AMCA configuration in final stages

[MehrotraPrince]

@ WHITESMOKE

I guess I have mentioned most of the things you talked about in my reply to India Army, my point is that there is a serious lack of reality in our thinking and our assement of what is doable and what is needed.

As I often showed on PDF, there is no requirement for a second stealth fighter in IAF, since it won't offer any operational advantages over FGFA, the only point is, it is "more Indian", but that imo is not a good reason to waste billions of taxpayers money, that could be used for more important defence related procurements.
So this is just another development, for the wrong reasons!

The on need for AMCA is in IN as a carrier fighter for IAC 2, especially since we don't have a 5th gen fighter for them so far and because they will be the spearhead to project power in future. IN has already stated their interest in such a fighter, but we doing the same mistake again that we did with LCA, making it too complicated by first developing an airforce version and then re-design ot to a naval version.
Keep in mind that ADA messed up the navalising of LCA as well and navalising an AMCA, even for the possible use with catapults is waaaaaay more difficult, so all those who think we have gained anything for a naval AMCA, because we now have N-LCA, are highly mistaken!!!

I'm sorry, but so far I don't see the changes, we still are at the basics, haven't achieved anything yet, but keep dreaming about things that even are difficult for countries that are far ahead of us. Keep it simple and think about the needs of the forces first!

Simple example, DRDO messed up radar and engine developments and still are dreaming about AESA radar, 5th cockpit for LCA MK2 and even a stealthy MK3, at the same time ADA made the whole LCA project even more complicated, by developing N-LCA at the side, which requirers to mix up requirements of IAF and IN for the MK2.

The better choice would have been, to integrate not only a foreign engine to LCA MK2, but also a foreign AESA (logically Rafales, since we produce it under licence in India). Not to develop N-LCA, but to increase the number of Mig 29s (and now comes the important part!) with higher Indian content!
IN is the biggest customer of Mig 29Ks, even more than RuN will operate, so why didn't we go for an Indian radar, why don't we think about integrating Kaveri into Mig 29s?
So instead developing a single engine less capable carrier fighter and making LCA development more complicated, DRDO should develop the indigenous AESA to replace Zhuk ME radars in the Migs, just like they should focus on improving and integrating Kaveri engine to replace RD33 engines. That would make our own developments useful within this decade and not only in the next one and more importantly, makes us / IN less dependen on Russia too.
At the same time, the LCA development would completely focused on IAFs requirement only and would be way easier as well.

But that is the problem, we (ADA/DRDO mainly) don't think about small steps, because a Russian fighter with Indian radar and engine might be an achievement, but still is a Russian fighter, no matter how much more capable it would be. It's more prestigious to develop an "indigenous carrier fighter" for an "indigenous carrier" and to claim that we have achieved something that only very few other countries can either.

Your analysis about AMCA project is good, you have really some good Theoretical knowledge, but sorry to say Zero practical knowledge about ground reality. Most of your theories about indigenous effort in LCA project is miles away from reality.

You have really no knowledge about what happened with our country after we exploded the Nuclear weapon. You have no knowledge why Russia recently proposed us for a joint venture in radar and engine development? you have no knowledge why Russia never shared or provided us with critical knowledge about radar or engines? and finally why now every one is ready to sell us their high tech weapons or even are ready for joint venture in engine, radar and other critical research works related to Defense.

If you really think that Russia will allow us to have our own radar in Mig-29 or Su-30, then you are too innocent to understand about technicalities of defense related projects. I don't want to spill the beans. Russia is our strategic partner, very generous as compared to USA but still share very limited knowledge with us, and this is true for other countries too.

I would say just one sentence, i.e. We can't let projects like LCA, AMCA, Nuclear submarine to fail no matter how much time it takes, these are more important than buying Rafale or fifth generation planes from Russia.

 

[tvsram1992]

i think AMCA will be initiated based on the PAK FA.

Inputs will be given based on the experience of Mki , Rafale , PAKFA and what not including the legendary Tejas .

 

[faithfulguy]

You are delusional on Kaveri issue...

1. Kaveri didn't failed rather requirement was changed. Its like I first asked 500cc bike, in mid course I changed my requirement to 1000cc bike..

2. Kaveri for AMCA is different project
3. Kaveri for Ships is different project
4. Kaveri for UAV is different project...

