AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

[Indx TechStyle]

Please provide details of pralay. Thanks in advance .

https://blog.mygov.in/ebooks/drdo/DRDO_Annual_Report.html#page/78
Adding a PDF File.

 

[Scrutator]

View attachment 13654
look in. the initial funding is already given in may 2016. so we can see full funding at the end on 2017 or mid 2018. and first there will be 2 TD TO TEST THE CONCEPT. then prototype so if fund clear in 2017-18 . td will come at the end of 2019 or early 2020.

Funding for Detail design phase is still awaiting PMO approval and the funds for the same have not been released. In an interview with Shekar Gupta, ADA chief Balaji himself echoed the same - that pending proving of some critical technologies, the detail design of AMCA hasn't started as yet!! From the 'New DRDO projects" list it is obvious that some more funds have been released to continue the work on critical technologies - but not on the full fledged detailed design.

Most optimistically AMCA final design project might start in about 1 year and then take several years (3-5) for the detailed design to be complete and then about 1-2 years for the prototype to be built!! 2019 for a roll out is almost impossible. Tejas Mk2 whose design is almost done (after 4+ years) will roll out it's first prototype around 2019!!

 

[Chinmoy]

Funding for Detail design phase is still awaiting PMO approval and the funds for the same have not been released. In an interview with Shekar Gupta, ADA chief Balaji himself echoed the same - that pending proving of some critical technologies, the detail design of AMCA hasn't started as yet!! From the 'New DRDO projects" list it is obvious that some more funds have been released to continue the work on critical technologies - but not on the full fledged detailed design.

Most optimistically AMCA final design project might start in about 1 year and then take several years (3-5) for the detailed design to be complete and then about 1-2 years for the prototype to be built!! 2019 for a roll out is almost impossible. Tejas Mk2 whose design is almost done (after 4+ years) will roll out it's first prototype around 2019!!

Let me quote something here from wiki...

Development of the aircraft had been divided into four phases or approaches:

• Design approach – designing and other activities
• Test approach – project definition, wind tunnel testing and modelling
• Technology development approach – engineering technology manufacturing development (ETMD) and prototype development
• Manufacturing and support approach – development during manufacturing and upgrades during the project lifetime[1]

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_AMCA#cite_note-dhqxnzzajv69c.cloudfront.net-1

Now as we could see, it does support what ADA Chief had already said. We have already completed the first two steps and now funds has been released for ETMD phase. Now it would involve technology development along with prototype. Although it is been speculated that the first prototype would be ready by 2019, but to be more realistic, we could see the first prototype by 2020 only. HAL has proposed two prototypes and 7 LSP of AMCA by 2025.

 

[Scrutator]

Let me quote something here from wiki...

Now as we could see, it does support what ADA Chief had already said. We have already completed the first two steps and now funds has been released for ETMD phase. Now it would involve technology development along with prototype. Although it is been speculated that the first prototype would be ready by 2019, but to be more realistic, we could see the first prototype by 2020 only. HAL has proposed two prototypes and 7 LSP of AMCA by 2025.

I don't mean to rain on everyone's enthusiasm (which I'll admit is cute). But it's better to ground one's expectation in reality than become unnecessarily tensed later on or worse blame DRDO et al.

The first phase of 'design' is high level design where you establish the kind of weight, wing, tail, engine, controls etc that you would like. The 'detailed' design is done after having established much of the critical component technologies (like they're doing right now wrt. serpentine supersonic intakes, stealth coating etc).

If you look at the Tejas Mk2 project (not Mk1), the detailed design has taken more than 4 years even though there was nothing critically different from Mk1 (no radically different/new technologies had been added in). Though a lot had changed from Mk1, but the changes were more like enlarging the wings, enlarging the intakes, enlarging the rear, rearranging the LRUs etc.
Now AMCA has some radically new technologies incorporated into the design (twin engine to start with, TVC, serpentine intakes and lot more...). Putting all these together in detailed design AND writing the Flight Control Software (from scratch for the new air frame) takes several years (I would say at the least 3 - this is very aggressive considering that there is no TD for AMCA) and then the manufacturing team will take the detailed drawings and build the aircraft (one can expect the first prototype to take the longest as new manufacturing methodologies and practices need to be established) - I would put an aggressive estimate of 1-1.5 years!!!

Net-net:
Detailed design starting : 2018
Detailed design completion : 2021
First prototype rolled out : 2022

After 2022, one can expect one prototype or LSP to roll out every year (with improvements/corrections in every subsequent roll out). Thus culminating in service induction from 2030 onwards.

 

[IndianHawk]

I don't mean to rain on everyone's enthusiasm (which I'll admit is cute). But it's better to ground one's expectation in reality than become unnecessarily tensed later on or worse blame DRDO et al.

The first phase of 'design' is high level design where you establish the kind of weight, wing, tail, engine, controls etc that you would like. The 'detailed' design is done after having established much of the critical component technologies (like they're doing right now wrt. serpentine supersonic intakes, stealth coating etc).

