What's new

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

And you indians have already wasted 40 pages worth of bandwidth drooling and chest beating over something that has no completion date? No prototype and heck not even secured funding?? Hahaha

Who is chest beating? You guys started a thread on some AZM program which doesnt even have ground work infrastructure to validate a 4th gen design, let alone a 5th gen one. AMCA is closing on it's design phase, entering prototyping. I've seen enough speculative talk with AK2, AZM, J10, etc, etc. from your side.
 
Who is chest beating? You guys started a thread on some AZM program which doesnt even have ground work infrastructure to validate a 4th gen design, let alone a 5th gen one. AMCA is closing on it's design phase, entering prototyping. I've seen enough speculative talk with AK2, AZM, J10, etc, etc. from your side.

Pardon to contradict - even if you might be correct for the moment with the AZM project, but from all I learned during all the yeras (or almost decades) of following the military aviation scene I would corect your pot to the following:

Who is chest beating? AMCA is far from closing on it's design phase, even further away entering prototyping. Similar to I've seen enough speculative talk with Tejas Mk. 1, Mk 1A, MCA Mk. 2, the AMCA FGFA, AMCA, ORCA, etc. from your side.
 
Who is chest beating? AMCA is far from closing on it's design phase, even further away entering prototyping. Similar to I've seen enough speculative talk with Tejas Mk. 1, Mk 1A, MCA Mk. 2, the AMCA FGFA, AMCA, ORCA, etc. from your side.

I'm curious to know why you think that India is far from closing the design phase? Is it based on the general reputation of incompetence in DRDO's track record or something more scientific?
 
I'm curious to know why you think that India is far from closing the design phase? Is it based on the general reputation of incompetence in DRDO's track record or something more scientific?

Based on two assumptions: First, indeed the past track record that makes me highly skeptical on any announcement as long as proof is not given and second since years we get always again and again new a slightly revised models on any air- or military related show, which make me assume, that the design is simply not finished yet ... and finally the term "soon" seems to have a different definition in India.

HAL AMCA development.jpg
 
Last edited:
Inefficiency of DRDO units/public sector undertakings (PSUs), cumbersome procurement processes, adversarial inter-ministerial relationships, corruption-plagued history, unrealistic technical specifications and lack of accountability. But strangely there are no clarion calls to fix these well-established reasons. Instead of finding solutions mostly knee jerk reactions rather being proactive in a time-bound manner, our indian strategy seems to be setting up committees whose end result is mournful blame-shifting and grandiose recommendations that rarely see light of day, in any meaningful time-frame . :alcoholic:
 
Based on two assumptions: First, indeed the past track record that makes me highly skeptical on any announcement as long as proof is not given and second since years we get always again and again new a slightly revised models on any air- or military related show, which make me assume, that the design is simply not finished yet ... and finally the term "soon" seems to have a different definition in India.
Recent media release claimed that India is aiming for a low observable aircraft and not a pure stealth platform. This moderation of expectation gives some hope.
 
Recent media release claimed that India is aiming for a low observable aircraft and not a pure stealth platform. This moderation of expectation gives some hope.

Thanks ... and honestly, I wish them all luck!
 
Pardon to contradict - even if you might be correct for the moment with the AZM project, but from all I learned during all the yeras (or almost decades) of following the military aviation scene I would corect your pot to the following:

Who is chest beating? AMCA is far from closing on it's design phase, even further away entering prototyping. Similar to I've seen enough speculative talk with Tejas Mk. 1, Mk 1A, MCA Mk. 2, the AMCA FGFA, AMCA, ORCA, etc. from your side.

It is nearing completion. The final designs 1:1 model is going for RCS testing, afterwards they will look for funds for prototyping. Not to mention they are already seeking vendors for the module, integration work of TDs.

Yes, Indians do speculative work, but the other members acts like Pakistanis dont do the same. Guess what? It's fine, it's a defence forum.
 
Based on two assumptions: First, indeed the past track record that makes me highly skeptical on any announcement as long as proof is not given and second since years we get always again and again new a slightly revised models on any air- or military related show, which make me assume, that the design is simply not finished yet ... and finally the term "soon" seems to have a different definition in India.

