AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

Lonewolf

Psychopathic Neighbour
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
4,673
Likes
14,447
Country flag
Something heavy like F-22 or J-20.
Can't amca design help in faster deveolpment of such a jet ?? , A chonky version based on it but tail fins acting as vertical stabilizer too , and bubble canopy , fatter nose .

As the European engine can be upgraded ,hope our indigenous turbofan can be developed into a heavy turbofan of 150 kn thrust ,but that will require change un metallurgy or the efficiency maybe hurt .
 

Hariharan_kalarikkal

๐•ฑ๐–”๐–”๐–‘๐–˜ ๐–—๐–š๐–˜๐– ๐–†๐–“๐–‰ ๐–†๐–“๐–Œ๐–Š๐–‘๐–˜ ๐–‹๐–Š๐–†๐–—
Banned
Joined
Aug 28, 2019
Messages
5,091
Likes
24,429
Country flag
Can't amca design help in faster deveolpment of such a jet ?? , A chonky version based on it but tail fins acting as vertical stabilizer too , and bubble canopy , fatter nose .

As the European engine can be upgraded ,hope our indigenous turbofan can be developed into a heavy turbofan of 150 kn thrust ,but that will require change un metallurgy or the efficiency maybe hurt .
It would be an Excellent approach imo
Hornet and Super hornet
main-qimg-2f54130dd50490fcfd1ad0efb0f53ea7.gif


F4F Wildcat and F6F Hellcat
main-qimg-87e90b9bffb309847dd34a92c136222f.png
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
2,250
Likes
2,009
Country flag
MTOW of MKI is ~39 tonnes.
That for AMCA is 25 tonnes. AMCA due to its medium payload won't able to do what a heavy fighter would. Though, it could take certain such operations in stop gap with limited goals. That's why it's being called multirole fighter.

No it does, if math exists, it does. This classification exists because it matters for air forces to define capabilities.

That's how fighters are classified for roles and capacities first place. AMCA is a stealth alternative of Rafael, TEDBF and F-18 Growler. Not Su 30 MkI at all.
From initial configuration on paper AMCA will be more capable than MKI in A-A operation. It will be more capable A-G operation where it doesn't need to carry huge missile like Brahmos or Rustom (don't know why Rustom is so heavy). I am also skeptical about A-G guided munitions like DRDO Glide Bombs or Sudarshan laser-guided bomb in stealth configuration (i.e. in internal weapons bay)
AMCA will carry SDB, SAAW and similar class of weapons easily.
Anti-Ship role is where I have my reservation till AMCA successfully integrates Brahmos, we don't have any alternative in our arsenal yet.
Entire situation regarding AMCA weapons package is in flux only time will tell..

Another thing to lookout is range and power (espically since advent of DEW) available. Even though MKI has advantage in MTOW but is is a fuel guzzler. It all depends on engine efficiency.
 

Tang

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
450
Likes
1,025
Country flag
MTOW of MKI is ~39 tonnes.
That for AMCA is 25 tonnes. AMCA due to its medium payload won't able to do what a heavy fighter would. Though, it could take certain such operations in stop gap with limited goals. That's why it's being called multirole fighter.

No it does, if math exists, it does. This classification exists because it matters for air forces to define capabilities.

That's how fighters are classified for roles and capacities first place. AMCA is a stealth alternative of Rafael, TEDBF and F-18 Growler. Not Su 30 MkI at all.
MTOW means nothing ultimately payload is what makes the difference,
Rafale can carry a payload of 8-9 tons
While MKI can carry a payload of 8 tons
 

Spitfire9

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
634
Likes
1,728
Country flag
Can't amca design help in faster deveolpment of such a jet ?? , A chonky version based on it but tail fins acting as vertical stabilizer too , and bubble canopy , fatter nose .

As the European engine can be upgraded ,hope our indigenous turbofan can be developed into a heavy turbofan of 150 kn thrust ,but that will require change un metallurgy or the efficiency maybe hurt .
When you talk of the European engine, do you mean the brand new engine proposal under discussion with RR? When you say your indigenous turbofan can be developed into a heavy turbofan of 150 kn thrust ,but that will require change un metallurgy or the efficiency maybe hurt, do you mean further development of that new 110kN-120kN engine independently by India to reach 150kN?

IIRC correctly the aim is to reach an agreement with RR by year end (not a detailed contract but enough detail for India to decide whether to go further with the idea).
 

Lonewolf

Psychopathic Neighbour
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
4,673
Likes
14,447
Country flag
When you talk of the European engine, do you mean the brand new engine proposal under discussion with RR? When you say your indigenous turbofan can be developed into a heavy turbofan of 150 kn thrust ,but that will require change un metallurgy or the efficiency maybe hurt, do you mean further development of that new 110kN-120kN engine independently by India to reach 150kN?

