AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

[Steven Rogers]

Stupidity or intentional? Armed & Unarmed AMCA models are different from each other, Armed one seems to be bearing latest design iteration. Check differences in tail, rudder and main wings

Unarmed and armed both are different, unarmed variant is the variant from 2013 Aero India, while armed variant is from 2015 and 2017 Aero India.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[scatterStorm]

.....
Why is AMCA model having LDP instead of conformal EOTS????

We not like this:

Bhai apan abhi bhot piche hai us mamaley mai. THE EOTS is designed to be stealthy yet, can also resist high G loads. Imagine the material research went through it.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Bhai apan abhi bhot piche hai us mamaley mai. THE EOTS is designed to be stealthy yet, can also resist high G loads. Imagine the material research went through it.

Possibly the tot will help.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[AMCA]

Bhai apan abhi bhot piche hai us mamaley mai. THE EOTS is designed to be stealthy yet, can also resist high G loads. Imagine the material research went through it.

F35 conformal EOTS is not as good as other EOTS on 4th gen. fighter jets


https://www.thedailybeast.com/newest-us-stealth-fighter-10-years-behind-older-jets
The problem stems from the fact that the technology found on one of the stealth fighter’s primary air-to-ground sensors—its nose-mounted Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS)—is more than a decade old and hopelessly obsolete. The EOTS, which is similar in concept to a large high-resolution infrared and television camera, is used to visually identify and monitor ground targets. The system can also mark targets for laser-guided bombs.

“EOTS is a big step backwards. The technology is 10-plus years old, hasn’t been able to take advantage of all the pod upgrades in the meantime, and there were some performance tradeoffs to accommodate space and stealth,” said another Air Force official familiar with the F-35 program. “I think it’s one area where the guys are going to be disappointed in the avionics.”

Ironically, older jets currently in service with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps can carry the latest generation of sensor pods, which are far more advanced than the EOTS sensor carried by the F-35.

 

[Kshithij]

Again you don't seem to understand that not signing COMSACA or BECA will not prohibit us from buying them and still operate them as we see fit. This only means we'd have to switch out US comms, datalinks, IFFs & navigation aids with Indian ones, heck we would do that in a heart beat so we have freedom & secrecy in our ops. This is the way our P-8I, C-17s, C-130Js, in the future Apaches, Chinooks will operate. The MH-60 Seahawk or S-70B is also in line to win the Navy's massive 100+ helo tender.

USA not only keeps tab over communications but also reduce the technology level if these agreements are not signed. USA wants to keep a person as an ombudsman in India to ensure that the technology is in safe hands. The key technology provided by USA will be transmitting information in USA controlled encryption and the reverse engineering will be made difficult.

India can get the technology by COMCASA but it will be controlled and hence not reverse engineered

 

[AnantS]

Unarmed and armed both are different, unarmed variant is the variant from 2013 Aero India, while armed variant is from 2015 and 2017 Aero India.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

know that... but why show an earlier design on an expo? Pointless from my pov

 

[scatterStorm]

F35 conformal EOTS is not as good as other EOTS on 4th gen. fighter jets


https://www.thedailybeast.com/newest-us-stealth-fighter-10-years-behind-older-jets
The problem stems from the fact that the technology found on one of the stealth fighter’s primary air-to-ground sensors—its nose-mounted Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS)—is more than a decade old and hopelessly obsolete. The EOTS, which is similar in concept to a large high-resolution infrared and television camera, is used to visually identify and monitor ground targets. The system can also mark targets for laser-guided bombs.

“EOTS is a big step backwards. The technology is 10-plus years old, hasn’t been able to take advantage of all the pod upgrades in the meantime, and there were some performance tradeoffs to accommodate space and stealth,” said another Air Force official familiar with the F-35 program. “I think it’s one area where the guys are going to be disappointed in the avionics.”

Ironically, older jets currently in service with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps can carry the latest generation of sensor pods, which are far more advanced than the EOTS sensor carried by the F-35.

EOTS on F35 is up-gradable, besides they are salvaging the hardware to keep cost down. You see the hardware is capable enough to run all the cutting edge algorithms to classify soft kill or hard kill targets.

It's like saying I have a smartphone from 2012 (I actually do an S4), yet the hardware is still capable enough to run all the apps, games etc. The algorithms are updated to utilise exact processing and memory requirements without upgrading the hardware unless the need arises. This is the whole point of saving on costs yet still able to perform mission tasks.

