Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) Project

[SQ8]

The AMCA will build on what has been learnt from the LCA, and what will be learnt from the Rafale's co-production..and the MKI.
At this point, it should be given priority(or rather dual use tech for both AMCA,MKI and Tejas) on R&D .

Also.. DRDO should for all purposes be given a bureaucratic backseat..and the AMCA project turned into a consortium and there should be bias on involving private contractors like BEL or tata electronics.
It would surprise HAL on what these companies come up with.
Let some private corporations have a stake in the program and promise them a chunk in profits from local sales and possibly even from a downgraded export version..
then see the result.

 

[3Idiots]

^^^^ AMCA will be taken up by ADA (which works under DRDO but is autonomous).

 

[SQ8]

^^^^ AMCA will be taken up by ADA (which works under DRDO but is autonomous).

As long as there is bureaucratic control.. or potential for extreme interference by anyone other than the end-user themselves.. there may be similar delays and issues as encountered by the LCA program.

 

[arp2041]

As long as there is bureaucratic control.. or potential for extreme interference by anyone other than the end-user themselves.. there may be similar delays and issues as encountered by the LCA program.

We have to understand here that delays in the LCA project are not solely because of DRDO/ADA/HAL but there is equal responsibility of IAF in it. IAF constantly changed its requirements time and again this was responsible for a long delay in the project. I am not saying that IAF is wrong in demanding improvements but they should had enough far sight so as to ascertain requirements of a 21st century jet. Hope this is not repeated with AMCA & the project runs smoothly.

 

[SQ8]

We have to understand here that delays in the LCA project are not solely because of DRDO/ADA/HAL but there is equal responsibility of IAF in it. IAF constantly changed its requirements time and again this was responsible for a long delay in the project. I am not saying that IAF is wrong in demanding improvements but they should had enough far sight so as to ascertain requirements of a 21st century jet.

Hence my point..
The IAF should lay down a set of X requirements good for 2045 and leave a liaison with the manufacturer to ensure that those X are met. neither they or any other element should then interfere with the team beyond making sure that X is being met.
They should not change X to 2X, add a Y or tell the team how to do their job.

 

[Bl[i]tZ]

Actually Oscar once put up a video of some APC being designed in US and then they wanted it to have a tank gun etc. etc.. That was funny and bureaucracy probably does that.

LCA delay was not just hal problem, the IAF also keeps moving the goal posts. They have tasted blood having tested a lot of highly advanced western fighters and they keep revising their olders specs.

They want an AESA on Tejas MK2. That tells you about their expectations of a Mig 21 replacement

The IAF deserves equal criticism.

 

[sancho]

The AMCA will build on what has been learnt from the LCA

That would have been the case if everything in the LCA project would have gone the right way, but if we look at the facts there is not much for AMCA to base on LCA.

Radar: ideally indigenous MMR in LCA MK1 => first indigenous AESA in LCA MK2 => NG AESA in AMCA
current reality EL 2032 in LCA MK1 => indigenous MMR or foreign AESA in LCA MK2 => first indigenous AESA in
AMCA

So AMCAs radar will more likely be based on the ToT we get from Rafale or a foreign co-development partner, but not from the indigenous development for LCA.

Engine: ideally indigenous Kaveri engine in LCA MK1 / MK2 => upgraded Kaveri in AMCA
current reality GE 404 in LCA MK1 => GE 414 in LCA MK2 => Kaveri / Snecma in AMCA

So again more benefit from Rafale selection or co-development for the AMCA engine, than from LCA.


Design: 4th gen design, compared to 5th gen stealth design not much to base as well.



The fact is, the co-development of FGFA tells us what where we really gathered knowledge and experience, cockpit design, composite materials. These fields are also the once where AMCA would benefit from LCA, but for any other major field Rafale, FGFA and co-developments with foreign partners will be more helpful.

 

[IND151]

The AMCA will build on what has been learnt from the LCA, and what will be learnt from the Rafale's co-production..and the MKI.
At this point, it should be given priority(or rather dual use tech for both AMCA,MKI and Tejas) on R&D .

Also.. DRDO should for all purposes be given a bureaucratic backseat..and the AMCA project turned into a consortium and there should be bias on involving private contractors like BEL or tata electronics.
It would surprise HAL on what these companies come up with.
Let some private corporations have a stake in the program and promise them a chunk in profits from local sales and possibly even from a downgraded export version..
then see the result.

DRDO should not be given backseat

however participation of private players is crucial

258 private firms were involved in K 4 project and K 4 project is on track

same needs to be done in case of AMCA

 

[sancho]

Actually Oscar once put up a video of some APC being designed in US and then they wanted it to have a tank gun etc. etc.. That was funny and bureaucracy probably does that.

LCA delay was not just hal problem, the IAF also keeps moving the goal posts. They have tasted blood having tested a lot of highly advanced western fighters and they keep revising their olders specs.

They want an AESA on Tejas MK2. That tells you about their expectations of a Mig 21 replacement

The IAF deserves equal criticism.

Criticism yes, but not equal, since the changes of requirements were caused by the delays and failures of the development. The higher thrust engine was a result of the overweight and drag problems that, which not even the GE 404 could change. AESA radar was the long term perspective for LCA anyway, but initially we should have LCA MK1 with MMR in operational service long time ago and I'm sure they had expected an upgrade procedure like we see it for JF 17 today, first MMR in Block 1, upgraded MMR in Block 2, AESA upgrade in Block 3.

 

[Markus]

The AMCA will build on what has been learnt from the LCA, and what will be learnt from the Rafale's co-production..and the MKI.
At this point, it should be given priority(or rather dual use tech for both AMCA,MKI and Tejas) on R&D .

Also.. DRDO should for all purposes be given a bureaucratic backseat..and the AMCA project turned into a consortium and there should be bias on involving private contractors like BEL or tata electronics.

BEL is a govt. company.

Large Indian conglomerates should be encouraged to pump money into defence.

 

[sancho]

My solution for AMCA:

- joint development with Brazil (according my infos this was already proposed to them)
- let HAL/ADA & Embraer develop it, with Dassault as consultancy partner
- benefit as much as possible from Rafale and FGFA in terms of avionics and design
- Focus on beeing a carrier fighter to be used by Indian an Brazilian future CATOBAR carriers
- later upgrades can replace parts of Indian and Brazilian airforce fighters too, but only as a secondary requirement
- take DRDO out of the general development and let them focus on co-developments with foreign partners on indigenous AESA and Kaveri K10 engine
- take RBE 2 AESA and GE 414 engine (thanks to licence production rights) for the prototypes and if necessary for the early versions and add indigenous AESA and engine when ready
- let Indian and Brazilian privat companies participate in production of spares and parts
- develop a common Indo - Brazilian weapon pack, that both countries buy or use in numbers (cost reduction) and offer this for export countries too

Most importantly, make it simple and don't overestimate indigenous capabilities because of pride reasons!!!

 

[tvsram1992]

My solution for AMCA:

- joint development with Brazil (according my infos this was already proposed to them)
- let HAL/ADA & Embraer develop it, with Dassault as consultancy partner
- benefit as much as possible from Rafale and FGFA in terms of avionics and design
- Focus on beeing a carrier fighter to be used by Indian an Brazilian future CATOBAR carriers
- later upgrades can replace parts of Indian and Brazilian airforce fighters too, but only as a secondary requirement
- take DRDO out of the general development and let them focus on co-developments with foreign partners on indigenous AESA and Kaveri K10 engine
- take RBE 2 AESA and GE 414 engine (thanks to licence production rights) for the prototypes and if necessary for the early versions and add indigenous AESA and engine when ready
- let Indian and Brazilian privat companies participate in production of spares and parts
- develop a common Indo - Brazilian weapon pack, that both countries buy or use in numbers (cost reduction) and offer this for export countries too

Most importantly, make it simple and don't overestimate indigenous capabilities because of pride reasons!!!

You mean to say that we should have atleast one foreign partner . After LCA experience , Mki,Rafale production,FGFA TOT/inputs ,Kaveri Foregin help and LCA western help , dont you think should we go for indigenous? Lets feel proud after making AMCA , btw its not only matter of pride but also it reduces dependence on others and we can get aircraft at a lesser price . No issues with spares etc if our indigenous industry is good . If we still want a combat effective aircraft we can increase production rate of FGFAs that will still be superior to AMCA in the coming decade . Ps i know FGFA and AMCA are different categories and Jaguars , Mig27s need to be replaced . I think already secret deal is done between Russia and India on other 5th gen project .

 

[arp2041]

with the addition of AMCA along with FGFA, LCA, MMRCA & Su-30mki, IAF surely will be a power not even the US will like to mess with

 

[sancho]

You mean to say that we should have atleast one foreign partner . After LCA experience , Mki,Rafale production,FGFA TOT/inputs ,Kaveri Foregin help and LCA western help , dont you think should we go for indigenous?

First of all, indigenous doesn't mean developing it alone!
Secondly, different partners can be used in different fields for different advantages!

Brazil / Embraer – have good experience in the aero field, is an emerging country, most likely will buy Rafale as well and will have a similar requirement for CATOBAR carrier fighters.
=> That means, they are the perfect co-development partner to jointly fund and order AMCA with similar requirements and in numbers that will reduce the operating costs too!

Dassault – with the Rafale licence production and the offsets they have to return to Indian industry, they are the perfect industrial partner for any future indigenous development. In this case, there is even hardly any better since Rafale was developed at first for navy and as a CATOBAR fighter.
=> So be it for the development in general, or for the navalising of the fighter, they are an obvious choice!

Engine and radar (preferably Snecma & Elta / Thales) – as mentioned in my earlier posts, these are the fields where we completely failed in LCA development and where we already search for foreign partners, to have these techs ready for LCA MK2.
=> These co-developments will be the base for AMCA!

Again, LCA development hardly gives us more than material and cockpit design experience, that would be good enough for a 5 th gen fighter (see FGFA participation).
Rafale will give us mainly the chance to get into deeper ties with Thales and Snecma for AESA and Kaveri developments, especially since it is unclear how much ToT we will be able to absorb and how long it takes. We can't learn from Rafale or FGFA and develop AMCA at the same time. So either we co-develop AMCA with foreign partners now, or we skip the development and wait till we learned enough and develop it only for the MKI replacement around 2030.

 

[Kinetic]

The AMCA will build on what has been learnt from the LCA, and what will be learnt from the Rafale's co-production..and the MKI.
At this point, it should be given priority(or rather dual use tech for both AMCA,MKI and Tejas) on R&D .

Also.. DRDO should for all purposes be given a bureaucratic backseat..and the AMCA project turned into a consortium and there should be bias on involving private contractors like BEL or tata electronics.
It would surprise HAL on what these companies come up with.
Let some private corporations have a stake in the program and promise them a chunk in profits from local sales and possibly even from a downgraded export version..
then see the result.

Outstanding reply. I always thought you will be an excellent manager, not already. Don't know why DRDO or ISRO don't hire some top management guys from IIMs and I do not think GoI have any plan to implement something like this.