AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

[Rowdy]

Now read this,
https://m.reddit.com/r/GlobalPowers/comments/36roli/event_germany_israel_to_help_india_on_gtre_kx/

that is a fantasy based sub . that is pure fiction

 

[tharun]

...............................................................................................................

Please give the link of this news or pdf.................

 

[Gessler]

Please give the link of this news or pdf.................

These are images taken by a camera. I don't know where they came from...they were lying in my Hard drive.

Do a Google Image-search.

 

[sasum]

Please give the link of this news or pdf.................

See yesterday's post by water car engineer under the thread 'AMCA-- upgrades and discussions' on PDF.
PDF links can't be copy-pasted on this forum.

 

[Chinmoy]

Anechoic chambers are not just for assessing RCS values...they're also used for analysing & calibrating electromagnetic emissions of all kinds. Even DRDO and ISRO have dedicated chambers for missiles, satellites etc.

However, the most effective method of evaluating RCS is when a 1:1 scale (or lower) model of the aircraft in question is hoisted about 50 feet or so above the ground in an open space on a stand and then radar is fired at it.

This is what US did in there quest to develop SR-71.

 

[Superdefender]

An concept art of AMCA releasing bomb.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

An concept art of AMCA releasing bomb.View attachment 7826

I have observed design in many forums. Weapon bay looks too inconsistent.

 

[Superdefender]

I have observed design in many forums. Weapon bay looks too inconsistent.

Yes, the 3B-09 design model of Aero India 2013 may not be the final one, according to which AMCA will have 4tn internal weapons as well as 4tn internal fuel. But medium fighters like F-35 and AMCA just can't have more than 2-2.5 tn int. weapon capacity. F-35's internal weapon load is slightly more than 5,000 pounds. So final AMCA design will have somewhere around that. Also I think int. fuel load may be increased.

 

[Illusive]

Yes, the 3B-09 design model of Aero India 2013 may not be the final one, according to which AMCA will have 4tn internal weapons as well as 4tn internal fuel. But medium fighters like F-35 and AMCA just can't have more than 2-2.5 tn int. weapon capacity. F-35's internal weapon load is slightly more than 5,000 pounds. So final AMCA design will have somewhere around that. Also I think int. fuel load may be increased.

Aero India 2013 was 3B-07, 3B-09 is latest(2015)

 

[Superdefender]

Aero India 2013 was 3B-07, 3B-09 is latest(2015)

Ah, yup. You are right. It looks like mini F-22.

 

[tsunami]

Yes, the 3B-09 design model of Aero India 2013 may not be the final one, according to which AMCA will have 4tn internal weapons as well as 4tn internal fuel. But medium fighters like F-35 and AMCA just can't have more than 2-2.5 tn int. weapon capacity. F-35's internal weapon load is slightly more than 5,000 pounds. So final AMCA design will have somewhere around that. Also I think int. fuel load may be increased.

Even F-22 and PAKFA can not have 4 tn internal weapons forget about AMCA. If AMCA can have 7 Internal missile like 5 BVR and 2 IR missile(Just 1 less than F-22) that will be more than most of the fighters in similar class like F-35 only 4 mssile and J-31 possibly 4-6 missile. I believe AMCA will at least have 6 internal hard point.
Also F-22's weapon bay size is 3.5x0.9x0.35 mtrs(Two main internal weapon combined 3.5x1.8x0.35 mtr). Means It's length and width can even support a mark 84 bomb which is a 2000lb bomb but it's depth is only 0.35 mtr or 35 centimeter and even mark 83 (1000 lb) bomb have the diameter of 357 MM. This is the reason that F-22 can only have 500 lb Mark 83 or the lesser bombs.

If ADA manages to make a main weapon bay at 3.5x1.5x0.4 mtr AMCA will be far better in strike role too.

 

[Superdefender]

Even F-22 and PAKFA can not have 4 tn internal weapons forget about AMCA. If AMCA can have 7 Internal missile like 5 BVR and 2 IR missile(Just 1 less than F-22) that will be more than most of the fighters in similar class like F-35 only 4 mssile and J-31 possibly 4-6 missile. I believe AMCA will at least have 6 internal hard point.
Also F-22's weapon bay size is 3.5x0.9x0.35 mtrs(Two main internal weapon combined 3.5x1.8x0.35 mtr). Means It's length and width can even support a mark 84 bomb which is a 2000lb bomb but it's depth is only 0.35 mtr or 35 centimeter and even mark 83 (1000 lb) bomb have the diameter of 357 MM. This is the reason that F-22 can only have 500 lb Mark 83 or the lesser bombs.

My dream AMCA weapon bay is 2 bays each containing 4 air-air missiles. If that's not feasible, then 2 bays with each containing 3 missiles as well as 2 sidebays each contains 1. Primary weapon will be Astra mk. 2 BVRAAM. ADA will design considering that.