But I agree that in electro optical search and track systems they are a bit behind on this jet.

 

[scatterStorm]

Naya AMCA ka model to esa lag raha hai jaise ADA kai designers were too bored to come up with some radical design choice but went with copying airframe elements from YF23, F22 and maybe F35.

I think they are using the concept of "horizontal progress", the same shit that Chinese are doing. Because Chinese actually do have a 20 year plan of copying US, come to parity and surpass it.

Granted itna research nahi kerna padegi, we will save some money but then have we developed technologies that are feasible on that air frame yet, and please refrain from saying yes we did on Tejas Mk1 .... it comes not even close to what US have on them.

 

[Prashant12]

According to ADA, they will zero in on an industrial partner for the AMCA by the end of this year, with the TDs taking to the air in another 3-4 four years from that point.

 

[scatterStorm]

According to ADA, they will zero in on an industrial partner for the AMCA by the end of this year, with the TDs taking to the air in another 3-4 four years from that point.

Jha bro is smart, Jha bro know this shit ain't happening soon.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Naya AMCA ka model to esa lag raha hai jaise ADA kai designers were too bored to come up with some radical design choice but went with copying airframe elements from YF23, F22 and maybe F35.

I think they are using the concept of "horizontal progress", the same shit that Chinese are doing. Because Chinese actually do have a 20 year plan of copying US, come to parity and surpass it.

Granted itna research nahi kerna padegi, we will save some money but then have we developed technologies that are feasible on that air frame yet, and please refrain from saying yes we did on Tejas Mk1 .... it comes not even close to what US have on them.

From where this logic came is probably unknown, as like India intruded into the American defence security and targeted the designs of the aircraft. And if your logic says , taking designs from three aircraft and putting into one requires less effort, then that's quite idiotic, since it requires series of wind tunnel testings, data generation, takes more than designing a new aircraft from scratch since then you will be scratching the head with various flaws since you hardly know what you made since you copied those not designs. At least grow up and bring sane things other than stupid logics and village type juggad. Kindly don't derail the thread with such help.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[scatterStorm]

From where this logic came is probably unknown, as like India intruded into the American defence security and targeted the designs of the aircraft. And if your logic says , taking designs from three aircraft and putting into one requires less effort, then that's quite idiotic, since it requires series of wind tunnel testings, data generation, takes more than designing a new aircraft from scratch since then you will be scratching the head with various flaws since you hardly know what you made since you copied those not designs. At least grow up and bring sane things other than stupid logics and village type juggad. Kindly don't derail the thread with such help.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

1. Nowhere I mentioned ADA designers hacked some sites and gain exact blueprints.
2. Nowhere I mentioned it would be easy!
3. Pleas explain, how I am derailing the thread? Mods please let me know.
4. I mentioned and I quote "No radical airframe design" was shown.
5. It does have elements to all the aircrafts I mentioned, for which I supported my fact that it will probably reduce more research work. As RCS softwares and solvers can almost accurately output these parameters.
6. There are tools like Autodesk with aeronautical engineering package, you can create an airframe inside that and simulate the entire airflow and wind tunnel testing. Heck companies like LM have proprietary softwares to do that to further proof test wind tunnel testing.
7. Does having the information about RCS, CFD, Stress test and airflow test, physics engine used in simulation software won't improve build time? In fact most modern jet programs make use of them.
8. Corrolery --> Essentially you are saying computational time won't reduce, we won't make faster progress on constructing airframes. Sorry bro you are were hiding in a cave for too long.

By this logic our Tejas program would have been waiting to "touch the sky with glory".

Airframes are typically easy to simulate, constructing them with all the components is other part of the story, for that metallurgical mix is also a big part and that is why we require an actual model in wind test.

