AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

[SARTHAK]

probably on serrated panels imo

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

AMCA should not suffer the massive delays & procrastination as with LCA. Chance favors the prepared mind.
LCA should have been inflated to MWF long back, similarly as we will make a future 125KN engine & making progress in avionics & other sub-systems, so AMCA should be inflated to AHCA which we should try to have by 2035. Difference b/w LCA & MWF is 3 decades, this should not be case b/w AMCA & AHCA otherwise AHCA prototype will fly in 2055.
If govt. agencies can't do it alone then this is the right time to orient & integrate private sector at sub-systems level which will also generate employment opportunities.

 

[Blademaster]

Turning the tedbf into an airforce fighter would be a project in itself .. Since AMCA is there this project is dead in the water.

How so? If anything at all, building a naval plane is a much more rigorous process than an air force version. All you would need to do is eliminate the tailhook and be able to add more payload. After all the F-18s were bought and used by air forces around the world not in a naval role but in an aerial role.

 

[karn]

How so? If anything at all, building a naval plane is a much more rigorous process than an air force version. All you would need to do is eliminate the tailhook and be able to add more payload. After all the F-18s were bought and used by air forces around the world not in a naval role but in an aerial role.

Yeah .. But whatever modifications the naval fighter needs for the airforce version needs to be designed and validated. Airforce also have different requirements WRT to performance at altitude maneuverability etc. All this someone has to pay for .. which the airforce isnt going to.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Guys, TEDBF thread watchers may not be watching this thread.

 

[SARTHAK]

AMCA should not suffer the massive delays & procrastination as with LCA. Chance favors the prepared mind.
LCA should have been inflated to MWF long back, similarly as we will make a future 125KN engine & making progress in avionics & other sub-systems, so AMCA should be inflated to AHCA which we should try to have by 2035. Difference b/w LCA & MWF is 3 decades, this should not be case b/w AMCA & AHCA otherwise AHCA prototype will fly in 2055.
If govt. agencies can't do it alone then this is the right time to orient & integrate private sector at sub-systems level which will also generate employment opportunities.

all of this depends on tejas mk2 ,if that is delayed ,amca wil be late ,tejas mk2 will be crucial as many new tech will be going into it and then there improvement of those will find its place in amca

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

all of this depends on tejas mk2 ,if that is delayed ,amca wil be late ,tejas mk2 will be crucial as many new tech will be going into it and then there improvement of those will find its place in amca

MWF is a delta-canard & AMCA is tandem-bi-plane. FCS will be different.
5th gen design requirement do not depend on 4th gen.
Can u pls give specific examples of those components which cannot be implemented in AMCA until done in MWF?
Suppose hypothetically MWF is cancelled, u think it will affect AMCA?

 

[Lonewolf]

MWF is a delta-canard & AMCA is tandem-bi-plane. FCS will be different.
5th gen design requirement do not depend on 4th gen.
Can u pls give specific examples of those components which cannot be implemented in AMCA until done in MWF?
Suppose hypothetically MWF is cancelled, u think it will affect AMCA?

Software part , avionics , actuators , MFD , sensor fusion , weapon integration ??

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Software part , avionics , actuators , MFD , sensor fusion , weapon integration ??

I already told u that FCS/avionics/S-w will be different for different airframe. How will u deploy canard logic in a jet w/o canards & vice-versa?
Actuators can be common but that doesn't make 2 projects interdependent. A turbo-prop ormodified business-jet testbed can be used to test it.
I really doubt if these 2 jets will have same cockpit. Same MFD can be used but the 3rd party MFD manufacturer like Samtel will provide independently to 2 different projects. That doesn't make 2 projects interdependent. And again MFD testing can be done in a S/w lab.
AMCA is 5th gen, supposed to have more sensors than 4th gen MWF. For RCS reduction, all sensors on AMCA needs to be embedded smoothly in airframe while in 4th gen they are buldging out & easily visible. We can't really compare F-22 & Rafale for example. Again a turboprop or modified business-jet testbed A/c can test sensors like air data sensors, inertial sensors
New gen jets require new gen weapons with restricted dimensions for IWB. But again their testing can be done on any existing jet.
Hence hypothetically even if MWF is cancelled, it won't impact AMCA. LCA can also test some components.
Some examples of testbed jets:

 

[MirageBlue]

How so? If anything at all, building a naval plane is a much more rigorous process than an air force version. All you would need to do is eliminate the tailhook and be able to add more payload. After all the F-18s were bought and used by air forces around the world not in a naval role but in an aerial role.

There is no doubt that the TEDBF can be turned into an Air Force fighter with MUCH LESSER work than had to be done to turn Tejas LCA into a Naval LCA.

But there is work to be done, not just to remove the tail-hook. They'll be expected to lighten structures that are designed for much higher sink rates for carrier landing and also remove the wing folding mechanism that imposes a 8G max load on the TEDBF. They'll also have to re-design the main landing gear and probably even the nose gear (since the nose gear is likely being designed with catapult launching requirement in mind).

Basically the empty weight of the Air Force variant of the TEDBF would have to be at least 800-1000 kg lower than that of the Navy TEDBF. If the IAF wants, it can then get an absolute beast of a TEDBF variant. Far more powerful than the Rafale, with equivalent or more modern avionics and amazing payload.

Sadly, given the type of IAF leadership we have, I doubt that there is any plan to develop that IAF variant of TEDBF so far. They are completely stuck on 114 MRFA and nothing else.

 

[Ar.gaurav28]

so AMCA should be inflated to AHCA which we should try to have by 2035

My opinion :-
we don’t need a AHCA but as such around 30Ton fighter will be of perfect spec jet for Indian needs neither a true middleweight nor a heavyweight,a balance between both & as per news about 125kn engine I believe AMCA mk2 specs will be around 30Tons.

E.Weight. :- 13Ton
Fuel capacity.:- 8Ton
Payload. :- 9.5Ton(2.5T internal)
T.Thrust. :- 250KN(25492.9kgf)

many gonna say it will produce less thrust in Indian conditions but they should also note as su30mki produces same thrust and it’s M.Takeoff weight is 38+Ton.
The very reason ge414 epe with 116kn thrust(on papers only) was thought perfect for 25Ton fighter. Even reports used to be of 110+Kn engine only.

heavier the fighter more expensive is it’s maintenance, if we are thinking about two front war we need sophisticated fighters but in big no. as well, coz of which the need for single engine fighters arises, they need to be at-least half of total strength.

Sadly, given the type of IAF leadership we have, I doubt that there is any plan to develop that IAF variant of TEDBF so far. They are completely stuck on 114 MRFA and nothing else.

It is more on the timeline rather than the fault of IAF Leadership, & upto certain extent it falls on the navy as well. They could have made it clear abit earlier for developing a twin engine fighter which was pretty evident since tejas mk1 took it’s first flight in 2001. Alot of time was wasted on naval mk2.
when we are expecting tejas mk2 to rollout if TEDBF would be rolling out at the same time IAF would have been interested in the fighter.
but current scenario is the TEDBF will go into production at the same time as AMCA.
so from their perspective it will be two different platforms with almost same configuration nothing much different to offer so they chose the better one(AMCA) if need be can order more… making AMCA cheaper, lesser maintenance cost & same infrastructure!
For now the better thing will be to have TEDBF mk2 with true stealth(internal weapons bay,etc)
&
MMRC 2.0 is more like symbolic or as an insurance against things like tejas mk2 fails to meet the IAF needs or China/Pakistan attacks before we can get our squadron strength upto the desired figure.

 

[johnj]

It is more on the timeline rather than the fault of IAF Leadership, & upto certain extent it falls on the navy as well. They could have made it clear abit earlier for developing a twin engine fighter which was pretty evident since tejas mk1 took it’s first flight in 2001. Alot of time was wasted on naval mk2.
when we are expecting tejas mk2 to rollout if TEDBF would be rolling out at the same time IAF would have been interested in the fighter.
MMRC 2.0 is more like symbolic or as an insurance against things like tejas mk2 fails to meet the IAF needs or China/Pakistan attacks before we can get our squadron strength upto the desired figure.

IN consider buying mig29k for both carriers. IAF consider buying fgfa and mk2, plus 40 mk1. MMRCA is not a insurance or requirement, but a necessity/urgent necessity now and caused by retiring mig 23, mig 27 and addition of su30mki.
IN shown interest in NLCA due to issue with Mig29k, and found on one engine jet not enough. IAF case is different, no 150 mmrca[36], no fgfa, and increased su30 order and new 83 mk1a. and demanding 114 mmrca[rafale]
36/57 NMRCA and 114 MMRCA is urgent necessity of now not considering future or insurance against things like tejas mk2/amca. IAF hoped to deploy 150 eft/rafale by 2020. IAF consider equipping 114 fgfa and 150plus mmrca plus 150 plus mk2, 60 plus amca by 2035/37.

 

[vikata]

Software part , avionics , actuators , MFD , sensor fusion , weapon integration ??

In fact Dr. Deodhare himself has said that mark 2 (mwf) will be a stepping stone for amca ,I think he know a thing or two about R&D.

 

[SARTHAK]

MWF is a delta-canard & AMCA is tandem-bi-plane. FCS will be different.
5th gen design requirement do not depend on 4th gen.
Can u pls give specific examples of those components which cannot be implemented in AMCA until done in MWF?
Suppose hypothetically MWF is cancelled, u think it will affect AMCA?

imo mk2 will be ada first attempt at sensor fusion , algorithms can only be refined if mk2 is used as a test bed for tech , mk2 will be India 's first attempt to have gallium nitride-based(radar and utews) , as i said its about refinement amca will take lesser effort once tech is proved , take tedbf for example , you can watch interviews on ddr , the designer said that tedbf and amca design have a lot in common and have borrowed design elements , designing more complex fbw will also be difficult, implementation of eodas like system would be more easy if dc maws are integrated into mk2's body(unlike sukhoi which carries pod),WAD cockpit will first come on mk2 then on amca , i found a thread on radar progressive development by indranil roy on twitter, he mentioned how continous development improved radome material and arrangement of t/r modules in confined space + other refinements like pilot tubes

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

My opinion :-
we don’t need a AHCA but as such around 30Ton fighter will be of perfect spec jet for Indian needs neither a true middleweight nor a heavyweight,a balance between both & as per news about 125kn engine I believe AMCA mk2 specs will be around 30Tons.

E.Weight. :- 13Ton
Fuel capacity.:- 8Ton
Payload. :- 9.5Ton(2.5T internal)
T.Thrust. :- 250KN(25492.9kgf)

many gonna say it will produce less thrust in Indian conditions but they should also note as su30mki produces same thrust and it’s M.Takeoff weight is 38+Ton.
The very reason ge414 epe with 116kn thrust(on papers only) was thought perfect for 25Ton fighter. Even reports used to be of 110+Kn engine only.

heavier the fighter more expensive is it’s maintenance, if we are thinking about two front war we need sophisticated fighters but in big no. as well, coz of which the need for single engine fighters arises, they need to be at-least half of total strength.

Looking at China's & global advancement, we need AMCA & AHCA both to replace MKI & other jets for a huge sub-continental country otherwise we will be facing a crunch again as we faced with LCA to MWF. Just like J-20 7J-35, again China will surprise us with its 6th gen jet(s) & supply Pak with J-20/35. Then we will be left with only AMCA in 5th gen. Hence AHCA MK1 can be an inflated AMCA & its MK2 can be with DEW.
The current AMCA design is a compulsion due to lack of strong engine. If u quote 125KNx2 engines jet then it will automatically become AHCA due to increased dimensions & weight of engine & T/W ratio it will offer, F-22 has 116KN dry thrust x2 engines with 120cm diameter, 516cm length, 1.8T weight. F-35's engine giving 125KN dry thrust weighs 1.7T, 117cm dia., 559cm length. Compared to this AMCA's GE414 engine giving 58KN dry thrust weighs 1.1T, 89cm dia., length 391cm. MKI's AL-31FP engine produces 77KN dry thrust, weighs 1.5T, 495cm length, dia. 91cm.

If we look at how much weapons can be delivered per sortie, how much fossil fuel is burnt, probability of kill, attrition rate, fleet readyness rate, etc, 1 F-35's F-135 engine produces more thrust than 2 GE414 engines. Either produce 1 engine jet like F-35 or upcoming Suhoi Checkmate which can carry 4 AAMs internally OR a stealth jet with 2 engines should be able to carry min. 8 AAMs internally which AMCA can't. The engine power has to improve. Also if research is going on longer range missiles then on shorter missiles also to be used after merge.
If AMCA really needs to be "advanced" then changes in weapons quantity & quality is also required. New gen jets require new gen weapons. If stealth advantage has to be taken then only 4 BVRAAMs & zero CCMs, neither it will suffice, nor it is economical for a stealth jet & except guns no defence in dogfight. AMCA would be flying into death trap in dogfight in stealth mode. If there were SWB for 2 CCMs then it could have sufficed for now.

So AMCA MK2 should ideally hold SWB & total 6 AAMs internally. That will require 110KN AB-thrust to go vertical.

The definition of sophisticated fighter for next 3-4 decades has rapidly upgraded as per technological advancement. There are only 2 choices - Either we can continue to lag forever just boasting about our capabilities or reduce the gap with more realistic AMCA MK2 & AHCA. All we need are 2 good engines.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

imo mk2 will be ada first attempt at sensor fusion , algorithms can only be refined if mk2 is used as a test bed for tech , mk2 will be India 's first attempt to have gallium nitride-based(radar and utews) , as i said its about refinement amca will take lesser effort once tech is proved , take tedbf for example , you can watch interviews on ddr , the designer said that tedbf and amca design have a lot in common and have borrowed design elements , designing more complex fbw will also be difficult, implementation of eodas like system would be more easy if dc maws are integrated into mk2's body(unlike sukhoi which carries pod),WAD cockpit will first come on mk2 then on amca , i found a thread on radar progressive development by indranil roy on twitter, he mentioned how continous development improved radome material and arrangement of t/r modules in confined space + other refinements like pilot tubes

1st attempt of sensor fusion as a complete product. And MWF will be stepping stone for AMCA just by chronological coincidence bcoz 5th gen jet require more R&D time than 4th gen. There are some things which can be common in jets like MFDs, MAWS, RWR, LWR, EW antennas, radar, auxilliary equipments, air data sensors, perhaps a core OS. But when u already have example of LCA components tested on modified civil A/c & many other similar foreign examples then u don't have to wait & depend on complete success of a 4th gen jet for a 5th gen jet, especially when they are of diff. airframe config.
Moreover, when we are talking abt a gen leap, there are many additional things in 5th gen which 4th gen doesn't have,either due to cost or space or design. Many customizations have to be done for H/w & S/w.
For example, many people like comparing F-22 & Rafale but it is not right at all. Just the RCS & IRS reduction, airframe shaping has so many concerns & customized implementations.
Hence comparing 5th gen AMCA with 4th gen TEDBF & MWF is not wise at all just bcoz some basic components are same.

J-20 is not compared with J-10C & didn't depend on it.

Su-57 & Su-35 might have shared similar cockpit, MFDs, some mechanical components,auxilliary equipments like OBOGS, APU, engine, IFRP, some EW antennas but Su-57 is still so much different. The MAWS, LWR, RWR, HUD, OLS, etc are different. It didn't wait for Su-35-S, it is just natural chronology.

Rather than depend on defence journalists, i would prefer to watch direct interview of DoD staff if available.

 

[flanker99]

Can anyone dig out a digital copy ?

 

[flanker99]

Got these off a preview

 

[Super Flanker]

Got these off a preview

View attachment 152434

View attachment 152435

Model of TEDBF and Tejas MK-2 are From Aero India 2021 which was held last year. But I don't know from where that AMCA Model is though:-

 

[flanker99]

As expected more delays and shifting goal posts.

AMCA will be Mach 2 Fighter, rollout in 2026: GD AMCA Neeli – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org