If you look at the Tejas Mk2 project (not Mk1), the detailed design has taken more than 4 years even though there was nothing critically different from Mk1 (no radically different/new technologies had been added in). Though a lot had changed from Mk1, but the changes were more like enlarging the wings, enlarging the intakes, enlarging the rear, rearranging the LRUs etc.
Now AMCA has some radically new technologies incorporated into the design (twin engine to start with, TVC, serpentine intakes and lot more...). Putting all these together in detailed design AND writing the Flight Control Software (from scratch for the new air frame) takes several years (I would say at the least 3 - this is very aggressive considering that there is no TD for AMCA) and then the manufacturing team will take the detailed drawings and build the aircraft (one can expect the first prototype to take the longest as new manufacturing methodologies and practices need to be established) - I would put an aggressive estimate of 1-1.5 years!!!

Net-net:
Detailed design starting : 2018
Detailed design completion : 2021
First prototype rolled out : 2022

After 2022, one can expect one prototype or LSP to roll out every year (with improvements/corrections in every subsequent roll out). Thus culminating in service induction from 2030 onwards.

Agreed that it's a very complicated and time taking process. But we keep hearing again and again that the design has been frozen already.generally that means they have conceptualized the prototype already.
And the manufacturing of prototype should start soon.
One can infer many interpretations from these reports.
If we accept that design is frozen then we can have LSPs by 2025.

We don't really know at what stage the program is. But we have been working on design since 2013_14 probably.

 

[Scrutator]

Agreed that it's a very complicated and time taking process. But we keep hearing again and again that the design has been frozen already.generally that means they have conceptualized the prototype already.
And the manufacturing of prototype should start soon.
One can infer many interpretations from these reports.
If we accept that design is frozen then we can have LSPs by 2025.

We don't really know at what stage the program is. But we have been working on design since 2013_14 probably.

How can the design be 'frozen' when a suitable engine hasn't yet been determined!!! Aircrafts are always designed around a specific engine. It's possible that the 'HIGH LEVEL DESIGN' is frozen - in terms of its overall aerodynamic shape, the type of tail, type of wings, intakes etc. Before they even know if the serpentine intake would work, how could they possibly have completed a DETAILED DESIGN and further 'frozen' it!! Detailed design is required before they start bending and welding the metal (in this case composites)!!

 

[IndianHawk]

How can the design be 'frozen' when a suitable engine hasn't yet been determined!!! Aircrafts are always designed around a specific engine. It's possible that the 'HIGH LEVEL DESIGN' is frozen - in terms of its overall aerodynamic shape, the type of tail, type of wings, intakes etc. Before they even know if the serpentine intake would work, how could they possibly have completed a DETAILED DESIGN and further 'frozen' it!! Detailed design is required before they start bending and welding the metal (in this case composites)!!

I am aware of these issues. That makes me wonder why I keep reading such reports.

 

[Abhi9]

Cockpit design of AMCA being tested out. Notice the side control stick like F-16

 

[Abhi9]

...................................................................................

 

[tharun]

Cockpit design of AMCA being tested out. Notice the side control stick like F-16

Not just f-16 most pf western fighters had a side control stick........................

 

[Vijyes]

I am aware of these issues. That makes me wonder why I keep reading such reports.

I think the biggest hurdle is kaveri engine. According to me and safran website, kaveri will be assisted by safran for 1 billion euro and probably additional orders for rafale. This is going to come out by 2018 and once kaveri engine is done, the prototype of AMCA and LCA Mk2 will fly by 2019 or eaely 2020. At present, the aim is to complete GaN AESA radar by 2019 with Israeli joint development. It will be miniature version of AWACS but more capable and IMO will be doable considering the track record of LRDE in radars.

Once the engine is done, everything else should be in place. The only remaining hurdle will be stealth paint. Most other stealth features have been planned/designed like serpentine intakes, enhine cooler, frequency selective nose, tinted canopy glass and the technology is not as complicated as the engine. AMCA is not intended to be as stealthy as F22 as it would compromise on ground attack. F22 is only air superiority fighter. So, AMCA is likely to be inferior in stealth intentionally to F22 but with mulitirole ability.

 

[Scrutator]

AMCA is not intended to be as stealthy as F22 as it would compromise on ground attack. F22 is only air superiority fighter. So, AMCA is likely to be inferior in stealth intentionally to F22 but with mulitirole ability.

Could you please explain why stealthiness would compromise ground attack?
F35-B is specifically designed for ground attack and is also designed to be stealthy.

 

[Vijyes]

Could you please explain why stealthiness would compromise ground attack?
F35-B is specifically designed for ground attack and is also designed to be stealthy.

The thrust vectoring directionality will be compromised if the outlet has to be made rigid as in F22. India wants to have a flexible thrust

 

[Scrutator]

The thrust vectoring directionality will be compromised if the outlet has to be made rigid as in F22. India wants to have a flexible thrust

Hmmm...maybe I am still confused here. F22 does have thrust vectoring (and so does F35). You're right that F22 is designed for air superiority. But I don't understand how stealth negatively affects ground attacks - F35 is stealthy, designed for ground attacks and also has thrust vectoring.