View attachment 609391

You're a respected moderator here and you're making remarks against a country such as these?

Nobody assumes that the AMCA will be out "soon", at least not that seriously follow the program. It will take it's own time and the program will have to be carefully managed. There are many technologies that the AMCA requires where India has not gained much experience from the Tejas program, such as stealth, conformal antennae, IWBs, weapon ejectors, etc. There are other areas where the Tejas program has led to rich experience such as composites, FCS and avionics where it will be a lot more straightforward unless there is scope creep.

There are studies that have been on-going for several years that result in different configurations being designed, modeled and then wind tunnel tested. Fine-tuning and modifications result from that. They'll be analyzed against ASRs and the IAF and other stakeholders will have to be onboard with the final design. That is the normal course of action for ANY design house. So what's wrong with seeing different designs every year or so? It only indicates that a lot of thought is being put into the design phase before it is frozen and thousands of crores of rupees spent on development. No point rushing into making a prototype and putting it in the air and then not seeing it enter even into a proper development phase 7-8 years later.

Here are just SOME of the AMCA configurations that have been studied in detail so far, since this image dates back several years. Since then several more would've been added to the list.

XO6Qq2T.png


How many models have Japan showcased for their Future Fighter requirements? I've seen at least 4 different models and they only just recently finalized that it will be done on their own, without being an evolution of a foreign design. And what about Turkey and it's TF-X? They were till recently claiming that it'll be in service by 2025. Does that sound realistic?

From what we know from open sources this is the latest AMCA design that is under study. When it'll be frozen, we'll know if ADA and others release that info. But even by the most optimistic timelines, it won't be in service anytime this decade. There will be NG-TD (Next Gen Tech Demonstrators) built to first prove the design's critical technologies and only then will it move into the full development phase. That is what happened with the Tejas as well, with TD, PV and then LSP prototypes built.

This is the latest design from what we know. Modified intakes with forward swept edges and DSI and modified vertical stabilizers that resemble those of the F-35.

8QbmkAT.jpg

amca-model.jpg

amca-model1.jpg


Some of the types of studies that are done with every new version of the AMCA design.

zRaUNEE.jpg

mv8YLOw.jpg

NezluEx.jpg


All these images are being posted to show one thing- that this is a clean sheet design, with a lot of work being done behind the scenes before it is finalized. It isn't a modification of some existing fighter that magically materializes out of thin air and emerges as a model ready to go into full development.
 
Who is chest beating? You guys started a thread on some AZM program which doesnt even have ground work infrastructure to validate a 4th gen design, let alone a 5th gen one. AMCA is closing on it's design phase, entering prototyping. I've seen enough speculative talk with AK2, AZM, J10, etc, etc. from your side.
We don’t need local infrastructure, while that is being built, our designers can use foreign facilities to do the work.

This is the difference between PAC and HAL/ADA.

We prioritize our fighter requirement over infrastructure construction while you delay your fighter projects due to lack of LOCAL infrastructure. Although nothing bad in this but I believe india must rethink its priorities.
 
You're a respected moderator here and you're making remarks against a country such as these?

Nobody assumes that the AMCA will be out "soon", at least not that seriously follow the program. It will take it's own time and the program will have to be carefully managed. There are many technologies that the AMCA requires where India has not gained much experience from the Tejas program, such as stealth, conformal antennae, IWBs, weapon ejectors, etc. There are other areas where the Tejas program has led to rich experience such as composites, FCS and avionics where it will be a lot more straightforward unless there is scope creep.


Sorry if I offended your feelings, but you are wrong at least by the posts above which repeatedly claim a first flight in 2025! And this is - at least by my definition very "soon" and "too soon" given the long delays of a type, which is not very much of a most modern high-end fighter, namely the Tejas.

Point is that they are refining the Tejas design since decades and now they propose the Mk.2 - in fact a type, the IAF originally aimed for - will also only be ready at around the same time ... so at least by my assumption in mind of the past track-record I would bet nearly everything that neither the date for the Tejas Mk.2 (de facto a new aircraft) nor for the AMCA in 2025 will be met.


How many models have Japan showcased for their Future Fighter requirements? I've seen at least 4 different models and they only just recently finalized that it will be done on their own, without being an evolution of a foreign design. And what about Turkey and it's TF-X? They were till recently claiming that it'll be in service by 2025. Does that sound realistic?
...