 

[AMCA]

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

 

[Steven Rogers]

1. Nowhere I mentioned ADA designers hacked some sites and gain exact blueprints.
2. Nowhere I mentioned it would be easy!
3. Pleas explain, how I am derailing the thread? Mods please let me know.
4. I mentioned and I quote "No radical airframe design" was shown.
5. It does have elements to all the aircrafts I mentioned, for which I supported my fact that it will probably reduce more research work. As RCS softwares and solvers can almost accurately output these parameters.
6. There are tools like Autodesk with aeronautical engineering package, you can create an airframe inside that and simulate the entire airflow and wind tunnel testing. Heck companies like LM have proprietary softwares to do that to further proof test wind tunnel testing.
7. Does having the information about RCS, CFD, Stress test and airflow test, physics engine used in simulation software won't improve build time? In fact most modern jet programs make use of them.
8. Corrolery --> Essentially you are saying computational time won't reduce, we won't make faster progress on constructing airframes. Sorry bro you are were hiding in a cave for too long.

By this logic our Tejas program would have been waiting to "touch the sky with glory".

Airframes are typically easy to simulate, constructing them with all the components is other part of the story, for that metallurgical mix is also a big part and that is why we require an actual model in wind test.

Read correctly, the airframe is still not easy to design by Auto desk or unity or Rage, the whole detailed design of a fighter is to be designed, whole set of LRUs are needed to design with efficient utilization of spaces , they need to be fitted and simulated so that they can do that efficiently on ground. Designing an aircraft don't include designing of some random out-skin of some different aircrafts and jumping like Ragdoll for that feat. And if you are including the designs of various aircraft without any detail, you will need decades to solve the aerodynamic problems with those inherent design that bring due to their distinct feature.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[Kshithij]

Read correctly, the airframe is still not easy to design by Auto desk or unity or Rage, the whole detailed design of a fighter is to be designed, whole set of LRUs are needed to design with efficient utilization of spaces , they need to be fitted and simulated so that they can do that efficiently on ground. Designing an aircraft don't include designing of some random out-skin of some different aircrafts and jumping like Ragdoll for that feat. And if you are including the designs of various aircraft without any detail, you will need decades to solve the aerodynamic problems with those inherent design that bring due to their distinct feature.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

The most important aspect of all aircrafts today is Fly-By-Wire. FBW is the hardest aspect of modern fighters. There is no way one can steal the codes for it. So, without the codes, one will have to develop one's own codes. And since no person thinks exactly like the other, there are bound to have lot of problems with the design stability and LRU adjustments.

 

[kunal1123]

CROSS POSTING

OFB 7.62x51 mm assault rifle....................................

AMCA

 

[kunal1123]

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

foreign majors have responded to this EOI as well..???

so this EOI is for creation of integration facilities
not for creation of module of AMCA itself ?????????
then who will create that...........
and is HAL responded?? as ADA is nodal agency for the design & development what is level of involvement of HAL in AMCA ?

 

[kunal1123]

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2018/04/5-reasons-why-this-is-boeings-sharpest-move-in-india-yet.html

"Internally, HAL has rued the idea of not being the principal integrator of India’s next fighter. But this new agreement settles that sulk. HAL now stands satisfied to be up on stage with the world’s biggest aircraft company and one of India’s fastest rising private aerospace firms"

so HAL is out from AMCA ......

 

[john70]

Is 3B-09 Configuration, final AMCA Design?
http://idrw.org/is-3b-09-configuration-final-amca-design/

SOURCE: VISHAL KARPE / FOR MY TAKE / IDRW.ORG

Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) has displayed Two Scale models of Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) at Defence Expo 2018 which is currently being held in Chennai, TamilNadu. AMCA Scale model was displayed showcasing Stealth and Non-Stealth configuration even though both models displayed were not exact same of the same design.

Stealth configuration of Scale model which is same as AMCA design which was provided in the documents issued for the Request for Expression of Interest to seek vendors who could manufacture Two Next Generation Technology Demonstrator (NGTD) based on Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Configuration 3B-09 is latest configuration refinement which was carried out from the initial 3B-01 concept over the years while working on design refinement by ADA.

ADA has promised that vendor selection will be done by end of this year for AMCA and once the final contract is confirmed, selected vendors who could manufacture Two Next Generation Technology Demonstrator (NGTD). NGTD-1 within 3½ of executing a contract with ADA and NGTD-2 within the end of 4th year.

After Next Generation Technology Demonstrator (NGTD) completes initial flight trials, ADA has proposed to develop first Prototypes of AMCA from 2025 on wards before aircraft is cleared for production from 2030 on wards.

 

[porky_kicker]

Interesting first time seeing a EOTS pod on the nose , it's location is unique inclined to the right.

Also shown is retractable IFR