1st design of AMCA was most stunning and visually like a mini F-22 (and somewhat like Japans ATD-X). Final design of AMCA is very different.
Main reason for weight for F 35 is engine and many part which are not going to be use in one model but is still there so as a result AMCA is lighter.
Really, if that is true, than 4 tn is too small for AMCA. It must have above 8 tn int. fuel. By the way, no one is answering about int. bays? F-35 has lesser int. weapons than proposed AMCA design. Is that why it has so much int. fuel despite less composite?
If weight is your concern, then AMCA will have two engines, as opposed to one in F-35.
there is no existence of either amca or its engines then how such info gonna available.
I have been talking of AMCA in many forums and everybody says that internal weapon bay design of AMCA is inconsistent
This info is available because specs of fighter are well defined before its development.
US might have designed F 35 as very long range Bomber role. We may have designed AMCA in a role like the one of Rafale.
I know that! F-35's peak thrust is above 190 kN in afterburner and it uses single engine. But if India chooses GE-414 Enhanced engine (peak thrust=116 kN), then peak thrust of AMCA will be 232 kN, way more than that of F-35! Still their empty weights are nearly simillar.
What is the TWR of the two? Sorry, being lazy.
Yes, F-35 can act as a bomber. But how 8tn vs. 4tn. in int. fuel? I am asking how, when e.w. of both are almost equal. AMCA will have more no. of int. weapons than F-35, sacrificing space for more internal fuel. Is it the reason? And someone just said AMCA will have way more composites than AMCA, does not make sense. I have still not got any satisfactory answer.
I said long range bomber and not simply Bomber.
You must have seen pics of final design of AMCA at AERO INDIA 2013 with surpentile intake. The specification mentioned in wiki is based on that final design. It's not fake! Top speed is ofcourse my doubt. One expert had said it to be above mach 1.9, but mach 2.5!!
Are you kidding? Rafale can carry more load than MKI! Rafale is medium multirole and Su-30 MKI is heavy dominance. Both have separate roles, so both are different. But here we have two simillar jets in almost all aspect. Still F-35 can take double capacity of int. fuel than AMCA. It does not make sense. I donot care about short/long range bomber. I mean how?