Again, you miss one important issue: Not the number of configurations tested nor the important changes are relevant - indeed Japan, Korea, Turkey (IMO a very different story) and others have shown sometimes even more such models - but the fact, that certain circles in India and such forums keep posting expectations, which are impossible to hold, they are sticking to timelines, when even those for the much simpler types (aka Tejas Mk. 1 and 1A) are no longer valid, and still wanted to be taken seriously!?

That's the point.

Otherwise I fully agree with you, that it will follow its own Indian way of development, ... but why then boasting to the public dated that simply cannot be met? It's even worse than the typical Russian chest-bumping claims and the current Turkish day- (or shall i say wet-) dreams!
 
Sorry if I offended your feelings, but you are wrong at least by the posts above which repeatedly claim a first flight in 2025! And this is - at least by my definition very "soon" and "too soon" given the long delays of a type, which is not very much of a most modern high-end fighter, namely the Tejas.

About the 2025 first flight- that is the likely date by when a NG-TD (Next Gen - Tech Demonstator) demonstrator will be flown; caveat- if the funding is made available for the demonstrator to be assembled by 2024-25.

ADA had released a tender many months ago to have the forward, mid and aft fuselage sections assembled at Sulur AFS, in Coimbatore. 2 NG-TDs were to be flown and they need to prove the basic 5th gen technologies.

After that, the production standard prototypes will be assembled and flown. Given the level of technology meant to go into the AMCA, it will not be anytime before 2035 that I would expect the AMCA to enter service. But that is my estimate and ADA hasn't put out any timelines since the project hasn't yet been granted funding to begin full scale development.

Point is that they are refining the Tejas design since decades and now they propose the Mk.2 - in fact a type, the IAF originally aimed for - will also only be ready at around the same time ... so at least by my assumption in mind of the past track-record I would bet nearly everything that neither the date for the Tejas Mk.2 (de facto a new aircraft) nor for the AMCA in 2025 will be met.

You've got it a bit wrong here, so let me explain.

the MWF (Tejas Mk2) is not the type the IAF originally aimed for in the 1980s. The IAF didn't want a Mirage-2000 and MiG-29 replacement from the LCA program, since both were brand new in the IAF back then. It wanted a MiG-21 class aircraft and set ambitious ASRs for it that far exceeded the MiG-21. A few of the original ASRs were not met and concessions were granted, but that is normal for each and every program. Unless of course, one is deliberately hiding facts about a program, which is very true of certain nations that don't have a free press or transparency. If only fanboys were to talk about the Tejas, you'd only hear good things about it. We only know about all the problems that the F-35 faced because they have the most vibrant and well informed media and a lot of transparency.

Even in the MRCA 1.0 contest, all the contestants failed to meet some of the ASRs that the IAF set. Does that mean they were all bad? No, some of those could be fixed to meet the ASRs and some couldn't. If required, any of the MRCA contestants could've entered IAF service with the IAF granting concessions. Par for the course. In all of the IAF's history, every single imported jet has failed to meet some or the other stated requirement. the IAF has adjusted accordingly or upgraded it to meet them. Case in point- the DARIN-1 upgrade for the Jaguar, which started the same year it entered service since the original NAVWASS equipment was considered unacceptable!

The Mk1A was proposed by HAL as a bridge between the Mk1 and the then Tejas Mk2 (which had a MTOW of 15.5 tons and F-414 engine). Once IAF bought into the Tejas Mk1A, and indicated that 83 would be ordered, for a total of 123 Tejas Mk1 and Mk1A fighters, that would replace the 126 MiG-21bis that were upgraded to Bison standard, the LCA program would shift over to the larger class Mk2.

Once the IAF was happy with the changes being brought on the Mk1A, the focus shifted to adding more fuel and payload to the Tejas Mk2 and making it a fighter that could replace the Mirage-2000 and MiG-29. That is the MWF and you are entitled to your view on when you think it would fly or enter service.

Again, you miss one important issue: Not the number of configurations tested nor the important changes are relevant - indeed Japan, Korea, Turkey (IMO a very different story) and others have shown sometimes even more such models - but the fact, that certain circles in India and such forums keep posting expectations, which are impossible to hold, they are sticking to timelines, when even those for the much simpler types (aka Tejas Mk. 1 and 1A) are no longer valid, and still wanted to be taken seriously!?

That's the point.

2025 for the first flight of a NG-TD demonstrator is doable provided the funding is provided to do that. I don't believe it has been done as yet. It will be like the J-31 first flight in 2012, which was clearly nowhere near being production ready. We saw major changes in the proposed FC-31 fighter model later displayed as an export product, which has not yet flown in that config, 8 years after that first flight. Why? Because the J-20 has taken up all the resources as of now.

NG-TD AMCA demo will fly with F-414-INS6 engines, with a very limited FBW Flight Control Law with limited gains initially and the program will slowly build up pace of testing and envelope expansion. Depending on how that goes, there will be limited series production prototypes built with the interim F-414-INS6. The experience gained with the Tejas FCS means it won't be such a long process, but it will be very involved nevertheless. The final variant of the AMCA with twin 115 kN thrust class engines is a long way off. The engine doesn't yet exist, so all we can say as of now is that the interim F-414-INS6 will power the first few squadrons of AMCA when they enter service, possibly around 2035.

Many posters are driven by the desire for the IAF to have a 5th gen fighter because China is fielding the J-20 now and the F-35 is entering service in large numbers. And some may underestimate the amount of work that needs to be done to get the AMCA to IOC level. One area where I still have my hopes pinned is the bringing in of private sector players in a big way into the Indian aerospace complex. They allow the freeing up of resources at HAL and other DRDO labs for R&D, while the private suppliers do what they do best- manufacture.
 
We don’t need local infrastructure, while that is being built, our designers can use foreign facilities to do the work.

This is the difference between PAC and HAL/ADA.

We prioritize our fighter requirement over infrastructure construction while you delay your fighter projects due to lack of LOCAL infrastructure. Although nothing bad in this but I believe india must rethink its priorities.


I'm afraid you've got it the other way around- you cannot design and do R&D for a local fighter if you don't have the infrastructure to do it. India's mistake was to let the HF-24 Marut retire and then not use all the experience it gained in it's design, test and manufacture to build follow on fighters. They have now rectified that situation, so that the Mk1A, MWF, TEDBF, AURA, AMCA and maybe even ORCA will all be designed and built in India.The Tejas experience was difficult and it was delayed, but the fruits of it are that now India has all the necessary experience and infrastructure to design, develop and test nearly all of the elements for a modern fighter.

A military turbofan is where we've fallen short- 80% of the way there with the Kaveri but the remaining 20% to get a fully certified and flightworthy turbofan is the hardest part. Sadly, there isn't enough being invested to get that. Hopefully AMCA will rectify that situation since the IAF needs a 115-120 kN thrust engine and wants it done indigenously.

If Pakistan prioritizes its fighter requirement over infrastructure to design and develop one, pray tell us what is the exact fighter requirement from Project Azm? I've seen some claims of it being a twin engine 5th gen type, some saying it'll be a single engine 5th gen type. Is there even a basic rendering of it? Is there any Air Staff Requirement out there for it?

Do you have the facilities to do even basic supersonic and subsonic wind tunnel testing? The RCS testing? The composite fabs and auto claves to build all the necessary skin panels and primary structures? The 'iron rigs' to test out fuel systems and hydraulic systems? What facilities do you have to design, develop and test the Fly By Wire FCS? What about facilities to design and develop mission computer systems and other avionics? Do you even have a test flying agency that certifies airplanes? If so, what is their setup like and what have they certified so far, since the JF-17 is certified by Chinese military flying agencies?

With zero facilities, none of these basic activities that go into the design of a 4th or 5th gen fighter can be done in Pakistan. So what is Project Azm?

Believe me, this is not meant as an insult, but a wake up call. If you want to straight away jump into the design and development of a 5th gen fighter without having built all the needed infrastructure and facilities to do it for a 3rd or 4th gen fighter, it will not be possible to do it on your own.

So once again, what is Project Azm? FC-31 modified to suit PAF requirements? You'll be riding on China's coat tails again while claiming it to be indigenous?
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom