Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyot (LMFS), a MIG and ADA production

Rahul Singh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
Actually IAF seems like using AMCA to push defense R&D to optimum level. It seems like they do not care if AMCA comes little inferior, they know their FGFA will be overwhelmingly superior to anything enemy flies. What they want instead is to throw defence R&D in country on steroid run and at same time challenge privet sector into aggressive defence R&D as well. No surprise, when DRDO alloted task for developing panoramic cockpit displays for AMCA to privet sector. Everybody knows privet sector will do little if they stick to only manufacturing upon TOT. To catch China privet sector needs to step in and run parallel with DRDO and i believe IAF's compulsions on AMCA provides ample reasons, motivations and challenges.

PS: I have been a critic of IAF's attitude towards indigenisation but their recent actions regarding Akash and LCA forced me to change my views. And if my words are sounding too optimist then reason is just as written.
 
Last edited:

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,234
Country flag
Kind of agree with Rahul. Let MiG work with ADA and help in MCA.

Besides i cant figure what sense does it make to have so many planes doing similar function and similar capability. PAKFA, FGFA, LCA MK2, MCA and now LMFS????

I think it would be logical if we tie to develop Next Gen UCAVs
The MiG project here seems to be a kind of untold agreement between us and Russians you know. I mean who knows that our scientists who designed the wind tunnel model might have discussed it with MiG engineers secretly to allow easy cross-over of knowledge for both parties. I mean just take a look at the intended designs of both parties. Both medium class, both sharing similar design concepts and both aimed at a similar category of aircraft. I cannot be any more obvious than this.

The joint cooperation might be very limited in terms of joint investment but I think there will be a mutual level of consultation when it comes to AMCA and LMFS being made in both the countries.

Maybe both countries will cooperate under the table with just exchange of knowledge and know how; but we both would call it "independent development" since there's no official channel and hence AMCA and LMFS might come out as "half brothers"..LOL.

But one thing puzzles me is ADA approach SAAB recently for AMCA. Wonder what caused them to consider Sweden an option all of a sudden.

About your comment on UCAVs, lets face it; today's UCAVs can only replace gunships as air to ground strike aircraft. They are less maneuverable, slow and too vulnerable to be able to conduct aerial missions. So I think that we should scrap off gunship making in the near future since LCH Dhruv is already made and focus on filling gunship role with smart UCAVs.

It will be a long time before UCAVs are technologically capable enough to replace manned fighters.
 
Last edited:

Rahul Singh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
The MiG project here seems to be a kind of untold agreement between us and Russians you know. I mean who knows that our scientists who designed the wind tunnel model might have discussed it with MiG engineers secretly to allow easy cross-over of knowledge for both parties. I mean just take a look at the intended designs of both parties. Both medium class, both sharing similar design concepts and both aimed at a similar category of aircraft. I cannot be any more obvious than this.
May be just coincidence. MCA was always on cards and as appeared was scaled up twin seater variant of LCA in medium class. As time progressed ADA improvised the basic design by removing vertical stabilizer to make it stealthy attack aircraft because by 2005 IAF was feeling need for a potent 'attack cum fighter' jet. By 2008-9 when requirement for medium weight 5th gen fighter started to become imminent IAF started showing interest in MCA. But by now, thanks to 126, they were in love with swing role fighters. So they demanded ADA for a swing role 5th gen fighter. ADA might have realized that elevator-less canard-less delta winged MCA with internal bays may not fulfill stringent air to air requirement. May be then they decided to add elevator rejecting more obvious option 'Canard' because of its radar friendliness.

May be i am wrong but it could be one possibility.

MCA-1,2. Model 2 is clearly scaled up twin engined variant of LCA.


MCA-3 Tail less(vertical and horizontal) concept.


AMCA. Quite different from earlier models but impression of MCA-2 noticeable.
 
Last edited:

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,234
Country flag
May be just coincidence. MCA was always on cards and as appeared was scaled up twin seater variant of LCA in medium class. As time progressed ADA improvised the basic design by removing vertical stabilizer to make it stealthy attack aircraft because by 2005 IAF was feeling need for a potent 'attack cum fighter' jet. By 2008-9 when requirement for medium weight 5th gen fighter started to become imminent IAF started showing interest in MCA. But by now, thanks to 126, they were in love with swing role fighters. So they demanded ADA for a swing role 5th gen fighter. ADA might have realized that elevator-less canard-less delta winged MCA with internal bays may not fulfill stringent air to air requirement. May be then they decided to add elevator rejecting more obvious option 'Canard' because of its radar friendliness.

