AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

[Agnostic_Indian]

The one thing I forgot to mention in my previous post is


As a first step IAF should ask ADA to refine the LCA's shape with the 100 percent stealth and internal bomb bays and serpentine intake AND WITH TWIN ENGINES with appropriate increase in wing size and weight..

then only AMCA will have a good weapon load as there will be too many power sapping compromises for stealth and cooling needs and avionic needs.

are you serious ?

all this modification on lca?

 

[SajeevJino]

are you serious ?

all this modification on lca?

I think he is talking about a New platform..

and Cancel the LCA program....

surely I'm saying LCA is not compatible in Future wars..

we have options to acquire fighters from.West or Russia.

so shall we redesign our LCA into a CAS fighter such as A 10 and Yak 130

 

[ersakthivel]

are you serious ?

all this modification on lca?

No not on lca but model twice big as LCA ,with twin engines and internal bomb bays,retaining its basic flight charecteristics as much as possible and refined for stealth .

Ofcourse inlet and other things can be moe forward and minor modifications made with addition of tail fins and double canted vertical tails or whatever needed.

Because that's what the russians seem to be doing with sukhoi, and J-20 seems to adapt the same canrd delta of J-10.

SO they are up in the air on time without 5th gen avionics or engine.

First ADA should concentrate on stealth materials and 100 percent stealth shape.

If not then if they follow the new model then tech wise atleast they should follw the EUROFIGHTER TRANCHES approach.
Get it's basic airframe flight worthy, first with digital,two GE or RUSSIAN engines, FCS and hydraulic actuators and and available compostes adapted for stealth.

Then hydraulics can be changed to all electricals and digital fcs to fly by light later and engine added hen they are ready like the chinese and russians.


If we give it specs like

1.The engine should give 11:1 thrust:its own weight on the first flight itself.
2.fly by light FCS.
3.All electrical actuators
4.and should do dog fight with better STR than F-16.
5.should supercruise with more speeds than F-22.
6.Thrust vectoring must be on the first prototype,
7.Should have the world's best radar and ew suit.
8.Itshould have the least IR signature than all other stealths9.The RAM coating on it should be best in the world.


And follow the same path like ,
1.FIRST LET US DEVELOP TWO TECH DEMOS (TDs) .
2.Test all these techs on it till 10 years ,
3.And after 10 years we should build two Pvs first.
5. and keep the fully ready first PV and test it to death for one year, because if some thing happens to it the whole program would be delayed for years.
6.spend 5 years on them.
.7.After that start building LSPs slowly and test them for 10 years.
8.If one of the systems delays the program for a few years then the program will be delayed further.

If we want all the tech on first TD it will be the approach and there will be only delays and griefs,because the model is entirely new,and there is no other way to go.

But if we accomadate the flight charecteristics of LCA however much possible with 100% stealth, twin engines and internal bomb bays and fuel we will be building 6 or 7 LSPs and PVs simultaneously, So that each aircraft can be used to validate the parameters first.

if we look at F-16s ,RAFALEs ,mirages,PAKFAs and J-20s, they are all following this approach only.

The chinese are testing second stealth with in a year of it's first stealth test flight.



You should read both by posts 478 and 479 together.

 

[ersakthivel]

I think he is talking about a New platform..

and Cancel the LCA program....

surely I'm saying LCA is not compatible in Future wars..

we have options to acquire fighters from.West or Russia.

so shall we redesign our LCA into a CAS fighter such as A 10 and Yak 130

I am not talking about cancellation of LCA,it is as good as anything IAF can get for point defence and cas role.

I am talking about the AMCA.

 

[ersakthivel]

PAK-FA/FGFA/T50: India, Russia Cooperate on 5th-Gen Fighter
This link is posted by avarage american on the sukhoi PAKFA link.
There too IAF wants 360 deg stealth coverage of asea and other goodies that may dely the plane by another 5 years.
Notice how the PAKFA is an adoption of existing flanker frame.

from that article,
That divergence also expresses itself in each side's proposed timelines. While Russia is focused on 2015 trials, Indian officials have pushed a timeline that's 4-5 years longer, in order to develop many of the FGFA's systems. India reportedly wants 40-45 design changes to the current PAK-FA, including its own avionics and a "360 degrees" AESA radar. That last requirement is likely to involve AESA "cheek fairings" that need to maintain aircraft stealth levels, a tailcone radar, and the internal computing and software required to fuse all of those radars into a single picture. They also want at least 2,000 hours of certification flying, and possible configuration changes in light of tests. India now expects their fighters to prepare for service no earlier than 2019, and if the IAF fields a 2-seat version, it's likely to take even longer. About 100 HAL engineers already operate from a facility in Bangalore, and another contingent will move to Russia to work in the Sukhoi design
bureau.
May 14/12: Late to India. India is already backtracking on service dates for its FGFA variant of Sukhoi's T-50, bringing them closer to predictions made by outside observers years ago. M M Pallam Raju has moved the plane's certification and production start date from 2017 back to 2019. Close examination shows that 2020 or beyond is more likely.

India's Business Standard also highlights a number of areas that aren't settled, where ongoing specifications changes and/or technical problems may end up delaying the fighter and send India's costs skyrocketing. Avionics, the question of a 2-seat version for India, and requests like a "360-degree" AESA radar all add risk. Since Sukhoi's plane already meets Russian requirements, India will be on the hook for changes beyond the existing "Tactical Technical Assignment," which reportedly includes 40-45 changes to the PAKL-FA design already. India's Business Standard.

India's history is littered with overly ambitious projects that India's Ministry of Defense and associated state-run agencies approved, but could not execute. The cutting-edge nature of the FGFA project magnifies those risks, even with Sukhoi's assistance.

This is what I meant,working forever on prototypes with sky as the limit.

 

[ersakthivel]

HAs the IAF sent ASR of AMCA to ADA?

In February 2009, ADA director P.S Subramanyam said at a Aero-India 2009 seminar, that they are working closely with Indian Air Force to develop a Medium Combat Aircraft. He added that according to the specification provided by the Indian Air Force, it would likely be a twenty ton aircraft powered by two GTX Kaveri engines

http://www.hindu.com/2009/02/05/stories/2009020559830400.htm

In April 2010, the Indian Air Force issued the Air Staff requirements (ASR) for the AMCA which placed the aircraft in the twenty five ton category
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_04_21_2010_p0-221350.xml

With aerodynamic design optimisation near complete, the AMCA's broad specifications are final. The aicraft will have a weight of 16-18 tonnes [16-18 tons with 2-tons of internal weapons and four-tonnes of internal fuel with a combat ceiling of 15-km, max speed of 1.8-Mach at 11-km. The AMCA will be powered by 2 x 90KN engines with vectored nozzles—likely to be the new GTRE-Snecma engine under development.

already three different figures are floating on the net and already three different models of the plane has been shown to the world. No one knows which is the final one.

is this final or it will be changed?

So what is the final ASR?

already GTRE and IAF are wrestling whether the final k-10 with snecma version will have enough thrust,requiring the mediation of defence minister A.K>antony to appoint a joint committe to study whether the proposed jv will have the required thrust and after two years of delay on this count we have not yet heard whether the JV ha been signed or not?

With the much touted FGAF petering out, why is the circus begining all over again for the AMCA?
By the time this circus is over chinese would have inducted their J-20 into service and we will be calling AMCA obsolete.

We know the chinese are developing J-20 for 10 years.From 2009 to 2012 we cannot agree on what level of tech is available in the country to start designing the AMCA.

since asr is not yet finalised we can assume the project is not yet started at all.so any 2009 time line starting date for amca is false.

 

[agentperry]

as far as i know aircraft is not a car which can be modified easily and even a 1940 model can be converted into a speedster or hot rod.
its critical field and expertise and technology both are not with us. combined effect of all three is that settle with 4.5 gen advance plane with cheaper contents and mass production facility instead of getting 5th gen plane in 6th gen era

 

[p2prada]

combined effect of all three is that settle with 4.5 gen advance plane with cheaper contents and mass production facility instead of getting 5th gen plane in 6th gen era

China will be moving into the 6th gen era a little later than the US. We can't compare to those two countries in R&D spending today, but we eventually will. At that time we need to be able to at least be their equal. Russia is already up to American standards while China will catch up quickly. Other countries like Britain-France (JV), Japan, Sweden and Turkey will also have their own programs, 5th and 6th gen.

If we get our first AMCA and AURA prototype flying by 2017, we will only move forward from there. So, there is no point in setting a lesser goal and lag behind the rest of the world.

 

[p2prada]

so shall we redesign our LCA into a CAS fighter such as A 10 and Yak 130

Instead LCA can function as a trainer in order to train rookie pilots before moving to 5th gen aircraft.

The USAF uses F-16s as a trainer before pilots move to F-22s and F-35s.

 

[Shaitan]

 

[p2prada]

Could be the early MCA concepts made before the actual project started.

 

[ersakthivel]

as far as i know aircraft is not a car which can be modified easily and even a 1940 model can be converted into a speedster or hot rod.
its critical field and expertise and technology both are not with us. combined effect of all three is that settle with 4.5 gen advance plane with cheaper contents and mass production facility instead of getting 5th gen plane in 6th gen era

Agreed ,but if you look at J-20,PAKFA, they both are evolution of existing Mig-1.44 MFI and SUKHOI platforms, about which chinese and russian have lot of experience, so all they have to concentrate on is adopting them to x band stealth.

If they nitpicked on a brand new airframe(there is no need for it in the first place,since Mig-1.44, sukhoi are known and proven)their project will be delayed by atleast a decade.Serious professional design organizations like sukhoi won't buy IAF's bull shit ,out of the world fantasies for all world beating specs.

If you insist on two seater ,100 percent stealth like the IAF insisted on PAKFA earlier in 2005,they will transfer these design responsibilities on your head and,they will move ahead with their program.Because they are not a talking shop with no production and deadline responsibilities like IAF.

They have to make and sell 1000 fighters in good time and recoup their investment.

Because they have to keep production shedule and make some money to stay aloft in the business.Talking gas is not what they get paid for.

If you take 5 years give 3 different ASRs and reject 3 different models based on your fantasies seen on jane's defence weekly like IAF did on AMCA, then they won't care much about keeping their word ,and dump you with whatever they are going to produce for their airforce and world market.

Then all the HAL guys have to do is to keep repeatedly looking at the FGFA yellow colour models for a while and ultimately toe the russian line, saying HI..Hi.... we don't need two seater FFGA fighters now,since the whole world knows it is beyond the capacities of HAL and IAF combine to alter it.




But the IAF can afford to play football with ADA at leisure,sneering at ADA all the time.The chinese are test flying their 5th gen in 2012,And IAF is giving the FINAL ARS for AMCA only in 2011,means how fast the thinking process in IAF is,instead of sparring with GTRE-snecma ,advancing the spurious argument that GTRE won't gain any indigenous know how from GTRE-SNECMA deal and scuttling the JV for 3 years,the IAF could have finalised the ASR 3 years before.

If the ASR has been finalized in 2005 ,And a lot of design steps would have been finished by now.Testing of atleast the airframe would have atarted by 2014,The LCA TD flew just 78 years after the funding.

The problem is IAF is a fighting force ,and not engineering force.It just doesnot have the ability to get the correct assesment of technologicwl assesment of country's technical potential, and how to harness it into a 5th gen fighter with stealth capacities in time and how to employ tactics to take on the enemy.

That's why I said this ASR and GSQR things must be finalized by inter disciplinary committee chaired by competent people with knowledge and authority.It should never be alowed to become a late outcome of 5 year long confabulations between ADA abd IAF.

It injures our national security.

The tejas has been tested to death and increasing it size and putting another engine on it and acomadating internal bombbays on them and finishing it within 10 years with adequate capacities must be the first goal of first medium weight ,5th gen IAF fighter for the future.

Because right now the priority is to take on the J-20 with a much lighter, much lower all around signature ,much more stealthy 5th gen in a point defence role like the LCA tejas was once designed for.
I want another engine added because the country doesnot have the tech to produce a single engine with 180 kn thrust like they are doing for F-35.
SO add another engine, sacrifice a bit of range and keep the fighting specs in tact for a medium point defence fighter in 5th gen avathar for the4 already proven LCA aerodynamics.


Since we have all conquering PAKFA getting accepted with much diluted single seater and ,not F-22 equivalent stealth,why are we driving ada into into wall with much harder specs than SUKHOI design team?Does IAF thinks that ADA has more competence than SUKHOI in designing 5th gens?

If the MOD has any sense it should proceed along these lines.Then ADA and DRDO can pander to all the whims and fantasies of IAF in another heavy 5th gen fighter program to replace the RAFALE , and keep working on it for the next 25 years,No harm in that in a new project with all the bells and whistles.

 

[ersakthivel]

China will be moving into the 6th gen era a little later than the US. We can't compare to those two countries in R&D spending today, but we eventually will. At that time we need to be able to at least be their equal. Russia is already up to American standards while China will catch up quickly. Other countries like Britain-France (JV), Japan, Sweden and Turkey will also have their own programs, 5th and 6th gen.

If we get our first AMCA and AURA prototype flying by 2017, we will only move forward from there. So, there is no point in setting a lesser goal and lag behind the rest of the world.

If we take 10 years to set world beating ASR for the first 5th gen stealth, we will always lag behind.LOOK
despite comming 20 years behind F-22, J-20 is far inferior to F-22,Does the chinese care?They know right now they can only manage this much.Same for the PAKFA, it is not going to match F-22 either in stealth or avionics, because we are going to do the avionics.Are we better than F-22 standard?

SO IAF wants ADA to keep sucking it's thumb by setting out of the world specs much harder than chinese and SUKHOI ,while all other players like china,russia are pooling their national tech resourcees OF THE DAY to get 5th gen equivalents.
WHY doesn't it goes into IAF's head?

 

[ersakthivel]

Instead LCA can function as a trainer in order to train rookie pilots before moving to 5th gen aircraft.

The USAF uses F-16s as a trainer before pilots move to F-22s and F-35s.

Keep your advices on LCA usage to the ADA tejas thread.Good simulators make fine F-22 pilots in 2 years time, have you ever heard of that?

 

[ersakthivel]

Could be the early MCA concepts made before the actual project started.

It was the actual model of AMCA displayed in aero india ,before the IAF changed the ASR again (or not is still to be answered,because no body has posted the final ASR of AMCA here)
SO all the design work would have gone to waste if the model was changed.Then people will troll like the AMCA which starrted in 2009 is yet to........like blah,blah some day in 2020.

 

[p2prada]

Korea's T-50 is at the same level as the LCA and the USAF is looking at it as a trainer option. There is a whole thread with the discussion about LCA being a possible trainer for the USAF where orders can stretch anywhere between 350 and 1000. F-16 is the current LIFT trainer for F-22 pilots. These are facts. If simulators were so good, then every kid with a joystick in his hand will pilot the F-22.

You are the only idiot in the world who believes LCA is some God given aircraft that will beat F-22 and what not.

Even Israeli Air force is looking at the T-50 for trainer requirements and have already flight tested it. Both LCA Mk1 and T-50 have the exact same specs. A F-404 engine, 6.5 tons empty weight, 2.5 tons of fuel, 4-4.5 tons payload(better than LCA Mk1), it carries all kind of A2G loads including LGBs. It's external hardpoint design is far superior to what's on the LCA. It has 3 on each wing and one under the centerline for a large bomb.

You don't know anything about what others are doing, let alone what India is doing. You don't even know what are the global standards for airwarfare today. You don't know how airwarfare works and you ASSUME A LOT. You don't have the basic knowledge about airwarfare to even start assuming. Like what gave you the rather "brilliant" idea that the J-20 could be inferior to the F-22? Did some official from Chengdu say that to you? Did you read it in a journal? Did you speak to PLAAF officers? Obviously the answer is No. So, what gives you that idea? Even Lockheed Martin officials and even the chief designer of the F-22 cannot say for sure the J-20 is inferior or superior by just looking at photographs. Heck, the USAF looked at the Mig-31 photographs initially and thought it will be the best air superiority aircraft in the world, they were not even close to the truth when it was officially revealed to be an interceptor. So, stop ASSUMING, or you end up looking like the first 3 letters in that word, if not already.

Analysts assume because that's their job. You don't even know the ABCs of aircraft to start speculating even when people with years of experience in air forces have been wrong whenever they based their future on assumptions.

It is actually a pain to look at your posts. So, at least stop quoting me, the notifications are annoying. All you had to do was Google and you would have known the USAF requirement for trainers instead of posting ludicrous things.

 

[ersakthivel]

Korea's T-50 is at the same level as the LCA and the USAF is looking at it as a trainer option. There is a whole thread with the discussion about LCA being a possible trainer for the USAF where orders can stretch anywhere between 350 and 1000. F-16 is the current LIFT trainer for F-22 pilots. These are facts. If simulators were so good, then every kid with a joystick in his hand will pilot the F-22.

You are the only idiot in the world who believes LCA is some God given aircraft that will beat F-22 and what not.

Even Israeli Air force is looking at the T-50 for trainer requirements and have already flight tested it. Both LCA Mk1 and T-50 have the exact same specs. A F-404 engine, 6.5 tons empty weight, 2.5 tons of fuel, 4-4.5 tons payload(better than LCA Mk1), it carries all kind of A2G loads including LGBs. It's external hardpoint design is far superior to what's on the LCA. It has 3 on each wing and one under the centerline for a large bomb.

You don't know anything about what others are doing, let alone what India is doing. You don't even know what are the global standards for airwarfare today. You don't know how airwarfare works and you ASSUME A LOT. You don't have the basic knowledge about airwarfare to even start assuming. Like what gave you the rather "brilliant" idea that the J-20 could be inferior to the F-22?

WHOLE WORLD KNOWS.MAY BE WITH YOUR 4TH GRADE MANDARIN SKILLS YOU SEEM TO HAVE FOUND OUT THE OPPOSITE.IF THERE IS ANYTHING YOU DISCOVERED PLEASE POST ON THE J-20 THREAD,"REGARDING THE SUPERIORITY OF J-20 OVER F-22

Did some official from Chengdu say that to you? Did you read it in a journal? Did you speak to PLAAF officers? Obviously the answer is No. So, what gives you that idea? Even Lockheed Martin officials and even the chief designer of the F-22 cannot say for sure the J-20 is inferior or superior by just looking at photographs.

CAN YOU POST A SINGLE SPEC OF J-20?PROPOSED ENGINE THRUST,RADAR,AVIONICS,SENSORS?

Heck, the USAF looked at the Mig-31 photographs initially and thought it will be the best air superiority aircraft in the world, they were not even close to the truth when it was officially revealed to be an interceptor. So, stop ASSUMING, or you end up looking like the first 3 letters in that word, if not already.

Analysts assume because that's their job. You don't even know the ABCs of aircraft to start speculating even when people with years of experience in air forces have been wrong whenever they based their future on assumptions.

It is actually a pain to look at your posts. So, at least stop quoting me, the notifications are annoying. All you had to do was Google and you would have known the USAF requirement for trainers instead of posting ludicrous things.

1.what is the wing loading of korea's T-50?

2.Can it take off from airfields in LEh with 2 drop tanks and missiles?

3.Does it have cranked delta which mimicks the simple swept high wingloading wing's high AOA control at the wing root and ,along with the exceptional ITR performance of deltas with other part of the wing?

4.What is the TWR of t-50?

5.What is the composite level of T-50.

6.Will it have all the goodies available to LCA in next upgrade,the form of better eengine developed foe AMCA,and all tech upgrades like fly by light ,all electrical actuators.

Does the korean airforce fly 400 rust bucket migs with questionable engines and flying fossil jaguars THAT NEED URGENT REPLACEMENT?

KEEP DISCUSSION TO AMCA.

Answer.

You already made a grand stand on the roof top with a very pleasing post in ADA tejas with "I WON'T POST ON LCA ANYMORE".

THEN WHY ARE YOU DRAGGING LCA HERE?

WHY DON'T YOU POST AMCA SPECS?

INSTEAD YOU ARE DISCUSSING USING LCA AS TRINER.IS THIS THREAD MEANT FOR THAT PURPOSE?

IF THERE IS WHOLE SEPARATE THREAD FOR THE PURPOSE WHAT IS THE POINT IN DRAGGING IT HERE?
DON'T DERAIL DISCUSSIONS WITH YOUR OWN DIRECTIONS.

 

[p2prada]

What an amazingly intelligent list of questions.

 

[ersakthivel]

Answer the 6 questions on the lca tejas thread, and lets move the discussion there,not here,
it is not the place for that.
Thanks.

 

[ersakthivel]

In February 2009, ADA director P.S Subramanyam said at a Aero-India 2009 seminar, that they are working closely with Indian Air Force to develop a Medium Combat Aircraft. He added that according to the specification provided by the Indian Air Force, it would likely be a twenty ton aircraft powered by two GTX Kaveri engines.[4]
In April 2010, the Indian Air Force issued the Air Staff requirements (ASR) for the AMCA which placed the aircraft in the twenty five ton category.[5]
By August 2011, the aircraft was in its preliminary design phase. As of July 2012, with aerodynamic design optimisation near complete, the AMCA's broad specifications are final. The aicraft will have a weight of 16-18 tonnes [16-18 tons with 2-tons of internal weapons and four-tonnes of internal fuel with a combat ceiling of 15-km, max speed of 1.8-Mach at 11-km.[9] The final design is expected to be shown to the air force by 2012, after which full scale development on the aircraft may start.[11]

I hope the final ASR of amca configuration remains the final ASR of august 2011, till the aircraft is designed.

SO real configuration for amca's aerodynamic has just started it seems, or not ?according to the final ASR .

That's why I said the job of configuring 'SO MANY FINAL ASR' must be left to the inter disciplinary committee comprised of eminent technical guys , with inputs from IAF and ADA,

SO we are finalizing the asr of amca only in 2011 august ,when J-20 was so close to first flight.

Who is responsible for this delay?

Since the flying wing type model of AMCA with no tail fins was bandied about for so many years, is this a joke?

In my opinion if right thought process was applied this asr could have been finalized on 2003 iself,and atleast the airframe could have been test flown with suitable low powered alternative engine by 2014 or so.