AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
4,393
Likes
9,120
Country flag
Tom cruise in the movie flew It, his mission was to take it to Mach-10, after he achieved mach-10 speed he later moved the joystick a little bit and then the aircraft went of control and crashed.
 

MirageBlue

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2020
Messages
320
Likes
2,047
Country flag

Mark my words. The Tejas Mk2 MWF will become the IAF's workhorse upon induction. It offers pretty much everything the IAF needs in a single engine fighter.

Once it becomes clear that no matter what, no more imports are coming, reluctant IAF brass will embrace it since on paper, it's specifications are simply great. Tejas Mk1 has done the ground-work in making the IAF see what a local fighter jet can be. Tejas Mk1A will take it 2 steps further with improved maintenance, radar and sensors. Tejas Mk2 MWF will be the ultimate evolution of the Tejas series.
 

Bhartiya Sainik

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2021
Messages
407
Likes
1,132
Country flag
I saw this aircraft in the opening scene of Top Gun : Maverick.
BTW, the movie was very entertaining but few things were blunder.
Plot of Top Gun 2 roughly is similar to when Israel destroyed Iran's nuclear plant but today attacking a foreign nation's nuclear plant might lead to WW3.
I wonder how Maverick survived high altitude thermal disintegration at Mach-10.:hail::eric:
In era of F-22 & F-35 which the movie should have used, it appears more like advertisement for F-18E/F Super Hornet to secure foreign contracts. F-22 with stealth, IWB & TVC is perfectly suited for the movie's mission & could have performed the mission flawlessly. But perhaps they didn't wan't to show F-22 Vs Su-57 but an inferior 4th gen jet destroying all Russian 5th gen jets. F-14 shooting the 2nd Su-57 is unrealistic & F-18 shooting the 3rd Su-57 is also not impossible but highly unlikely as the Su-57 has spherical situational awareness + DIRCM who's usage was conveniently not shown. The 2nd Su-57 was shown to use TVC against F-14 only once while in reality it would be next to impossible for F-14 to get behind Su-57 & remain behind.
The SAMs guarding the nuclear site were RF guided S-125 Neva/Pechora (SA-3 Goa) but were shown evaded by flares :doh: :facepalm::pound:
Another thing is that a shoreline will be having early warning radars, SAMs, Manpads, AAAs, CIWSs & also the possible sneak routes through canyons & valleys.
 

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
4,393
Likes
9,120
Country flag
BTW, the movie was very entertaining but few things were blunder.
Plot of Top Gun 2 roughly is similar to when Israel destroyed Iran's nuclear plant but today attacking a foreign nation's nuclear plant might lead to WW3.
I wonder how Maverick survived high altitude thermal disintegration at Mach-10.:hail::eric:
In era of F-22 & F-35 which the movie should have used, it appears more like advertisement for F-18E/F Super Hornet to secure foreign contracts. F-22 with stealth, IWB & TVC is perfectly suited for the movie's mission & could have performed the mission flawlessly. But perhaps they didn't wan't to show F-22 Vs Su-57 but an inferior 4th gen jet destroying all Russian 5th gen jets. F-14 shooting the 2nd Su-57 is unrealistic & F-18 shooting the 3rd Su-57 is also not impossible but highly unlikely as the Su-57 has spherical situational awareness + DIRCM who's usage was conveniently not shown. The 2nd Su-57 was shown to use TVC against F-14 only once while in reality it would be next to impossible for F-14 to get behind Su-57 & remain behind.
The SAMs guarding the nuclear site were RF guided S-125 Neva/Pechora (SA-3 Goa) but were shown evaded by flares :doh: :facepalm::pound:
Another thing is that a shoreline will be having early warning radars, SAMs, Manpads, AAAs, CIWSs & also the possible sneak routes through canyons & valleys.
I would like to convey some few things myself.

In the ending scene, Tom cruise and all his comrades flew a few FA-18s with air to air missiles and air to ground munitions along with a targeting pod.

So right before these guys could bomb that target of theirs, an E-2 Hawkeye which was Operating far from the shore had detected a pair (2) of SU-57s, the SU-57s were more than 40-50 kms away from the FA-18s.

