AMCA News and Discussions

[Philip]

To get positive on the AMCA as a smaller affordable desi (!) stealth fighter,let's chalk up successes and areas of grey.Composites,the emergence of Astra,cockpit systems,FBW-not FBL,plus other components being built in India for the LCA,wings,spars,etc.,mean that building the body of the aircraft will not be a problem for current tech reqs.However,conformal radar,etc. has yet to mature and this is supposed to be part of the FGFA programme.As far as the engine is concerned an absolute zero!

This aspect to me is the most insurmountable and the one where the max. effort must be made right now if the programme is to succceed.We cannot have a third fiasco after the HF-24 and LCA.So a choice should be made between east and west.I think that we must be honest and not fool ourselves that Kaveri-X will do the business! Perhaps taking a leaf out of the Russian experience,have two engines in prototypes and select the best.Since the FGFA programme is on the anvil,a parallel study should be made so that the same issues are not repeated later on.I somehow feel that we are spreading our resources and legs too wide.There's the unfinished LCA/NLCA to deal with,IJT which the IAF want dumped,FGFA and Super Sukhoi on right now,apart from the upgrades to MIG-29s,M-2000s, and Jaguars.

AESA ,conformal radars and IRST sensors plus new commns. suites have to be developed.The touted JSF style helmet that needs no HUD,has yet to be perfected on the JSF.So we can see the challenge ahead.My strongest worry is the amount of weaponry that a medium sized stealth fighter can carry internally.As anti-stealth dev. improves,the value of stealth will reduce and air combat will retain its importance,so any engine fitted on will have to be a 3-D TVC.Ultimately it is not going to be any individual aircraft that will swing the battle,but the holistic assets of the IAF which will include AWACS,HALE UAVs,aerostats,etc.,all linked through NCW to dominate and control the skies.

Which will succeed first? The AMCA or our classified UCAV project?

[Sancho]

Which will succeed first? The AMCA or our classified UCAV project?

In both cases, the one that gets credible foreign assistance and that is backed by the forces by a real requirement! If ADA and DRDO again want to do these projects as they done LCA, we will only run into the next mistakes. If the forces don't see a real need for it, they simply stick with other alternatives.
So if AMCA turns out to be a twin engined fighter with SC, AESA radar, TVC, similar to FGFA but technically inferior in every aspect, why should IAF bother to invest so much money in the project (just because it's fully indigenous), when they simply can increase the FGFA order and get even more operational advantages?
That's the same argumentation they had against HTT40 and for the PC-7!

IF IAF would want another type of stealth fighter and would make more sense to develop it downwards from FGFA, instead upwards from LCA. Going for commonality with FGFA, for example by co-developing the AL 41 and use the same engine in a single engine AMCA design, would at leas offer more commonality and would make both fighters more different again. But DRDO failed with the Kaveri development and want to make it up by using it in AMCA instead, no matter if IAF want another type of engine or not!

Similarly, developing AURA alone at this point with, Kaveri having problem, DRDO not even having Rustom H readly and India struggeling big times with aircraft design (constant drag and weight issues), will just run into the next mistake. The best way currently is a co-development with the Israelis, that want stealth UCAVs as well, but might not get the money, nor the approval from the US. India then would be a logical co-development partner and we could focus on integrating the Kaveri K9, while the Isrealis bring in their expertise in design and avionics. One could even combine it to an UCAV and HALE drone development (Gobal Hawk like), both based on the same engine and systems, which IAF and IN would love to back, since they have the need for such aircrafts, while at least IAF don't need another fighter.

[Karan M]

SagarG/Boreas - the AMCA final configuration is due 2018, with a first flight circa 2020, so long ways yet before we see the actual "look" of the aircraft!

Re: Sancho - FGFA is a Russian plane. Very unlikely to get the design specs we want to reconfigure into any AMCA, and nor do the Israelis have the across the board experience we need for UCAVs etc. We will have consultants for specific subsystems etc. As regards "India struggling with drag and weight", don't go overboard ... LCA operates in a strict form factor, MiG-21 sized, that means dense packaging and a shorter length making fuselage-drag modelling a challenge, but which has been identified, solutions found and is being addressed. Such restrictions don't apply to newer programs.

