DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

SavageKing456

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2020
Messages
2,637
Likes
16,009
Country flag
View attachment 166700

So, guys it is finally clear that AMCA won't have EOTS, atleast the mk1 won't have it. It will have DAS as it has been mentioned by DRDO officials working on AMCA in several news articles though not seen on this model, perhaps coz its submerged blended inside body so no need to show it on aerodynamic test model. On the other hand EOTS has never been mentioned once by officials.
Also EOTS and IRST both doesn't makes sense as EOTS can do the same work of IRST so expectation of EOTS after IRST confirmed are extremely slim.
Absence of EOTS means targeting pod for ground attack missions thereby say bye bye to stealth ground attack missions.

I am disappointed slightly, because we took our sweet time to work AMCA out and still lack EOTS essential system for mk1 which is going to be inducted in 2030/32.
I understand that IAF is okay with it which leads me to double down ony belief that IAF is indeed very adamant on its air defence role and completely forgets about striking ground targets.
To draw out parallel, SU 57 too doesn't have EOTS and guess what is the performance of RUAF in Ukraine, they are rather performing very low sorties that too on SU25 with dumb weapons.

If anything is to go by, current PAF has better ground attack capability than IAF, fight me!!!

My conclusion is that AMCA mk1 is good for only air ops and doesn't IRST put a problem for frontal aspect stealth?

And what are those things other than IRST circled?
View attachment 166701
View attachment 166702

I swear if AMCA mk2 too doesn't have EOTS then I am gonna flip out

View attachment 166703
It doesn't makes any sense
Probably the IAF required and forced DRDO to put it otherwise EOTS was pretty much confirmed in amca mk1
 

binayak95

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Messages
1,426
Likes
3,011
Country flag
The only possible reason is IAF allegedly saw the KF21 flight and decided to speed up the AMCA with existing technology like IRST, DAS etc. So they will induct before 2030 and attach the EOTS in further iteration.

But this is IAF we don't do that here.
You'd be surprised. The forces are not what they were pre 2017. Things have changed drastically.
 

Arihant Roy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2018
Messages
1,340
Likes
10,542
Country flag
21:22 second. Pilot says AIM-54 goes almost vertical and you took it for granted. There is something called feeling and real world physics. Could you point me an instance in the interview where he mentioned firing at an negative or zero degree angle and the missile shoots up to 80,000 feet?
Service ceiling of a F-14 is 53,000 feet. Just imagine a missile which you would fire at 0 degree and after travelling few feet it would turn 90 degree and climb 27,000 feet. Hope you could figure out how it would look like. Moreover if it could vertically climb to 80,000 feet, why have they launched it at an angle to attain the service ceiling during ALSM test? It could have vertically climbed upto 80,000 feet. Right?

View attachment 166126

View attachment 166128

View attachment 166129

Site doesn't allow me to upload the whole paper on Missile flight parameters and guidance law for A2A and A2G launch. But these are some snippets.

On Astra Mk3, DRDO should have mentioned the range to be 340 km instead of 190 km. Because if missiles start flying vertically up to its service ceiling, then no matter from what altitude it is launched, it would travel to 65000 feet and travel 340 km. They should have left alone the launch altitude here.

More importantly, they should have leave behind the AOA also in their display.

I got it that no matter how much technical paper or snippets I present, you are a hard believer that every missile is launched in a plane axis and it shoots up to its maximum altitude.

Lets agree to disagree here.
Exactly in a previous para I had quoted a text which says the missile climbs up immediately after launch so that it can cruise in the rarefied atmosphere of 80000 ft and then comes down on its target just before the terminal phase.

It has been mentioned in several sources and videos.


http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-54.html

What, you are now coming to semantics? Which part of the missile climbs up to 80-100000 ft don't you understand ?

The missile doesn't goes 90 degree and shoots straight up. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to comprehend this because the whole point of climbing to the ceiling of 100000 ft is to make the missile fly longer at the same thrust level due to the lesser skin drag from the rarefied air.

Why would the missile waste precious energy and climb straight up 90 degree . In that way it isn't covering any horizontal distance , and the whole point of this exercise is to make the missile fly longer. So such a move would defeat its entire purpose. The RIO was over ecstatic and that's why he said almost vertical.


From 3:05 to 3:30. The missile flies an optimised profile between 24000 metres to 30000 metres after launch.

You are being deliberately obtuse just to prove that you aren't wrong. That doesn't mean it changes the facts on the ground.

The only technical paper you have presented is for an experimental launch of an AIM-54 from a F-15 for a study on hypersonics. THATS WHAT YOU HAVE DONE.





Watch from 1:43 onwards. That's how the Phoenix or any missile climbs towards its ceiling.

Also notice the horizontal launch and not a high alpha launch.

Don't give me the same bullshit that what are the planes of reference? Was the photographing aircraft in the same plane as the launch aircraft or was it horizontal? Don't try to hide behind such sophistication when you know you are plain wrong.


Tell me was the aircraft photographing Tejas in this case in the same plane as the Tejas launching the missile?
Is this launch with the nose level ?
Or is it a high alpha launch just because according to you we don't know or see the frames of reference????


SHOW ME A SINGLE VIDEO WHERE DURING A TEST LAUNCH OR A WEAPONS TRIAL, A BVRAAM WAS LAUNCHED WITH THE NOSE HIGH UP.

YOU CANT. Coz there isn't any. In my years of playing and studying in DCS, haven't ever seen someone going high alpha to launch a bvraam. Equating a single experimental case with regular launches won't do.

YOUR INFLATED SENSE OF EGO WONT ALLOW YOU TO ADMIT THAT YOU ARE WRONG.

You are the only person in the entire world who is completely ignorant of how a Phoenix and some other bvraam works . Ask anybody on this or on other forum.


And I will again mention it. ASTRA mk3 has a 300+KM RANGE AND THE MISSILE INDEED CLIMBS TO HIGHER ALTITUDE AFTER LAUNCH FOR V LONG RANGE SHOTS.
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top