AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (HAL)

abingdonboy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
8,039
Likes
33,588
Country flag
Like they did with "Shakthi" Engine!?


Still begging frace for help.
The Shakti and IMRH engine approaches are by far the most pragmatic that could’ve been taken given the place india finds itself. ‘Joint’ development with specific enhancements as per Indian requirements with all manufacturing and after-sales support done in india

IP remains the holy grail that no one will give you. When India stops deluding itself and sees the situation for what it is the foundation will be there to create IP but fantasies that someone else is going to come and gift you the ability is farcical
 

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
5,689
Likes
15,181
Country flag
Like they did with "Shakthi" Engine!?


Still begging frace for help.
umm The HSTE 1500 is fruit of Snecma HAL - Shakti JV. We haven't designed higher capacity turbine engines. Helicopters engines and gearboxes are complex stuff not only in design but also material wise. Requires quite research and development. JV helps in guiding latter to right direction and quickens path.
 

Vamsi

New Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
4,858
Likes
29,459
Country flag
umm The HSTE 1500 is fruit of Snecma HAL - Shakti JV. We haven't designed higher capacity turbine engines. Helicopters engines and gearboxes are complex stuff not only in design but also material wise. Requires quite research and development. JV helps in guiding latter to right direction and quickens path.
Ideally after developing Shakti engine via JV , IMRH engine should have gone fully indigenous route, if not, it only means that no reasonable Tech Transfer had happened in that JV, which again means, no reasonable tech transfer will happen for 110KN engine in a JV, so after 2050 we will again go begging french for a JV for 160KN engine and the cycle repeats..
 

AnantS

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
5,689
Likes
15,181
Country flag
Ideally after developing Shakti engine via JV , IMRH engine should have gone fully indigenous route, if not, it only means that no reasonable Tech Transfer had happened in that JV, which again means, no reasonable tech transfer will happen for 110KN engine in a JV, so after 2050 we will again go begging french for a JV for 160KN engine and the cycle repeats..
that is given. But with JV as I said - gives pointers to move research in right direction - provided parallely double efforts are made in your parallel research. China did that successfully.

Anyone company which in actual gives IP and metallurgy know how and know why - prolly is the one who has lost interest in Moh and Maya and wants to head for Sanyas soon.
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
5,125
Likes
27,490
Country flag
Ideally after developing Shakti engine via JV , IMRH engine should have gone fully indigenous route, if not, it only means that no reasonable Tech Transfer had happened in that JV, which again means, no reasonable tech transfer will happen for 110KN engine in a JV, so after 2050 we will again go begging french for a JV for 160KN engine and the cycle repeats..
It can still go full indigenous. We dont know which engine will be chosen.

Chinese MRH of 13Ton MTOW are using similar 1300-1500shp engine in tripple configuration.
 

karn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
3,663
Likes
15,587
Country flag
Ideally after developing Shakti engine via JV , IMRH engine should have gone fully indigenous route, if not, it only means that no reasonable Tech Transfer had happened in that JV, which again means, no reasonable tech transfer will happen for 110KN engine in a JV, so after 2050 we will again go begging french for a JV for 160KN engine and the cycle repeats..
Isn't it the case that either the airframe is proven and the engine is new or the engine is proven and the airframe is new .. if both are new there is development hell.
It makes sense for HAL to offer a drop in replacement for shakti on ALH and ask for an upgrade of a proven engine for the IMRH from the French .
 

MonaLazy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
1,320
Likes
7,895
no reasonable tech transfer will happen in a JV
With Brahmos we absorbed Russian Tech and tested with lot of indigenous components. If we able to do similar thing to Engine tech, then at least we have covered some good learning curve.
From the Brahmos experience...

Pros-
  • We are manufacturing an advanced (by the standard of our adversaries) Mach 3 cruise missile in house
  • We are doing so relatively cheaply
  • We have inducted it in serious numbers so we pose a credible threat to our enemies today, not at some future time
  • We are exporting it to anyone that will pay, will help us get tremendous leverage against China by selling it to countries that don't perceive China as friendly
  • We have absorbed and localized 30-year-old Russian missile tech.
  • There was an incident of "accidental" firing of this missile to our West. What shouts domination better than a missile that can slice through enemy AD cover like a hot knife through butter?
  • We have miniaturized it into Brahmos NG- same destructive potency in a smaller form factor, would like to know what, if any, is the Russian contribution to the NG missile

Cons-
  • We still need to go back to the Russians for their Tsirkon tech for hypersonic Brahmos II. We are still not at the bleeding edge of tech. But so is the USA, if that makes us feel any better.

And for the singular con, we only have ourselves to blame as required investments in R & D for hypersonic tech were not made in time. But still, we are better off today with Russian "help" than we would be had we been slogging away on our own without this "screwdrivergiri".

Similarly, we will be in a better situation with help from RR/Safran/GE for the future engine, than without. Let's be careful before dissing away such high-level co-operation which has been offered to a very select few nations.
 
Last edited:

Aditya Ballal

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
3,565
Likes
22,056
Country flag
From the Brahmos experience...

Pros-
  • We are manufacturing an advanced (by the standard of our adversaries) Mach 3 cruise missile in house
  • We are doing so relatively cheaply
  • We have inducted it in serious numbers so we pose a credible threat to our enemies today, not at some future time
  • We are exporting it to anyone that will pay, will help us get tremendous leverage against China by selling it to countries that don't perceive China as friendly
  • We have absorbed and localized 30-year-old Russian missile tech.
  • There was an incident of "accidental" firing of this missile to our West. What shouts domination better than a missile that can slice through enemy AD cover like a hot knife through butter?
  • We have miniaturized it into Brahmos NG- same destructive potency in a smaller form factor, would like to know what, if any, is the Russian contribution to the NG missile

Cons-
  • We still need to go back to the Russians for their Tsirkon tech for hypersonic Brahmos II. We are still not at the bleeding edge of tech. But so is the USA, if that makes us feel any better.

And for the singular con, we only have ourselves to blame as required investments in R & D for hypersonic tech were not made in time. But still, we are better off today with Russian "help" than we would be had we been slogging away on our own without this "screwdrivergiri".

Similarly, we will be in a better situation with help from RR/Safran/GE for the future engine, than without. Let's be careful before dissing away such high-level co-operation which has been offered to a very select few nations.
Source for the Bhramos being relatively cheaper than other similar missiles?
 

MonaLazy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
1,320
Likes
7,895
Source for the Bhramos being relatively cheaper than other similar missiles?
Are there any similar missiles? It is cheaper now because Indian contribution has gone up when compared to the earlier production lots. Here's one example-


How Brahmos Missile Has Become Cheaper
By Ajai Shukla
April 06, 2023 15:24 IST

Before Data Patterns developed an indigenous check-out equipment, Brahmos Aerospace was paying a Russian supplier three times what it will now pay the Indian company.

IMAGE: The Indian Navy carried out a successful precision strike in the Arabian Sea by a ship-launched BrahMos missile with DRDO-designed Indigenous Seeker and Booster, March 5, 2023. Photograph: ANI Photo
Data Patterns Limited, one of India's fastest-growing and technologically most promising aerospace and defence (A&D) firms, unveiled in Chennai an indigenous BrahMos missile check-out equipment (COE), ready for delivery to BrahMos Aerospace.
Indian firms such as Data Patterns are driving down the price of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile system by designing and developing indigenous solutions to replace costly foreign parts in the Indo-Russian missile.
Before Data Patterns developed an indigenous COE, Brahmos Aerospace was paying a Russian supplier three times what it will now pay the Indian company.



"I commend [Data Patterns] for having delivered mission critical systems on all the programs that they have partnered with us on time. We are proud to be associated with Data Patterns and look forward to a long-standing collaboration," said Atul Rane, who heads the Indo-Russian joint venture BrahMos Aerospace.
"BrahMos is an important customer of Data Patterns. We have always delivered all their requirements on schedule, maintained quality standards, and provided maintenance support, consistently exceeding the uptime requirements. Indigenous development of the COE by Data Patterns has resulted in a direct cost savings of about 75 per cent in foreign exchange for BrahMos," said Data Patterns chief S Rangarajan.
More like this
Navy Tests Ship-Launched BrahMos Missile
Navy Tests Ship-Launched BrahMos Missile


BrahMos In Flight! What A Sight!
BrahMos In Flight! What A Sight!

The COE that Data Patterns has developed for the BrahMos is a three-bay test system that checks the health and functionality of the missile's electrical sub-systems.
This unit validates the missile's performance through interfacing with its umbilical and maintenance connections.
The shelter mounted COE can test the articles in the field during its life cycle, ensuring readiness for launch at all times, without delay.
The COE has three major subsystems. The first is the main processor unit for the "man machine interface (MMI) such as keyboard, joystick, printer, monitor and external interface for storage media.
The second is an 'input-output sub-system' which interfaces with the missile for carrying out the test.
The third is dedicated to self-control and self-test. The COE is designed for transportability.
"The COE has been deployed by all the three (armed services) at multiple locations across India today. We are delighted to see Data Patterns, an Indian company, leading the way in this industry," said Rane.
"Before Data Patterns developed an indigenous COE, Brahmos Aerospace was paying a Russian supplier three times what it will now pay the Indian company," Rane added.
BrahMos Aerospace was formed as a joint venture between India's Defence R&D Organisation (DRDO) and Russia's NPO Mashinostroyenia, earlier known as Federal State Unitary Enterprise NPOM of Russia.
The company was established in India on February 12, 1998, through an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA), between India and Russia.
The missile system's name -- BrahMos -- represents the fury of India's Brahmaputra and the grace of Russia's Moskva rivers.
The joint venture company, BrahMos Aerospace, was established with an authorised capital of $250 million -- nwith 50.5 per cent coming from the Indian side and 49.5 per cent from the Russian side.
Data Patterns designs and develops electronic hardware, software, firmware, product prototype and carries out testing, validation and verification.



Based in Chennai, Data Patterns employs over 1000 people, and is among the top 500 listed companies in India.
The company works closely with defence public sector undertakings like Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd and Bharat Electronics Ltd, and with organisations involved in defence and space research, such as DRDO and ISRO.
 

Vamsi

New Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
4,858
Likes
29,459
Country flag
From the Brahmos experience...

Pros-
  • We are manufacturing an advanced (by the standard of our adversaries) Mach 3 cruise missile in house
  • We are doing so relatively cheaply
  • We have inducted it in serious numbers so we pose a credible threat to our enemies today, not at some future time
  • We are exporting it to anyone that will pay, will help us get tremendous leverage against China by selling it to countries that don't perceive China as friendly
  • We have absorbed and localized 30-year-old Russian missile tech.
  • There was an incident of "accidental" firing of this missile to our West. What shouts domination better than a missile that can slice through enemy AD cover like a hot knife through butter?
  • We have miniaturized it into Brahmos NG- same destructive potency in a smaller form factor, would like to know what, if any, is the Russian contribution to the NG missile

Cons-
  • We still need to go back to the Russians for their Tsirkon tech for hypersonic Brahmos II. We are still not at the bleeding edge of tech. But so is the USA, if that makes us feel any better.

And for the singular con, we only have ourselves to blame as required investments in R & D for hypersonic tech were not made in time. But still, we are better off today with Russian "help" than we would be had we been slogging away on our own without this "screwdrivergiri".

Similarly, we will be in a better situation with help from RR/Safran/GE for the future engine, than without. Let's be careful before dissing away such high-level co-operation which has been offered to a very select few nations.
Wow! Nice comparison with brahmos, but you forgot one thing, there's a difference between Russians & westoids....

In this proposed 110KN engine JV, the max ToT we may get is the "know-how" to manufacture the HPT blades from scratch,this is the max limit remember

the HPT blade material would still be imported & it's composition & "know-how" to make that material will NOT be shared with us......so if west sanctions us,

1.then how will you manufacture your JV engine ??

2. if you are in middle of a war, your problems will become worse, what will you do in that situation ??

there is one more reason why this JV should not go forward, I don't trust Americ*nts, British*ts, as far as french is concerned, at the end of the day, they too are west
 

MonaLazy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
1,320
Likes
7,895
there's a difference between Russians & westoids....
There is none!


the joint venture was formed at a time when Russia was undergoing financial turmoil and India should have "encashed" it by having more collaborations.
...
"We, in fact, extended financial help to create infrastructure and brought many Russian scientists so that we develop technology.

Russia was in a economic mess then, that's how we got such a sweet deal. The West is wary of China now, so is laying out the red carpet for us. The onus is on us to grab the opportunity.

In this proposed 110KN engine JV, the max ToT we may get is...
The rest of your post is in the realm of conjecture. The fine print of what is on offer from each player is privileged info only available to a handful of people who have read and understood their proposals as part of their professional duties. Let's not cast aspersions and raise doubts before the problem presents itself. Maybe they are still working their way to the right level of ToT otherwise we would have signed the dotted line by now.

don't trust Americ*nts, British*ts, .. french
You are welcome to your bias, but we exist in a world where the reality of doing jet engine business will have you cross paths with those exact people. Deal with it!
 

Rassil Krishnan

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
2,106
Likes
9,228
Country flag
From the Brahmos experience...

Pros-
  • We are manufacturing an advanced (by the standard of our adversaries) Mach 3 cruise missile in house
  • We are doing so relatively cheaply
  • We have inducted it in serious numbers so we pose a credible threat to our enemies today, not at some future time
  • We are exporting it to anyone that will pay, will help us get tremendous leverage against China by selling it to countries that don't perceive China as friendly
  • We have absorbed and localized 30-year-old Russian missile tech.
  • There was an incident of "accidental" firing of this missile to our West. What shouts domination better than a missile that can slice through enemy AD cover like a hot knife through butter?
  • We have miniaturized it into Brahmos NG- same destructive potency in a smaller form factor, would like to know what, if any, is the Russian contribution to the NG missile

Cons-
  • We still need to go back to the Russians for their Tsirkon tech for hypersonic Brahmos II. We are still not at the bleeding edge of tech. But so is the USA, if that makes us feel any better.

And for the singular con, we only have ourselves to blame as required investments in R & D for hypersonic tech were not made in time. But still, we are better off today with Russian "help" than we would be had we been slogging away on our own without this "screwdrivergiri".

Similarly, we will be in a better situation with help from RR/Safran/GE for the future engine, than without. Let's be careful before dissing away such high-level co-operation which has been offered to a very select few nations.
IF WE Collab with outsiders, then the advantage will only be gleaned if the knowledge is absorbed and leveraged for further Local R&D from our side, otherwise if it is not exploited further, then it is a CON.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top