Re: engine, whats the point of a Kaveri MK2 if its not on the AMCA? At >100Kn each (latest info from Aero India) it should meet the needs provided they can get a reliable partner and have it ready in time

BTW - IAF Air Chief just confirmed at AI, that he supports a dedicated project management team from the IAF for every large project going forward. They've clearly woken up, and hopefully the LCA experience won't arise (disinterested customer). Having said that, the function is yet to be formalized and remains ad hoc at the discretion of AHQ.

[SaiK]

nice nice.. i like to hear that.

next would be some focused group for kaveri 100 - 120 kN. (if all those SCBs pics should shoot jingo blood pressure up.

[shiv]

As far as the engine is concerned an absolute zero!

No Philip. A per what I hear from your namesake AM Rajkumar, the Kaveri is working fine. There is a working engine there. The basic tech is sorted out. It needs some refinement and improvement. If I search I find many examples of engines developed in the 60s that now serve as the basis for modern fighter and civilian engines.

The important thing is not to give up on the Kaveri but to start another engine program in parallel even as Kaveri is taken forward. Done properly there is every possibility of having a reliable family of engines based on Kaveri that could appear by 2020-2025.

[SagarAg]

SagarG/Boreas - the AMCA final configuration is due 2018, with a first flight circa 2020, so long ways yet before we see the actual "look" of the aircraft!

Re: Sancho - FGFA is a Russian plane. Very unlikely to get the design specs we want to reconfigure into any AMCA, and nor do the Israelis have the across the board experience we need for UCAVs etc. We will have consultants for specific subsystems etc. As regards "India struggling with drag and weight", don't go overboard ... LCA operates in a strict form factor, MiG-21 sized, that means dense packaging and a shorter length making fuselage-drag modelling a challenge, but which has been identified, solutions found and is being addressed. Such restrictions don't apply to newer programs.

Re: engine, whats the point of a Kaveri MK2 if its not on the AMCA? At >100Kn each (latest info from Aero India) it should meet the needs provided they can get a reliable partner and have it ready in time

BTW - IAF Air Chief just confirmed at AI, that he supports a dedicated project management team from the IAF for every large project going forward. They've clearly woken up, and hopefully the LCA experience won't arise (disinterested customer). Having said that, the function is yet to be formalized and remains ad hoc at the discretion of AHQ.

I seriously hope this step is taken by IAF ASAP. Without much further ado this is the need of the hour. I want to see them fully supporting and taking responsibility of AMCA development with head heart and soul in upcoming years rather than going down the way they went with LCA program.

[Philip]

Shiv,if Kaveri is functioning well in its current avatar,great news,I was under the impression that further work is still needed,but its application as far as the AMCA goes will be 0.You're spot on,a new engine programme is req.,with the req. performance that the AMCA needs.For validating the airframe/aerodynamics at least,a firang engine is req. for the prototypes.If there are willing partners to come aboard,why reinvent the wheel? The air chief's remarks about embedded IAF teams for all large projects is a breadth of fresh air.If done,then no one can accuse the end-user of apathy and indifference,sabotaging "nationally prestigious projects" and being "import" fans.

[prabhug]

Atleast the wiki says me kaveri is atleast is as good as M88-2 (which is on rafale)

[vina]

No Philip. A per what I hear from your namesake AM Rajkumar, the Kaveri is working fine. There is a working engine there. The basic tech is sorted out. It needs some refinement and improvement. If I search I find many examples of engines developed in the 60s that now serve as the basis for modern fighter and civilian engines.

Well, it is working, but still not "fine" . The design wet and dry thrust is not achieved yet. Per what folks posted here, there was screech in the afterburner (not a very difficult to fix problem, even the F-35 engine had screech which got fixed) and vibration and other issues that will get fixed and the engine flown.

Your post about Midhani making the single crystal materials is incredible news . What it means is that we are over the hump and it is the easy downhill from here. The path got easier. The toughest part is behind us now.

To put it in perspective, we have jumped from Zero to 1990 (the progress after that has not been earth shattering and largely marginal as far as engines go , okay numerical techniques got better etc) in terms of tech (the Russians didn't have an ETOPS rated jet engine until very recently ,2000 or so, the West had it from 1980s)

The important thing is not to give up on the Kaveri but to start another engine program in parallel even as Kaveri is taken forward. Done properly there is every possibility of having a reliable family of engines based on Kaveri that could appear by 2020-2025.

Folks here posted (was it KaranM?) posted on Kaver MK2 at 100+ KN. Wonder what you heard about it. I think with the current over sized core, a scaled up low pressure spool will see us get there , once the core is fixed properly and the high temp materials from DMRL come through.

[shiv]

Shiv,if Kaveri is functioning well in its current avatar,great news,I was under the impression that further work is still needed,but its application as far as the AMCA goes will be 0.You're spot on,a new engine programme is req.,with the req. performance that the AMCA needs.For validating the airframe/aerodynamics at least,a firang engine is req. for the prototypes.If there are willing partners to come aboard,why reinvent the wheel? The air chief's remarks about embedded IAF teams for all large projects is a breadth of fresh air.If done,then no one can accuse the end-user of apathy and indifference,sabotaging "nationally prestigious projects" and being "import" fans.

Philip Kaveri has actually flown for 65 hours and has shown that it can function reliably on an aircraft. I have this from 2 different sources outside of BRF. Some "issues" have been identified and will be rectified after which it will go for another round of tests. Once we have one working engine - other engines can be built around that - given that the materials are working and changes can be made to the dimensions and stages etc.

Lots of examples of old engines being developed and used are available

For eg
http://www.geaviation.com/engines/military/f101/

The F101 engine was originally developed for the Advanced Manned Strategic Aircraft program, which became the B-1A strategic bomber, and powered four development aircraft from 1970 to 1981 Utilizing the same core design as the F101, the F110 and F118 engine derivatives were created by adding new low pressure systems to tailor engine performance to the desired aircraft application
<snip>
The F101 core (high-pressure compressor, turbine and combustor) became the basis of the CFM56 series.

A 1970 engine core is part of today's CFM 56, forty years later - a reliable engine that flies 10,000 hours without maintenance

The same F101 core was again used and now powers the F-16

Utilizing the same core design as the F101, the F110 engine was created by adding different fan and afterburner packages to tailor engine performance to the desired aircraft application.
<snip>
The F110 engine has been the engine of choice for the F-16 since there was an engine choice for that aircraft. Conceived as an alternative to the Pratt & Whitney F100, the F110 is designed to provide significantly higher performance, greatly improved reliability, and sharply reduced operation and support costs.

The same core again powers the B2

Utilizing the same core design as the F101, the F110 and F118 derivative engines were created by developing new low pressure systems to tailor engine performance to the desired aircraft application.

A working core is a fundamental requirement and must never be thrown away.

[Austin]

Shiv an engine can only be considered as sucessful once it gets Flight Qualified and Certified to fly on an aircraft it is designed for which is Tejas.

The engine needs to fly x amount of hours on the aircraft and then once it meets all the check point it can be considered as usable engine. Post that there are other issues like Engine Life , TBO , other Maintenance stuff that get sorted our when we have enough aircraft build around those engine to get those parameter and if it meets the laid criteria but thats later.

Right now Kaveri has been bench tested on Ground and Tested on IL-76 prototypes , it still has to be mated with Tejas and needs to get Flight Qualified after flying some 1000 odd hours on the aircraft.

[member_22605]

Let me see if i can do a karthik here(i'll give it a try)
On friday i visited the ADA stall. There was a youngish guy standing there by the model,I was clicking pictures and was discussing with my mates regarding the S duct and blocker and its differences etc he asked me if there was anything that i wanted to know. I was pleasantly surprised. He was the signature expert from ADE Sc 'D'. My first question was the target RCS for which he said "no numbers". I then asked him if he could tell me the umber of zeros before the decimal for which said "There are a few zeros and that's all i can say right now". I was almost jumping with joy. We then discussed about the RCS measurement tests the model went through at various places in the country. We both agreed that we definitely needed a closed full scale test chamber but he said the open field test was just as good with minor inaccuracies. He said the aerodynamic layout has more or less been frozen subject to minor changes. Then i asked him about the famous S duct, for which he said"we are not doing what the russians are doing" He also said the S duct in the AMCA would not just hide the compressor face but also have RAM coated interiors. At this point i asked him about the edge alignment and he said all that has been taken care of and he also said the vertical stab may see changes but not as dramatic as the PAK-FA stabs. Then asked him about the IR suppressors and as expected he agreed that the current plates are very heavy but very functional at the same time. He said work was on to reduce the weight and brig it to manageable limits. Then the most significant revelation in my opinion came when i asked him about the RAM. He said they have already got a few kinds of paints and have demonstrated it to the users on service aircrafts and he said the reduction was of the order of 15dB. When i pressed him further he said"no numbers, if you want something come meet me personally in my office". But the jingo in me was thoroughly satisfied with whatever i got and we exchanged cards. I'll probably meet him this week but may not be able to satisfy fellow rakshaks with the numbers. We had a discussion on the frequency bands but i don't think i can post it here. But from what i've got i believe this bird may be just as stealthy if not more than the T-50 and JSF. Regarding engines he said they are still finalizing and about the general avionics maybe we all know. Overall a very intellectually satisfying conversation.
Cheers!

[Austin]

New Design For India's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

“Let’s be clear: the HAL-Sukhoi program isn’t a joint effort,” says an IAF officer with Bengaluru-based Training Command. “The airframe will be identical to the ones the Russians currently have in flight test. Our decision to go with a single-seat configuration is principally to avoid potential time overruns that will almost certainly be part of designing such a configuration. The maximum that HAL will do is insert a few systems of our choice and play lead integrator for the ‘MKI,’ if you will. Therefore, it is imperative that India look ahead and begin developing technologies and platforms like the AMCA. We cannot forever be a buyer of aircraft that are conceptualized, designed by others, and simply assembled or license-built here.”

A senior scientist at the AMCA directorate in Bengaluru says, “We have the fourth-generation Tejas on the one hand. But evolutionary technologies we are developing for the AMCA are on the cutting edge. They hope to be comparable with the best in the world. If we need a little help along the way in the interests of pragmatism, cost and time, we will study the feasibility of cooperation. But this ideally needs to be a fully Indian program. Sensitive stealth technologies will not be shared by foreign technology companies.”

[SaiK]

why why spend billions for PAKFA rather put that money into AMCA. We can establish test facilities, augment and advance infrastructure and focus high on core technologies including Kaveri. Money worth spent.. and in the meanwhile, get Rafale.

Get back to board meeting for the pakfa requirements. what is there to MKI. how much indic or other components? question is, it does not cost what it has been quoted for this unknown plane yet.

[Kanson]

Let me see if i can do a karthik here(i'll give it a try)
On friday i visited the ADA stall. There was a youngish guy standing there by the model,I was clicking pictures and was discussing with my mates regarding the S duct and blocker and its differences etc he asked me if there was anything that i wanted to know. I was pleasantly surprised. He was the signature expert from ADE Sc 'D'. My first question was the target RCS for which he said "no numbers". I then asked him if he could tell me the umber of zeros before the decimal for which said "There are a few zeros and that's all i can say right now". I was almost jumping with joy. We then discussed about the RCS measurement tests the model went through at various places in the country. We both agreed that we definitely needed a closed full scale test chamber but he said the open field test was just as good with minor inaccuracies. He said the aerodynamic layout has more or less been frozen subject to minor changes. Then i asked him about the famous S duct, for which he said"we are not doing what the russians are doing" He also said the S duct in the AMCA would not just hide the compressor face but also have RAM coated interiors. At this point i asked him about the edge alignment and he said all that has been taken care of and he also said the vertical stab may see changes but not as dramatic as the PAK-FA stabs. Then asked him about the IR suppressors and as expected he agreed that the current plates are very heavy but very functional at the same time. He said work was on to reduce the weight and brig it to manageable limits. Then the most significant revelation in my opinion came when i asked him about the RAM. He said they have already got a few kinds of paints and have demonstrated it to the users on service aircrafts and he said the reduction was of the order of 15dB. When i pressed him further he said"no numbers, if you want something come meet me personally in my office". But the jingo in me was thoroughly satisfied with whatever i got and we exchanged cards. I'll probably meet him this week but may not be able to satisfy fellow rakshaks with the numbers. We had a discussion on the frequency bands but i don't think i can post it here. But from what i've got i believe this bird may be just as stealthy if not more than the T-50 and JSF. Regarding engines he said they are still finalizing and about the general avionics maybe we all know. Overall a very intellectually satisfying conversation.
Cheers!

Good one saab!

