AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

[garg_bharat]

I had read in news. ...................

It is only at concept stage. The design will be complete when a prototype is built.

 

[smestarz]

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.

IFF and other sensors are best for identifying, but most pilots want to rely on visual aid. Thus is there are actually cameras outside which gives the pilot a sene of 360 views with maginification, then it would be very helpful. For example, seeing a friendly pilot flying but then just magnifying the view that looks at his side can give you even the tail no, and also the missiles he is carrying (if maintaining radio silence) usually as I see, the "bulge" of cockpit can be reduced and the planes can be made more shapely

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.

If they put a POD then it would be heavy, but if the concept is made that just prior to ejection the top blows off, then It works out.. Even downward ejection seat could be useful.. but these might be harmful at 0/0 or ejection at low heights.

 

[garg_bharat]

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

Likely India can do on its own. But DRDO/GTRE or any government org is incapable of this kind of industrial projects.

Give it to Bharat Forge or Mahindra, and transfer the engineers to them as well, and you will see success.

 

[garg_bharat]

It is only at concept stage. The design will be complete when a prototype is built.

A jet has a lot of components that need to be designed and built. It is not just a shell that you see.

First wait for some clarity on engine, radar etc.

A plane is built AROUND major components like engine, radar etc, not other way round.

 

[garg_bharat]

I do not see any definitive shape of AMCA before 2022. Means when they would have the components and can actually design the plane. A prototype can be expected by 2027. AMCA will not join IAF before 2030.

The current timeline will see Russian FGFA starting to come from 2022.

For next 15 years, one should not expect AMCA in IAF.

 

[salute]

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.

lol,

cameras for id jets, is that a jk,

jets are much faster than ww1 and ww2 planes and faster for camera or spotter like ww1 and ww2,

you wont like pilot keep playing with cameras,

and also what about clouds and night time flying and enemy jets bvr weapons,

cameras are mostly useful for ground surveillance,

but drones do that now along with jets.

 

[Superdefender]

Above image released by ADA (3B-09) shows 3 possible configurations of Internal
weapons bay. First upper two images show AMCA carrying 5 medium ranged
BVRAAMs, similar to AIM-120 AMRAAM. Second middle two images show AMCA
carrying Vympel R-77 medium range air-air missiles. But due to bigger
diameters, it can carry only 4 R-77s. Third lower two images show AMCA
carrying two bombs, similar to American GBU-31/32/38 JDAM, along with 2
medium range BVRAAMs. Also ADA cancelled side-bays without citing any reasons.
Conclusion: There is no doubt about inconsistency in design of internal
weapon bay. We can just hope ADA & IAF to reach final ground soon.

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.

1. But how can you say for sure that ADA will incorporate uneven/asymmetric
missile configuration?
2.You are not even sure that Astra Mk.2 will folded wings or not.
If the worst case happens (above point 1 and 2 become negative), then AMCA
weapon bay will look like @Illusive attachment. If the best case happens (1
and 2 become positive), then perhaps it will be any one of the three in the
above pic. Also, one thing I noticed in attachment by @Illusive that the length
of bay must be minimum 3.6x2=7.2m because two air-air missiles are attached by
front-rear straight combination.

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.

Even F-22 and PAKFA can not have 4 tn internal weapons forget about AMCA.

You know what, I think attachment by @Illusive may be suitable provided it has
enough height/depth to hold PGM or LGB securely, otherwise the bay door can't
be closed which will lead to stealth compromise. After much thinking last night,
I now think 3.65x0.7x0.35 dimensions of bay may not be possible. First reason
is ADA does not want side bays. I remembered the other reason last night.
Remember they also plan to integrate Brohmos-NG/Brohmos-M in AMCA! its weight is
1.5 tn, length is 6m and width is 510mm (0.51m). MKI can carry 1 Brohmos-A, but 3
Brohmos-NG. FGFA will also carry 3 NGs, but AMCA can carry only 2. So how can a
bay of 3.65x0.7x0.35 dimensions hold NG?!! Two bays will carry one NG each. Thus
dimension for each bay should be 7.4x0.7x0.53 (to accommodate NG safely). See the
depth is increased, so now bombs with more diameters can fit in. And by 7.4m, we
can attach 2 air-air missiles in front-rear straight combination too, if need arises
(means if ADA couldn't manage to place incorporate uneven/asymmetric
missile configuration). By 0.7m breadth, we can put 2 Astra Mk.2 side-by-side, because
0.3x2=0.6m by your folded wing theory which is safely less than 0.7m. I don't think we
can put 3 BVRAAMs side-by-side because AMCA is not so big. By carrying two NGs,
AMCA internal weapon capacity will increase to a minimum 3tn. We can assume int. weapon
capacity to be 3.3 tn, and the rest will be added to fuel section to increase more fuel than 4tn.

 

[HariPrasad-1]

View attachment 7847
Above image released by ADA (3B-09) shows 3 possible configurations of Internal
weapons bay. First upper two images show AMCA carrying 5 medium ranged
BVRAAMs, similar to AIM-120 AMRAAM. Second middle two images show AMCA
carrying Vympel R-77 medium range air-air missiles. But due to bigger
diameters, it can carry only 4 R-77s. Third lower two images show AMCA
carrying two bombs, similar to American GBU-31/32/38 JDAM, along with 2
medium range BVRAAMs. Also ADA cancelled side-bays without citing any reasons.
Conclusion: There is no doubt about inconsistency in design of internal
weapon bay. We can just hope ADA & IAF to reach final ground soon.

1. But how can you say for sure that ADA will incorporate uneven/asymmetric
missile configuration?
2.You are not even sure that Astra Mk.2 will folded wings or not.
If the worst case happens (above point 1 and 2 become negative), then AMCA
weapon bay will look like @Illusive attachment. If the best case happens (1
and 2 become positive), then perhaps it will be any one of the three in the
above pic. Also, one thing I noticed in attachment by @Illusive that the length
of bay must be minimum 3.6x2=7.2m because two air-air missiles are attached by
front-rear straight combination.



You know what, I think attachment by @Illusive may be suitable provided it has
enough height/depth to hold PGM or LGB securely, otherwise the bay door can't
be closed which will lead to stealth compromise. After much thinking last night,
I now think 3.65x0.7x0.35 dimensions of bay may not be possible. First reason
is ADA does not want side bays. I remembered the other reason last night.
Remember they also plan to integrate Brohmos-NG/Brohmos-M in AMCA! its weight is
1.5 tn, length is 6m and width is 510mm (0.51m). MKI can carry 1 Brohmos-A, but 3
Brohmos-NG. FGFA will also carry 3 NGs, but AMCA can carry only 2. So how can a
bay of 3.65x0.7x0.35 dimensions hold NG?!! Two bays will carry one NG each. Thus
dimension for each bay should be 7.4x0.7x0.53 (to accommodate NG safely). See the
depth is increased, so now bombs with more diameters can fit in. And by 7.4m, we
can attach 2 air-air missiles in front-rear straight combination too, if need arises
(means if ADA couldn't manage to place incorporate uneven/asymmetric
missile configuration). By 0.7m breadth, we can put 2 Astra Mk.2 side-by-side, because
0.3x2=0.6m by your folded wing theory which is safely less than 0.7m. I don't think we
can put 3 BVRAAMs side-by-side because AMCA is not so big. By carrying two NGs,
AMCA internal weapon capacity will increase to a minimum 3tn. We can assume int. weapon
capacity to be 3.3 tn, and the rest will be added to fuel section to increase more fuel than 4tn.

Awesome analysis. .......................

 

[Superdefender]

@HariPrasad-1, thanks. Still a defence enthusiast, not even close to any pro defence expert.

 

[Superdefender]

@HariPrasad-1, thanks. Still a defence enthusiast, not even close to any pro defence expert.

 

[shade]

I do not see any definitive shape of AMCA before 2022. Means when they would have the components and can actually design the plane. A prototype can be expected by 2027. AMCA will not join IAF before 2030.

The current timeline will see Russian FGFA starting to come from 2022.

For next 15 years, one should not expect AMCA in IAF.

By 2030 muricans will have jets that can actually go invisible and chinks shortly after,

 

[HariPrasad-1]

@HariPrasad-1, thanks. Still a defence enthusiast, not even close to any pro defence expert.

If enthusiast can analyze such beautifully than experts may not be required. thanks.

 

[Superdefender]

@shade, what is an invisible plane!?

 

[shade]

@shade, what is an invisible plane!?

i mean real invisible like there-is-a-jet-going-to-bomb-you-but-you-cant-see-it
A sci fi term for this will be "optical camoflouge"
many things are sci fi now,but DARPA is pissing money on making these sci fi things a reality.
and when americans get something,the chinese magically do too.

 

[tsunami]

Conclusion: There is no doubt about inconsistency in design of internal
weapon bay. We can just hope ADA & IAF to reach final ground soon.

That is the entire argument. Nothing is confirmed.

1. But how can you say for sure that ADA will incorporate uneven/asymmetric
missile configuration?

That will help to put more missiles in it.

2.You are not even sure that Astra Mk.2 will folded wings or not.
If the worst case happens (above point 1 and 2 become negative), then AMCA
weapon bay will look like @Illusive attachment. If the best case happens (1
and 2 become positive), then perhaps it will be any one of the three in the
above pic. Also, one thing I noticed in attachment by @Illusive that the length
of bay must be minimum 3.6x2=7.2m because two air-air missiles are attached by
front-rear straight combination.

I can not see all the attachments you are mentioning, In office. But seriously one missile behind another??

We are not talking about PAKFA we are taalking about AMCA. A weapon bay with 7.2 mtr length not going to happen.

You know what, I think attachment by @Illusive may be suitable provided it has
enough height/depth to hold PGM or LGB securely, otherwise the bay door can't
be closed which will lead to stealth compromise. After much thinking last night,
I now think 3.65x0.7x0.35 dimensions of bay may not be possible. First reason
is ADA does not want side bays. I remembered the other reason last night.
Remember they also plan to integrate Brohmos-NG/Brohmos-M in AMCA! its weight is
1.5 tn, length is 6m and width is 510mm (0.51m). MKI can carry 1 Brohmos-A, but 3
Brohmos-NG. FGFA will also carry 3 NGs, but AMCA can carry only 2. So how can a
bay of 3.65x0.7x0.35 dimensions hold NG?!!

Show me one documentary proof where it says ADA have plans to fit Bramhos NG in AMCA internal weapon bay. And remember it should perfectly say internal weapon bay.

Because carrying a bramhos NG internally will be difficult for even PAK FA, carrying 2 bramhos NG was a plan to carry them on external hard points not internal.

Two bays will carry one NG each. Thus
dimension for each bay should be 7.4x0.7x0.53 (to accommodate NG safely). See the
depth is increased, so now bombs with more diameters can fit in. And by 7.4m, we
can attach 2 air-air missiles in front-rear straight combination too, if need arises
(means if ADA couldn't manage to place incorporate uneven/asymmetric
missile configuration). By 0.7m breadth, we can put 2 Astra Mk.2 side-by-side, because
0.3x2=0.6m by your folded wing theory which is safely less than 0.7m. I don't think we
can put 3 BVRAAMs side-by-side because AMCA is not so big. By carrying two NGs,
AMCA internal weapon capacity will increase to a minimum 3tn. We can assume int. weapon
capacity to be 3.3 tn, and the rest will be added to fuel section to increase more fuel than 4tn.

In most of the cases I found weapon bay to carry only 5 missiles, Not even 6. And I will be glad if we will have internal weapon capacity to 1800 Kg. With 2 SDB MER (Each having 4 bombs) and 2 BVR missile.

And yes now there is much less possibility of side weapon bays. This means AMCA will be able to carry maximum 5 missiles.

 

[Superdefender]

@tsunami, so by simpler means, AMCA can't carry 2 Brohmos-Ms in stealthy mode, right?

 

[Superdefender]

@tsunami, so by simpler means, AMCA can't carry 2 Brohmos-Ms in stealthy mode, right?

 

[tharun]

@tsunami, so by simpler means, AMCA can't carry 2 Brohmos-Ms in stealthy mode, right?

I think u never heard about Brahmos-NG next generation they are making it compact that they can fix it in the internal bay.....
Brahmos-NG is lighter and three meters shorter.....

 

[tharun]

That is the entire argument. Nothing is confirmed.

Show me one documentary proof where it says ADA have plans to fit Bramhos NG in AMCA internal weapon bay. And remember it should perfectly say internal weapon bay.


Because carrying a bramhos NG internally will be difficult for even PAK FA, carrying 2 bramhos NG was a plan to carry them on external hard points not internal.

There is no documentary about fitting brahmos NG in AMCA but weed to wait for the clarification

 

[Superdefender]

I think u never heard about Brahmos-NG next generation they are making it compact that they can fix it in the internal bay.....
Brahmos-NG is lighter and three meters shorter.....

Brohmos-M is also referred to as Brohmos-NG! Both are same.