Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft [AMCA] Development | Updates & Discussions.

[nik22]

Tejas is totally ready for induction...but everytime IAF is not giving final clearance...IAF says it still doesn't meet their standard.!

really? you have flown tejas ?

 

[majid mehmood]

None sense

what do u mean
the report is from ur newspaper not pakistan
truth is harsh

 

[Agent_47]

what do u mean
the report is from ur newspaper not pakistan
truth is harsh

Kaveri Project is broken in to two parts:

• Kabani core for UAV applications (under development)
  
• improve Kaveri output to 95KN+ and reduce weight (already 81kN+ archived ,waiting for approval of fund around 2000+ cr)

Making an aero engine from scratch is harsh hard.

 

[Agent_47]

Here's the pdf.

The Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: A Technical Analysis

Serious private participation will most likely occur in the AMCA program. HAL will integrate the fabricated and tested modules from private firms, and test the full system.

@Oscar - I remember you mentioning something about private firm participation, it might very well happen.

The ADA is designing the AMCA with an internal fuel capacity of 4 tonnes to exclude the necessity of
carrying outboard fuel tanks which significantly compromise the aircraft's stealth properties. The
ADA estimates that the AMCA will have a combat radius of 1,000 km on these 4 tonnes of internal fuel.

It must be noted that the F-35 A carries 8.3 tonnes of fuel and the F-35 C close to 9 tonnes that enable
both these aircraft to achieve a combat radius of no more than 1,100 km for an aircraft with a
14
maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of 31 tonnes. It would seem therefore that the AMCA would
have to be half the weight of the F-35 in order to achieve a 1,000-km unrefuelled combat radius or
have revolutionary engines that cut fuel consumption in half.
Given that the AMCA is a twin-engine aircraft with greater fuel consumption, such range statistics as
given by the ADA simply do not hold up to preliminary scrutiny.

I think range problem pointed out by the author is misplaced.
AMCA - 25 ton MTOW, 4.7 ton fuel ,1,852+ km combat radious
Rafale - 24.5 ton MTOW, 4 ton fuel , 1000+ km are achievable. @Oscar @kurup @sudhir007 @Abingdonboy @Dillinger

 

[topgun047]

R

I think range problem pointed out by the author is misplaced.
AMCA - 25 ton MTOW, 4.7 ton fuel ,1,852+ km combat radious
Rafale - 24.5 ton MTOW, 4 ton fuel , 1000+ km are achievable. @Oscar @kurup @sudhir007 @Abingdonboy @Dillinger

Rafale has this range with 3 externsl fuel tanks iirc

 

[SR-91]

really? you have flown tejas ?

So far every pilot that has flown it, admires it!!!!!


Love flying the mean machine: Tejas test pilot - The Times of India


No need to pull a leg of your own brother, IMO, LCA Tejas is ready but IT IS IAF that wants MORE. NO doubt about it!!

 

[Agent_47]

R

Rafale has this range with 3 externsl fuel tanks iirc

No, 4.7 ton fuel is internal.
Specifications and performance data

 

[majid mehmood]

Kaveri Project is broken in to two parts:

• Kabani core for UAV applications (under development)
  
• improve Kaveri output to 95KN+ and reduce weight (already 81kN+ archived ,waiting for approval of fund around 2000+ cr)

Making an aero engine from scratch is harsh hard.

link pls
and not the approval of fund it is approval of wind up

 

[topgun047]

Alert 5 » KF-X hits roadblock after failure to get clearance for 4 key technologies from U.S. - Military Aviation News
South Korea’s dream of developing its KF-X fighter has suffered a setback after KAI failed to get clearance from the U.S. for four key technologies from Lockheed Martin.


Photos: KAI

Four key technologies are: active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, infrared search and track sensor, electro-optical targeting pod and electronic warfare jammer.

A Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) official said as a consequence, the program might have to be delayed.


A reason why India should do its own R & D instead of becoming US sidekick.
I would put my money on Turkey being next.

 

[SRP]

Alert 5 » KF-X hits roadblock after failure to get clearance for 4 key technologies from U.S. - Military Aviation News
South Korea’s dream of developing its KF-X fighter has suffered a setback after KAI failed to get clearance from the U.S. for four key technologies from Lockheed Martin.


Photos: KAI

Four key technologies are: active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, infrared search and track sensor, electro-optical targeting pod and electronic warfare jammer.

A Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) official said as a consequence, the program might have to be delayed.


A reason why India should do its own R & D instead of becoming US sidekick.
I would put my money on Turkey being next.

Wrong thread

 

[Agent_47]

Alert 5 » KF-X hits roadblock after failure to get clearance for 4 key technologies from U.S. - Military Aviation News

Four key technologies are: active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, infrared search and track sensor, electro-optical targeting pod and electronic warfare jammer.

A Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) official said as a consequence, the program might have to be delayed.


A reason why India should do its own R & D instead of becoming US sidekick.
I would put my money on Turkey being next.

AESA radar - capable radar already in test stage. (UTTAM for LCA mk2)
electronic warfare suite - co developed with israel ready and being fitted with Mig29,LCA

IRST - Will get ToT of Russian 101KS-V with FGFA contract.
electro optical - Co-development with israel is easy option.

The point is, india is not and will not be US sidekick like turkey or SK and indian R&D is capable enough to fullfill all the requirements for AMCA project either from scratch or co-development in next ten years.

 

[scientien]

it is for noting, a country like south korea asked for US help. south korea is a developed country with more advanced than India.

Fail logic, because according to you they should have agency more capable than ISRO,which they dont.

 

[Agent_47]

AMCA need much more advanced radar that UTTAM.


a probable one.

Dude, we have a time frame of 10 year to develop and mature all needed technologies.In these areas we have enough basic ground cleared to develop a much more advanced version.

US have the most advanced equipment. and you cannot compare radar or other electronic equipment used in F-35 with any other equipment developed by others as US have most advance military hardware.
it is for noting, a country like south korea asked for US help. south korea is a developed country with more advanced than India.

It is all about priorities, rite? Korea and Japan don't have a requirement to make all by themselves and be independent of others West. But we do, so our effort are on that direction. Also unlike them our required numbers are big.
No one is denying uncle sam is superior. We are building our military to fight less capable adversaries than US.A technological developed country does not mean they are superior in every field. Brazil can make superior businesses jets than china. or israel can make better UAVs then the whole Europe.(not a literal comparison)

ISRO had years of experience in developing rockets... did any Indian company have an experience in manufacturing high end defense hardware??
and ISRO is not a defense development agency. deference equipment needs to be cutting edge and must always stay ahead of enemy in technological advancement. it is not in case of a civilian agency.

he is pointing out you failed logic not a literal comparison.

 

[scientien]

deference equipment needs to be cutting edge

And space technology is not cutting edge?
Well technology required to develop radar is nearly same for both agency no matter what purpose(fundamentally)
Same as technology used in arihnat nuclear reactor and civilian nuclear reactor.
Also we are fairly good at microwave technology just nees some more research on nanoscience and material science.

 

[topgun047]

And space technology is not cutting edge?
Well technology required to develop radar is nearly same for both agency no matter what purpose(fundamentally)
Same as technology used in arihnat nuclear reactor and civilian nuclear reactor.
Also we are fairly good at microwave technology just nees some more research on nanoscience and material science.

No...defence teach needs to be superior to the tech enemy has for it to be called succesful( or counter a superior tech using innovative thinking in case of Russia)
For example ISRO's PSLV is extremly successful but a crude launch vehicle.It gets the job done cheaply but in terms of sophistication it is nowhere near what NASA or ESA have to offer.