Regarding the tail section, as you can see, or it seems, they have adopted a conservative approach keeping in mind the engine will be Achilles's heel and they ought to, whatever matters, make this plane a highly maneuverable one as per the AF stipulation, so a F-18 type tail. As the project proceeds one may see chances of tail section getting redesigned!

[SaiK]

perhaps a raptor tail appearance would satisfy many eyes.

[Philip]

Just for the record about the IAF's "indifference" to the LCA.I've posted before how a reputed AM deputed by the IAF to head the entire LCA programme with full powers,repeatedly chosen by committee after committee,right upto PM level-this took a few years,had his appointment blocked time and time again and letter of appointment by the PMO allegedly hidden until he retired so that he could not take up the post.He even told APJAK when he was chief def/scientific advisor to the PM that it was all tall talk about the dates given for the arrival of the engine,aircraft,etc.According to him it is only in the last few years that the programme is on track,and that appears to be after the IAF was taken aboard,but years have been lost and even underpowered MK-1 has yet to be inducted.What did AKA say which I've quoted in the A-I thread? "20 years delay".

Guys,I remember the time around 30 years ago when Rajiv G was specially briefed about the LCA and gave it the green light.I was abroad on assignment then,but managed to get the IT issue featuring the same.What excitement,that we were going to make our own light fighter.It was meant to be inducted in the mid '90s.That is two decades ago and we still haven't inducted it in MK-1 form.When I calculate the time taken upto now,it is almost half my lifetime! At this track record rate of delivery,if the go-ahead for the AMCA is given today and hopefully it will arrive in 20- 25 years ,I most probably will be in my grave! If it does arrive earlier and in my lifetime,I will die a happy man!

[geeth]

^^^ Some People have mindsets that will never change..Keep defending the indefensibe.

Who asked IAF not to join? why couldn't they join the programme voluntarily? Were they thinking that the LCA was being designed for the Egyptian AF? To be frank, I am of the opinion that in the past (and also in the future), IAF alone should not have been given a free hand in defining the specs for the plane that is to be designed by DRDO. They have the operational experience, but to define the spec, you need much more knowledge than operational/maintenance experience..and this needs more than mere reading of brochures.

[SaiK]

well system spec is different from operational spec. there are systems that have changed design to operational specs. operational specs are vital for any product long term survival. even the raptors and jsfs have suffered and are quickly learning the engineering aspects of operational aspects - plays big time especially when it comes to make a force presence.

most of them may fall into constraints and quality attributes, but could also involve functional scope. so, please don't ignore the operational aspects at all, hello designers.

[geeth]

don't ignore the operational aspects at all, hello designers.

Well, Discuss with the designers before you write down things impossible to achieve, just because some other plane has it

[SaiK]

sure, and at the same time designers just don't ignore the core customer it is after all designed for.

and btw, if some other plane has it means, it is doable by humans and engineers. how did they do it? would not be publicly available, but must be done to get there. process maturity happens only by total involvement by all stakeholders and participants, even down right to small employees.

[shiv]

Right now Kaveri has been bench tested on Ground and Tested on IL-76 prototypes , it still has to be mated with Tejas and needs to get Flight Qualified after flying some 1000 odd hours on the aircraft.

Not Il 76 prototypes. An engine has flown and provided flying power on a test Il 76

It is semantics to say there is "no engine". There will be no engine until one millisecond after a Tejas (or other aircraft) flies with Tejas. To that extent there is no engine.

The point I am making is that if the core works you have a usable engine that can be developed. The Kaveri core is working and has flown.

[geeth]

^^^Yeah, F-22 is doable, B-2 is doable, a Blackjack or concorde is doable, and done already by humans..what next?

[SaiK]

depends on your operational requirements. if IAF wants B2 or F22, then they would have to write them down. operational requirements feeds into system architecture and engineering designs. you just can't ignore is what i am saying, be it LCA , MCA or F22.

[NRao]

^^^Yeah, F-22 is doable, B-2 is doable, a Blackjack or concorde is doable, and done already by humans..what next?

Buy the designs for YF-23 and be done with it.

[Austin]

Shiv , Well thats correct you might have a working core and for that matter a working engine that has been tested for 1000's hours on test bench and on IL-76 but you still need to flight qualify the engine on the platform it is designed for which is Tejas , without that you dont have a working flight qualified engine which has flown for 100 of hours on the platform

Else the engine can run on ground or on test plaftorm practically we cant use it on any aircraft that is usable to the airforce.

[Indranil]

Let me see if i can do a karthik here(i'll give it a try)
On friday i visited the ADA stall. There was a youngish guy standing there by the model,I was clicking pictures and was discussing with my mates regarding the S duct and blocker and its differences etc he asked me if there was anything that i wanted to know. I was pleasantly surprised. He was the signature expert from ADE Sc 'D'. My first question was the target RCS for which he said "no numbers". I then asked him if he could tell me the umber of zeros before the decimal for which said "There are a few zeros and that's all i can say right now". I was almost jumping with joy. We then discussed about the RCS measurement tests the model went through at various places in the country. We both agreed that we definitely needed a closed full scale test chamber but he said the open field test was just as good with minor inaccuracies. He said the aerodynamic layout has more or less been frozen subject to minor changes. Then i asked him about the famous S duct, for which he said"we are not doing what the russians are doing" He also said the S duct in the AMCA would not just hide the compressor face but also have RAM coated interiors. At this point i asked him about the edge alignment and he said all that has been taken care of and he also said the vertical stab may see changes but not as dramatic as the PAK-FA stabs. Then asked him about the IR suppressors and as expected he agreed that the current plates are very heavy but very functional at the same time. He said work was on to reduce the weight and brig it to manageable limits. Then the most significant revelation in my opinion came when i asked him about the RAM. He said they have already got a few kinds of paints and have demonstrated it to the users on service aircrafts and he said the reduction was of the order of 15dB. When i pressed him further he said"no numbers, if you want something come meet me personally in my office". But the jingo in me was thoroughly satisfied with whatever i got and we exchanged cards. I'll probably meet him this week but may not be able to satisfy fellow rakshaks with the numbers. We had a discussion on the frequency bands but i don't think i can post it here. But from what i've got i believe this bird may be just as stealthy if not more than the T-50 and JSF. Regarding engines he said they are still finalizing and about the general avionics maybe we all know. Overall a very intellectually satisfying conversation.
Cheers!

Nice, thanks. I also believe that the compressor blades on AMCA will be completely hidden. They go up and inside making space for the missile bay. Also I think the RAM paint comes from some lab in Chandigarh. Had read about it in some newsletter.

Could you please ask these on your next visit and share if possible
1. Any insights about the weapons bay? Is it one large bay capable of carrying all the internal armaments. Or are they using side bays? what are the kinds and amount of armaments that it can carry internally.
2. Are they developing the ejection system themselves. Or are they planning to adapt the ones from the PAKFA (which are reported to be completed).
3. Except for the EJ200, there is no other engine in the 100-120 kN category featuring a TVC. How are they going to handle this.
4. What indigenous weapons are they planning to modify for internal carriage.

Thanks in advance.

[vasu raya]

^^^Yeah, F-22 is doable, B-2 is doable, a Blackjack or concorde is doable, and done already by humans..what next?

Buy the designs for YF-23 and be done with it.

and IAF would simply accept it without putting the AMCA through too many hoops just to build credibliity

[SaiK]

well nrao, it would require to fulfill strategic requirements then. there are many requirements and mission profile characteristics based on which even operational specifications will be written. i am sure, IAF can't have a stealth mission as operational right now, but they can very well write them down. if they can't, then they have to engineer the spec.

[NRao]

well nrao, it would require to fulfill strategic requirements then. there are many requirements and mission profile characteristics based on which even operational specifications will be written. i am sure, IAF can't have a stealth mission as operational right now, but they can very well write them down. if they can't, then they have to engineer the spec.

((Sloooooooooooooooooow day in the office.))

Back to square one. So, what does the following fulfill?

perhaps a raptor tail appearance would satisfy many eyes.

[SaiK]

(..same here..) wish I was with IAF to tell, (not tell them, but arm chair).

it tells it is neither SR71 nor Raptor. .

--
wiki link has good data to discuss : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_technology Planform alignment

[nachiket]

3. Except for the EJ200, there is no other engine in the 100-120 kN category featuring a TVC. How are they going to handle this.

EJ200 is in the 90kN category. A higher thrust variant is not available and there seem to be no plans to develop one. Choices are limited to F414EPE or go large in the AL-31 category. But that I think will be too big and heavy for the AMCA. They may have to scrap TVC if they go with the F414. I don't think that is such a bad thing. The Rafale and Typhoon manage to have a similar maneuverability to the MKI even without TVC. No reason why the AMCA can't.

[NRao]

3. Except for the EJ200, there is no other engine in the 100-120 kN category featuring a TVC. How are they going to handle this.

EJ200 is in the 90kN category. A higher thrust variant is not available and there seem to be no plans to develop one. Choices are limited to F414EPE or go large in the AL-31 category. But that I think will be too big and heavy for the AMCA. They may have to scrap TVC if they go with the F414. I don't think that is such a bad thing. The Rafale and Typhoon manage to have a similar maneuverability to the MKI even without TVC. No reason why the AMCA can't.

Seriously?

I have seen F-22 vids that compete with the MKI. Are there vids of the Rafael doing the same?

[nachiket]

Seriously?

I have seen F-22 vids that compete with the MKI. Are there vids of the Rafael doing the same?

NRao ji, I am not talking about post stall maneuvers. TVC fighters are kings in that. But traditional performance parameters like ITR, STR, climb rate, etc. are not dramatically impacted by TVC. A dogfight between an MKI and a non-TVC Mig-29 (which has a lot of excess thrust compared to a flanker) will still be close contest assuming similar piloting skills, with the MKI at a slight advantage.

In the Indo-UK air combat exercises, the MKI didn't enjoy any advantage over the Typhoon.

[NRao]

Ah, got it. I do not place too much emphasis on those neat showboat maneuvers anyways, but was curious.

Thx.

[Indranil]

Nachiket ji,

I am not suggesting Thrust vectoring. ADA says so.


Also, EJ200 had a plan for with TVC. It is called the EJ230 which was offered to India for Tejas Mk2. It has 3D-TVC and 103kN of thrust.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... on-333501/

They were planning a 120 kN version as well.
http://typhoon.starstreak.net/Eurofighter/engines.html

Future of the EJ200

Engine uprating

The EuroJet consortium were required to build an engine (often referred to as EJ2x0) which had at least a 20% growth potential. There are already plans to carry out the necessary modifications to reach this higher (Stage-1) output in the 2000 to 2005 timeframe. Such an improvement will require a new Low Pressure Compressor (raising the pressure ratio to around 4.6) and an upgraded fan (increasing flow by around 10%). This would result in the dry thrust increasing to some 72kN (or 16,200lbf ) with a reheated output of around 103kN (or 23,100lbf). Given recent increases in the weight of the Typhoon it may not be unexpected to find this upgrade performed in the near future.

More interestingly perhaps is Rolls-Royce and EuroJet's plan to increase the output 30% above the baseline specification as a Stage-2 modification. Such an upgrade will require more substantial plantwide changes including a new LP compressor and turbine and an improvement in the total pressure ratio. These upgrades would yield a new dry thrust of around 78kN (or 17,500lbf) with a reheated output of around 120kN (or 27,000lbf). The indications are that these improvements will come on stream between 2005 and 2010, in time for the Typhoon's Mid Life Upgrade expected around 2016.

The link has more info on the TVC for EJ200/230!

[nachiket]

Thanks indranil. I am just worried about getting into an AL-55 like situation again. The new version of the EJ200 seems to be only on the drawing board, and 30kN is huge jump. They won't be able to keep the rest of the specs the same. And if final specs aren't available now, it will be difficult to design the AMCA around it.

[SaiK]

There were willing to demonstrate the TVN.. in test bed:
http://defense-update.com/20110209_typhoon_tvn.html

We did not choose them on price / low cost bidding. So, we have to work with F414. Now, it is quite possible to have EJ2?0-TVN for AMCA. It all depends on how we are finalizing on the design.

[Indranil]

Actually I was not right about the vertical stabilizers of AMCA.

The edges of the vertical stab of the F-22 actually do not match its wings or horizontal stabs at all. On the YF-23, the edges of the stabilizer as seen from the plan (dark lines) view matches the edges of the wing. I had previously thought the projection on the horizontal (dashed lines) should match.

Click for larger image.


The same can be said about AMCA.

[shiv]

If we get AMCA before get an engine of our own it will be a dud. Kaveri/other engine first. AMCA next IMO