I'm sure it is. And there is a Kavari for the next generation Tata Nano engine that will be successful. And then Indians can boast that Kavari is now a successful project.

 

[faithfulguy]

@sancho u seem to be against AMCA development, but what about the post-2025 scenario in which 3 of the important IAF fighters would retire - mirage, mig 29, jags. They will need replacements & considering the time frame it will be logical to replace the mid-weight 4th gen fighters with a mid-weight 5th gen fighters. Yes, going for more FGFA can be an option but there nos. too have limits (IAF can't be dependent on one fighter type only), we can't go for more than 250 FGFA (not even that nos.), so where will we bridge the gap (& actually increase the squad nos.) created from retirement of around 250+ jags, mig29 & mirage-2000s.

This is when Rafael comes in to fill in the gap. The number of Rafael could be substantially higher.

 

[faithfulguy]

@ WHITESMOKE

I guess I have mentioned most of the things you talked about in my reply to India Army, my point is that there is a serious lack of reality in our thinking and our assement of what is doable and what is needed.

As I often showed on PDF, there is no requirement for a second stealth fighter in IAF, since it won't offer any operational advantages over FGFA, the only point is, it is "more Indian", but that imo is not a good reason to waste billions of taxpayers money, that could be used for more important defence related procurements.
So this is just another development, for the wrong reasons!

The on need for AMCA is in IN as a carrier fighter for IAC 2, especially since we don't have a 5th gen fighter for them so far and because they will be the spearhead to project power in future. IN has already stated their interest in such a fighter, but we doing the same mistake again that we did with LCA, making it too complicated by first developing an airforce version and then re-design ot to a naval version.
Keep in mind that ADA messed up the navalising of LCA as well and navalising an AMCA, even for the possible use with catapults is waaaaaay more difficult, so all those who think we have gained anything for a naval AMCA, because we now have N-LCA, are highly mistaken!!!

I'm sorry, but so far I don't see the changes, we still are at the basics, haven't achieved anything yet, but keep dreaming about things that even are difficult for countries that are far ahead of us. Keep it simple and think about the needs of the forces first!

Simple example, DRDO messed up radar and engine developments and still are dreaming about AESA radar, 5th cockpit for LCA MK2 and even a stealthy MK3, at the same time ADA made the whole LCA project even more complicated, by developing N-LCA at the side, which requirers to mix up requirements of IAF and IN for the MK2.

The better choice would have been, to integrate not only a foreign engine to LCA MK2, but also a foreign AESA (logically Rafales, since we produce it under licence in India). Not to develop N-LCA, but to increase the number of Mig 29s (and now comes the important part!) with higher Indian content!
IN is the biggest customer of Mig 29Ks, even more than RuN will operate, so why didn't we go for an Indian radar, why don't we think about integrating Kaveri into Mig 29s?
So instead developing a single engine less capable carrier fighter and making LCA development more complicated, DRDO should develop the indigenous AESA to replace Zhuk ME radars in the Migs, just like they should focus on improving and integrating Kaveri engine to replace RD33 engines. That would make our own developments useful within this decade and not only in the next one and more importantly, makes us / IN less dependen on Russia too.
At the same time, the LCA development would completely focused on IAFs requirement only and would be way easier as well.

But that is the problem, we (ADA/DRDO mainly) don't think about small steps, because a Russian fighter with Indian radar and engine might be an achievement, but still is a Russian fighter, no matter how much more capable it would be. It's more prestigious to develop an "indigenous carrier fighter" for an "indigenous carrier" and to claim that we have achieved something that only very few other countries can either.

What you said is common sense. But the media and politicians do not want common sense, they only want votes or viewership. As a result, that tie development of defense weapons around these lines.

What India should do is separate the requirements of military from domestic defense technical capability. The military purchase should be separate from the development of domestic technology. This is needed as the military is preparing to encounter modern adversaries but the technology for Indian institutions are not capable of producing all necessary critical modern weapons. Once India technology catch up with the rest of the world, than India can tie the two closer together

I would say just one sentence, i.e. We can't let projects like LCA, AMCA, Nuclear submarine to fail no matter how much time it takes, these are more important than buying Rafale or fifth generation planes from Russia.

India should continue to develop AMCA and nuclear subs. But do not tie the Indian militaries requirements base on these developments.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

And the real plane will look totally different from these two. Its too early to know what the plane look like.

That is pretty much how it will look like if they dont change the design again. The model isn't fan art.

 

[WHITESMOKE]

@ WHITESMOKE

I guess I have mentioned most of the things you talked about in my reply to India Army, my point is that there is a serious lack of reality in our thinking and our assement of what is doable and what is needed.

As I often showed on PDF, there is no requirement for a second stealth fighter in IAF, since it won't offer any operational advantages over FGFA, the only point is, it is "more Indian", but that imo is not a good reason to waste billions of taxpayers money, that could be used for more important defence related procurements.
So this is just another development, for the wrong reasons!

The on need for AMCA is in IN as a carrier fighter for IAC 2, especially since we don't have a 5th gen fighter for them so far and because they will be the spearhead to project power in future. IN has already stated their interest in such a fighter, but we doing the same mistake again that we did with LCA, making it too complicated by first developing an airforce version and then re-design ot to a naval version.
Keep in mind that ADA messed up the navalising of LCA as well and navalising an AMCA, even for the possible use with catapults is waaaaaay more difficult, so all those who think we have gained anything for a naval AMCA, because we now have N-LCA, are highly mistaken!!!

I'm sorry, but so far I don't see the changes, we still are at the basics, haven't achieved anything yet, but keep dreaming about things that even are difficult for countries that are far ahead of us. Keep it simple and think about the needs of the forces first!

Simple example, DRDO messed up radar and engine developments and still are dreaming about AESA radar, 5th cockpit for LCA MK2 and even a stealthy MK3, at the same time ADA made the whole LCA project even more complicated, by developing N-LCA at the side, which requirers to mix up requirements of IAF and IN for the MK2.

The better choice would have been, to integrate not only a foreign engine to LCA MK2, but also a foreign AESA (logically Rafales, since we produce it under licence in India). Not to develop N-LCA, but to increase the number of Mig 29s (and now comes the important part!) with higher Indian content!
IN is the biggest customer of Mig 29Ks, even more than RuN will operate, so why didn't we go for an Indian radar, why don't we think about integrating Kaveri into Mig 29s?
So instead developing a single engine less capable carrier fighter and making LCA development more complicated, DRDO should develop the indigenous AESA to replace Zhuk ME radars in the Migs, just like they should focus on improving and integrating Kaveri engine to replace RD33 engines. That would make our own developments useful within this decade and not only in the next one and more importantly, makes us / IN less dependen on Russia too.
At the same time, the LCA development would completely focused on IAFs requirement only and would be way easier as well.

But that is the problem, we (ADA/DRDO mainly) don't think about small steps, because a Russian fighter with Indian radar and engine might be an achievement, but still is a Russian fighter, no matter how much more capable it would be. It's more prestigious to develop an "indigenous carrier fighter" for an "indigenous carrier" and to claim that we have achieved something that only very few other countries can either.

I agree with most of your points here but not with some. Lets talk about first with what I agree. About LCA, I totally agree they shall freeze the project with MK-II. Making MK-III with stealth will be kind of redesign and a lot mess. First they should complete what is in hand rather than bragging things. But whom to blame, bragging is in Indian's blood. Only making a jet is not enough but more valuable experience is learned by operating it.
Now using Indian content in MIG-29, that is a valid thing. NLCA will not be that much effective as it stands nowhere near MIG-29. May be they are doing it just for moral boosting. But I doubt using kaveri for Mig-29. I don’t think with current comfig they can improve it. We are stuck on material part and I think engine design has also reached its limit. Making improvements in current kaveri will be much more difficult than making a new engine. But about AESA, that is very much possible. I think we might see that in MK-II also. Adding homemade AESA in Mig-29 would be wise decision. Instead of paying money to Russians for naval Aesa, why not invest it at home?
Now about tax payer's money for AMCA, I think it’s not as simple as you said. If we do not develop, then we will always have to import. Even if i keep aside the strategic portion, still we will be paying tax payer's money to import. Do you think its wiser to be always importing? Why not stop it somewhere? I am not saying 100% indigenous, but 15-20% import is not bad at all in a product. When Jaguar, Migs and Mirage will be retired, who will fill the gap? MMRCA will be import so we will be paying money there, Pakfa...too heavy aircraft and I am sure it will cost much more than what is being said right now. LCA...well in any case it will always will be 4th gen. We can never be close to china in military might if we are always dependent on import. Numbers can not be filled by import only. If so, it will be very costly option. Now regarding design knowledge of 5th gen, how they will learn if they will not develop? LCA design is done nothing more can happen there. MK-II will be almost same, nothing much will be changed there. Its not only about being operational advantage, sometimes you have to make the space. AMCA could be good for export someday. So it is surely another development but not for wrong reasons.
Now about change in management and system, that is really a serious concern. I am sure in few years we will get to know that things were different for AMCA or it was just a repeat. What I am saying is that if we do not develop now, we will always be importing. Aviation sector is too important to be import dependent. The knowledge about composite or other things we have today did not came from no where. It was learned from different projects. Of-course most of the projects are mismanaged and they waste a lot, but then again tell me what thing in India has been done without overspending or waste? Instead of wasting billion dollars on stone elephants and parks, I would be much happy if it is being wasted on AMCA.

 

[sancho]

@sancho u seem to be against AMCA development, but what about the post-2025 scenario in which 3 of the important IAF fighters would retire - mirage, mig 29, jags. They will need replacements & considering the time frame it will be logical to replace the mid-weight 4th gen fighters with a mid-weight 5th gen fighters. Yes, going for more FGFA can be an option but there nos. too have limits (IAF can't be dependent on one fighter type only), we can't go for more than 250 FGFA (not even that nos.), so where will we bridge the gap (& actually increase the squad nos.) created from retirement of around 250+ jags, mig29 & mirage-2000s.

No I am only against the development of an IAF AMCA, because all fighters can be replaced by the types that we already procure, or develop.

FGFA is the replacement for Mirage 2000 and Mig 29 (intially also for Mig 27UPG, but that might have been changed now) and only a part of the Jags will be replaced around that time, some of them will just reach their MLU time by then, because we produced them till 2008.
Not to mention that we talk about a time, when armed drones and UCAVs will have taken over most of the strike roles anyway, which makes replacing the Jags with another fighter (other than FGFA) hardly needed. AMCA offer no advantages over FGFA in the strike role, while AURA UCAV has over both stealth fighters!

So the best mix for that time will be...

5th gen hi level - FGFA / AURA UCAV
4.5 gen medium level - Super 30 / Rafale
4.5 gen lo level - LCA MK2 / armed Rustom

The next fighter that really needs a replacement in IAF, will be the MKI around 2035, so AMCA will come a decade too early!

Most of what you mentioned are correct but not all. LCA mk1 now has empty weight of 5680 kg just 180 kg more than original planned and to me this much obesity is accepted

The last official source:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3Ypw_Ma1gug/TVeFu_sULnI/AAAAAAAAAHM/zKh2MylRys4/s1600/DSC03688.JPG

Development of AESA has been divided into eight parts of which two are ready.I am quite hopeful that it will get completed by 2015 or early 2016.

You are, but ADA officials just recently stated, that MK2 will have a multi mode radar, but that it's needs to be seen if it will be an puls doppler or AESA radar. So they are not as optimistic!

 

[sancho]

What India should do is separate the requirements of military from domestic defense technical capability. The military purchase should be separate from the development of domestic technology. This is needed as the military is preparing to encounter modern adversaries but the technology for Indian institutions are not capable of producing all necessary critical modern weapons. Once India technology catch up with the rest of the world, than India can tie the two closer together

Not really, what India needs is to improve it's industry as fast as possible! That can be done in 2 ways, once the slow way by doing everything alone and hope to get it done with out much problems. The other way is, to search for experienced and reliable partners, that are ready to jointly develop NG projects. Even if India can contribute only a limited part to these developments, the know how and access to all techs will give our industry a huge boost, while our forces gets the lasted weapon systems to take on any opponent!
That's why FGFA, Brahmos, Barak 8 are the most important developments currently and why the procurements of Apaches, Chinooks, or C130Js are only minor important additions, to increase the capability in less important fields, thanks to the access to the US market that we now have.

But now we have to select the next Joint developments and these would be my choices:

1) N-AMCA development with Dassault, based on Rafale M / combined with a procurement of 200 Rafales

2) Joint short to medium range missile development, based on Trishul SAM and MICA, to replace R73 on IAF fighters, to provide IA and IN (sub launched) with a quick reaction SAM

3) AURA UCAV + HALE drone development with Israeli IAI, based on Kaveri K9 engine

4) A NG helicopter development, in the medium class with pusher rotor

5) NG SSK development with Germanys HDW, based on the U216


India should continue to develop AMCA and nuclear subs. But do not tie the Indian militaries requirements base on these developments.[/QUOTE]

 

[sancho]

But I doubt using kaveri for Mig-29. I don’t think with current comfig they can improve it.

According to the recent reports, Kaveri K9 offers the same dry thrust like the RD 33 engines, it only lacks behind in the wet trust, which is mainly needed during take off. According to my calculations, we just need around 83kN with Kaveri, to make the Mig take off, which is around the original goals of the engine.

But about AESA, that is very much possible.

Possible for sure, the only question is when. LCA MK2 is now aimed on 2017/18 and even for that timeframe a basic AESA is unsure so far, that's why I am for the safe option and simply use Rafales AESA for Rafale and LCA MK2, to speed up the induction, while the indigenous AESA could be used to replace Zhuk ME in the Mig 29Ks around 2025 during the first upgrade and N-AMCA. That gives both forces more commonality and reduced costs.

Now about tax payer's money for AMCA, I think it’s not as simple as you said. If we do not develop, then we will always have to import.

As I said in my replies to the other members, I didn't said we shouldn't develop AMCA at all, but according to our real needs and requirements. AMCA in IAF is as explained not needed and without any operational effect, while AMCA in IN would be a major increase of capability, especially to project power with IAC2!
But developing it as ADA and DRDO plan again, will just ran into the next failure, because they make it too complicated again, because they think about their own interests only.

What I am saying is that if we do not develop now, we will always be importing.

That's not correct, because selfreliance can not only be achieved by indigenous developments only, but also by joint developments according to our requirements. That's what FGFA, Brahmos, or MTA offers us and that's what we have to push now with Israel and European nations too.
Also to learn about NG developments, you don't have to develop and produce 100 x fighters, 10 or even just a single tech demonstrator are enought! That's how everyone else in the world is doing it as well and that's a more cost and time-effective way of development too.

but then again tell me what thing in India has been done without overspending or waste?

Only we have waste of money in other areas, doesn't mean it justifies waste of money in all areas. Because that is the same justifcation for a low class government worker to take bribes, because he says everybody does it, or even ministers does it. But it doesn't matter who does it, it is simply wrong and not helpful for the country.
My point is also not only the money that is wasted, but that nobody is accountable for the spendings and the failures. Take Kaveri engine as an example, it is a failed project and is the main reason why LCA as a whole is so delayed, but did you ever heared that the DRDO managers, or scientists that were responsible for the development were fired? In any even small company, if you mess up a project even a little bit, you get at least a punishment, if not even loose the job directly, so why do we always try to find excuses for DRDO / ADA and Indian scientists, instead of taking them to account like we do it with anybody else?

 

[WHITESMOKE]

According to the recent reports, Kaveri K9 offers the same dry thrust like the RD 33 engines, it only lacks behind in the wet trust, which is mainly needed during take off. According to my calculations, we just need around 83kN with Kaveri, to make the Mig take off, which is around the original goals of the engine.



Possible for sure, the only question is when. LCA MK2 is now aimed on 2017/18 and even for that timeframe a basic AESA is unsure so far, that's why I am for the safe option and simply use Rafales AESA for Rafale and LCA MK2, to speed up the induction, while the indigenous AESA could be used to replace Zhuk ME in the Mig 29Ks around 2025 during the first upgrade and N-AMCA. That gives both forces more commonality and reduced costs.




As I said in my replies to the other members, I didn't said we shouldn't develop AMCA at all, but according to our real needs and requirements. AMCA in IAF is as explained not needed and without any operational effect, while AMCA in IN would be a major increase of capability, especially to project power with IAC2!
But developing it as ADA and DRDO plan again, will just ran into the next failure, because they make it too complicated again, because they think about their own interests only.




That's not correct, because selfreliance can not only be achieved by indigenous developments only, but also by joint developments according to our requirements. That's what FGFA, Brahmos, or MTA offers us and that's what we have to push now with Israel and European nations too.
Also to learn about NG developments, you don't have to develop and produce 100 x fighters, 10 or even just a single tech demonstrator are enought! That's how everyone else in the world is doing it as well and that's a more cost and time-effective way of development too.



Only we have waste of money in other areas, doesn't mean it justifies waste of money in all areas. Because that is the same justifcation for a low class government worker to take bribes, because he says everybody does it, or even ministers does it. But it doesn't matter who does it, it is simply wrong and not helpful for the country.
My point is also not only the money that is wasted, but that nobody is accountable for the spendings and the failures. Take Kaveri engine as an example, it is a failed project and is the main reason why LCA as a whole is so delayed, but did you ever heared that the DRDO managers, or scientists that were responsible for the development were fired? In any even small company, if you mess up a project even a little bit, you get at least a punishment, if not even loose the job directly, so why do we always try to find excuses for DRDO / ADA and Indian scientists, instead of taking them to account like we do it with anybody else?

Regarding Kaveri, getting dry throust is not enough alone. Wet thrust is also too complex thing. They are stuck with TET issue and seems with current knowledge they wont be able to make any improvement. Who knows where they lack? I heard long back single crystal tec was developed in labs but seems its long way to introduce it at industrial level. May be they lack the tech, may be its the manufacturing technique or may be its the design constrains. Further, first they have to finish the development and testing and then they will have to see how reliable it is in working. things deviate a lot from lab to actual user. Even if they succesfully install it on a jet, even a minor problem later on can ground the things for long time. China hsa a bigger R&D bugget than us and even they are working on engine long before and still you see they have to reply on import. I think this time India should ask serious $hit from France either for AESA orEngine. They have been awarded a lot deals now. If this is done, only then we might see these systems on Mig-29 or say MCA.

Now about MCA for navy, I think right now Navy has set their proirties onm subs and ships. There is also talk going on N-MMRCA. If this happens, the space will be too limited for indigenous N-MCA. Regarding ICA2, who knows how long it will take even when we are not sure when we are getting IAC1. They have just sorted out Gear box issue and no one knows when they will pop out other issue. But I dont mind if they develop it for Navy or IAF since its all about developing 5th gen jet.



Now about accountability in DRDO/HAL, seems it is not that easy as we say. DAE and ISRO directly reports to PMO while DRDO/HAL you can count how many loops are there. Unless they are re-orgnised and some one there to check the real work done instead of giving press statements, nothing will happen.

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

I'm sure it is. And there is a Kavari for the next generation Tata Nano engine that will be successful. And then Indians can boast that Kavari is now a successful project.

What India do is non of your concern..... do show concern on Chinese engine... WS -10 failed , they came up with WS-10A and when WS-10A failed then came with WS-10B and no one using WS-10 original engine........

Kavari also going on same lines.....

YOu must accept that WS-10/WS-10A and WS-13 is failed engine from China?

No you will say ask Chinese, when you can comment on Indian engine, you can apply same logic on Chinese engine and comment. But your false ego wont let be.

 

[kurup]

What India do is non of your concern..... do show concern on Chinese engine... WS -10 failed , they came up with WS-10A and when WS-10A failed then came with WS-10B and no one using WS-10 original engine........

Kavari also going on same lines.....

YOu must accept that WS-10/WS-10A and WS-13 is failed engine from China?

No you will say ask Chinese, when you can comment on Indian engine, you can apply same logic on Chinese engine and comment. But your false ego wont let be.

Well he will now comment that he is not chinese and you will have to discuss this with an chinese guy .

He is a just obsessed about India coming from you know where and all he does 24/7 in this forum is write BS in India Defence .

 

[faithfulguy]

Well he will now comment that he is not chinese and you will have to discuss this with an chinese guy .

He is a just obsessed about India coming from you know where and all he does 24/7 in this forum is write BS in India Defence .

I like to share facts with you guys as many Indians here are factually challenged. When you say 1+1=3, I have to correct you. When you see a cat fell into a ditch, you need to rescue it. Its just human nature that I help people in need.

 

[satishkumarcsc]

I like to share facts with you guys as many Indians here are factually challenged. When you say 1+1=3, I have to correct you. When you see a cat fell into a ditch, you need to rescue it. Its just human nature that I help people in need.

One problem is there when you share facts...because most of them are myths concocted in your dreams.....and you have fallen so deep into your concocted beliefs that it is beyond rescue...