Indian scientists discover materials that self-repair mechanical damages
Posted On: 24 JUL 2021 5:10PM by PIB Delhi
New materials may soon make it possible for damaged electronic components, such as in space crafts, to mend themselves. The materials recently developed by scientists can repair their own mechanical damages with the electrical charges generated by the mechanical impact on them.
Maolenkar sir on twitter had clearly stated navy will not convert some land based a/c to its needs as it often results in subpar platform ...ada didn't consider a naval requirement early in the program and now its too late any radical design change will further delay the much needed program.
Maolenkar sir on twitter had clearly stated navy will not convert some land based a/c to its needs as it often results in subpar platform ...ada didn't consider a naval requirement early in the program and now its too late any radical design change will further delay the much needed program.
That isn't what I am saying. @Bleh suggested that after AMCA Mk1, they could do what they did with Tejas and make a bigger AMCA Mk2. An AMCA Mk2 in the Su-30MKI category maybe. Just like Tejas Mk2 is now in the medium category. Similar thing also happened in the case of the Hornet which grew up to be Superhornet.
But I doubt they could do that easily on a stealth bird like AMCA.
The proposed JV engine of 110 kN is said to be upgradable by 20% thrust, which translates to around 130 kN.
Thus incraesing the size of AMCA to similar to Su-30 mki seems logical, if it translates to improved fuel capacity and increased payload
The proposed JV engine of 110 kN is said to be upgradable by 20% thrust, which translates to around 130 kN.
Thus incraesing the size of AMCA to similar to Su-30 mki seems logical, if it translates to improved fuel capacity and increased payload
I am talking in terms of MTOW. We can't go from AMCA size to F-22 or J-20 size. Heck, its better to design a new plane at that point. And we'll need to design a 6th gen either way by 2050. The design effort for that should begin in 2030 itself, with FSED starting after AMCA Mk2 is done by late 2030s.
What I mean is that a 5th gen in the Su30MKI category won't have the payload and thrust of just the Su-30MKI, it would be comparable to J-20.
That isn't what I am saying. @Bleh suggested that after AMCA Mk1, they could do what they did with Tejas and make a bigger AMCA Mk2. An AMCA Mk2 in the Su-30MKI category maybe. Just like Tejas Mk2 is now in the medium category. Similar thing also happened in the case of the Hornet which grew up to be Superhornet.
But I doubt they could do that easily on a stealth bird like AMCA.
Its still too early to talk about amca mk2 so far we can only confirm it will have a better engine and unmanned capabilities.
IMO there won't be substantial design or size difference between both like lca vs mwf.
Its still too early to talk about amca mk2 so far we can only confirm it will have a better engine and unmanned capabilities.
IMO there won't be substantial design or size difference between both like lca vs mwf.
For our own sake, I hope there isn't any substantial difference and the differences are limited to the engine and unmanned capability. AMCA has a modular cockpit, so maybe a module to swap out the cockpit with an unmanned cockpit module that turns AMCA into optionally manned. Other than that, AMCA Mk1 and Mk2 should be largely similar or else the delay would be too much.
The proposed JV engine of 110 kN is said to be upgradable by 20% thrust, which translates to around 130 kN.
Thus incraesing the size of AMCA to similar to Su-30 mki seems logical, if it translates to improved fuel capacity and increased payload
Dry thrust is important. A 20% increase from 75 KN gives 90 KN of dry thrust. All this thrust from a GEF414 sized engine. It's too steep a task. Pratt and Whitney stuff. Even if RR manages to develop this tech, neither they will transfer the technology nor the IP. Period. Infact that decision is way above RR. Obviously UK Govt and hence US will have to give the final nod. And here people are saying 'Hell with CAATSA'. Nobody seems to get a grasp of the extend to which American stuffs are used in Domestic Military Products. Even the components inside seekers of our missiles, satellites etc...
For our own sake, I hope there isn't any substantial difference and the differences are limited to the engine and unmanned capability. AMCA has a modular cockpit, so maybe a module to swap out the cockpit with an unmanned cockpit module that turns AMCA into optionally manned. Other than that, AMCA Mk1 and Mk2 should be largely similar or else the delay would be too much.