In fact, most of the early stealth fighters (B2 and F117) were designed for ground attacks.

 

[Vijyes]

Hmmm...maybe I am still confused here. F22 does have thrust vectoring (and so does F35). You're right that F22 is designed for air superiority. But I don't understand how stealth negatively affects ground attacks - F35 is stealthy, designed for ground attacks and also has thrust vectoring.

In fact, most of the early stealth fighters (B2 and F117) were designed for ground attacks.

The F22 is more stealthy than F35. That is why US doesn't give out F22 to any foreign country but sells F35. Secondly, B2 is more stealthy but is only a ground attack plane. To be a multirole fighter, the stealth has to be slightly compromised. The outlet of F22 is for example, square shaped and rigid, not in case of AMCA or F35. F22 is the only true stealth fighter, not even F35

 

[Scrutator]

The F22 is more stealthy than F35. That is why US doesn't give out F22 to any foreign country but sells F35. Secondly, B2 is more stealthy but is only a ground attack plane. To be a multirole fighter, the stealth has to be slightly compromised. The outlet of F22 is for example, square shaped and rigid, not in case of AMCA or F35. F22 is the only true stealth fighter, not even F35

Interesting! I'll agree that the nozzles of F22 look more stealthy. So, the circular nozzle on F35 B is to enable ground attacks? But the Navy/Airforce versions (F35 A/B) also have similar nozzles. Still not sure that how shape of the nozzles are enabling/disabling ground attacks.

 

[smestarz]

Unfortunately stealth has now become a relative term.. something like size of bee or golf ball etc., It is just matter of time when technology evolves (like photonic radar) that can illuminate the stealth plane like its basking on a nice summer day. Further, stealth is good (at least till now) but do also understand the cost of producing and maintaining this stealth. I am sure that the cost of maintaining F-22 for a few years would amount to cost of the plane itself. Thus you are losing more money in actually maintaining the stealth.. and is it worth it, considering that F-22 has not played a part in any major action?

The F22 is more stealthy than F35. That is why US doesn't give out F22 to any foreign country but sells F35. Secondly, B2 is more stealthy but is only a ground attack plane. To be a multirole fighter, the stealth has to be slightly compromised. The outlet of F22 is for example, square shaped and rigid, not in case of AMCA or F35. F22 is the only true stealth fighter, not even F35

 

[Scrutator]

Unfortunately stealth has now become a relative term.. something like size of bee or golf ball etc., It is just matter of time when technology evolves (like photonic radar) that can illuminate the stealth plane like its basking on a nice summer day. Further, stealth is good (at least till now) but do also understand the cost of producing and maintaining this stealth. I am sure that the cost of maintaining F-22 for a few years would amount to cost of the plane itself. Thus you are losing more money in actually maintaining the stealth.. and is it worth it, considering that F-22 has not played a part in any major action?

Agree and disagree. Agree that it is relative; but disagree that it can actually be quantified in some absolute size.
Stealth is actually dependent on your enemy's capabilities (and it has always been relative - relative to your enemy's capabilities)!! One needn't get bogged down by the theoretical detection capabilities. If you have a plane that can fly at 50,000 ft and your enemy has no SAM that can rise to that altitude, you don't have to worry how big you look on his radar!! If you enemy has no 'photonic' radar then don't worry about looking like a golf ball!

 

[Vijyes]

Unfortunately stealth has now become a relative term.. something like size of bee or golf ball etc., It is just matter of time when technology evolves (like photonic radar) that can illuminate the stealth plane like its basking on a nice summer day. Further, stealth is good (at least till now) but do also understand the cost of producing and maintaining this stealth. I am sure that the cost of maintaining F-22 for a few years would amount to cost of the plane itself. Thus you are losing more money in actually maintaining the stealth.. and is it worth it, considering that F-22 has not played a part in any major action?

Stealth planes are not to be made during peace time preparation in large numbers. Stealth technology is not cheap to maintain. But it is needed never the less for world war 3 in case it happens or major war between india-pak etc. So, just because you have stealth doesn't mean jeep it ready every day. But do keep them handy for immediate production in short notice in case of war. Some wars are sudden but most wars can be anticipated. For example, stalin anticipated world war 2 and started to stock up from 1938 in the 5 year plan.

 

[Horushmar.]

Agree and disagree. Agree that it is relative; but disagree that it can actually be quantified in some absolute size.
Stealth is actually dependent on your enemy's capabilities (and it has always been relative - relative to your enemy's capabilities)!! One needn't get bogged down by the theoretical detection capabilities. If you have a plane that can fly at 50,000 ft and your enemy has no SAM that can rise to that altitude, you don't have to worry how big you look on his radar!! If you enemy has no 'photonic' radar then don't worry about looking like a golf ball!

Agree, not to mention that with every weapon a counter system will be made: stealth plane detecting radars
for example.