVC.

Disadvantages:

1. Reduces overall thrust of the engine.
2. Only 2D TVC possible.

Since we are already struggling with developing a 90kN engine, Flat nozzles are a luxury we can't afford as of now. However this would have been, significant addition to over all stealth and made the plane invisible from behind as well.

Ok. Didn't know it was such a challenge to incorporate those into the aircraft.

 

[Sancho]

Ok. Didn't know it was such a challenge to incorporate those into the aircraft.

It's not that much of a challange, in fact it's easier than the 2.5D or 3D thrust vectoring nozzles, since you have less moving parts and only moving around 1 axis.
But most TVC systems are aimed on moving the nozzles to multiple directions, which is not possible with the 2D system of the F22. So it's more a question of, if your focus is on maximum manuverability and some RCS reductions, or on some manoeuvrability and more signature reduction.

 

[cyclops]

So does this mean that the 3B-09 is frozen?

 

[Adioz]

I came across an old article on AMCA's internal weapons bay:-
Inconsistency in design of AMCA’s Internal Weapons Bay

IMHO, the article is wrong on this account: The first pic has 5 Astra BVRAAM, not 5 AMRAAM. Astra's dimensions are smaller than AMRAAM.

Also, considering that R-77 is fatter than the Astra, AMCA might be able to carry only 4 R-77.

I know that AMCA is a medium fighter, but even so, comparing it with the F-22's internal weapons capacity:-

• 6 AMRAAM in main bays
• 2 Sidewinder short range missiles in side bays

Now while looking through the PLAAF BVRAAM missiles, i found these to be way too fat when compared to the likes of Astra, Meteor and AMRAAM.
This makes me question what the J-20 can carry in its bays. IMHO, it can't carry more than 4 BVRAAMs.
Yeah, I know that the J-20 also carries two SR AAM in its side bays.
Even so, I can't help but smirk when I think about how AMCA would possibly carry a larger BVRAAM load in its internal bay when compared to J-20 (to say nothing of the J-31)

I guess its too much to ask for a side weapons bay in AMCA, huh?

Anyone knows more details of sleeker Chinese BVRAAM that I might be missing?

 

[scatterStorm]

I came across an old article on AMCA's internal weapons bay:-
Inconsistency in design of AMCA’s Internal Weapons Bay

IMHO, the article is wrong on this account: The first pic has 5 Astra BVRAAM, not 5 AMRAAM. Astra's dimensions are smaller than AMRAAM.

Also, considering that R-77 is fatter than the Astra, AMCA might be able to carry only 4 R-77.

I know that AMCA is a medium fighter, but even so, comparing it with the F-22's internal weapons capacity:-

• 6 AMRAAM in main bays
• 2 Sidewinder short range missiles in side bays

Now while looking through the PLAAF BVRAAM missiles, i found these to be way too fat when compared to the likes of Astra, Meteor and AMRAAM.
This makes me question what the J-20 can carry in its bays. IMHO, it can't carry more than 4 BVRAAMs.
Yeah, I know that the J-20 also carries two SR AAM in its side bays.
Even so, I can't help but smirk when I think about how AMCA would possibly carry a larger BVRAAM load in its internal bay when compared to J-20 (to say nothing of the J-31)

I guess its too much to ask for a side weapons bay in AMCA, huh?

Anyone knows more details of sleeker Chinese BVRAAM that I might be missing?

Nice observation, what I think is that during an initial airframe design stage, you need a "reference" to design your IWBs. I believe that the designers have nothing to do with any of the armament is general. It might be to design the correct dimension of IWBs you need weapons as dimensional reference, in this case we can see 4 R77 look alike missiles.

As for SWBs I think engine being fitted wouldn't allow us to cramp 2 SWBs. We aren't there yet unfortunately.

 

[Trinetra]

Isro working on 'igloos' for future outposts on moon

BENGALURU: In what's likely to become India's biggest science programme in the next few years, Isro has started work on building igloos on the Moon. These 'lunar habitats', as scientists call them, will be built by sending robots and 3D printers to the Moon, and by using lunar soil and other material.

The project has seen progress with a working model - created using a 3D printer - sitting in the space agency's lunar terrain test facility. Scientists have drawn up five designs of the lunar habitats, and hope their work could contribute to plans of creating outposts on the Moon. Although there's no mission plan yet, Isro wants to have the technology ready for building these structures.

Isro Satellite Centre (Isac) director M Annadurai likened the igloos on the Moon to India's outpost in Antarctica. "We are planning to use the Moon as an outpost - like missions in Antarctica. In the long run, the space station is likely to be scrapped. Many countries, including the US, are considering building more permanent structures on the Moon and working out of there. When that happens, we want India to have contributed," he told TOI.

According to him, astronauts going to the Earth's satellite in the future will spend more than just a few hours there. "To keep them safe and help them work from there, we need smart materials, which is what we are focusing on building," he said.

Annadurai said the space agency has mastered the process of creating lunar simulant (material that approximate the properties of lunar soil), and it has about 60 tonnes of it. Its properties match 99.6% with the samples brought from Moon by Apollo missions.

 

[Trinetra]

Isro working on 'igloos' for future outposts on moon

BENGALURU: In what's likely to become India's biggest science programme in the next few years, Isro has started work on building igloos on the Moon. These 'lunar habitats', as scientists call them, will be built by sending robots and 3D printers to the Moon, and by using lunar soil and other material.

The project has seen progress with a working model - created using a 3D printer - sitting in the space agency's lunar terrain test facility. Scientists have drawn up five designs of the lunar habitats, and hope their work could contribute to plans of creating outposts on the Moon. Although there's no mission plan yet, Isro wants to have the technology ready for building these structures.

