AMCA announcement at Aero India 2015?

[sancho]

Certainly their capabilities would have grown to support a bigger platform.

=>

They don't go from a 4th gen single engine design, to a 4.5th gen twin engine design, by adding one more engine and some minor system upgrades, but want to move a whole generation forward, without even having mastered this generation of fighters and that makes this dream unrealistic at this point.

It's not about just a bigger plattform, but...

- complete new design (stealth with the requirement to carry fuel and weapons internally)
- complete new engine with advanced capabilities (supercruise and TVC)
- complete new radar (AESA)
- complete new passive sensors (IRST, optronics)
- complete new cockpit avionics (advanced displays, com links)

None of this is available in the Indian industry or the LCA today and even for LCA MK2 only parts of them will be developed (AESA, possibly IRST). Even if we would want to make an F35 with no flight performance requirements, we couldn't because we lack the capability to develop the most crucial part, the stealth design! No design experience, no RCS test facilities, let alone the huge problems we have in normal aircraft design (LCA, N-LCA, Saras, Sitara...), so without help or gains from the FGFA project, on what base do they want to start such a project?

 

[Ind4Ever]

-Few billions? Check the costs of other 5th gen projects. Thats why nations like the USA or Russia were searching for partners (India as the partner of the latter one).
-And cost escalations are very common thing. Look at the F35 program. You cant predict how much money you will eventually pay.
-This whole program is a total waste. We need to upgrade our existing (pathetic) infrastructure and production facilities in order to produce more Sukhois and Tejas and to maintain them properly. Furthermore, we have a solid 5th gen project ongoing. We are a developing country with huge poverty, health care and sanitation problems which need to taken care of ASAP.
Wasting money on two 5th gen projects is something that eve developed nations would not do.

We do not swim in money and again, you drastically underestimate the costs of such a projects..

That's why I said we can have semi stealthy AMCA later we can improve with more funds and more technical support . For instance we can meet our MMRCA needs . With the amount of 20 billion + AMCA Fund can be used for upgrades . That's what I ment.

DAFUQ

First stealth aircraft was invented by Germans . After Hitler was killed their scientists who had very advanced knowledge on missiles , Boats , aircraft , Nuclear technology etc was bought by Soviets and Americans . That was the
beginning of modern warfare with high tech weapons , full grown rocket propulsion system , Stealth bomber , heavy duty modern tanks came to the scene .

 

[Koovie]

That's why I said we can have semi stealthy AMCA later we can improve with more funds and more technical support . For instance we can meet our MMRCA needs . With the amount of 20 billion + AMCA Fund can be used for upgrades . That's what I ment.

And how many decades is that gonna take? We could not come up with a 4th gen fighter that can compete with others.

How much money will it cost? Will it be as effective and capable as current 4.5 gen fighters? Do you seriously think that the IAF is willing to wait that long and ready to take such risks?

First stealth aircraft was invented by Germans . After Hitler was killed their scientists who had very advanced knowledge on missiles , Boats , aircraft , Nuclear technology etc was bought by Soviets and Americans . That was the
beginning of modern warfare with high tech weapons , full grown rocket propulsion system , Stealth bomber , heavy duty modern tanks came to the scene .

[It (Horton Ho229) was never meant to be stealth aircraft. It "accidentally" had features which reduced the effect of early radars. Stealth technology really kickstarted with the American developments.]

Ignore that one

And saying that the German were technologically much more advanced than the allies is wrong too. In most cases they had similar technology, but unlike the Germans, they were not stupid enough to waste precious resources of highly experimental technology (the Brits had operational Meteor jet fighters before the war ended, but never used them for active air to air combat).

And the Germans were not the first to field heavy tanks, the Russians (KV series) and the French (Char B1) had them before the Germans.

 

[sancho]

That's why I said we can have semi stealthy AMCA

What is semi stealth???

It (Horton Ho229) was never meant to be stealth aircraft. It "accidentally" had features which reduced the effect of early radars.

OT, but that's not correct! It was purposly designed and developed to avoid radar detection, to counter the advantage of the Brits, therefor included weapon bays or non reflecting materials and even coatings, all key features to avoid radar detection.

 

[Koovie]

OT, but that's not correct! It was purposly designed and developed to avoid radar detection, to counter the advantage of the Brits, therefor included weapon bays or non reflecting materials and even coatings, all key features to avoid radar detection.

Oh you are right! My bad.

 

[Krate M]

@sancho we do have RCS test facilities, but they are limited to scale models and need to make a full size fighter/medium size aircraft RCS test facility.
I think the LCA mk1 foc to mk2 design fix period should be used to start making these facilities if we want them to be ready for AMCA. Even then we might be delayed.

The biggest hurdle in LCA development has been lack of infrastructure. Even today we don't have a trisonic windtunnel, which Boeing was supposed to build as offset for c17. This when this is a 50s technology. The kaveri program was heldback due to foreign exchange issues when testing was needed.

A large wind tunnel capable of taking entire aircraft size test object will be critical if we even think of a major civilian aircraft program. Right now we are/were using Airbus facilities in France and they are damn expensive.

All these testbeds and facilities need to be setup first, to save money and development time as well as strategic independence.

 

[Ind4Ever]

And how many decades is that gonna take? We could not come up with a 4th gen fighter that can compete with others.

How much money will it cost? Will it be as effective and capable as current 4.5 gen fighters? Do you seriously think that the IAF is willing to wait that long and ready to take such risks?

I don't think it will take another 10 years for derivative of Tejas and adding another engine into it Plus carnad like euro fighter or Rafale . Tejas itself a 4+ fighter . We produce MKI which is 4++ . All the required technology of 4th gen fighter is available for India . We can make it in the same time frame MMRCA . IF WE WANT . But our IAF is highly worried about delays in procurement already so we will play safe. But I belive going for two engine Tejas with carnad will be a great move if we do. AMCA will be produced in less time since we might have made huge progress in many cases.

Cost : When our IAF ready to spend 20-30 billion dollar on Rafale . We can easy spend that money on new flatform and improving our Aviation infrastructure .

Again Since our IAF already worried about delays in procurement we will go for safer and proven flatform . But if our Navy thought same like IAF today we still be buying Russia France spain Italian vessels.

I like to point out that F35 is not built in 10 years or 15 years but decades of aircraft development .

[It (Horton Ho229) was never meant to be stealth aircraft. It "accidentally" had features which reduced the effect of early radars. Stealth technology really kickstarted with the American developments.]

Dude u need to go back to history books . And see the scientist names and their who made most of US and Russian rockets and missiles. You won't belive what you will see .

Ignore that one

And saying that the German were technologically much more advanced than the allies is wrong too. In most cases they had similar technology, but unlike the Germans, they were not stupid enough to waste precious resources of highly experimental technology (the Brits had operational Meteor jet fighters before the war ended, but never used them for active air to air combat).

And the Germans were not the first to field heavy tanks, the Russians (KV series) and the French (Char B1) had them before the Germans.

Dude again Today's cruise missile like tomahawk share large principles of V2 rockets. Germans invented very single technology we are using now. From Rockets to Stealth war planes , anti tank missile , Machine guns lots more. It's a lots of history so we can't say it in just one comment . Area 51 is not a fan boy as u may think . It's true . These are ufo base or not I don't know But most of the captured technology from Germans and their scientists are been working there. Most of them fleed to Soviets and US . German Jewish scientists joined US and there allies ( most of them)
I don't want to discus here as it will become off topic .

What is semi stealth???

Rafale , Su 35 , EF 4++ fighter which share stealth features but not like F35 or Raptor

 

[sancho]

we do have RCS test facilities, but they are limited to scale models and need to make a full size fighter/medium size aircraft RCS test facility...

...The biggest hurdle in LCA development has been lack of infrastructure.

That's the point, we have very basic infrastructure yet for an aviation industry, that is in it's early stages and aimed on normal aircrafts and 4th gen fighters. So we have to improve that first, before we can make such a big jump to the next generation and the first use for that won't be AMCA, but AURA UCAV, that must be tested in such facilities in a full size mock up too.

Rafale , Su 35 , EF 4++ fighter which share stealth features but not like F35 or Raptor

No they don't! They have features to reduce the RCS, but not stealth, which includes carrying internal loads only and fully shaped airframe design. Even the F18 Silent Hornet with CFTs and weapon pods, can only reduce the RCS to an extend, that is limited by it's standard design airframe and that is the closest you get to "semi stealth", but we are talking about AMCA which is meant to be a stealth fighter and needs a fully stealth airframe to start with.

 

[Ind4Ever]

That's the point, we have very basic infrastructure yet for an aviation industry, that is in it's early stages and aimed on normal aircrafts and 4th gen fighters. So we have to improve that first, before we can make such a big jump to the next generation and the first use for that won't be AMCA, but AURA UCAV, that must be tested in such facilities in a full size mock up too.



No they don't! They have features to reduce the RCS, but not stealth, which includes carrying internal loads only and fully shaped airframe design. Even the F18 Silent Hornet with CFTs and weapon pods, can only reduce the RCS to an extend, that is limited by it's standard design airframe and that is the closest you get to "semi stealth", but we are talking about AMCA which is meant to be a stealth fighter and needs a fully stealth airframe to start with.

Stealth is not ment as carrying weapons inside bay . As far as I know these features are to reduce the RCS of a fighter jet . More stealthy means less RCS . That's why I called it has semi stealth . I think u dint read my post properly . We was discussing about having two engined tejas with carnad (plus less RCS like available technology as of now) MMRCA instead of Rafale .So we will have more potent AMCA in short time frame . As we could have developed or deployed our own or imported equipment required for Medium Multi Role Aircraft . Hope this made it clear

 

[Luca1]

That's why I said we can have semi stealthy AMCA later we can improve with more funds and more technical support . For instance we can meet our MMRCA needs . With the amount of 20 billion + AMCA Fund can be used for upgrades . That's what I ment.


First stealth aircraft was invented by Germans . After Hitler was killed their scientists who had very advanced knowledge on missiles , Boats , aircraft , Nuclear technology etc was bought by Soviets and Americans . That was the
beginning of modern warfare with high tech weapons , full grown rocket propulsion system , Stealth bomber , heavy duty modern tanks came to the scene .

I think India should buy the cheapest Mmrca available as a stop gap measure and divert more funds into AMCA. Forget about offsets but require the manufacturer to create the development and construction facility in India so Indian scientist can learn. SkillS, technology and time is much more important than money. India need to enhance its aeronautics fundamentals before think about AMCA. I agree with @sancho and @Koovie in their assessment.

 

[sancho]

Stealth is not ment as carrying weapons inside bay .

Of course it is, because that is the ultimate RCS reduction feature, since any external payload will increase the reflection of radar waves. You can have different sizes of weapon bays, or different internal fuel capacity which is only dependent on the operational needs, but carrying weapons and fuel internally, apart of the shaping of the airframe is the base of "stealth".

3rd to 4th generation => basic airframe design, external payloads, no or limited aim on RCS reduction due to special materials and coatings

4.5th generation => advanced airframe design with the aim on RCS reduction due to less moving surfaces, special materials and coatings, but still with external payloads

5th generation => stealth airframe design with high aim on RCS reduction due to internal carriage of weapons and fuel, shapings, special materials and coatings

 

[Koovie]

I don't think it will take another 10 years for derivative of Tejas and adding another engine into it Plus carnad like euro fighter or Rafale . Tejas itself a 4+ fighter . We produce MKI which is 4++ . All the required technology of 4th gen fighter is available for India . We can make it in the same time frame MMRCA . IF WE WANT . But our IAF is highly worried about delays in procurement already so we will play safe. But I belive going for two engine Tejas with carnad will be a great move if we do. AMCA will be produced in less time since we might have made huge progress in many cases.

Cost : When our IAF ready to spend 20-30 billion dollar on Rafale . We can easy spend that money on new flatform and improving our Aviation infrastructure .

Again Since our IAF already worried about delays in procurement we will go for safer and proven flatform . But if our Navy thought same like IAF today we still be buying Russia France spain Italian vessels.

I like to point out that F35 is not built in 10 years or 15 years but decades of aircraft development .

What derivative ? There is not a single plan of making something like a twin engine Tejas... and that would require a total redesign and tons of money, infrastructure, know how and facilities as well. We cant just make a fighter comparable to the Rafale in 10 years. Thats delusional.

The whole AMCA idea is rubbish. Better spend the money on existing projects (MKIs, Tejas, upgrades and of course the FGFA).

I like to point out that F35 is not built in 10 years or 15 years but decades of aircraft development .

Yeah, and it took them billion and billion and billions despite the fact that it was carried out by the most powerful nation, its allies and the most experienced aircraft manufacturers.

Why do you think that a developing nation alone can make it with much less money in less time?!

Dude again Today's cruise missile like tomahawk share large principles of V2 rockets. Germans invented very single technology we are using now. From Rockets to Stealth war planes , anti tank missile , Machine guns lots more. It's a lots of history so we can't say it in just one comment . Area 51 is not a fan boy as u may think . It's true . These are ufo base or not I don't know But most of the captured technology from Germans and their scientists are been working there. Most of them fleed to Soviets and US . German Jewish scientists joined US and there allies ( most of them)
I don't want to discus here as it will become off topic .

Yes, they made the concept of cruise missiles. But how effective do you think they were? Allies had similar ideas, but again, they were smart enough not to waste their time and resources on these kind of experimental weapons. Especially considering that Germany had comparatively weak economy to begin with.

 

[Ind4Ever]

TV

Of course it is, because that is the ultimate RCS reduction feature, since any external payload will increase the reflection of radar waves. You can have different sizes of weapon bays, or different internal fuel capacity which is only dependent on the operational needs, but carrying weapons and fuel internally, apart of the shaping of the airframe is the base of "stealth".

DID I SAY NO ? All I said was that Stealth Means Less RCS on Radar .
Rafale is not 5th gen fighter . No internal bay. Yet it has less RCS compared to other 4th gen fighter. So i said we can make our own MMRCA with less RCS and 4++ avionics can be used . So we will get our own MMRCA .

3rd to 4th generation => basic airframe design, external payloads, no or limited aim on RCS reduction due to special materials and coatings

Did I say NO?

4.5th generation => advanced airframe design with the aim on RCS reduction due to less moving surfaces, special materials and coatings, but still with external payloads

Did I say no ?

5th generation => stealth airframe design with high aim on RCS reduction due to internal carriage of weapons and fuel, shapings, special materials and coatings

Thank You But did I said no ?

I mentioned Stealth means Less RCS .
whether you carry play loads internally or externally . If the RCS is more if you have internal bay it doesn't ment to be stealth . Am I making it clear ?

I understand what is 345 gen fighter features.

What derivative ? There is not a single plan of making something like a twin engine Tejas... and that would require a total redesign and tons of money, infrastructure, know how and facilities as well. We cant just make a fighter comparable to the Rafale in 10 years. Thats delusional.

The whole AMCA idea is rubbish. Better spend the money on existing projects (MKIs, Tejas, upgrades and of course the FGFA).

Meri friend Two engine Tejas is not planned .You are correct

It will take more funds .Yes u are correct

But AMCA is needed and important like FGFA too. Both are different . One is Heavy FGFA .And another is medium AMCA . We will use Tejas MK2 as light weigh fighter or interceptor. Same like
LCA 1 , MMRCA , Sukoi 30s . I just told my opinion that we can have our own MMRCA if we wanted . But we are going for Rafale . And AMCA . That's what we were discussing.

Yeah, and it took them billion and billion and billions despite the fact that it was carried out by the most powerful nation, its allies and the most experienced aircraft manufacturers.

Why do you think that a developing nation alone can make it with much less money in less time?!

Dude F35 is not only one variant like one Jaguar. But it's like Sukoi family . Many countries have their own spec and requirements. As you know it's short wing is not good for dogfight. So it is made in such a way it can defeat an enemy jets from stand off range. It needs lots of technology to be invented and redefined for the future warfare . It takes more time for softwares to be developed.Its way beyond our comparison with AMCA . Which is single variant for IAF May Be FOR Navy . It won't cost like F35. Wrong comparison. That's why I said and telling again. We can have 4++ gen fighter which can be derived from Tejas design with two engine , Carnad configuration. Don't get confused It's my personal view not our IAF or DRDO plan

Yes, they made the concept of cruise missiles. But how effective do you think they were? Allies had similar ideas, but again, they were smart enough not to waste their time and resources on these kind of experimental weapons. Especially considering that Germany had comparatively weak economy to begin with.

Leave it

 

[Etilla]

Do more，talk less。

Will our Indian friends ever learn？

Rest assured，the so-called MACA won't fly this side of 2025，even with massive foreign assistances。

The first flying technology demonstrator around 2045-50

The main problem is the lack of stealth tech
We have to wait for Russia to finish with PAK-FA so they can start ToT for FGFA (2025) then 10-15 years to absorb tech and put it into meaningful use. Within 5 years of integrating stealth tech AMCA should fly.

IAF's basic requirement in AMCA is complete stealth not part stealth like say F-15SE was.

 

[sancho]

Thank You But did I said no ?

I mentioned Stealth means Less RCS .
whether you carry play loads internally or externally .

Yes you did say no, by saying

Stealth is not ment as carrying weapons inside bay .

, which is wrong. And no, Stealth requires internal payloads, because a stealth fighter that carries external loads his not stealthy anymore, only because it has a shaped airframe, just as the Silent Hornet is not stealthy because it can carry CFTs and weapon pods. Stealth combines all these features and therefor your have stealth or you don't!