No offence but they portrayed the SU-57 pilots as very Unprofessional. After the FA-18s successfully completed their mission, they headed back towards the Aircraft carrier, but unfortunately Tom cruise was shot down, after that his friend came in an FA-18 to save him but he too was shot down. Later they Both find an F-14 and fly it and do all the Destroying Russian equipment Stuff.

Ok here is the misconception, In the end there was an SU-57 which came to kill them, and if I am remember that SU-57 had fired several R-77s at the F-14 but they somehow dodge it. I don't understand one thing, the F-14 is literally in front of the SU-57 and SU-57 is chasing it tail chase but he still magically survives so many R-77s at WVR? (Lol).

It was a nice movie but in reality, in a BVR fight SU-57 will wreck any American 4th Generation Fighter!

Anyways it's just "HOLLYWOOD" which has the typical mentality of "Russia always weak, USA the strongest!"
 

SARTHAK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
632
Likes
1,324
Country flag
Mark my words. The Tejas Mk2 MWF will become the IAF's workhorse upon induction. It offers pretty much everything the IAF needs in a single engine fighter.

Once it becomes clear that no matter what, no more imports are coming, reluctant IAF brass will embrace it since on paper, it's specifications are simply great. Tejas Mk1 has done the ground-work in making the IAF see what a local fighter jet can be. Tejas Mk1A will take it 2 steps further with improved maintenance, radar and sensors. Tejas Mk2 MWF will be the ultimate evolution of the Tejas series.
mk2 is simply indian gripen e/single engine rafale
 

Blademaster

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
3,757
Likes
11,781
BTW, the movie was very entertaining but few things were blunder.
Plot of Top Gun 2 roughly is similar to when Israel destroyed Iran's nuclear plant but today attacking a foreign nation's nuclear plant might lead to WW3.
I wonder how Maverick survived high altitude thermal disintegration at Mach-10.:hail::eric:
In era of F-22 & F-35 which the movie should have used, it appears more like advertisement for F-18E/F Super Hornet to secure foreign contracts. F-22 with stealth, IWB & TVC is perfectly suited for the movie's mission & could have performed the mission flawlessly. But perhaps they didn't wan't to show F-22 Vs Su-57 but an inferior 4th gen jet destroying all Russian 5th gen jets. F-14 shooting the 2nd Su-57 is unrealistic & F-18 shooting the 3rd Su-57 is also not impossible but highly unlikely as the Su-57 has spherical situational awareness + DIRCM who's usage was conveniently not shown. The 2nd Su-57 was shown to use TVC against F-14 only once while in reality it would be next to impossible for F-14 to get behind Su-57 & remain behind.
The SAMs guarding the nuclear site were RF guided S-125 Neva/Pechora (SA-3 Goa) but were shown evaded by flares :doh: :facepalm::pound:
Another thing is that a shoreline will be having early warning radars, SAMs, Manpads, AAAs, CIWSs & also the possible sneak routes through canyons & valleys.
And which country is stupid enough to put its most prized assent so close to the shoreline. In fact it would be way further up north in fact like a couple hundred of miles north deep into the center of Iran.
 

Blademaster

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
3,757
Likes
11,781
I would like to convey some few things myself.

In the ending scene, Tom cruise and all his comrades flew a few FA-18s with air to air missiles and air to ground munitions along with a targeting pod.

So right before these guys could bomb that target of theirs, an E-2 Hawkeye which was Operating far from the shore had detected a pair (2) of SU-57s, the SU-57s were more than 40-50 kms away from the FA-18s.

No offence but they portrayed the SU-57 pilots as very Unprofessional. After the FA-18s successfully completed their mission, they headed back towards the Aircraft carrier, but unfortunately Tom cruise was shot down, after that his friend came in an FA-18 to save him but he too was shot down. Later they Both find an F-14 and fly it and do all the Destroying Russian equipment Stuff.

Ok here is the misconception, In the end there was an SU-57 which came to kill them, and if I am remember that SU-57 had fired several R-77s at the F-14 but they somehow dodge it. I don't understand one thing, the F-14 is literally in front of the SU-57 and SU-57 is chasing it tail chase but he still magically survives so many R-77s at WVR? (Lol).

It was a nice movie but in reality, in a BVR fight SU-57 will wreck any American 4th Generation Fighter!

Anyways it's just "HOLLYWOOD" which has the typical mentality of "Russia always weak, USA the strongest!"
The plot at the end was totally convoluted to justify no loss of US airmen in a saturated SAM environment with no B-2 or B-1B bomber support.
 

WolfPack86

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Messages
9,579
Likes
15,408
Country flag
Why likely €1 bn French deal is a reminder of India’s failure to build indigenous jet engine
New Delhi: Later this month, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh is slated to review one of India’s most strategically important projects — the development of a 120-kN (kilo Newton) engine to power the country’s futuristic 6.5-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

The fighter jet is expected to form the cornerstone of the Indian Air Force’s manned tactical fleet within the next decade.

But there’s a problem right at the starting line — there is no indigenous jet engine to power India’s most ambitious planned aircraft.

French engine giant Safran is asking for more than €1 billion to transfer the technology needed to make the engines, as part of Rafale offsets contracts.

When it signed the €7.8 billion Rafale deal with India in 2016, France committed to investing 50 per cent, or €3.9 billion, in India in return for the deal.

For India’s jet-engine scientists, as well as the air force, the €1 billion deal is a painful reminder of the country’s failure to produce a combat jet engine of its own.

The country has achieved significant successes in producing power plants for the space programme, as well as missiles. Progress on developing an indigenous combat jet-engines, though, has been elusive.

India, government sources said, is now exploring working jointly with France to produce a new jet engine for the future aircraft of both countries. Last year, British firm Rolls-Royce told ThePrint it was also keen to work with India on co-developing and manufacturing engines for the AMCA.

The government, however, seems keen to make the deal with France happen, official sources said, deepening collaboration with a country that has been among India’s most important providers of cutting-edge military technology.

The combat jet-engine challenge
Few countries have succeeded in mastering the complex technologies needed to produce jet engines for combat aircraft.

Until recently, only China’s fifth-generation J-20 fighter — also known as the ‘Mighty Dragon’ — was originally equipped with the Russian-made AL31F engine, and then with the WS-10 Taihang.

Derived from CFM-56II turbofan engines imported from the United States in the 1980s, the WS-10, however, suffered from chronic problems of power and maintenance.

The WS-10 has begun to be replaced with the more powerful and modern WS-15, but is still, by the estimation of some experts, a generation behind modern Western jet-engine technology.

Even the engines that power the Boeing 747 civilian airliner have at least 40,000 parts. Temperatures in the combustion chamber can go up to 1,400ºC.

These high-end technologies are so difficult to master that very few countries succeed, according to Timothy Heath, an expert at Rand Corporation, an American, non-profit global police think tank.

In some senses, the ability to manufacture combat jet-engines is the true test of a country’s military-industrial base. All five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council — the United States of America, Russia, China, the United Kingdom and France — make advanced engines.

Although some countries like Japan and Germany have the technology to also do so, few outside this elite club have manufactured successful combat jet engines.

Failed efforts to master technology
India’s search for its own combat jet-engine was shaped by the problems faced by the HF-24 Marut, the country’s first indigenous fighter.

The Marut was to have been powered by the Bristol Orpheus 12 engine. When the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) project to develop the engine collapsed, though, India was forced to accept the less-powerful Bristol Orpheus 703.

The Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) in Bengaluru eventually produced a version of Orpheus 703 with afterburners, significantly enhancing the engine’s power. The engine, though, proved unsuitable for the Marut’s airframe — making the otherwise-excellent aircraft obsolete before its time.

In 1983, the government sanctioned work on the multi-role Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), at an estimated cost of Rs 560 crore. The LCA was meant to replace the Soviet-made MiG-21.

Feasibility studies carried out in India and abroad revealed that while there was no entirely suitable engine available anywhere in the world, the Rolls-Royce RB-1989 and General Electric F404-F2J engines, by and large, met the requirement.

The GTRE, since 1982, had been working on the indigenous GTX-37 engine, and pushed for its adoption on the LCA.

Four years later, a study was jointly carried out by the Aeronautical Development Agency, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, and GTRE to evaluate GTX-37.

In December 1986, the GTRE proposed the development of the indigenous Kaveri engine for the LCA. Based on this proposal, the government sanctioned a Rs 382.86 crore project in March 1989.

While GTRE did develop nine prototype Kaveri engines, as well as four core engines that undertook 3,217 hours of engine testing, including in Russia, they failed to meet the required parameters to power a fighter.

Instead of a so-called ‘wet thrust’ of 81 kN — the thrust the engine can deliver when a fighter needs maximum power — the Kaveri generated only 70.4 kN.

“GTRE has been unable to deliver an engine that could power the LCA despite a cost overrun of 642 per cent and a delay of about 13 years,” the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) noted in a sharply-worded report released in 2011.

“The project is now faced with the alternative of entering into a joint venture with a foreign house for further development of the engine,” the report went on to say.

Large numbers of other critical projects went the same way.

The Advanced Light Helicopter, scholar Eric Arnett has noted, was meant to be an Indian-designed and Indian-produced helicopter. The Shakti engine used by the helicopter, though, was co-designed with the French firm Turbomeca.

New roles for old engines
The Kaveri engine is now being redesigned for other applications, like drones.

“The Kaveri project has helped us master several critical technology domains and, because of this project, the ecosystem exists within the country for design, development, manufacture, assembly, testing and qualification of indigenous 80-kN class of engines,” a senior DRDO official told ThePrint.

“In addition, the technological capabilities achieved through the Kaveri project can be very useful in the development of higher-thrust engines such as AMCA class,” the official further said, adding: “It is always a climb when it comes to making something new altogether.”

The problems, experts say, ranged from gaps in metallurgy, manufacturing infrastructure and test facilities, to the denial of critical technologies after India’s nuclear tests. “And no country, even our closest friends, was keen to part with technology for jet engines,” another official said.

India’s jet-engine quest also suffered from a lack of appropriate scientific personnel, CAG noted in its report. “At the time of sanctioning of the project, GTRE had to nearly double its sanctioned strength of trained manpower to cope with the target,” it said.

“Even today, the institute is beset by shortages in the scientific and technical branch personnel which are affecting the progress of the project,” the report added.
 

DeadCritic

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2022
Messages
36
Likes
102
Country flag
I think govt should hire private entities to manage our lazy govt employees and push them to work on faster prototyping and frequent improvements.
And hopefully, market and sell products like private businesses do which eventually will make these govt entities less loss-making.
Not bad mouthing but compared to the rest of the world, these agencies are really slow.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,674
Likes
9,212
Expecting AMCA haha. No way we are going to do this. Tejas MK1A , MK-2 , TEDBF and AMCA.

In Next years we can expect Tejas MK1A and MK-2 roll out.

After 2025-26 we can see TEDBF and AMCA.

Till then we are going to test the EOTS and improved UTTAM radar.
AMCA prototype is expected by late 2023 or early 2024 and the first flight is expected to be by 2024-25.
EOTS and Uttam Radar are going to tested on Hawker Beechcraft's Hawker 800 testbed aircraft.
 

Arjun Mk1A

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2022
Messages
1,025
Likes
6,042
Country flag
AMCA prototype is expected by late 2023 or early 2024 and the first flight is expected to be by 2024-25.
EOTS and Uttam Radar are going to tested on Hawker Beechcraft's Hawker 800 testbed aircraft.

I am taking an conservative approach with HAL. There is a backlog with MK1a and MK2. So AMCA maybe at start of 2025 or 2026. If they deliver on time.
 

Dark Sorrow

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
4,674
Likes
9,212
I am taking an conservative approach with HAL. There is a backlog with MK1a and MK2. So AMCA maybe at start of 2025 or 2026. If they deliver on time.
AMCA is/will be having a separate assembly line. Its assembly would not be an issue. HAL is just an assembler. Most R&D is done by ADA, NAL and DRDO.
As for development ADA/NAL/DRDO are having separate teams.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top