Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft by 2018

[sancho]

I actually would have preferred if ada concentrated on a strategic aerial refueller, and medium lift aircraft instead of AMCA...

ADA should develop designs and assist NAL, HAL, or OFB, but should never be in charge for such projects, just like DRDO shouldn't. The project always should be run by the manufacturer of the product, since only they can realistically assess what is possible in a given time (although HAL also has not the best record in this field ), but it's nonsens to keep those who have the best experience aside of the development only.

 

[Srinivas]

Oh boy

I donot know why the Think Tanks here always try to downplay LCA and other HAL related stuff.

But the truth is India got the tech from PAK FA program and they are confident of incorporating it into any existing airframe.

Earlier HAL and DRDO used to do the stuff from the scratch But now they are concentrating on getting technologies and integrating them to make a final product.

They have the agreements with Russian Aviation industry for AESA help. In the stealth Department they have the guidance of Sukhoi as a part of PAK FA deal.

Electronic systems and all they have the experience of integrating the Israeli stuff in Sukhoi platform.

All they have to do is to design an air frame from a an existing design of proven fighter jet. Which they can do in 4 years.

There are lot of similarities between Su 35 and PAK FA

Fig: 2

HAL has to do the similar kind of job shown in Fig:2 if they decide to take a proven airframe. No need to reinvent the wheel.

 

[thesolar65]

I donot know why the Think Tanks here always try to downplay LCA and other HAL related stuff.

But the truth is India got the tech from PAK FA program and they are confident of incorporating it into any existing airframe.

Earlier HAL and DRDO used to do the stuff from the scratch But now they are concentrating on getting technologies and integrating them to make a final product.

They have the agreements with Russian Aviation industry for AESA help. In the stealth Department they have the guidance of Sukhoi as a part of PAK FA deal.

Electronic systems and all they have the experience of integrating the Israeli stuff in Sukhoi platform.

All they have to do is to design an air frame from a an existing design of proven fighter jet. Which they can do in 4 years.

I think some experts here are ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, of Foreign Arms Manufacturers!! Who knows?

 

[sancho]

I donot know why the Think Tanks here always try to downplay LCA and other HAL related stuff.

Who was refering to LCA or HAL? I commented on the ammount of wrong statements that you came up with.

 

[Srinivas]

Who was refering to LCA or HAL? I commented on the ammount of wrong statements that you came up with.

Please read my last post and let me know if any thing you feel that I have written wrong.

 

[sancho]

Please read my last post and let me know if any thing you feel that I have written wrong.

A lot of it, but all that has nothing to do with the topic of this threat (I suggest to read up in the Pak Fa / FGFA thread about the differences of design), so I'll comment only on AMCA related things here. Like your claim that HAL would use the Mig 29 airframe as a base of AMCA. First of all, HAL doesn't licence produce the Mig 29, so has no airframe to base anything on. Secondly, the Mig 29 was designed in the 70s and is even far away of beeing a modern 4th generation design, let alone to have any use as a base of AMCA, except that it incorporates 2 engines. Even LCA design would be much better, since it includes far more modern design features or materials to base a NG fighter on (one reason I would prefer a single engine, tailless delta winged AMCA). So apart that your claim hardly has any base, it doesn't even make any logical sense. When you then add the "anti Russian" policies that ADA/DRDO showed in LCA development, by constantly rejecting any Russian offer to team up for design, engine or radar of the fighter (which imo was one of big mistakes), you should understand that they won't search for Russian help and why they even want to develop another 5th gen fighter next to the FGFA.

 

[Srinivas]

Thanks for the reply

So I'll comment only on AMCA related things here. Like your claim that HAL would use the Mig 29 airframe as a base of AMCA. First of all, HAL doesn't licence produce the Mig 29, so has no airframe to base anything on.

The Mikoyan is merged with other companies

In 2006, the Russian government merged 100% of Mikoyan shares with Ilyushin, Irkut, Sukhoi, Tupolev, and Yakovlev as a new company namedUnited Aircraft Corporation. Specifically, Mikoyan and Sukhoi were placed within the same operating unit.

India can get the TOT MIG related designs and set up the plant here in India. Additionally India can also get the help of MIG designers who are already worked on stealth aspects for MIGs.

Secondly, the Mig 29 was designed in the 70s and is even far away of beeing a modern 4th generation design, let alone to have any use as a base of AMCA, except that it incorporates 2 engines. Even LCA design would be much better, since it includes far more modern design features or materials to base a NG fighter on (one reason I would prefer a single engine, tailless delta winged AMCA). So apart that your claim hardly has any base, it doesn't even make any logical sense.

Sukhoi Flankers are also designed in 70's we are only talking about airframe and its tweaking to reduce the RCS. AMCA is a medium combat aircraft so LCA airframe with single engine is not considered. If they go for twin engine modification for LCA mark 1 it will take lot of effort so instead they are choosing existing twin engine aircraft from which they can derive a 5th gen aircraft.

When you then add the "anti Russian" policies that ADA/DRDO showed in LCA development, by constantly rejecting any Russian offer to team up for design, engine or radar of the fighter (which imo was one of big mistakes), you should understand that they won't search for Russian help and why they even want to develop another 5th gen fighter next to the FGFA.

LCA is a program which was started considering that there will be some tech. help from the Americans. But AMCA is a new program and AMCA is a starting at the time when MIG needs investments and ready to offer tech. help.

 

[MilSpec]

I donot know why the Think Tanks here always try to downplay LCA and other HAL related stuff.

hal is not involved in amca

 

[Srinivas]

hal is not involved in amca

I think it is ADA, But I have only quoted about normal trend here.

 

[JayAtl]

The AMCA should be shelved for good.Instead,the very limited resources and trained man power ADE has,should be totally devoted in developing the AURA stealth HALE UCAV and get done with it.Why create a repeat of capability when we already have committed to FGFA project??

what is the the trained manpower and resources at the ADE. I presuming you know this to make your statement above?

I mean in other countries, multiple projects are handled by multiple teams and even shared teams... but per your statement ADE is incapable of chewing gum and walking.

 

[Jayanta]

Just read that Japan and India wish to have bilateral defence relationship to develop. Why not tie up with them for the AMCA??

 

[faithfulguy]

I donot know why the Think Tanks here always try to downplay LCA and other HAL related stuff.

But the truth is India got the tech from PAK FA program and they are confident of incorporating it into any existing airframe.

Earlier HAL and DRDO used to do the stuff from the scratch But now they are concentrating on getting technologies and integrating them to make a final product.

They have the agreements with Russian Aviation industry for AESA help. In the stealth Department they have the guidance of Sukhoi as a part of PAK FA deal.

Electronic systems and all they have the experience of integrating the Israeli stuff in Sukhoi platform.

All they have to do is to design an air frame from a an existing design of proven fighter jet. Which they can do in 4 years.

There are lot of similarities between Su 35 and PAK FA

Fig: 2

HAL has to do the similar kind of job shown in Fig:2 if they decide to take a proven airframe. No need to reinvent the wheel.

India is offering 50% of development cost. But India contributes substantially less in tech. The money India pay out is just a buy in cost to get the plane. Not purchase of technology. India WILL not receive any key technology from PAKFA. So this is in effect another MKI project.

Thanks for the reply



The Mikoyan is merged with other companies

In 2006, the Russian government merged 100% of Mikoyan shares with Ilyushin, Irkut, Sukhoi, Tupolev, and Yakovlev as a new company namedUnited Aircraft Corporation. Specifically, Mikoyan and Sukhoi were placed within the same operating unit.

India can get the TOT MIG related designs and set up the plant here in India. Additionally India can also get the help of MIG designers who are already worked on stealth aspects for MIGs.



Sukhoi Flankers are also designed in 70's we are only talking about airframe and its tweaking to reduce the RCS. AMCA is a medium combat aircraft so LCA airframe with single engine is not considered. If they go for twin engine modification for LCA mark 1 it will take lot of effort so instead they are choosing existing twin engine aircraft from which they can derive a 5th gen aircraft.




LCA is a program which was started considering that there will be some tech. help from the Americans. But AMCA is a new program and AMCA is a starting at the time when MIG needs investments and ready to offer tech. help.

maybe india can take over the mig 1.44 prototype and make that AMCA.

 

[Zarvan]

LCA has been a good experiment for India. AMCA around 2018 is a little too optimistic though.

Good experiment seriously yes good experiment in wasting money

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Good experiment seriously yes good experiment in wasting money

And what, continuing to give out money to every other country to build up their own industry is even better??

It can look foolish now, like how this looked foolish then -

But it will all be worth it.

Realistically, we can expect a TD-1 2020+.

 

[IndoUS]

As @Water Car Engineer showed with the above pics, the starting/beginning of ISRO are not the most flashing, they were humble beginning. But the small steps have helped us get where we are today. We have a fast growing space industry which is maturing everyday. Same is with the Tejas program, it was a great learning experience for all of the agencies involved in the project whether it be HAL, DRDO or the ADE. The industrial infrastructure that was non-existent back them is now there, the agencies now have experience and the know-how about the development projects to some degree. And just like the previous failures of ISRO with the Cryogenic engines and the current success. I believe that we can pull through with the development of the MK-II and the AMCA.