 

[Superdefender]

Wondering if AMCA will have gold plated glass cockpit or not!

 

[Superdefender]

Also F-22's weapon bay size is 3.5x0.9x0.35 mtrs(Two main internal weapon combined 3.5x1.8x0.35 mtr).

AIM-120C Specification | Astra Mk.1 Specification
______________________ | ________________________
Length: 3.65m | Length: 3.5m
Diameter: 180mm | Diameter: 178mm
Wingspan: 450mm | Wingspan: 254mm
Weight: 157kg | Weight: 154kg

No, you are wrong in length. It's not 3.5m, it's 3.9m.
See AIM-120C is 3.65m long; so how can it be fitted in
Dimension of 3.5x0.9x0.35! Exact dimension of each F-22
bay is 3.9x0.9x0.35.Thus, two rectangular bays will measure
3.9x1.8x0.35. And it has 2 side-bays too. After you mentioned
those figures, I got confused. So I searched and presented.

If ADA manages to make a main weapon bay at 3.5x1.5x0.4 mtr AMCA will be far better in strike role too.

Now diameter of 120C is 180mm (0.18m). Three 120C will fit in
each bay, so 0.18x3=0.54m, so easily fits in breadth of 0.9m.
As I said before, Astra Mk.2 will be primary weapon. Lets
assume its length and diameter will be 3.6m and 180mm respectively.
so to fit 3 Astra Mk.3s in each bay, the breadth of each bay
must be minimum 0.54m. You have mentioned before that a single
large bay of 1.5m breadth will suffice. So if I take two bays,
then each bay will be of 0.75m in breadth by your theory. By
that, we can add one more Mk.2 to each bay, totaling 8 in internal
bays only (not including 2 side-bays). Hence, perfect dimension for
AMCA's each bay should be 3.65x1.5x0.35 if the design features no
side-bays and 3.65x1.1x0.35 if the design features two side-bays.
If ADA chooses weapon bays similar to Raptor in pic, then above
dimensions should be perfect in my view. Otherwise if ADA chooses
like the one which @Illusive posted (3B-09 pic bay), then it will
be different. Notice the significant difference in wingspan of both
missiles. That's our advantage.

 

[tsunami]

First of all we are talking here about AMCA not a dream fighter.

AIM-120C Specification | Astra Mk.1 Specification
______________________ | ________________________
Length: 3.65m | Length: 3.5m
Diameter: 180mm | Diameter: 178mm
Wingspan: 450mm | Wingspan: 254mm
Weight: 157kg | Weight: 154kg

Normally I don't go for wiki figures but let's say most of what you say is correct but there is no way Astra wings are just 254 mm.

Can you please give me any source of your claims other then Wiki.

No, you are wrong in length. It's not 3.5m, it's 3.9m.

OK. You are correct here.

Exact dimension of each F-22
bay is 3.9x0.9x0.35.Thus, two rectangular bays will measure
3.9x1.8x0.35.

Now diameter of 120C is 180mm (0.18m). Three 120C will fit in
each bay, so 0.18x3=0.54m, so easily fits in breadth of 0.9m.

By that logic, answer me why Americans didn't put 5 missiles in a single weapon bay.

The answer is you forgot wings.

Ever heard about folded wings of AIM 120D.

It's wings are folded but that still makes the minimum required of the missile to more then 30 centimetres.
Lets say around 35 centimetres.

So 3 missiles need 0.35x3= 1.05 meter space. Where as the Bay width is only 0.9 mtr.

Now to solve this problem the did this

They arranged missiles in uneven format so that the wings of the missile doesn't touch each other.

This will also mean that a bay with 3.9 mtr length will not be able to handle 3 missiles lengthier then 3.65 mtr.

As I said before, Astra Mk.2 will be primary weapon. Lets
assume its length and diameter will be 3.6m and 180mm respectively.
so to fit 3 Astra Mk.3s in each bay, the breadth of each bay
must be minimum 0.54m. You have mentioned before that a single
large bay of 1.5m breadth will suffice. So if I take two bays,
then each bay will be of 0.75m in breadth by your theory. By
that, we can add one more Mk.2 to each bay, totaling 8 in internal
bays only (not including 2 side-bays). Hence, perfect dimension for
AMCA's each bay should be 3.65x1.5x0.35 if the design features no
side-bays and 3.65x1.1x0.35 if the design features two side-bays.
If ADA chooses weapon bays similar to Raptor in pic, then above
dimensions should be perfect in my view.

If you understand my above analysis then I don't think I have to explain this part.

This means we will not be able to fit more then 5 missiles in a weapon bay of size 3.9x1.5x0.4 mtr.

Because we will need minimum length of the weapon bay around 3.9 mtr to fit 3.6 mtr missiles in uneven format. And each missile will be taking a space of 30 centimetre when arranged in uneven format.

The reason I say we should keep depth of the weapon bay at 0.4 mtr is because that way we will be able to fit a 1000 lb bomb (If we have same bomb like Mark 83) in AMCA internal weapon bay.

To increase the number of missile carried internally we need to increase the width of the weapon bay.

But considering that we have a design like mini F-22. I don't think that we can have a bigger internal weapon bay then F-22 in a smaller fighter.

Otherwise if ADA chooses
like the one which @Illusive posted (3B-09 pic bay), then it will
be different. Notice the significant difference in wingspan of both
missiles. That's our advantage.
View attachment 7839

There were some expert on different forum talking that Astra Mk-2 will be more like AIM 120D in terms dimensions to improve it's performance and range. I don't see there will significant difference.

Also I don't like the design of internal weapon bay which is shown in the attachment because it is having a divider in it. Which might be blocking some weapons to be fit in to the bay.

 

[smestarz]

AIM-120C Specification | Astra Mk.1 Specification
______________________ | ________________________
Length: 3.65m | Length: 3.5m
Diameter: 180mm | Diameter: 178mm
Wingspan: 450mm | Wingspan: 254mm
Weight: 157kg | Weight: 154kg

No, you are wrong in length. It's not 3.5m, it's 3.9m.
See AIM-120C is 3.65m long; so how can it be fitted in
Dimension of 3.5x0.9x0.35! Exact dimension of each F-22
bay is 3.9x0.9x0.35.Thus, two rectangular bays will measure
3.9x1.8x0.35. And it has 2 side-bays too. After you mentioned
those figures, I got confused. So I searched and presented.


Now diameter of 120C is 180mm (0.18m). Three 120C will fit in
each bay, so 0.18x3=0.54m, so easily fits in breadth of 0.9m.
As I said before, Astra Mk.2 will be primary weapon. Lets
assume its length and diameter will be 3.6m and 180mm respectively.
so to fit 3 Astra Mk.3s in each bay, the breadth of each bay
must be minimum 0.54m. You have mentioned before that a single
large bay of 1.5m breadth will suffice. So if I take two bays,
then each bay will be of 0.75m in breadth by your theory. By
that, we can add one more Mk.2 to each bay, totaling 8 in internal
bays only (not including 2 side-bays). Hence, perfect dimension for
AMCA's each bay should be 3.65x1.5x0.35 if the design features no
side-bays and 3.65x1.1x0.35 if the design features two side-bays.
If ADA chooses weapon bays similar to Raptor in pic, then above
dimensions should be perfect in my view. Otherwise if ADA chooses
like the one which @Illusive posted (3B-09 pic bay), then it will
be different. Notice the significant difference in wingspan of both
missiles. That's our advantage.
View attachment 7839

I personally do not like cockpits at all. The cockpit was there so that the pilot could sit, have a great vision all around and view if someone is in rear (WW1 and WW2) and have controls etc. Hence there was the need to sort of have a "viewing" place for the pilot. But with the video technology now almost fully developed. One does not really need to have glass cockpit. I would put the cockpit internal to the plane (and not like he pilot is seated on the plane) And use various cameras around the plane to help him look around. He might not really have to twist his neck to look around. Also with camera comes a very important aspect.. MAGNIFICATION. Thus you can identify much faster. Thus vision is not hampered, there is magnification possible to see clearly so why need the glass cockpit? Let the pilot get into the plane like on Su-34 (ladder just behind the Front wheels, This will make the plane integrity better. Also this system can actually help to it an integrated ejection pod where the entire "cockpit" ejects and this pod contains, some food, water and also weapons and ammo, just in case.
Just a little designing ingenuity is required.

 

[tsunami]

..............................

 

[Superdefender]

@tsunami, I think you are right on the attachment that @Illusive posted. How can the fighter carry a laser guided bomb in that dimension? Only suitable for carrying air-air missiles.

 

[Superdefender]

@smestarz, if someone is rear so that his backyard will be cooled by the heat generated from the engines!!! Are you alright, buddy?

 

[nitish.sarangi]

Also with camera comes a very important aspect.. MAGNIFICATION. Thus you can identify much faster.

I like the idea of having camera giving a 360deg view but these days fighters are equipped with IFF and the radars are powerful enough to identify aircrafts long before visual contact is made. For identifying unknown bogeys, it would be good.

Also this system can actually help to it an integrated ejection pod where the entire "cockpit" ejects and this pod contains, some food, water and also weapons and ammo, just in case.

The F111 aardvark has the ejection pod design but the rocket motor ejection system will take quite some space and add weight, so overall weight of a/c would increase. there is a tradeoff there.