May be i am wrong but it could be one possibility.

MCA-1,2. Model 2 is clearly scaled up twin engined variant of LCA.


MCA-3 Tail less(vertical and horizontal) concept.


AMCA. Quite different from earlier models but impression of MCA-1B noticeable.
Could be. However, I don't understand IAF's obsession with twin engine aircraft so much now. This is what worries me since 2 engines means double the maintenance costs and India in general cannot afford that right now. We are not big enough and rich enough to manage something like this. Even US and party are going for single engine for a second stealth jet. IMO AMCA should be a powerful single engined fighter that balances IAF's 2-engine-heavy air force with single engine jets as well so as to keep costs low and to keep pilots maximum in the air. There is a very strong inverse correlation between these 2 factors that IAF planners know very well. 200 Tejas in both MKs will still be almost only 1/4th of our quarter air force in the coming years. Going by IAF's interest in Typhoon and Rafale & even the SH as skeptics believe, I would be amazed if they choose a single engine finally. I know that 2 engines mean more reliability but reliability has a high cost and when it comes to ripoffs like European jets or even the strings-bound US jets, either maintenance costs are high or the aircraft needs suppliers' nod to get used.

Wonder why IAF is pressing for 2 engine second stealth jets even after thinking of such factors. Simply imitating the Chinese is not the solution since they are still 3 times richer and well-off than us with lesser disparity. We are already going to have 2 engined FGFAs, MKIs, MRCAs(maybe), Naval MiGs etc. I think before the formal sanctioning of AMCA's official work begins, ADA must reconfigure the design to a single engine one also just once to test its effectiveness.

As such in the past we had such high costs despite having a largely single engine air force (MiG-21, 23, 27, Mirage) and we had trouble keeping our pilots in the air too long. This is what needs to be undone. The reason why Israeli air force maintains a blade's edge lethality in the region is its pilots remain MAX in the air; which is because of its largely single-engine air force. And besides, we already are going to have 3 twin engine platforms (taking MRCA's underdog equation out) to perform deep strike missions in case of war. That would already be driving IAF costs high in case of war time. Is it necessary to have an air force that have all 1,000 fighters (including the coming ones in near future) as twin engined? If we could have MRCA (NOT F-16), AMCA and Tejas as single engine (roughly 50% of IAF), we could still maintain a terrific deep strike capability with MKIs and FGFA/PAKFA while medium range assaults could be done by the medium jets all which our pilots retaining high clocking hours of training in the air, maintaining skill edge as well as keep costs low.

What do you think?
 

chex3009

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2010
Messages
929
Likes
201
Country flag
With all these twin-engined aircraft of the IAF, maintenance sky-rockets so to complement large force of MKIs and the FGFAs, what the IAF should do is to go for a single engined AMCA and single seater version of the AMCA rather than prefer the two-seater version. AMCA will be the best to play the role that an F-35 will play in the USAF. I think a single engined and single seater should be what IAF should look for. But i am afraid, the AMCA is a twin-engined one, but is the IAF opting for the two-seater version or it would be just the navy that will opt for that???
 

Rahul Singh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
....................What do you think?
Let me stick with AMCA. AMCA as required will be in 18-20 ton class and as of today there is no engine in the world except F-135 which can deliver +180 KN reheated thrust as desired. Problem with F-135 is that in all likelihood it will come as 'no TVC nozzle' engine and with present specifications will never allow AMCA to supercruise. So F-135 is out of probable option. Now second option could be unnamed 180 Kn engine of production PAK-FA. It can be a good option and may be engine of choice for LMFS but it will make serious compromise on commitment towards level of indigenisation in AMCA. In addition it will kill project Kaveri which we can't afford to let happen at any cost. So, despite being commercially unsuitable, strategically twin engine AMCA is very much need of the time.
 

chex3009

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2010
Messages
929
Likes
201
Country flag
Let me stick with AMCA. AMCA as required will be in 18-20 ton class and as of today there is no engine in the world except F-135 which can deliver +180 KN reheated thrust as desired. Problem with F-135 is that in all likelihood it will come as 'no TVC nozzle' engine and with present specifications will never allow AMCA to supercruise. So F-135 is out of probable option. Now second option could be unnamed 180 Kn engine of production PAK-FA. It can be a good option and may be engine of choice for LMFS but it will make serious compromise on commitment towards level of indigenisation in AMCA. In addition it will kill project Kaveri which we can't afford to let happen at any cost. So, despite being commercially unsuitable, strategically twin engine AMCA is very much need of the time.
But Rahul, wouldn't it be a BIG headache for the IAF to maintain all the twin-engined jets, our super flanker, MMRCAs (EF or Super Hornets), the AMCA. I mean this is nightmare of air force of a country like India.

I can't understand IAF operating two platforms of twin-engined fifth Gen fighter. India would be the first country to do so if it happens, i guess!!!
 

warriorextreme

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2010
Messages
1,866
Likes
3,033
Country flag
our current production capability for LCA is just 8 per year..
GOI should also start building new facilities for LCA MK-II and AMCA.
 

Rahul Singh

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
3,652
Likes
5,790
Country flag
But Rahul, wouldn't it be a BIG headache for the IAF to maintain all the twin-engined jets, our super flanker, MMRCAs (EF or Super Hornets), the AMCA. I mean this is nightmare of air force of a country like India.

I can't understand IAF operating two platforms of twin-engined fifth Gen fighter. India would be the first country to do so if it happens, i guess!!!
Yes Chex, maintaining multiple two engined fighters will be headache for IAF. But i see no way out as design of MKI, FGFA and AMCA requires TVC for super-maneuverability something which can be incorporated only with two engine configuration. As far as M-MRCA goes then IAF should select single engine jet and IAF has already said that if single engine jet meets ASR for M-MRCA then they will select it straightaway. But there are whole lot of concerns regarding these single engine contenders which can not be overlooked.

No, USAF with F-22 and F-35 will be first to operate two types of 5G fighters.
 
Last edited:

chex3009

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2010
Messages
929
Likes
201
Country flag
I can't understand IAF operating two platforms of twin-engined fifth Gen fighter. India would be the first country to do so if it happens, i guess!!!
No, USAF with F-22 and F-35 will be first to operate two types of 5G fighters.
Rahul, what i said was that India would be the first country to operate two twin-engined fifth gen fighters.
 

A.V.

New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
6,503
Likes
1,157
Avia port has released the detail specifications of the LMFS project this was in pipeline since 2008 , when sukhoi won the pakfa go ahead , mig was given a consolation of this LMFS funds beyond 2015 . it might slowly take shape later on .


РОССИЯ ПОМОЖЕТ РАЗРАБОТАТЬ ИСТРЕБИТЕЛЬ ПЯТОГО ПОКОЛЕНИЯ ДЛЯ ВВС ИНДИИ

RUSSIA MIGHT WORK ON A 5TH GENERATION Aviation Complex with INDIA . ( from the report its not FGFA OR PAKFA VERSION)
Российская Федерация примет участие в разработке легкого истребителя пятого поколения специально для военно-воздушных сил Индии, сообщает в понедельник индийский оборонный интернет-портал Brahmand Defence and Aerospace News.

"В ходе переговоров, состоявшихся во время визита индийской военной делегации в Москву во главе с командующим ВВС Прадипом Васантом Наиком, российская сторона подтвердила готовность совместно с индийцами разработать новый легкий истребитель пятого поколения, который будет отвечать специфическим требованиям ВВС Индии", - говорится в сообщении интернет-портала.

По информации издания, которое ссылается на источники в индийской делегации, новый легкий истребитель будет разработан на платформе, отличной от совместной тяжелой платформы, на которой в настоящее время создается перспективный многоцелевой истребитель пятого поколения, получивший в Индии обозначение FGFA.

Издание напоминает, что в декабре 2010 года ФГУП "Рособоронэкспорт", корпорация HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited) и компания "Сухой" подписали контракт на разработку эскизно-технического проекта FGFA. Это - первый из серии документов, регулирующих обязательства сторон на разных этапах осуществления программы. Истребитель пятого поколения будет разрабатываться на основе представленного главкому ВВС Индии ПАК ФА, испытания которого успешно проводит компания "Сухой". Две опытных машины уже совершили 60 полетов, передает "Интерфакс"
Россия поможет разработать истребитель пятого поколения для ВВС Индии // АвиаПорт.Дайджест

report dated 30.5 2011
 

A.V.

New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
6,503
Likes
1,157
легкого истребителя пятого поколения специально для военно-воздушных сил Индии, сообщает в понедельник индийский оборонный интернет-портал Brahmand Defence and Aerospace News.
They picked up the news from Brahmand and Aerospace news as they claim.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
They picked up the news from Brahmand and Aerospace news as they claim.
We have to wait for official confirmation. This may possibly be a JV for the AMCA or an entirely new concept.
 

ace009

Freakin' Fighter fan
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
1,662
Likes
526
Could be. However, I don't understand IAF's obsession with twin engine aircraft so much now. This is what worries me since 2 engines means double the maintenance costs and India in general cannot afford that right now. We are not big enough and rich enough to manage something like this. Even US and party are going for single engine for a second stealth jet. IMO AMCA should be a powerful single engined fighter that balances IAF's 2-engine-heavy air force with single engine jets as well so as to keep costs low and to keep pilots maximum in the air. There is a very strong inverse correlation between these 2 factors that IAF planners know very well. 200 Tejas in both MKs will still be almost only 1/4th of our quarter air force in the coming years. Going by IAF's interest in Typhoon and Rafale & even the SH as skeptics believe, I would be amazed if they choose a single engine finally. I know that 2 engines mean more reliability but reliability has a high cost and when it comes to ripoffs like European jets or even the strings-bound US jets, either maintenance costs are high or the aircraft needs suppliers' nod to get used.

Wonder why IAF is pressing for 2 engine second stealth jets even after thinking of such factors. Simply imitating the Chinese is not the solution since they are still 3 times richer and well-off than us with lesser disparity. We are already going to have 2 engined FGFAs, MKIs, MRCAs(maybe), Naval MiGs etc. I think before the formal sanctioning of AMCA's official work begins, ADA must reconfigure the design to a single engine one also just once to test its effectiveness.

As such in the past we had such high costs despite having a largely single engine air force (MiG-21, 23, 27, Mirage) and we had trouble keeping our pilots in the air too long. This is what needs to be undone. The reason why Israeli air force maintains a blade's edge lethality in the region is its pilots remain MAX in the air; which is because of its largely single-engine air force. And besides, we already are going to have 3 twin engine platforms (taking MRCA's underdog equation out) to perform deep strike missions in case of war. That would already be driving IAF costs high in case of war time. Is it necessary to have an air force that have all 1,000 fighters (including the coming ones in near future) as twin engined? If we could have MRCA (NOT F-16), AMCA and Tejas as single engine (roughly 50% of IAF), we could still maintain a terrific deep strike capability with MKIs and FGFA/PAKFA while medium range assaults could be done by the medium jets all which our pilots retaining high clocking hours of training in the air, maintaining skill edge as well as keep costs low.

What do you think?
When it's a case of survivability/ Reliability vs Cost, my choice is simple - survivability. A trained pilot (and not to mention a human life) is flying out there and being cheap is not the best for him (or her), for the air-force morale or for the country as such.
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
6,242
Likes
7,522
Country flag
Re: Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyot (LMFS), a MIG and A

With AMCA put on the backburner by ADA, MiG LMFS might just get into the news now.
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
6,242
Likes
7,522
Country flag
Re: Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyot (LMFS), a MIG and A

Россия поможет разработать истребитель пятого поколения для ВВС Индии / АвиаПорт.Дайджест

Old News...

Published: 30.05.2011

The Russian Federation will participate in the development of a light fighter of the fifth generation specially for the air forces of India, said on Monday the Indian defense web portal Brahmand Defence and Aerospace News. "During the talks held during the visit of an Indian military delegation to Moscow led by commander Air Force Pradeep Vasant Naik, the Russian side confirmed its readiness along with the Indians to develop a new light fighter of the fifth generation, which will meet the specific requirements of the Indian Air Force, "- said the Internet portal. According to the newspaper, which refers to sources in the Indian delegation, a new light fighter will be developed on a platform other than the joint heavy platform, which is currently being established promising multipurpose fighter of the fifth generation, has received the designation in the Indian FGFA. newspaper reminds that in December 2010 the "Rosoboronexport", the corporation HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited) and the company "Sukhoi" signed a contract for the development of conceptual and technical project FGFA. This - the first of a series of documents governing the obligations of the parties at different stages of the program. Fifth-generation fighter to be developed on the basis of a commander in chief of the Indian Air Force PAK FA test is successfully carried out by "dry". Two test machines are already carried out 60 missions, reports "Interfax".
 

SajeevJino

Long walk
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
6,017
Likes
3,364
Country flag
Re: Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyot (LMFS), a MIG and A

A living MiG 1.44 LMFS in Zhukovskiy Russia

 

cobra commando

Tharki regiment
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
11,115
Likes
14,530
Country flag
Re: Liogkiy Mnogofunktsionalniy Frontovoi Samolyot (LMFS), a MIG and A

^^

Sitting in the sunshine on the Mikoyan ramp at Zhukovsky.
August 2011



in 2009




Summer 2009



Spring 2011



Autumn 2011



in 2012
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top