I concur.Amca mk2's focus should be on improved materials(better ram,lighter structure etc) and flexibility so it could absorb newer tech at short notice
Actually ISRO has developed technologies that are needed to build ETOS.
Our optical EO satellites have very good resolution.
We have to miniaturize these technologies from ISRO and develop necessary software to compensate motion, target identification , classification and tracking.
I really appreciate your enthusiasm, but miniaturization is again will come to much later stages of AMCA development, probably in its Mk1 or Mk2 variant.
You have valid concerns about EOTS not been in amca,eots being a cutting edge sensor needs quite heavy technology research but dw AMCA would definitely have eots and many of technologies are developed already if not complete.
Like I said, technology development is good, but that won't come up in the first variant of AMCA, expect them in later variants.
To all folks who I've replied, it doesn't mean its capabilities won't be enough, without EOTS based tech, the first variant with an IRST pod could be attached and would still be far more leather than the J20s. A pod with SAR and EOTS based sensor suite would do just fine.
The question is, will the IRDE be able to do it with planned powerplant because 95KN won't cut in if we are going with those at first. 110KN sure, but barely.
Hopefully IRDE will package them all in a single unit as well. Who knows.
That isn't what I am saying. @Bleh suggested that after AMCA Mk1, they could do what they did with Tejas and make a bigger AMCA Mk2. An AMCA Mk2 in the Su-30MKI category maybe. Just like Tejas Mk2 is now in the medium category. Similar thing also happened in the case of the Hornet which grew up to be Superhornet.
But I doubt they could do that easily on a stealth bird like AMCA.
Right now there is no 6th genration plane. USA's NGAD is under developement. But the question is how much more will it incorporate design changes over 5th generation plane. You see 4th generation planes airframe already had a very good level of manuverability. 5th genration incorpoarted stealth, while retaing manuverability. Other changes like RAM coatings, electronics, radars, engine are all back compatible with 4th genration stuff. Also, the stealth aspects of F22/F35 is already quite matured, and a lot of CED modelling (using supercomputer) have been done and RCS tested. I don't foresee any major stealth design to emerge in the 6th genration fighters like NGAD/Temptest/FCAS, giving it a great leap over existing 5th genration platforms.
From our perspective, we need to sustain our aircraft programme in the next decade. For that AMCA mk2 and TEDBF mk2 seems logical (rather than going for a new design which itself takes more a decade to mature).
Copying smartly is more advantageous especially if you have lots of cash to burn, 100BN to be specific on military hardware. There capability of copying can easily be seen with its Nanjing Wiiboox 3D Technology Co. factory which 3D prints Composites which are now being staple in there fighter jet programs such as J20s and the awaited naval variant stealth jet. The RAM coating on J20 along with composites is much better than even SU57s.
The main question is whether such material air worthy.
It will have to go through lot of stress testing, flutter testing and vibration testing before it can be treated air worthy. Its IR signature also needs to identified during flight.
Effects of vibration, stress and flutter on RF-attenuation also need to identified.
What about effect of S-band and L-band radars?
If you look at the F22 program and then the later program of F35 and even the NGs B2, its already clear that different type of RAM coating are applied to different areas of the airframes. Example stabilizers and nose cones have erosion seen in F22 and F35. So its much more likely to assume that all research with different RAM material will be applied to different sections of the jet.
It should be.. But expect other factors. Like MWF has same T/W ratio as LCA due to increments.
I won't be surprised if AMCA Mk2 is larger.
Yea that's what I'm saying, very old news that it's not. View attachment 117111
Frontally canards are dihedral, so absolutely not... 8 signature producer fins compared to 4 of F-22/35. Go eat your bat-penis soup. (Indians don't get too happy, neither is our AMCA.. We both have had different priorities)
The proposed JV engine of 110 kN is said to be upgradable by 20% thrust, which translates to around 130 kN.
Thus incraesing the size of AMCA to similar to Su-30 mki seems logical, if it translates to improved fuel capacity and increased payload
If you increase composites percentage by 3D printing them, then you can go with 110KN non-enhanced versions with still improved fuel capacity, you will be ready from day one to be able to have slight better T/W ratio.
What is composite usage percentage in our AMCA?
Much of this can be predicted by just tracking the J20 program.
From our perspective, we need to sustain our aircraft programme in the next decade. For that AMCA mk2 and TEDBF mk2 seems logical (rather than going for a new design which itself takes more a decade to mature).
We must realize that in trying to catch up with Western military technology, we are trying to hit a fast moving target. Its clear that China and USA will field a 6th Gen in the early 2040s. I am talking with 2050 as the service date for our 6th Gen. This should be our goal if we aim to be a viable superpower. By 2050, Indian defence budget would be more than half the American budget, without the need to maintain an expensive list of foreign bases or forward positioning. Suffice it to say that in monetary terms, we would be putting in roughly the same amount of money as USA in military R&D in the late 2040s onwards (obviously, equal investment in R&D won't yeild us an equal result because we won't have the advantage of a knowledge based economy, knowledgr accrual, etc). Despite having such resources invested into R&D, if we are not aiming at being at least one step behind the Americans by then, it will be pointless. So we definitely should aim at fielding our 6th Gen fighter within 10-15 years of the Americans fielding theirs.
By 2036-37, ADA should be mostly free from AMCA Mk2 and there is no such thing as a TEDBF Mk2 yet. At that point, entire ADA and Air Force itself should start PDP on a 6th Gen fighter. Technologies required for it need to be developed continuously and in tandem with AMCA. While AMCA remains the focus area, there are technologies that will not make it into AMCA, but 6th gen fighter.
Right now there is no 6th genration plane. USA's NGAD is under developement. But the question is how much more will it incorporate design changes over 5th generation plane. You see 4th generation planes airframe already had a very good level of manuverability. 5th genration incorpoarted stealth, while retaing manuverability. Other changes like RAM coatings, electronics, radars, engine are all back compatible with 4th genration stuff. Also, the stealth aspects of F22/F35 is already quite matured, and a lot of CED modelling (using supercomputer) have been done and RCS tested. I don't foresee any major stealth design to emerge in the 6th genration fighters like NGAD/Temptest/FCAS, giving it a great leap over existing 5th genration platforms.
6th Gen is being defined as we speak and we don't know which way the meta will develop. But we do have some idea.
First off, the elimination of vertical stabilizers, canards, any other small feature on the fighter jet that can give a resonance return in the L-band. So while 5th Gen stealth is limited primarily to radar bands used for targeting (such as X and Ku bands), 6th Gen stealth will focus on being VLO even to early warning radars of L band. That alone affords a massive tactical advantage.
Another factor is that we need to think of 6th Gen as a system of systems. A 6th Gen fighter will only be a part of it. The wingman concept that is in its infancy with 5th Gen systems, will evolve to be far more distributed, connected, versatile and automated than the systems in design today.
Other areas include an adaptive cycle engine that will massively increase fuel efficiency and boost combat radius of 6th Gen planes.
Yet another area is CIWS. I believe 6th Gen planes will incorporate some form of missile and DEW based CIWS system, drastically improving their survivability beyond any 4th or 5th Gen airframe.
Increased computing power (enabled by increased electric power due to newer engines) will allow 6th Gen to launch coordinated cyber-EW attacks at unprcedented levels that will devastate enemy C2 networks and IADS.
Intelligent Vehicle Health Monitoring, self-healing and fault tolerance on 6th Gen planes will be a generation ahead of the 5th Gen counterparts.
6th Gen fighters will be more focused on air superiority role, thereby will likely be larger (Su-30, J-20 category), while also having a much larger internal weapons bay capability (entirely due to the adaptive cycle engines).
This is what I wrote about my understanding of a 6th Gen a few months ago:-
You are talking about the upcoming generation of drone swarms. Future drone swarms will have much better autonomy due to leaps in AI technology (which will happen much faster than leaps in other areas of air combat). In addition, the kind of swarms I am talking about will be carried inside 6th gen fighters and will be used to defend against missiles. A kind of swarm of tiny interceptor missiles. Current CATS systems don't have anything like that. The kind of future system I am takling about won't just plug and play with current 4th and 5th gen fighters because it relies on magazine capacity for effectiveness. Large 6th gen planes will be able to carry a swarm inside them.
^At 2:43 Serrio Mal intercepts Rocinante's missiles.
^At 0:43 Rocinante's missile swarm intercepts the UNN battleship's missiles and defends the Razorback.
I know its "just a TV show" but the idea has merit. A swarm of HTK interceptors carried inside or flying as wingmen to your jet and if enemy BVRAAMs come close and evasion; soft-kill through ECM and DIRCM; hard-kill through DEW, all fails, you use the HTK interceptor swarm to block multiple BVRAAMs. And why just stop at HTK interceptors. Some of these mini interceptors can have an HPM warhead that EMPs the incoming BVRAAM.
This will force future BVRAAM to evolve as well, relying on AI to evade HTK interceptors and flying in swarms to saturate enemy jet's hard-kill defences. This then points to requirement of a larger BVRAAM carriage capacity, all hinting towards heavier fighter jets.
The major technological challenges towards making such a swarm of HTK defensive missile swarm will likely be:-
Control: By 2040, AI will easily evolve to be autonomous enough to not require human intervention to complete a BVRAAM interception and to keep up with AI of future BVRAAM.
Propulsion: Simple solid rocket motors won't work. Throttling and ramjets will become indispensable. Good that we have SFDR to rely on. More energy dense fuels will be needed, there is progress in that as well.
Manuever: Much higher Gs will be required to handle interceptions from the rear. Can be done through advances in composite material tech, especially better reinforcement fibers. Tiny attitude control thrusters in the nose are already a thing in missiles.
Miniaturization: One thing that works in favour is the defensive nature of the HTK missiles which won't have to fly far to hit the incoming BVRAAM. The more challenging part will be miniaturization (and ruggedization) of electronics.
Although this tech looks super-advanced, by my assessment, the Americans will have the capability to make these things by 2040-45. As you said, drone capability can be added later, so even if Americans roll-out their 6th gen fighters by 2040, they can add this capability 5 years later. DEW will be required to be ready by 2040. Looking at their current progress, I think they can have DEW weapons ready by 2040. These two will be some of the defining capabilities of 6th gen fighters. Now imagine 4th gen fighters supported by a swarm of current CATS systems going against this machine. 4th gen are going to be toast. Hard-kill against BVRAAM completely changes the game, and that is how 6th Gen air warfare should (and likely would) be defined.
.
What the Europeans are doing looks like a half-hearted attempt at a 5.5th Gen fighter. Despite of what they say, other than the engine and a couple of planned capabilities such as cooperative engagement, nothing about their jets is 6th Gen. Heck, take away the engine and everything else they are planning is already planned for AMCA Mk2.
.
Overall, 6th Gen should be able to:-
Fly further with much larger weapons load (meaning it needs breakthroughs in engine efficiency which is already happening with major leaps in materials, CFD and adaptive cycle)
Have better stealth (newer RAM, RAS; tailless design and fluidic thrust vectoring; better IR suppression due to third airstream in engine)
Have capability to hardkill BVRAAM swarm (DEW and large capacity of autonomous HTK defensive missile swarm)
Advanced Avionics (Photonic radar; Advanced AI-assistance to pilot enabling just one pilot to handle the wingmen swarm, defensive missile swarm, any offensive BVRAAM swarm launched, flying the jet itself i.e. optionally manned, combat manuever, tactical decisions, etc; Advanced, all-aspect, fused sensors with quantum communication that is capable of networking to the level that each sensor of each asset on a battlefield is able to act like a part of a gigantic distributed aperture, and therefore each 6th gen jet should be able to seamlessly share data (5th Gen has already addressed this to an extent); hardening of avionics against future HPM devices and DEW. Fusing data from all these things will require a much higher computing power)
All Electrical actuators
Next Gen AI enabled BVRAAM that can tackle swarms of enemy defensive HTK missiles and still defeat enemy jets.
Simpler maintenance, better availability and quicker turnaround times (AI enabled predictive Structural Health Monitoring, robotics, modularization, no hydraulics, more rugged RAM/RAS, fluidic thrust vectoring, etc)
First step is defining what 6th gen warfare will look like based on technologies expected to mature in next two decades. Next step is deciding the role of the fighter jet in it (including mission profiles). After that the first step in design of a 6th gen fighter is "sizing". I've briefly laid out all these steps and to me it looks like 6th Gen fighters should be heavy.
Yes some of these improvements, like advancements in AI, can be back-ported to 5th Gen. Yet others like L-band stealth, CIWS, larger weapons bay, better self-healing stealth materials can't be back-ported. Similar to how today you can only back-port part of the 5th Gen technologies to the 4th Gen airframe. So yeah, in 2035, it would be better to go for a new clean sheet design than to keep on sticking with AMCA upgrades till 2050. No doubt we should continue to buy and upgrade AMCAs, but the 6th Gen program needs to be started on the right time, or we lose our edge. The Chinese R&D would have matured by then, they'll be fielding formidable platforms against us.
We must realize that in trying to catch up with Western military technology, we are trying to hit a fast moving target. Its clear that China and USA will field a 6th Gen in the early 2040s. I am talking with 2050 as the service date for our 6th Gen. This should be our goal if we aim to be a viable superpower. By 2050, Indian defence budget would be more than half the American budget, without the need to maintain an expensive list of foreign bases or forward positioning. Suffice it to say that in monetary terms, we would be putting in roughly the same amount of money as USA in military R&D in the late 2040s onwards (obviously, equal investment in R&D won't yeild us an equal result because we won't have the advantage of a knowledge based economy, knowledgr accrual, etc). Despite having such resources invested into R&D, if we are not aiming at being at least one step behind the Americans by then, it will be pointless. So we definitely should aim at fielding our 6th Gen fighter within 10-15 years of the Americans fielding theirs.
By 2036-37, ADA should be mostly free from AMCA Mk2 and there is no such thing as a TEDBF Mk2 yet. At that point, entire ADA and Air Force itself should start PDP on a 6th Gen fighter. Technologies required for it need to be developed continuously and in tandem with AMCA. While AMCA remains the focus area, there are technologies that will not make it into AMCA, but 6th gen fighter.
6th Gen is being defined as we speak and we don't know which way the meta will develop. But we do have some idea.
First off, the elimination of vertical stabilizers, canards, any other small feature on the fighter jet that can give a resonance return in the L-band. So while 5th Gen stealth is limited primarily to radar bands used for targeting (such as X and Ku bands), 6th Gen stealth will focus on being VLO even to early warning radars of L band. That alone affords a massive tactical advantage.
Another factor is that we need to think of 6th Gen as a system of systems. A 6th Gen fighter will only be a part of it. The wingman concept that is in its infancy with 5th Gen systems, will evolve to be far more distributed, connected, versatile and automated than the systems in design today.
Other areas include an adaptive cycle engine that will massively increase fuel efficiency and boost combat radius of 6th Gen planes.
Yet another area is CIWS. I believe 6th Gen planes will incorporate some form of missile and DEW based CIWS system, drastically improving their survivability beyond any 4th or 5th Gen airframe.
Increased computing power (enabled by increased electric power due to newer engines) will allow 6th Gen to launch coordinated cyber-EW attacks at unprcedented levels that will devastate enemy C2 networks and IADS.
Intelligent Vehicle Health Monitoring, self-healing and fault tolerance on 6th Gen planes will be a generation ahead of the 5th Gen counterparts.
6th Gen fighters will be more focused on air superiority role, thereby will likely be larger (Su-30, J-20 category), while also having a much larger internal weapons bay capability (entirely due to the adaptive cycle engines).
This is what I wrote about my understanding of a 6th Gen a few months ago:-
Yes some of these improvements, like advancements in AI, can be back-ported to 5th Gen. Yet others like L-band stealth, CIWS, larger weapons bay, better self-healing stealth materials can't be back-ported. Similar to how today you can only back-port part of the 5th Gen technologies to the 4th Gen airframe. So yeah, in 2035, it would be better to go for a new clean sheet design than to keep on sticking with AMCA upgrades till 2050. No doubt we should continue to buy and upgrade AMCAs, but the 6th Gen program needs to be started on the right time, or we lose our edge. The Chinese R&D would have matured by then, they'll be fielding formidable platforms against us.
We already have a concept of 6th gen and I think we're working on it too we should explore things like electromagnetic propulsion for aircrafts afaik DRDO worked on "some tech" like these since the 80s don't know the status things like these are not as complicated as turbo fan engines
Yes. ACM Bhadauria said they are looking at 6th Gen concepts. Which is exactly what is needed. This time, it shouldn't be the same old "ASQR" crap. They need a dedicated team that shuttles between TACDE, ADA and College of Air Warfare. They need to develop the concept of a 6th Gen system of systems.
