Involve Israel and Singapore in the MCA project

[sancho]

Hi Tshering22, from your first post I got the impression that your aim was to team up with Singapore and Israel as partners in the AMCA development and that they will buy them too. If that was the case then they have to take a share of the fundings too, because that is the only way to commit them into orders and good participation into the project. That's why I said that they won't have enough money for such a development, not to mention that Israel will get an ok from the US, which will pressure them to buy F35 of course.
If your aim in only to have them as consultants, as EADS in LCA development for example, it would be a different point of course, but then we can't expect to get the best techs they have, because nobody will give their best, if they can't use it too. Actually only Israel, because Singapore can't really provide much useful techs for such a development either and can't be a consultant.

So you think that USA and Russia are nuts having run 2 5th gen programs together with their F-35 AND f-22 and PAKFA and LMFA?

First of all, Russia has no 2nd 5. gen development running at the moment, MIG even developed a stealth UCAV prototype and the reports from Russia about their future carriers says, the want an airwing mixed with helicopters Mig 29Ks, a 5. gen fighter and UCAV!

Secondly, you missed the important word in that sentence, similar.
F22 and F35 are 2 totally different fighters, with clearly different designs, for different roles and with different aims in the operational terms. The F22 is a twin engine air superiority fighter, designed to be very stealthy, super manouverable, fast, long range radar...aimed to be the top side of the USAF. The F35 instead is a single engine strike and air defense fighter, which was aimed on costeffectiveness and to replace all other older fighters in USAF, USN and USMC.
Compare that with FGFA and AMCA!

Both are 5. gen twin engine fighters with the same capabilities (TVC, SC, long range radar...), the main difference beteen both will be the weight class only. While FGFA is a heavy Flanker class fighter, AMCA would be comparable to EF, or even F18SH hornet class.
AMCA is possibly meant to replace JAGs in the strike role, but there is nothing it could do better than the FGFA, because unlike the F22, FGFA is meant to be a multi role fighter from the begining and will be able to carry A2G weapons too. It's not clear so far how many, or what kind of A2G weapons FGFA could carry, but the fact that it has more space for the internal weapon bays than a medium class fighter, makes it doubtful that AMCA can carry more load than FGFA.
At the end, besides the fact that AMCA could have more indigenous content, only the medium class would mean a clear difference in both projects, the rest would be pretty similar .


Regarding stealth UCAV...

...I know that we have problems with the UAVs, that's why I said that the unmanned control will be difficult enough for us, but when you look at it correctly, you would see that we already have the better base for an 5. gen UCAV, than for a 5. gen fighter!

The 5. gen fighter would be based mainly on LCA development, which sadly is nowhere near to be ready now and still will need year, if not a decade till we really can gain from it. Not no mention that these are only 4. gen techs and must be heavily improved to be used in a 5. gen fighter.
On the other hand we have developed UAVs for some years now and have even JV in that field with Israel for example, on unmanned helicopters and DRDO is also developing unmanned vehicles. The unmanned controls in a UCAV won't be that much different, even if it is a stealth UCAV and no avionics, super manouverable designs are needed. The focus in the design is on stealth only, not on flight performance. Same goes for the engine, which don't need to high thrust, SC, or TVC and would be easier to develop than the AMCA engine. In terms of costeffectiveness such an UCAV is unbeatable, because its small, mean needs no cockpit area, no radar, no avionics and so on.
The main influence for both developments would be the know how that we get from FGFA partnership, because we will gain experience with stealth and again, it will be easier to develop a stealth design for a UCAV with that knowledge, than a more complicated fighter design.

With this already available base of experience, JV, or partnerships and the expected timeframe of 10-15 years, I see the chances for an indigenous stealth UCAV, much higher than an indigenous stealth fighter.

 

[marcos98]

HERE IS AN INTERESTING TIDBIT:

Ex-Lavi chief calls for new fighter, not $11 billion on F-35 - The DEW Line

I spent a week touring Israel's aerospace industry last November, which included a sighting of the only known survivor of the Lavi program. One of many things I came away with is a sense that Israel wants to return to the ranks of the world's developers of manned combat aircraft, rather than a niche supplier of systems and UAVs.

Ex-Lavi program manager and minister of defense Moshe Arens writes in Haaretz today that Israel would be better off launching a joint development program with Russia and India to build a new fighter rather than spend $11 billion to buy 75 Lockheed Martin F-35s. See excerpt below:

Are there alternatives to swallowing our pride and shelling out $3 billion for 20 F-35s? (The original plan had been to acquire 75 aircraft, which would have brought the price above $11 billion, but that was too expensive. ) Before we make that commitment, a little intellectual effort should be invested in looking at other options.

Does Israel still have the technological capability to design a first-rate fighter aircraft? That needs to be examined in some depth. No doubt some of the capability that existed at the time of the Lavi project has been lost over the years, but as has been proved time and again, Israel has a world-class technological capability. Its success in unmanned aerial vehicles is only one of a number of examples.

If it turns out that the capability to design the IAF's next fighter aircraft does exist in Israel, where could we go from there? Not to the U.S. Congress in search of funding, because we would have to remind them that 27 years ago they were fools to invest $1 billion in the development of the Lavi that Israel decided it did not want. We would have to look for partners who are prepared to invest resources in such a project, who have the necessary technological capability, and who are not involved in the F-35 project.

Are there such candidates? In theory, yes. France, with a great aeronautical industry, chose not to participate in the F-35 project. India, with a considerable aeronautical capability and a meteorically growing economy, might be another candidate. And there is Russia. Perhaps none of them would be interested, and perhaps all of them would be. It's worth a try.

 

[Tshering22]

Hi Tshering22, from your first post I got the impression that your aim was to team up with Singapore and Israel as partners in the AMCA development and that they will buy them too. If that was the case then they have to take a share of the fundings too, because that is the only way to commit them into orders and good participation into the project. That's why I said that they won't have enough money for such a development, not to mention that Israel will get an ok from the US, which will pressure them to buy F35 of course.

Actually Israelis aren't paying a heavy investment except $10 million dollars as security cooperative participants for the JSF program. Singapore is doing the same. The first tier partner UK is investing less than what we're investing in PAK FA.

So as committed participants, we can expect their contribution in kind of not in cash. In kind meaning technological inputs, their own modification choice etc. Singapore gets the same option. $10 million is something both can easily afford with an agreement of committed purchase.

If your aim in only to have them as consultants, as EADS in LCA development for example, it would be a different point of course, but then we can't expect to get the best techs they have, because nobody will give their best, if they can't use it too. Actually only Israel, because Singapore can't really provide much useful techs for such a development either and can't be a consultant.

That is why I am telling to get them to get the AMCA and let them modify it as they want while asking for technology cooperation in return. Singaporeans are smart people with a strong technology base. I am sure that something can definitely come out of them or if not, we can ask for doubling their nominal amount ($20 million).

First of all, Russia has no 2nd 5. gen development running at the moment, MIG even developed a stealth UCAV prototype and the reports from Russia about their future carriers says, the want an airwing mixed with helicopters Mig 29Ks, a 5. gen fighter and UCAV!

Stealth UCAV when they're not even able to manufacture their own normal UAVs! They're buying UAVs from Israel for now and planning for development of UCAVs in future. Where'd you get that news from?

Russians are NOW not having the 2nd one but there was a proposal posted in RIA Novosti about LMFA being considered in the future for the VVS as a tier-2 fighter. You'd like to remember that MiG-35 is not chosen by VVS yet.

Secondly, you missed the important word in that sentence, similar.
F22 and F35 are 2 totally different fighters, with clearly different designs, for different roles and with different aims in the operational terms. The F22 is a twin engine air superiority fighter, designed to be very stealthy, super manouverable, fast, long range radar...aimed to be the top side of the USAF. The F35 instead is a single engine strike and air defense fighter, which was aimed on costeffectiveness and to replace all other older fighters in USAF, USN and USMC.
Compare that with FGFA and AMCA!

Buddy that was the whole idea of having 2 stealth platforms in IAF! Along the US philosophy of a total stealth big daddy and a slightly lesser stealth smaller bro.

Both are 5. gen twin engine fighters with the same capabilities (TVC, SC, long range radar...), the main difference beteen both will be the weight class only. While FGFA is a heavy Flanker class fighter, AMCA would be comparable to EF, or even F18SH hornet class.

AMCA is possibly meant to replace JAGs in the strike role, but there is nothing it could do better than the FGFA, because unlike the F22, FGFA is meant to be a multi role fighter from the begining and will be able to carry A2G weapons too. It's not clear so far how many, or what kind of A2G weapons FGFA could carry, but the fact that it has more space for the internal weapon bays than a medium class fighter, makes it doubtful that AMCA can carry more load than FGFA.
At the end, besides the fact that AMCA could have more indigenous content, only the medium class would mean a clear difference in both projects, the rest would be pretty similar .

Both AMCA and FGFA will have multirole capabilities. FGFA will be primarily air A2A while secondary A2G while AMCA will be vice versa. But both will be Multirole.

Dedicated strike fighters are history, man.
Regarding stealth UCAV...

...I know that we have problems with the UAVs, that's why I said that the unmanned control will be difficult enough for us, but when you look at it correctly, you would see that we already have the better base for an 5. gen UCAV, than for a 5. gen fighter!

The 5. gen fighter would be based mainly on LCA development, which sadly is nowhere near to be ready now and still will need year, if not a decade till we really can gain from it. Not no mention that these are only 4. gen techs and must be heavily improved to be used in a 5. gen fighter.
On the other hand we have developed UAVs for some years now and have even JV in that field with Israel for example, on unmanned helicopters and DRDO is also developing unmanned vehicles. The unmanned controls in a UCAV won't be that much different, even if it is a stealth UCAV and no avionics, super manouverable designs are needed. The focus in the design is on stealth only, not on flight performance. Same goes for the engine, which don't need to high thrust, SC, or TVC and would be easier to develop than the AMCA engine. In terms of costeffectiveness such an UCAV is unbeatable, because its small, mean needs no cockpit area, no radar, no avionics and so on.
The main influence for both developments would be the know how that we get from FGFA partnership, because we will gain experience with stealth and again, it will be easier to develop a stealth design for a UCAV with that knowledge, than a more complicated fighter design.

With this already available base of experience, JV, or partnerships and the expected timeframe of 10-15 years, I see the chances for an indigenous stealth UCAV, much higher than an indigenous stealth fighter.

 

[Tshering22]

The F35 instead is a single engine strike and air defense fighter, which was aimed on costeffectiveness and to replace all other older fighters in USAF, USN and USMC.

About bolded part, Dude! that's the whole reason why this Lavi guy is so pissed. Netherlands, Norway, Israel and Australia are not satisfied with the JSF. Its all over the news. Austalia has complained 3 times about the doubts it has on JSF while Norway made a recent disclosure along with Netherlands.

At $132 million apiece (latest estimates after cost escalations), with no thrust vectoring, 1.6 mach top speed, limited payload, limited range, limited maneuverability and limited combat radius... its becoming an issue with the participant countries. UK also complained that Lockheed Martin is not giving them enough participation despite investing so much money.

Israel's scrape is that US wants to hold the critical tech in its hands and doesn't want US to put its own stuff onboard-- which has been done by Israelis since 3 decades on all their current fighters.

Also the sanction imposed on Israel when they dealt with China on some sensitive weapons tech, is causing them to talk like this. Basically, Israelis have options and are using them as a pressure tactic.

 

[sancho]

Oops, didn't see this post, before replying to the other.

Actually Israelis aren't paying a heavy investment except $10 million dollars as security cooperative participants for the JSF program. Singapore is doing the same. The first tier partner UK is investing less than what we're investing in PAK FA.

So as committed participants, we can expect their contribution in kind of not in cash. In kind meaning technological inputs, their own modification choice etc. Singapore gets the same option. $10 million is something both can easily afford with an agreement of committed purchase.

They are just export customers of F35, not anyway close to be a partner and even UK, that paid a good amount of money, has no say, or real benefit in that development.
We instead can get ToT, our own production line, customisations and many more things, so very different and totally worth it.
IF Israel would team/partner up with us for a fighter development, they for sure want to have similar benefits, so they surely have, or even want to pay more. The question is, are they able and allowed to?

That is why I am telling to get them to get the AMCA and let them modify it as they want while asking for technology cooperation in return. Singaporeans are smart people with a strong technology base. I am sure that something can definitely come out of them or if not, we can ask for doubling their nominal amount ($20 million).

That doesn't make sense, we pay the whole development and at the end Israel will have better fighters than we have, because they will modify their with the best they have and will not give us the same if it's only a tech coop.

Stealth UCAV when they're not even able to manufacture their own normal UAVs! They're buying UAVs from Israel for now and planning for development of UCAVs in future. Where'd you get that news from?

Mig Skat:

More infos:

MiG SKAT Unmanned Aerial Fighting Aircraft | Russian Arms, Military Technology, Analysis of Russia's Military Forces

Both AMCA and FGFA will have multirole capabilities. FGFA will be primarily air A2A while secondary A2G while AMCA will be vice versa. But both will be Multirole.

Dedicated strike fighters are history, man.

Of course, but even F35 is a multi role fighter, however mainly geared for strikes and AMCA will not be specially geared, or will be better in that role than FGFA and that is the difference.

About bolded part, Dude! that's the whole reason why this Lavi guy is so pissed. Netherlands, Norway, Israel and Australia are not satisfied with the JSF. Its all over the news. Austalia has complained 3 times about the doubts it has on JSF while Norway made a recent disclosure along with Netherlands...

Of course that project is now going over board with development costs and stuff, but that wasn't the point. It was, that a single engine fighter is still cheaper to operate than a twin engine fighter. That's why the operational costs of an twin engine heavy class F22 will be much higher, than for a single engine medium class F35. In our example the difference will be much lower, because both are twin engine fighters, so neither cost-effectiveness, nor different roles can be a real argument for such a combo in IAF, or IN. A stealth UCAV instead is very cost-effective and more capable in the strike role and would complement FGFA much more than AMCA.
If there would be numbers of older fighters that must be replaced, I could understand it, but not even that is the case!
There are 51 Mirage 2000, 69 Mig 29, 32 Mig 27 and at most 100 Jags, that will be upgraded to be in service till 2025, that's 252 fighters. All reports about Pak Fa and FGFA for IAF claims, the procurement of 250 fighters and not to forget that the Mig 27 and Jags are pure A2G fighters, so any Pak Fa / FGFA will improve IAF capabilities in both roles anyway. Get 150 stealth UVACs besides them and IAF would have an exellent 5. gen high level, with 4.5 gen LCA, MMRCA and MKIs at the mid and low levels.
The next fighter to be replaced then would be the early MKIs by 2035 possibly, but then we might see 6. gen fighters, or even unmanned fighters, who knows, but till then AMCA dosn't make real sense.

 

[Break the Silence]

IMO, Its useless to think about future JVs and other experiments, Untill we have a confirm News on NGFA/MCA..It has been 7 months for any news regarding NGFA...Its sad..that , On one side , we are getting regular updates on China's fifth gen .Plane ,even latest is of 6th gen ac by Usa, While on other side...We are still being stuck to LCA.
Regards,

 

[Chanakyaa]

If u want serious options.. Get Russians and Japanese on Board.

Indian Composites, Avionics and Money
Add Mig project 1.44 to it

The Recepie is complete.

PAk FA = High End Version
AMCA for Mass Induction , may be a cheaper version.

MIg have all the expertise we r looking for.

 

[Markus]

IAF chief has himself stated that MCA will only "complement" the MMRCA.

As such, it may not be in the same league as other stealth planes that we are talking about. PAK FA/FGFA will be partial technology feeders into the MCA. Russian approval may be required if other nations are made partners into MCA program.

 

[flanker143]

IAF chief has himself stated that MCA will only "complement" the MMRCA.

that doesn't mean that amca wud be any less capable or less stealthy........ by the comment he just mean't to say that amca will serve the IAF alongside the chosen mmrca jet.....thats it nothing more nothing less....

 

[sudhir007]

About bolded part, Dude! that's the whole reason why this Lavi guy is so pissed. Netherlands, Norway, Israel and Australia are not satisfied with the JSF. Its all over the news. Austalia has complained 3 times about the doubts it has on JSF while Norway made a recent disclosure along with Netherlands.

Agree with you 3 days before i read this news

F-35 - take it or leave it - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News
Who would have believed it? Some years ago Israel was developing the world's most advanced fighter aircraft, the Lavi, while the Western world's aircraft manufacturers were beating their way to our door, eager to participate in the Lavi project, or trying to sell their competing plane to the Israel Air Force. And now Israel goes hat in hand pleading for a chance to be allowed to acquire the F-35 aircraft, at a price tag of $150 million each. But it's not only the astronomical price. Israel is told that the F-35 must be taken as is - no changes or modifications to suit Israel's specific needs, and absolutely no Israeli systems included. Take it or leave it.

Just imagine Israel's position today had the Lavi project not been canceled. The IAF would be operating the world's most advanced fighter, upgraded over the years to incorporate operational experience and newer technology. Much of Israel's industry would have moved a great step ahead, Israel Aerospace Industries would have become a leading developer of fighter aircraft, and most importantly, a number of options would be open to the IAF in choosing its next fighter.
What were the outlandish claims trumpeted by the opponents of the Lavi? The project, they said, was too big for Israel. These narrow-minded skeptics had not believed that we could convince the U.S. Congress to fund most of the project, and certainly were incapable of foreseeing Israel's economic growth in the years to come. Now they are staring at a $3 billion price tag for 20 F-35s. They said Israel should not be developing military platforms but only accessory systems to be mounted on the platforms. Now Israel will not be allowed to mount Israeli systems on the F-35.

And where would we be today if we had believed that nonsense about not developing platforms? Out of the satellite-launching and unmanned-aerial-vehicle business. Where are they today, the people who at the time foolishly led the crusade against the Lavi? Surprisingly, 23 years later, some are still involved in decision-making on national security. They were against the development of the Lavi, against the development of an Israeli reconnaissance satellite, and against the development of the Arrow ballistic missile interceptor. But unfazed, they continue on.

Do they admit they were mistaken? Admitting past mistakes is a rare human quality, but there are exceptions. Dan Halutz, a fighter pilot ace and former IAF commander and chief of staff, at the time like many senior IAF officers a supporter of the cancellation of the Lavi project, recognizes in his recent book that it was a mistake to cancel the project.

So what's the use of crying over spilled milk? Are there alternatives to swallowing our pride and shelling out $3 billion for 20 F-35s? (The original plan had been to acquire 75 aircraft, which would have brought the price above $11 billion, but that was too expensive. ) Before we make that commitment, a little intellectual effort should be invested in looking at other options.

Does Israel still have the technological capability to design a first-rate fighter aircraft? That needs to be examined in some depth. No doubt some of the capability that existed at the time of the Lavi project has been lost over the years, but as has been proved time and again, Israel has a world-class technological capability. Its success in unmanned aerial vehicles is only one of a number of examples.

If it turns out that the capability to design the IAF's next fighter aircraft does exist in Israel, where could we go from there? Not to the U.S. Congress in search of funding, because we would have to remind them that 27 years ago they were fools to invest $1 billion in the development of the Lavi that Israel decided it did not want. We would have to look for partners who are prepared to invest resources in such a project, who have the necessary technological capability, and who are not involved in the F-35 project.

Are there such candidates? In theory, yes. France, with a great aeronautical industry, chose not to participate in the F-35 project. India, with a considerable aeronautical capability and a meteorically growing economy, might be another candidate. And there is Russia. Perhaps none of them would be interested, and perhaps all of them would be. It's worth a try.

 

[canadakz]

US might block the deal since technologies from the F-35 (Israel and Singapore are partners in the JSF programme) might be covertly transferred to India and then Russia. Furthermore, i don't think small countries like Israel and Singapore can support two 4 gen fighter programme simultaneously. Koreans have partnered with Indonesia for the KFX programme, maybe mca and KFX can be combined which will benefit both parts.

 

[Tshering22]

Agree with you 3 days before i read this news

So basically this means Israel will reduce the number of F-35s from 75-100 to 30-40 and consider another alternative. You should know the obvious logical reasons why Israeli firms fit their own gear into their fighters rather than American ones---they don't trust the manufacturers leaking out details to oil rich rivals of Israel. I mean if for example Israel and UAE have same F16 latest all-American, Syria can simply make a diplomatic overture and get to know the fighter's limitations and capabilities from UAE which the latter cannot refuse do to identity similarities and common culture. While if Israel puts its own stuff in their F-16s, no one but they know what they've got. Now that's a smart strategy.

France is not developing a manned stealth fighter after Rafale yet. Russia may not have developed enough trust level to switch over and PAKFA is already in way too advanced stage for Israelis to join Russians and us. AMCA seems the only viable project where they can gain more.

World was saying stuff when Dhruv was being developed and in turn it defeated tenders from already mature helicopters makers into the hands of South Americans years later. Maybe we should stop under-estimating ourselves way too much and believe in our capabilities. Modesty is fine but folks here under-estimate ourself wayy too much.

AMCA might even turn out better than JSF in terms of cost management and stealth. We'd be possibly getting a lot of know how from the PAKFA/FGFA which might be incorporated into this as well. I mean just because a bunch of Western countries are making it doesn't mean that its the best.

Let's face it; a significant % of their knowledge pool comprises of Indian origin people (not in JSF program but in other stuff). So I say why not get Israelis on board? They were able to stun the Americans when they built the Lavi as a threat to F-16 in the 80s. If we get them on-board, botth of us could benefit. I am sure that AMCA would be costing lesser than anything JSF team can cut on.

We're not going to be facing the raptors with AMCA nor are Israelis going to face any stealth fighters among their enemies. Therefore, if we jointly make it the best in its capability, we both still retain air superiority.

IMO, Its useless to think about future JVs and other experiments, Untill we have a confirm News on NGFA/MCA..It has been 7 months for any news regarding NGFA...Its sad..that , On one side , we are getting regular updates on China's fifth gen .Plane ,even latest is of 6th gen ac by Usa, While on other side...We are still being stuck to LCA.
Regards,

Don't sound so hopeless buddy. AMCA is a project that's going on and not a 'future concept'. There've been wind tunnel models cleared and shown in the exhibition. Maybe the Govt wants to emulate Chinese for once by keeping the project under tight secrecy and leaking only what is needed. Tejas was a conventional fighter so secrecy was not so important. AMCA on the other hand is a stealth fighter with sensitive tech involved.

Getting Israelis onboard here means one visit by IDAF chief or their defense minister and signing of an MoU and a couple of months here and there extra with Israeli scientists coming to India. Its not so impossible.

If u want serious options.. Get Russians and Japanese on Board.

Man, the point of AMCA was to avoid taking Russian help and do this stuff independent of them for once. Japanese won't do something that USA doesn't want them to do. Besides, we aren't that close in terms of military when we compare Japan to Israel and Singapore. We hold war games and counter terror drills on more regular basis with the latter 2 than Japan. And the last thing we'd want is taking American orders through Japanese mouths.

Israel has shown that it can make a cutting edge fighter in the 80s parallel to the USA's F-16. We've just finished with one now and are starting another. Besides, Israelis are not as submissive to USA as Japan is. They've dealt with countries that US doesn't want them to numerous times on its face.

So here they have a choice: lesser JSF to save initial cost at this gradual recovery time and when world economy gets stronger in the coming 10 years, obtain a similar but cheaper fighter in more numbers with their own changes that they want to keep.

 

[jha]

Why Israel Should be Part of AMCA Project ​

ADA along with HAL have embarked into developing a 5th generation aircraft all alone , AMCA project has per IAF ASR (Air staff requirement) has to be Fully stealth aircraft and also should be a multirole aircraft able to play role of both Air superiority fighter and also be able to carry precision air strikes ,very similar role which Tejas MK2 might have to carry out when inducted into Air force .

Constant delays in Tejas program have made many defence experts in India, question the whole AMCA project which India wants to carry out on its own with out any International defence partner , Many including Defence Expert Rakesh Sharma have suggested an international defence partners help to carry out this project , and why Israel fits the bill for the AMCA project .

Israel have technical knowing and might bring its expertise in Avionics and its subsystems to develop a highly capable aircraft , and in return India will get an international partner for Export and they will also play a crucial role in getting export orders for AMCA in international market , Israel are currently disappointed regarding F-35, since they will not be able to do any local upgrades to F-35 they indent to purchase and rising cost of this aircraft already has forced Israel to cut back on number which they earlier indented to induct .

while induction numbers of F-35 might be small for Israeli air force , Israel will also face another problem since it will have to carry out fleet replacement of older F-16 and F-15 in service with them , Israel is second largest operator of F-16 in the region and soon older Blocks will require replacement and Israel might struggle to replace them in one to one basis with F-35 ,and to avoid shriking of aircraft they too will require adding new variant of fighter aircraft or induct more similar aircrafts already in their force .

A Joint Venture between two will be a win win situation for both countries and their respected air force , it will also benefit whole AMCA project since it will cut down time for development of many systems and subsystems which India needs to develop for a 5th generation aircraft , and whole aircraft project will take shorter time to turn into reality , this will also keep Bossy IAF happy and steady export customer for ADA and HAL will make the whole project feasible and it might also lead to further orders in international market .

 

[graphican]

Involve Pakistan and china in the MCA project..

Why doesn't India handover its project to these two countries and buy back when they get it ready? Yar Had ho gai.

 

[Tshering22]

Why Israel Should be Part of AMCA Project ​

ADA along with HAL have embarked into developing a 5th generation aircraft all alone , AMCA project has per IAF ASR (Air staff requirement) has to be Fully stealth aircraft and also should be a multirole aircraft able to play role of both Air superiority fighter and also be able to carry precision air strikes ,very similar role which Tejas MK2 might have to carry out when inducted into Air force .

Constant delays in Tejas program have made many defence experts in India, question the whole AMCA project which India wants to carry out on its own with out any International defence partner , Many including Defence Expert Rakesh Sharma have suggested an international defence partners help to carry out this project , and why Israel fits the bill for the AMCA project .

Israel have technical knowing and might bring its expertise in Avionics and its subsystems to develop a highly capable aircraft , and in return India will get an international partner for Export and they will also play a crucial role in getting export orders for AMCA in international market , Israel are currently disappointed regarding F-35, since they will not be able to do any local upgrades to F-35 they indent to purchase and rising cost of this aircraft already has forced Israel to cut back on number which they earlier indented to induct .

while induction numbers of F-35 might be small for Israeli air force , Israel will also face another problem since it will have to carry out fleet replacement of older F-16 and F-15 in service with them , Israel is second largest operator of F-16 in the region and soon older Blocks will require replacement and Israel might struggle to replace them in one to one basis with F-35 ,and to avoid shriking of aircraft they too will require adding new variant of fighter aircraft or induct more similar aircrafts already in their force .

A Joint Venture between two will be a win win situation for both countries and their respected air force , it will also benefit whole AMCA project since it will cut down time for development of many systems and subsystems which India needs to develop for a 5th generation aircraft , and whole aircraft project will take shorter time to turn into reality , this will also keep Bossy IAF happy and steady export customer for ADA and HAL will make the whole project feasible and it might also lead to further orders in international market .

Dang! guess I am not the only one who thinks this way .