MirageBlue
Regular Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2020
- Messages
- 556
- Likes
- 3,274
The reason is more to do with the Internal Weapons Bay and the stealthy serpentine air intakes of the AMCA.Did ada consult with navy for naval amca version?
6500kg fuel and 6500 w load cannot take off with FULL frm carrier just like airforce version mig29 russia modified for carrier ,unless more powerfull engine used for naval.
Any expert answer pls....
Those lead to pressure recovery losses which means lower thrust while taking off from the carrier. But for any carrier fighter, there can be no pressure recovery losses at the most crucial take-off phase. Hence, the AMCA design was unsuitable for a carrier.
Which is why ADA and the IN agreed upon a clean sheet TEDBF design which doesn't have serpentine intakes like the AMCA. The focus instead on the TEDBF is to have the best possible pressure recovery with minimum losses to provide the highest thrust possible while taking off. Hence no Internal Weapons Bay on the TEDBF either since it cannot be accommodated with somewhat straight air intakes.