What's new

The Stealth In India's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wing sides can be modified later to allow stealthiness, however until you are sure what engine you will use in AMCA, I dont think you can bring the stealthy nozzle shaping, The air inlets look fine and with serpentine shapes(as claimed) will remain stealthy, however engine will remain an issue and the shaping...

Well Russian with S-117 engine currently have the same design, but reports are there for a square shape design in future, may be after FGFA comes into picture, ADA gaining advantage will go to that kind of shaping,

But again it depends if the architecture was initially designed or not.

thats right the nose is not stealthy at all...and the engine will decide the shape....the air inlets is the only positive point..its long and the design will help in covering the engine face...but that will compromise the space....I am not too sure if ADA will go for FGFA shaping..but surely will gain in this project for other improvements....
 
Looks like Iam late to this topic guys....Looks like people are threatened here with AMCA, after PAKFA was released some American analyst said south Asian countries apart from India need to stop operation an air force, and I wonder after MCA and Aura come into picture....

Mate, Look at the bolded part....you will know what I and the kooky lunatic said:)
 
Few Details ....

DSC01778-708150.JPG


DSC01779-708679.JPG
 
thats right the nose is not stealthy at all...and the engine will decide the shape....the air inlets is the only positive point..its long and the design will help in covering the engine face...but that will compromise the space....I am not too sure if ADA will go for FGFA shaping..but surely will gain in this project for other improvements....
I am not too sure if ADA will go for FGFA shaping..but surely will gain in this project for other improvements....

You can be sure that AMCA will heavily depend on the TOT for FGFA. current scenario is in drawing board, even if we master the avionics bit by that time we still will need tech knowhow on shaping, advanced material science for better composites and powerful computers to calculate shaped curves for a fifth gen fighter....

Thus I think it has to be influenced by FGFA and other ventures we are doing with external vendors.
 
See the discussion is based on the requirement put forward by IAF. They said they want an all aspect stealth, you know what that means right?...

Now if ADA designs the AMCA with only forntal stealth then, IAF will have more reasons to push AMCA away like they did with LCA. So there has to be no room for any compromise and trade offs..

I don't know if the rear stealth aspect is THAT important. Even F 35 doesn't seem to have concentrated too much on it. We rn't going to war with the US right where every little inch will count. Should be a good trade off I guess.

first of all u need to understand why US went for F-35. The reason is they have F-22 raptor which has an all aspect stealth. They needed this plane to become the work horse of USAF and there you dont need a fully stealthy plane.

The role of AMCA will be different in IAF.
 
I concur--only way the AMCA can be used is used for SEAD... make it something like GROWLER --for this if we need to take help from israel then also no problem.

A stealth growler will be a real asset to any AF..

A Growler version would mean with active jammers, but these are normally carried on external pods and even if they can be integrated, they could be integrated in FGFA too.

Do you feel that way because of the problems faced by LCA? The LCA had many delays because it was the first time anything like this was attempted in India. But HAL and DRDO has gained valuable experience from the LCA project and the infrastructure for the AMCA project is already in existance. We won't have to start from scratch for the AMCA as many of the components it needs is already developed for the LCA or is in development. Now the Indian defence industry is not what it was when the LCA program started. So, I think there is a fair chance for meeting the deadline. Delays if any will be minimal.

But all they did was developing a 4th gen fighter and its techs, so developing a stealth fighter with SC engine, TVC and other 5. gen techs would be also totally new for them.
Als till now they don't have any valuable experience, because they only build some prototypes yet and the main developments on engine and radar fields failed more, or less. They will gain experience only by inducting LCA MK1 and 2, as well as through there operational life.
If they go for AMCA and with the same aim of developing everything alone, we will see the same delays that we see in LCA development.
 
You can be sure that AMCA will heavily depend on the TOT for FGFA. current scenario is in drawing board, even if we master the avionics bit by that time we still will need tech knowhow on shaping, advanced material science for better composites and powerful computers to calculate shaped curves for a fifth gen fighter....

Thus I think it has to be influenced by FGFA and other ventures we are doing with external vendors.

yes, agreed, but I was talking about the shape..which i dont think will be influenced by the FGFA ...apart from that , yes India will definitely gain fron the other ventures that its doing with external vendors...

a very good suggestion which I got from a friend was that india can buy the old project of Mig's like 1.42/1.44 to speed up the work and gain experience...but still again..a doubt remains about how stealthy the 1.42 project was..
 
See the discussion is based on the requirement put forward by IAF. They said they want an all aspect stealth, you know what that means right?...

Now if ADA designs the AMCA with only forntal stealth then, IAF will have more reasons to push AMCA away like they did with LCA. So there has to be no room for any compromise and trade offs..



first of all u need to understand why US went for F-35. The reason is they have F-22 raptor which has an all aspect stealth. They needed this plane to become the work horse of USAF and there you dont need a fully stealthy plane.

The role of AMCA will be different in IAF.
But by that comparison won't the Pak Fa be the strategic stealth weapon (= F22) making all aspect stealth all important for the IAF and the AMCA the equivalent of the F 35. My more serious point would be that when Pak Fa flew and ppl were debating the rear aspect stealth at least some of the analysts seemed to be commenting that it's ok to have even nozzles, it's a fair trade off. That frontal stealth significantly outweighs rear.
 
yes, agreed, but I was talking about the shape..which i dont think will be influenced by the FGFA ...apart from that , yes India will definitely gain fron the other ventures that its doing with external vendors...

a very good suggestion which I got from a friend was that india can buy the old project of Mig's like 1.42/1.44 to speed up the work and gain experience...but still again..a doubt remains about how stealthy the 1.42 project was..
How much of the shape can be offset by the Ram coatings. I know that shape is all important for deflecting radar but when you go through stealth material development claims are made that 99% of radar etc. are absorbed by the coatings. If the role of the coatings is that high, then the influence that shapes may have on makng it 'stealithier' may be very less (this is not to say that you can take a spit fire, coat it with RAM and expect it to be stealthy)
 
people generally over look the Russian trade off of stealth and its competition with F-22. The Russian philosophy of BVR and the US philosophy of BVR. The Russian Air defense and the American air defense...
Which is a multipage topic itself.

Just a simple logic, Its imposible to think that Russians cant design an all aspect stealth aircraft. the trade off they have done can be covered by other aspect of combat and its very well known to them..

F-22 is not equal to PAKFA and PAKFA is not equal to F-22. By a logical analysis you will find that the purpose of these aircraft are little different...

AMCA is equivallent to F-35, that future will tell....what we always think that we are here to maintain parity by comparing fighter against fighter and SAM against SAM, but we forget that sometimes technology is not how it looks...

You wont be wrong in imagining that AMCA might superceed F-35 in future considering the advancement of science.

My more serious point would be that when Pak Fa flew and ppl were debating the rear aspect stealth at least some of the analysts seemed to be commenting that it's ok to have even nozzles, it's a fair trade off. That frontal stealth significantly outweighs rear.

so the bottom line is You can always say that it was fair trade off by Russia. wheather its a fair trade off for India???, thats a debatable topic....
 
people generally over look the Russian trade off of stealth and its competition with F-22. The Russian philosophy of BVR and the US philosophy of BVR. The Russian Air defense and the American air defense...
Which is a multipage topic itself.

Just a simple logic, Its imposible to think that Russians cant design an all aspect stealth aircraft. the trade off they have done can be covered by other aspect of combat and its very well known to them..

F-22 is not equal to PAKFA and PAKFA is not equal to F-22. By a logical analysis you will find that the purpose of these aircraft are little different...

AMCA is equivallent to F-35, that future will tell....what we always think that we are here to maintain parity by comparing fighter against fighter and SAM against SAM, but we forget that sometimes technology is not how it looks...

You wont be wrong in imagining that AMCA might superceed F-35 in future considering the advancement of science.



so the bottom line is You can always say that it was fair trade off by Russia. wheather its a fair trade off for India???, thats a debatable topic....
I'm imagining where the AMCA will fit in...
Imagine we go to war today and imagine we had 250 Pak Fa, 250 AMCA and 200 LCA Mk 2- how are we likely to deploy them? My guess is:

a) To enagage enemy aircraft deep inside the enemy territory and carry out deep penetration and strike we'll use Pak Fa. It has range and firepower to support it

b) If aircraft are detected taking off from,say Karachi and headed to India, u'll send AMCA, so will you if you want to carry out ground strikes in areas not too far from India- smaller range & payload. It's theatre will be India, some pak and bordering regions

c) If the enemy reaches bombay, chandigarh etc. your LCA MK-2?

Of the three Pak Fa will need most of it's strategic stealth strength coz it's theatre MIGHT be almost entirely INSIDE hostile territory. AMCA- Hmm...partly in India. And frontal stealth might be enuf for head on intercept missions until they let go of their BVR missiles.
Just a thought.
 
How much of the shape can be offset by the Ram coatings. I know that shape is all important for deflecting radar but when you go through stealth material development claims are made that 99% of radar etc. are absorbed by the coatings. If the role of the coatings is that high, then the influence that shapes may have on makng it 'stealithier' may be very less (this is not to say that you can take a spit fire, coat it with RAM and expect it to be stealthy)
See I will give a simple example for you to identify the difference btn RAM coating and Shaped curves.

Like Someone asks me to find an airplane in a football field, which is stuck to the tip of a iron pole and gives me a flash light to search it...So what I do it I reflect my flash light to scan the area.

If the plane id white and shiny it will reflect back the light to my eyes where I can see the plane and if the plane is Black then it may not reflect that much light and its difficult for me to see it.

Thats the way Shaped curve and RAM coating work, either absorb all the light and dont reflect at all.

Or deflect the incoming waves to other direction than sending it to the emitting source.

The problem with RAM coating is that it cant absorb all the light and make it invisible and will still emit some light back to the radar, it will still deflect, But the advantage of Shaped curve is that it will deflect the beams to different directions for the RADAR to get nothing...

Both have draw backs, but when combined it makes quite a punch and its difficult for the RADAR to pick it up...
 
By 2025-30 india will also start inducting MCA so u may count 30 fifth gen fighters perr year there on....

In total india will field 450+ fifth gen fighters by 2040.

2040 humm... Yaar I am 29 now and in the age 69, I am not going to care how many planes did any Air force had.
 
I'm imagining where the AMCA will fit in...
Imagine we go to war today and imagine we had 250 Pak Fa, 250 AMCA and 200 LCA Mk 2- how are we likely to deploy them? My guess is:

a) To enagage enemy aircraft deep inside the enemy territory and carry out deep penetration and strike we'll use Pak Fa. It has range and firepower to support it

b) If aircraft are detected taking off from,say Karachi and headed to India, u'll send AMCA, so will you if you want to carry out ground strikes in areas not too far from India- smaller range & payload. It's theatre will be India, some pak and bordering regions

c) If the enemy reaches bombay, chandigarh etc. your LCA MK-2?

Of the three Pak Fa will need most of it's strategic stealth strength coz it's theatre MIGHT be almost entirely INSIDE hostile territory. AMCA- Hmm...partly in India. And frontal stealth might be enuf for head on intercept missions until they let go of their BVR missiles.
Just a thought.
See it all depends on when are you getting the AMCA...I dont want to jump into give AMCA any role soon.

Its ggoing to come by 2025 minimum considering the govt hasnt approved the project.
AMCA will perform the same role that MRCA will do in near future...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom