India's AMCA Shape Tweaked Again?

[Wet Shirt Contest]

T-50 is a a Heavy 5th gen Air superiority Multi role Fighter

AMCA --Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft. .Both have there respective place.

When a Tailored made Heavy Fighter is under development, didn't see much use of AMCA in IAF.
Not to mention Other 4.5th Gen fighters in fleet (post 2020).

AMCA - Deep penetration Strike, Nuclear Strike, Dedicated ground attack. (replacement for jag's and mig 27)

Those capabilities are not so unique,
There are some upcoming upgrades for Jag's, they are Not getting retired anytime soon. In addition having a Fighter limited to one role is not good In a Modern Airforce. But still don't see much use of a Medium class 5th Gen fighter.

Edit: AMCA Project should be limited to R&D purpose.

 

[sancho]

AMCA - Deep penetration Strike, Nuclear Strike, Dedicated ground attack. (replacement for jag's and mig 27)

The old myths again. It doesn't have a greater payload capacity or range than FGFA, so why should IAF use it in deep strikes then? With the arrival of AURA, deep strikes will be handed over anyway and supported by the twin seat FGFA, espcially in the nuclear strike role and I said it so often, we don't need another type of fighter to replace 2 x squads of Migs and some Jags, which all are dedicated strike fighters only. AURA, armed Rustom will take over their roles and in numbers, these fighters will be replaced by FGFA or additional Rafale anyway.

250 x FGFA confirmed

51 x Mirage 2000
69 x Mig 29
36 x Mig 27 upg
lets say 100 x Jags

=> 256 (and we know that there aren't that many Mirage, Mig 29s, or Jags anymore, due to crashes)

The fact is, there is no operational advantage for IAF with AMCA, nor is their a need to replace a fighter with it until MKI will be retired. If we can extend the development ti around 2030, AMCA would be a good replacement, but it just would be the next embarrassment, if we take that long.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

The old myths again. It doesn't have a greater payload capacity or range than FGFA, so why should IAF use it in deep strikes then? With the arrival of AURA, deep strikes will be handed over anyway and supported by the twin seat FGFA, espcially in the nuclear strike role and I said it so often, we don't need another type of fighter to replace 2 x squads of Migs and some Jags, which all are dedicated strike fighters only. AURA, armed Rustom will take over their roles and in numbers, these fighters will be replaced by FGFA or additional Rafale anyway.

250 x FGFA confirmed

51 x Mirage 2000
69 x Mig 29
36 x Mig 27 upg
lets say 100 x Jags

=> 256 (and we know that there aren't that many Mirage, Mig 29s, or Jags anymore, due to crashes)

The fact is, there is no operational advantage for IAF with AMCA, nor is their a need to replace a fighter with it until MKI will be retired. If we can extend the development ti around 2030, AMCA would be a good replacement, but it just would be the next embarrassment, if we take that long.

AMCA is planned for 2025..so we can always expect 2- 3. years delay. mki will start retiring by 2040, so by 2030 we can inducted AMCA for increased squadron numbers and to replace other old fighters and at the same time we can export it to friendly countries who does not want heavy 5th gen fighters..by 2040 we can start replace mki also.

 

[sancho]

AMCA is planned for 2025..so we can always expect 2- 3. years delay. mki will start retiring by 2040, so by 2030 we can inducted AMCA for increased squadron numbers and to replace other old fighters and at the same time we can export it to friendly countries who does not want heavy 5th gen fighters..by 2040 we can start replace mki also.

MKIs will start beeing replaced between 2030 and 35, with around 30 years in service, IAF won't make the same mistake again and keep Russian fighters in service for so long. As show above, there is no need to increase the numbers or to replace a fighter, when you still are producing FGFA, possibly even LCA or Rafale by 2025.

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

The fact is, there is no operational advantage for IAF with AMCA, nor is their a need to replace a fighter with it until MKI will be retired. If we can extend the development ti around 2030, AMCA would be a good replacement, but it just would be the next embarrassment, if we take that long.

So as per your logic we should not work on AMCA because it can not replace any fighter before 2030 and it will be a embarrassment if we develop it by 2030 not before that!

 

[rockstarIN]

So as per your logic we should not work on AMCA because it can not replace any fighter before 2030 and it will be a embarrassment if we develop it by 2030 not before that!

No..we need to work on this plane to capitalize the experience gained from LCA as well as FGFA co developments. There will be enough export potential for this plane if it comes out as good. There are hardly any middle level 5th gen fighter programmes launched now apart from F-35. We, off course will get help from Russia and France as France has no plan for 5th gen and Russia already have Pak FA with us. So no more further plans for them too.

 

[Wet Shirt Contest]

So as per your logic we should not work on AMCA because it can not replace any fighter before 2030 and it will be a embarrassment if we develop it by 2030 not before that!

AMCA is the result of Poor Planing By Defence Officials.
One should explore future prospects beyond 2030+, If i take stats into account, What operational advantage AMCA gives over FGFA ? "For now" Limiting AMCA project strictly to Research test bed is right step forward.

 

[sancho]

So as per your logic we should not work on AMCA because it can not replace any fighter before 2030 and it will be a embarrassment if we develop it by 2030 not before that!

No, I am saying there is no operational nor technical benefit from AMCA in IAF, therefor we don't have to waste money there!

Develop AMCA as a tech demonstrator programm, to improve the industry - good reason
Develop AMCA as a 5th gen carrier fighter - good reason
Develop AMCA as a replacement of MKI beyond 2030 - good reason

Simple logic!

No..we need to work on this plane to capitalize the experience gained from LCA as well as FGFA co developments. There will be enough export potential for this plane if it comes out as good. There are hardly any middle level 5th gen fighter programmes launched now apart from F-35. We, off course will get help from Russia and France as France has no plan for 5th gen and Russia already have Pak FA with us. So no more further plans for them too.

Japan is developing a medium class fighter, Indonesia has joint S. Korea for a medium class fighter, Turkey might develop a medium class fighter, not to forget that most countries that can afford a 5th gen fighter will have the F35 by then, so exports are just a minor reason if at all. The biggest priority should always be, to provide our forces the best for the security of the nation and therefor we need a 5th gen aircraft program for the Indian Navy, not for any exports.

 

[IND151]

 

[ANPP]

Not in IAF, because with LCA MK2, Rafale and even the huge fleet of MKIs, we have the 2nd line ready and available for the next 30 years. Also with FGFA and AURA, there is no role left where the AMCA would be better in A2A or A2G.
The only real use would be in Indian Navy, since they have no 5th gen fighter yet and the medium class fighter would fit better to a carrier than a naval FGFA.

LCA, RAFALE, MKIs are 4 gen fighter, while AMCA is 5 gen fighter.

MKI is heavy fighter, while LCA is light weight fighter ( a huge payload gap b/w them). It is conformed that PAKFA & FGFA will be bigger than MKI.

By next decade we will have some ~500 heavy fighter. PAKFA will be air dominance fighter, while FGFA will work as swing roll fighter which is confirmed by IAF.

AURA & other uavs will fulfill the requirement of light weight fighter as well as LCA.

AS I mention earlier that we have lack of fighters which will serve as bridge b/w MKI & LCA. Right now we have MIG 29 only.
RAFALE also fulfill that gap but these are only in ~120, which is very low in number. Migs will be retired middle in next decade so condition will be worst. So induction of AMCA will fulfill that gap.

As IAF personal also mention they change the AMCA from partial stealth to complete stealth ( on par of PAKFA) & put the requirement of complete air dominance fighter in front of DRDO.

SO there is still a potent role in IAF for AMCA & delay is becz IAF change requirement which completly differ from what DRDO initially projected.

 

[Gessler]

^^ Buddy just one correction. the PAKFA/FGFA is actually much smaller and ligher than any Flanker out there.



^^Not a high-res pic but tells the story.

 

[ANPP]

the PAKFA/FGFA is actually much smaller and ligher than any Flanker out there.

Thank bro, but actually I didnt account the dimention of plane. I was considering the overall weight & surface area in which PAKFA is slightly greater.


As INDIA has too much geographical differences & we have too much airbases in hilly areas, now the headache of islands WHERE OPERATION of heavy weight fighter is really another headache so these birds can easily serve there along with LCA & AURA.

 

[ANPP]

I also have a doubt on image it looks photo shop.

 

[Wet Shirt Contest]

LCA, RAFALE, MKIs are 4 gen fighter, while AMCA is 5 gen fighter.

MKI is heavy fighter, while LCA is light weight fighter ( a huge payload gap b/w them). It is conformed that PAKFA & FGFA will be bigger than MKI.

By next decade we will have some ~500 heavy fighter. PAKFA will be air dominance fighter, while FGFA will work as swing roll fighter which is confirmed by IAF.

AURA & other uavs will fulfill the requirement of light weight fighter as well as LCA.

AS I mention earlier that we have lack of fighters which will serve as bridge b/w MKI & LCA. Right now we have MIG 29 only.
RAFALE also fulfill that gap but these are only in ~120, which is very low in number. Migs will be retired middle in next decade so condition will be worst. So induction of AMCA will fulfill that gap.

As IAF personal also mention they change the AMCA from partial stealth to complete stealth ( on par of PAKFA) & put the requirement of complete air dominance fighter in front of DRDO.

SO there is still a potent role in IAF for AMCA & delay is becz IAF change requirement which completly differ from what DRDO initially projected.

The Fact Is AMCA gives NO Clear Operational Advantage to IAF, You Are Confused with fighters and there Roles.

How "AURA" and Other UCAV's will the gap of LCA's ? When LCA is meant for Interception, Point Defence and Escorting Roles.

To Bridge the Gap Of between Low end and High End Fighters Iaf will have 126 + (x) No's Of Rafales, and Those are not Low in numbers. I wonder how YOU came to that conclusion. IAF don't Need Another type of fighter to replace Few squadrons of Migs and Jaguars. When Rafales ,AURA and Other UCAV's will fill the gap. Poor Planing!

 

[JAT BALWAN]

I also have a doubt on image it looks photo shop.

Hehehe... look @ the shades of aircraft , sun is on the left side of screen & only one shade is there...