AMCA based Advanced Fighter Bomber: is this what IAF need?

[IND151]

Hello friends.

AMCA is on drawing board and it will be a 5th gen fighter (and multi-role if sources are right.)

However, if this is true,its close ground capacity will be rather limited.

In my opinion we need a dedicated close ground support aircraft with limited air patrolling and reconnaissance capability.

I.e a aircraft which is multirole but its mainly a GCS/ Ground attack aircraft.(70:30)

just like Su-30 is multirole fighter but mainly a air superiority fighter.

This AFB should be based on AMCA which will solve many issues and all other medium weight fighters should be replaced with AMCA and AFB.

This AFB should be able to have good payload and be able to carry 6-8 tons of ammunition, have Ferry arnge in excess of 4,000 KM and combat radius of 800+ KM, capable of super cruise.

It should have 2 engines each having 11,000 KG wet trust.

In future, IAF should have only 5 types of fighters: LCA, AMCA, Pak FA/FGFA, AFB and Super MKI.


Currently we operate 6-7 type of fighters which creates several issues.

Hence reduction in number of types is necessary; apart from that a dedicated GCS aircraft is needed.

@Capt.Popeye eye @sancho @Manticore @SpArK @Penguin @Oscar > Your opinions are welcome.

 

[IND151]

In short this aircraft has to be 5th generation bomb truck.

According to Sancho, M-88 has potential of up to 110 KN.

So M-88-3 or a modified RD-33 MK can serve as power plant for both AMCA and AFB.

The other option could be Snecma Kaveri.

 

[GURU DUTT]

Hello friends.

AMCA is on drawing board and it will be a 5th gen fighter (and multi-role if sources are right.)

However, if this is true,its close ground capacity will be rather limited.

In my opinion we need a dedicated close ground support aircraft with limited air patrolling and reconnaissance capability.

I.e a aircraft which is multirole but its mainly a GCS/ Ground attack aircraft.(70:30)

just like Su-30 is multirole fighter but mainly a air superiority fighter.

This AFB should be based on AMCA which will solve many issues and all other medium weight fighters should be replaced with AMCA and AFB.

This AFB should be able to have good payload and be able to carry 6-8 tons of ammunition, have Ferry arnge in excess of 4,000 KM and combat radius of 800+ KM, capable of super cruise.

In future, IAF should have only 4 types of fighters: LCA, AMCA, Pak FA/FGFA and AFB.

Currently we operate 5-6 type of fighters which creates several issues.

Hence reduction in number of types is necessary; apart from that a dedicated GCS aircraft is needed.

@Capt.Popeye eye @sancho @Manticore @SpArK @Penguin @Oscar > Your opinions are welcome.

well final configuration will be much like a cross between B-52 flying wing and LCA with twin engines , comat radius will be more than 650Km but less than 800 Km , 16 metre in leanth and almost identical in width but much fatter in between than the american one and will have a pair of F414 and might fly in late 2018

 

[IND151]

well final configuration will be much like a cross between B-52 flying wing and LCA with twin engines , comat radius will be more than 650Km but less than 800 Km , 16 metre in leanth and almost identical in width but much fatter in between than the american one and will have a pair of F414 and might fly in late 2018

Thanks.

But AMCA will not be a dedicated CAS aircraft hence we need a dedicated CAS fighter which can serve as both conventional CAS aircraft, carrying weapons on wings too if stealth is not needed and carrying raids in heavily defended areas using stealth.

If AFB is based on AMCA, they will share may systems like radar, FBW, Power plant which means less maintenance nightmare for engineers.

 

[Peaceful Civilian]

Why not screw Rafale purchase program, concentrate on LCA mk2, and LCA mk3 ,some bombers and 5 gen jets.

 

[janon]

Why not screw Rafale purchase program, concentrate on LCA mk2, and LCA mk3 ,some bombers and 5 gen jets.

Depleting squadron strength, so we need jets immediately. At least 300 more jets are in dire need of retirement. We can't wait for a 5th gen jet to be developed and mature. And Rafales bring a lot of capability to the table, that LCA mkX can't.

 

[SwAggeR]

Why not screw Rafale purchase program, concentrate on LCA mk2, and LCA mk3 ,some bombers and 5 gen jets.

IA needs Rafale as stop gap solution. But I would agree that if these 2 years of delay didn' yield us anything except cost overruns then Rafale better be screwed as punishment but in that case MKI production line would need extension .

If this deal falls threw then France should be neglected in every future tender .But since France is only European country which supported us during our sanction period hence I think deal would be finalized with in next 60 days.

 

[surya kiran]

Some wishful thinking follows....

The AMCA in all probability will fill in the role of delivering striking ground targets. If this is the requirement, why not at-least think of delivery mechanism, which will be relevant for the next 25 yrs or so. Why do I make this point?

We have an air superiority fighter for the high. We have the LCA for the lo. Even with development of the AMCA we are looking at 'stealth'. Low observable platforms are the domain of the Americans. We can boast all we like and praise the J-20 and the Pak FA. But the bottom line is that they have been operating these technologies for close to 30 years now. I am pretty sure, by now they would have developed the means necessary to detect these planes too. Then how can they be beaten?

Also, one needs to look at the operational requirements. Where are the strike targets? The targets as of date are on the eastern sea board of China. As of date, the only way to reach them are ballistic missiles. Flying over the breadth of enemy territory undetected is practically impossible. In the far future, the plane developed also needs to provide potential deterrent against any known country which can be a threat.

Here, my question is what is the feasibility of developing an unmanned craft with the ability to provide high speed dash 100+ kms over sea level. The only known systems which can target such a craft are anti ballistic missiles. But, targeting planes is a lot more different than targeting a missile. These planes can be like the F-22 is for the US. In few numbers, but, the sheathed sword.

 

[SwAggeR]

In short this aircraft has to be 5th generation bomb truck.

According to Sancho, M-88 has potential of up to 110 KN.

So M-88-3 or a modified RD-33 MK can serve as power plant for both AMCA and AFB.

The other option could be Snecma Kaveri.

Snecma has already been kicked out. It' only Kaveri. DRDO should allocate more money and mind hour to make Kaveri successful.

Some wishful thinking follows....

The AMCA in all probability will fill in the role of delivering striking ground targets. If this is the requirement, why not at-least think of delivery mechanism, which will be relevant for the next 25 yrs or so. Why do I make this point?

We have an air superiority fighter for the high. We have the LCA for the lo. Even with development of the AMCA we are looking at 'stealth'. Low observable platforms are the domain of the Americans. We can boast all we like and praise the J-20 and the Pak FA. But the bottom line is that they have been operating these technologies for close to 30 years now. I am pretty sure, by now they would have developed the means necessary to detect these planes too. Then how can they be beaten?

Also, one needs to look at the operational requirements. Where are the strike targets? The targets as of date are on the eastern sea board of China. As of date, the only way to reach them are ballistic missiles. Flying over the breadth of enemy territory undetected is practically impossible. In the far future, the plane developed also needs to provide potential deterrent against any known country which can be a threat.

Here, my question is what is the feasibility of developing an unmanned craft with the ability to provide high speed dash 100+ kms over sea level. The only known systems which can target such a craft are anti ballistic missiles. But, targeting planes is a lot more different than targeting a missile. These planes can be like the F-22 is for the US. In few numbers, but, the sheathed sword.

It's better to develope Nirbhay and then work on increasing it's range by 2000km.

 

[surya kiran]

It's better to develope Nirbhay and then work on increasing it's range by 2000km.

Nirbhay is a subsonic cruise missile. A missile launch is way more dangerous than a plane launch and can be misunderstood.

 

[SwAggeR]

Nirbhay is a subsonic cruise missile. A missile launch is way more dangerous than a plane launch and can be misunderstood.

Sub sonic it is but still more than unmanned vehicles' speed.

It won't be detected before impact.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Another of these threads??!! Jesus H. Christ. It's not wonder the MoD is in a constant state of deadlock on procurements when EVERY SINGLE DECISION is criticised or questioned in such a manner. Questioning is a good and healthy thing to do but when you do it from a position of ignorance or frame leading questions and provocative headlines it is nothing but destructive and futile.

 

[janon]

Another of these threads??!! Jesus H. Christ. It's not wonder the MoD is in a constant state of deadlock on procurements when EVERY SINGLE DECISION is criticised or questioned in such a manner. Questioning is a good and healthy thing to do but when you do it from a position of ignorance or frame leading questions and provocative headlines it is nothing but destructive and futile.

MoD's delays are not influenced by threads on PDF. I do agree that speculative threads are unnecessary.

 

[SOHEIL]

 

[Penguin]

Chuckle

This AFB should be able to have good payload and be able to carry 6-8 tons of ammunition, have Ferry arnge in excess of 4,000 KM and combat radius of 800+ KM, capable of super cruise.

It should have 2 engines each having 11,000 KG wet trust.

In future, IAF should have only 4 types of fighters: LCA, AMCA, Pak FA/FGFA and AFB.

Your AFB would simply duplicate PAK/FA