IIRC correctly the aim is to reach an agreement with RR by year end (not a detailed contract but enough detail for India to decide whether to go further with the idea).
The jv
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
2,250
Likes
2,009
Country flag
That is platform dependent, a heavy weight aircraft with a great engine can easily outrange Rafale.
If you have good engines (efficient) then you don't need heavy aircraft. Medium weight category aircraft can perform the duties of heavy weight aircraft.
One of the prime advantages of heavy weight aircraft is additional fuel carrying capacity but if the aircraft is fuel guzzler lkike MKI that advantage is nullified.
Other advantage is capability to carry huge sized payload (physical dimension).

At the same time weapons systems/package must be also miniaturized. With advent of new technologies miniaturization is taking place.

First and foremost to adapt AMCA for strike role Rudram and other guided munition needs to miniaturized.
 

FalconSlayers

Based Kashmiri
Banned
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
13,688
Likes
64,777
Country flag
If you have good engines (efficient) then you don't need heavy aircraft. Medium weight category aircraft can perform the duties of heavy weight aircraft.
One of the prime advantages of heavy weight aircraft is additional fuel carrying capacity.

At the same time weapons systems/package must be also miniaturized. With advent of new technologies miniaturization is taking place.

First and foremost to adapt AMCA for strike role Rudram and other guided munition needs to miniaturized.
Plus BVRAAMs and Stand Off missiles eliminate the need of heavy weights, was just explaining him that an efficient engine can actually help in higher distance travelling in a heavy fighter.
 

Lonewolf

Psychopathic Neighbour
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
4,673
Likes
14,447
Country flag
If you have good engines (efficient) then you don't need heavy aircraft. Medium weight category aircraft can perform the duties of heavy weight aircraft.
One of the prime advantages of heavy weight aircraft is additional fuel carrying capacity but if the aircraft is fuel guzzler lkike MKI that advantage is nullified.
Other advantage is capability to carry huge sized payload (physical dimension).

At the same time weapons systems/package must be also miniaturized. With advent of new technologies miniaturization is taking place.

First and foremost to adapt AMCA for strike role Rudram and other guided munition needs to miniaturized.
Rudram is a ARM , you can't miniaturize it for same range , it will have range penalty , rudram is supersonic , and range is almost 200 km + , better than many system available .

And in war stealth is useful for preliminary role , afterwards ut would be our rudram mk1 , 2 ,3 .
Brahmos a ,etc doing the party
 

Spitfire9

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
634
Likes
1,728
Country flag
I have followed the debate regarding the virtues of medium weight and heavy weight aircraft and I get the impression that the relative inefficiency of the MKI engines versus a 'clean sheet' AMCA Mk2 engine would erode much of the 'paper' advantage of MKI (load/range).

Mk1A took ~5 years to actually order after the decision to go ahead was made and will start to be delivered 8-9 years after go ahead. And that for an enhanced Tejas, not a new design.

But AMCA Mk2 could come to the rescue, if any AHCA is so late that IAF has to get hold of new fighters, couldn't it? Might not be ideal but something is a million times better than nothing.
 

pipebomb

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2021
Messages
172
Likes
334
Country flag
Thanks for your reply. I have two more questions related to this
1} I have heard hal mentioning 110kn minimum requirement for amca engine. Given aero dynamic compromises one has to make for stealth shaping also limited internal fuel without external tanks, dry thrust is more important than wet thrust for a 5th gen stealth. My question is there a minimum requirement from ada/hal for the dry thrust.
2} Should we not aim to match 75%(approx) dry thrust as f119(which is 30 years old) even with RR partnership
 

Lonewolf

Psychopathic Neighbour
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
4,673
Likes
14,447
Country flag
Thanks for your reply. I have two more questions related to this
1} I have heard hal mentioning 110kn minimum requirement for amca engine. Given aero dynamic compromises one has to make for stealth shaping also limited internal fuel without external tanks, dry thrust is more important than wet thrust for a 5th gen stealth. My question is there a minimum requirement from ada/hal for the dry thrust.
2} Should we not aim to match 75%(approx) dry thrust as f119(which is 30 years old) even with RR partnership
I would not suggest so .

1) manuverability is seen by thryst to weight ratio alongside body shaping , amca is more optimized for manuverability compared to raw stealth , as raw stealth aircraft face more strain on body parts and higher down time for aircraft and more maintenance too .

2) learning from lesson of other country , it is a try to a perfect balance between stealth and manuverability , also it need to be optimized for least possible maintenance and downtime .

3) what we can aim for is a engine like m88 on scalability ,that engine is designed to be modified in future for higher thrust requirements without much penalty on fuel efficiency .

4) with 75 kn dry thrust ,it will be having 150 kn of thrust for 25 ton aircraft , that's almost same as that of f 22 with the penalty of its tvc that it uses , but we require a f 35 type 3d tvc in amca indigenous engine .

5) if required in further stage , and if Design allows ,we can increase thrust to about 20 &25 percent that's about 135 kn + wet thrust and 88 kn dry thrust , i think that's enough for whole development plan for future
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top