Isro Satellite Centre (Isac) director M Annadurai likened the igloos on the Moon to India's outpost in Antarctica. "We are planning to use the Moon as an outpost - like missions in Antarctica. In the long run, the space station is likely to be scrapped. Many countries, including the US, are considering building more permanent structures on the Moon and working out of there. When that happens, we want India to have contributed," he told TOI.

According to him, astronauts going to the Earth's satellite in the future will spend more than just a few hours there. "To keep them safe and help them work from there, we need smart materials, which is what we are focusing on building," he said.

Annadurai said the space agency has mastered the process of creating lunar simulant (material that approximate the properties of lunar soil), and it has about 60 tonnes of it. Its properties match 99.6% with the samples brought from Moon by Apollo missions.

Sorry Guys.. Posted in wrong thread ... I have Posted this article in ISRO thread again..

 

[Adioz]

Sorry Guys.. Posted in wrong thread ... I have Posted this article in ISRO thread again..

Lol.
Well, you could try editing your post and replacing the content with something relevant to the thread. Even if its something simple like: "I wonder which private companies are going to supply chain of AMCA".
That is what I do.:biggrin2:
You still got eight minutes to do that.

As for SWBs I think engine being fitted wouldn't allow us to cramp 2 SWBs. We aren't there yet unfortunately.

I think its more due to the fact that the AMCA is a medium fighter. Only F-22 and J 20 have side weapons bays. I remember a model of AMCA that had SWBs. So I guess ADA tried its best trying to incorporate these into the design. Guess its simply impossible for a medium fighter.

BTW, I was thinking that these weapons bays don't seem to have any saw-toothed edges like in F-22, F-35 or J-20.

 

[aditya10r]

Lol.
Well, you could try editing your post and replacing the content with something relevant to the thread. Even if its something simple like: "I wonder which private companies are going to supply chain of AMCA".
That is what I do.:biggrin2:
You still got eight minutes to do that.

How come you are so sure that AMCA will enter production or even low rate production by 2027/29?????

Even if the first flight occurs by 2024/25,it would still be 2032/33 to start low rate production of the aircraft.

Another thing is can we use the earlier models of AMCA which had side weapon bays to develop a heavy weight fighter??,it will save us from Russian nautanki thats going on in FGFA program.

 

[Trinetra]

Lol.
Well, you could try editing your post and replacing the content with something relevant to the thread. Even if its something simple like: "I wonder which private companies are going to supply chain of AMCA".
That is what I do.:biggrin2:
You still got eight minutes to do that.

I thought of that.. But immediately got a like from @Bhumihar .. so didn't want to disrespect his like about the article as he had already read the article...

 

[Adioz]

How come you are so sure that AMCA will enter production or even low rate production by 2027/29?????

Even if the first flight occurs by 2024/25,it would still be 2032/33 to start low rate production of the aircraft.

Well, its more of a hope. I came up with this timeline after looking at Tejas timeline:-

• Vendor Selection by: June-2018. (Assumed)
• NGTD-1 rolls out: Dec-2022
• Flight tests commence: Jan-2023
• NGTD-2 rolls out" June-2023
• Flight test ends by: December-2024.
• Prototype Vehicles phase starts (4 PVs planned): January-2025
• LSP-1 rolls out: January-2027 (Assumed)
• IOC: January-2029 (Assumed)
• SP-1 rolls out: January-2030 (Assumed)

If we compare it with Tejas timeline:-

• TD-1 first flight: January 2001
• TD-2 first flight: June 2002
• PV-1 first flight: November 2003
• PV-2 first flight: December 2005
• PV-3 first flight: December 2006
• LSP-1 first flight: April 2007
• Weapons trials commence: October 2007
• LSP-2 first flight: June 2008
  
• Government sanctions funds for production of Tejas for IAF: December 2009
• LSP-3 first flight (in final config.): April 2010
• IOC achieved: January 2011
• SP-1 handed over to IAF: January 2015

Considering that a lot of lessons have been learnt, and hoping that IAF does not change requirements and that we do not encounter any unforeseen challenges in AMCA, I think its a reasonable (though optimistic) timeline.

Another thing is can we use the earlier models of AMCA which had side weapon bays to develop a heavy weight fighter??,it will save us from Russian nautanki thats going on in FGFA program.

I was thinking the exact same thing! But not sure if the ADA or DRDO can handle parallel production. The earlier models of AMCA cannot be scaled up easily. Its going to take a lot of iterative design work and the airframe will be a new one.
Maybe once they get done with finalizing the configuration of AMCA (sometime in 2028-29) they can start thinking about making a technology demonstrator for a "AHCA".
Till then they can try to finish the design work on the airframe. The Tejas design team might be able to share the workload once they are done with Tejas Mk2.

If IAF can make do without the Su-57 MKI for 15 years, we might be able to see an AHCA that would also act as a replacement for some older Su-30 MKI squadrons.

 

[WolfPack86]

AMCA is looking very similar to F-22 Raptor.

 

[Suryavanshi]

AMCA is looking very similar to F-22 Raptor.

I think it's s basic template that every 5 th gen plane must follow.
The only different ones are su 57 and Iranian 5 th gen jet which by the way stays on ground.

 

[AMCA]

Nice observation, what I think is that during an initial airframe design stage, you need a "reference" to design your IWBs. I believe that the designers have nothing to do with any of the armament is general. It might be to design the correct dimension of IWBs you need weapons as dimensional reference, in this case we can see 4 R77 look alike missiles.

As for SWBs I think engine being fitted wouldn't allow us to cramp 2 SWBs. We aren't there yet unfortunately.

There was a video on delhi defence Review's youtube channel which had excerpts of actual Internal Weapon Bay testing for AMCA. The Channel got deleted and so is the video.

this is the link: