Navy keen on AMCA Project

[GareebNawaz]

Recently Israel raised their objection due to High Cost of F-35. definately technology better but consider One as IAC will ready AMCA will ready with new latest tech, Second we have no faith on USA as anytime they put ban on supply compare to russia and third our neibours have no such high tech so immediate need such as counter or showing extraordinary power.

Based on what? If we have no fiath in USA then they wouldnt be in mmrca in the first place. And China has a lot of high tech cruise missile, fighters, and other weapons. And we should be the best in Asia. There is no reason not to. So because we are too lazy doesnt mean we shouldnt do anything. And i am sure Navy will buy at least a sqd. of f-35 b or c (b in my opinion is better).

 

[angeldemon_007]

By logic you would focus on that RFI and figure out if a naval Pak Fa / FGFA version would fit to IAC 2s doctrine, because that fighter could be available earlier. Russian navy already stated, that they want such a version on their future carriers, which means a co-design is possible, which reduces costs again.

Actually our navy have ruled out N-PakFa because of the large size of the fighter jet compared to the smaller aircraft carrier which we have and this is the reason why IN is betting on N-AMCA because they don't want 30 ton fighter jets for their AC. Also, i think N-LCA is just meant for for getting experience so that ADA can get ready to develop a 5th gen N-fighter jet because they will have to make suitable changes so as to make a fighter jet suitable for operations on an AC.

 

[sancho]

Actually our navy have ruled out N-PakFa because of the large size of the fighter jet compared to the smaller aircraft carrier which we have and this is the reason why IN is betting on N-AMCA because they don't want 30 ton fighter jets for their AC. Also, i think N-LCA is just meant for for getting experience so that ADA can get ready to develop a 5th gen N-fighter jet because they will have to make suitable changes so as to make a fighter jet suitable for operations on an AC.

Any source for that? I never saw an official denial for N-Pak Fa, but the other way around, IN was interested in Flanker sized fighters, but they couldn't be used on Gorshkov and IAC1. The new fighters are meant for the way bigger IAC2 and appart from medium sized fighters that are mentioned in the RFI, as long as the carrier design is not fixed, it can be designed around the size of a N-Pak Fa FGFA. Why is there a need to develop N-AMCA alone and spend all the money alone, if we could share the costs with Russia that has a similar requirement?
That also tells us how important experience with N-LCA really is, close to worthless! We already couldn't do it alone and needed foreign consultancy, N-LCA aimed meant for STOBAR carrier, while IAC2 should be CATOBAR and although the basic changes for the naval fighter will be similar, we still won't have any experience in making the changes for catapult starts. The money we pay for N-LCA is just wasted and the development causes additional delays in LCA development, same will be the case with N-AMCA.