AMCA News and Discussions

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 11 Mar 2011 05:51

Samay wrote:^^Why they(DRDO) were sleeping till now, waiting for chinks to do it first,or they will blame someone else this time?
“Based on the feasibility study, ADA would be able to define technologies required for the aircraft along with the timelines for design and development and subsequent manufacturing. The feasibility study is expected to take about 18 months,” he said.

Here feasibility study doesnt means that the work on actual project will start from the 19th month ... :( :roll:


Respected sir, I am not sure whether your post is the impatience of youth or cluelessness - but please watch the last 60 seconds of this 5 minute video to understand the thought processes behind such a statement. A list is made of various new technologies required and the time scale and a score of 3.5 on 10 indicates that it might be doable with India's current knowledge base.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQIMb-28nqQ

It is quite likely that you underestimate the complexity of such a project. Having made the same mistake with the LCA I can't blame the DRDO for not wanting to making it again. It is also an indicator of how far ahead the US is - and that lead came from decades of work when Indians' were dreaming of swaraj. Please don't dumb things down so much.

ks_sachin
BRFite
Posts: 1002
Joined: 24 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Sydney

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby ks_sachin » 11 Mar 2011 10:08

Shivji,

Better to be safe than sorry would be their Mantra methinks....

But for many DRDO is damned if they do and damned if they don't....

Any way have you met Sq Ldr Murthy of late....Will give them a call today...

P Chitkara
BRFite
Posts: 355
Joined: 30 Aug 2004 08:09

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby P Chitkara » 11 Mar 2011 11:04

As someone said - this news is a sign of maturing of the organization. More like doing your homework well before embarking on the project.

This will definitely be a contributor in ensuring that the deadlines will be met.

SidGupta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 12:32

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SidGupta » 11 Mar 2011 11:20

It is quite likely that you underestimate the complexity of such a project. Having made the same mistake with the LCA I can't blame the DRDO for not wanting to making it again. It is also an indicator of how far ahead the US is - and that lead came from decades of work when Indians' were dreaming of swaraj. Please don't dumb things down so much.


I agree and respect the complexity of developing a 5th generation medium combat fighter with stealth capablities. (Note, i didnt say 'understand', as im hardly an aeronautical expert).

Unfortunately, as with most things, the truth lies somewhere in the 'greyzone'.

1. Has the GOI and Indian developments agencies like ADA/DRDO been laggard/slow in development OR
2. This is all a part of good planning process, that a nation with very limited modern jet development history, MUST go through in order to be succesfull

Pointing to the AMCA wiki, not that its the most reliable source:

Development timeline:
In August 2006, India's then defence minister Mr. Pranab Mukherjee announced in Parliament that the government is evaluating experiences gained from the Tejas programme for the MCA.[4]

In October 2008, the Indian Air Force asked the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) to prepare a detailed project report on the development of a Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA) incorporating stealth features.[5]

In February 2009, ADA director P.S Subramanyam said at a Aero-India 2009 seminar, that they are working closely with Indian Air Force to develop a Medium Combat Aircraft. He added that according to the specification provided by the Indian Air Force, it would likely be a twenty ton aircraft powered by two GTX Kaveri engines.[6]

In April 2010, the Indian Air Force issued the Air Staff requirements (ASR) for the AMCA which placed the aircraft in the twenty five ton category


So since October 2008, the ADA has been developing the detailed proposal - were in March 2011 and still 18 months away from a detailed feasability report.

Its going to take 4 years (Oct 08 to Oct 12) to develop just the detailed requirements, ASR, spec and feasability reports?

Is that good, bad or ugly? Will this time spent on 'research', reduce the development time and money, because of better 'foundation and homework'?

Some will say, that the ASR was only issued in Apr 10, so from ASR to detailed feasability report, will take 30 months - is that good, bad or ugly?

EDIT: shifted edit to new post
Last edited by SidGupta on 11 Mar 2011 11:41, edited 2 times in total.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16888
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Rahul M » 11 Mar 2011 11:34

yes, that's how long it takes. 5-6 years or even more is quite normal for project definition phase. why not check other projects elsewhere ? since yindians are clearly lazy and incompetent but videshilog are the standard, no ?

if they do it in 4 years it would be quite an achievement. first they have to decide with IAF what are the exact requirements. this would take some time for some requirements might clash with each other and that feedback has to be given to IAF to make a choice. once this iterative process is over they have a firm plan of what they want. this alone would take 2-3 years.
then comes the detailed planning for the 100's of subsystems, who builds what, every prospective developer and supplier has to be called up and verified, each of the individual subsystems in turn dovetailed with others so that final integration, when it happens goes off without a hitch.
how long do you think this should take ?

jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby jai » 11 Mar 2011 11:39

ks_sachin wrote:Shivji,

Better to be safe than sorry would be their Mantra methinks....



Correct "scope"ing and "spec"ing before you jump into a project is key to success to ensure that you meet project outcome plans within budget and time. This is a smart thing to do. IMO :wink:

SidGupta
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 19
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 12:32

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SidGupta » 11 Mar 2011 11:41

A request for proposal (RFP) was issued in July 1986, and two contractor teams, Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics and Northrop/McDonnell Douglas were selected in October 1986 to undertake a 50-month demonstration/validation phase ..... On 23 April 1991, the USAF ended the design and test flight competition by announcing Lockheed's YF-22 as the winner


So, for a country with the BEST (arguably) defense R&D and manufacturing ecosystem, it took them about 5 years from RFP to working prototype and selection.

Further, while the first flight of the prototype YF-22 was in 1990, the first flight of the first production model F-22 was in 1997, so another 7 years. First delivery to USAF in 2003.

17 years from RFP to first deliver, for United States of America.

If i treat the IAF's ASR as equivalent to the RFP, then starting 2010, adjusting for both India's 'development expertise' drawbacks, but advantage of modern global advancements (compared to 1980s), the first AMCA will not be delivered to the IAF before 2030, at best.

EDIT: Rahul, read your post, im not sure why youre so hostile and angry in your post. Im myself inquiring if '4 years' is good, bad or ugly performance? Since in isolation a number is just pointless, you do need a point of reference.

Ive chosen the F22, not because 'i luv firangi and hate yindians', but simply as i dont have any other point of reference. As flawed as the comparison is, its the only one i have.

how long do you think this should take ?


Again, im no authority. I have no secret access to confidential databases and must use what civilian mortals use i.e. google, wiki etc. My basic 2 minute search shows me that it took the US and its ecosystem of private-public defense R&D and manufacturing systems, 17 years to deliver the first F22, since RFP - so as i 'guesstimate' casually, i dont expect india to do it in less than 20.

It took the 'firangis' 5 years to go from RFP to first flying prototype. Its taking us 3 years from ASR to 'Detailed Feasability report' - make what you will out of that comparison.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16888
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Rahul M » 11 Mar 2011 12:21

I was not hostile to you. sorry if it came out that way. :)

the equivalent of IAF's expression of interest in 2008 would be USAF's initiation of ATF in 1981.

IAF ASR /= USAF RFP

the RFP came in 1986, that's 5 years. if we launch AMCA in 2012 as expected that would be 4 years. we expect first flight in 2017 and best date of IOC (IMHO) 10 years after that. I can live with that. the PAKFA/FGFA should be there in the meantime.

US took longer than everyone else because they had to develop the field along the way, late starters have the advantage of already being aware of pitfalls needed to avoid.

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Samay » 11 Mar 2011 19:01

shiv wrote:It is quite likely that you underestimate the complexity of such a project. Having made the same mistake with the LCA I can't blame the DRDO for not wanting to making it again. It is also an indicator of how far ahead the US is - and that lead came from decades of work when Indians' were dreaming of swaraj. Please don't dumb things down so much.

Sir, my point is exactly the same, that we were dreaming (sleeping) while they(us,china) were doing something.

Even china started in 1990s after they saw what happened in the gulf war.

Why feasibility studies and all those studies weren't started in 90's?

I am not diminishing anyone's capability,but people will ask about billions put into russian/american pockets,when it could have been saved and a lot more capability would have been developed till now,iff we had started it 15yrs back

Why we were waiting for russians to do it and then we buy something from them,claiming it as a great achievement of our rnd base??. This practice had been going on since decades.

manish.rastogi
BRFite
Posts: 365
Joined: 01 Nov 2010 15:30
Location: Pandora.....
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby manish.rastogi » 11 Mar 2011 19:18

^^^ i believe that for undertaking a project to develop 5th gen aircraft,they would have surely needed confidence and atleast an initial basic military aviation complex.
IMO they would have been waiting for success of the LCA project to undertake an even more ambitious project due to which government and they themselves have gained enough experience and confidence for AMCA...surely we didnt have that in the 90s!!

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby kmkraoind » 11 Mar 2011 19:23

The basics of aircraft consists of airframe, engines, avionics. Is it possible to design AMCA in two avatars? One is delta winged where airframe is optimized for high speed mach interceptor with air superiority (internal bay enough to house 6+2 AAMs) aircraft. The other one, chubby, large internal fuel fraction, high armored, low speed aircraft basically designed towards mainly bomber/deep penetration with large internal bays enough to accommodate ATG weapons.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 11 Mar 2011 20:30

Samay wrote:Sir, my point is exactly the same, that we were dreaming (sleeping) while they(us,china) were doing something.

Even china started in 1990s after they saw what happened in the gulf war.

Why feasibility studies and all those studies weren't started in 90's?

I am not diminishing anyone's capability



Sir this time you are overestimating Indian capability. Why as a feasibility study not done for 5th generation aircraft in the 90s? Because India had it even developed the tech for a 4th gen aircraft. Imagine the ROTFL if anyone had tried. Anyone who thinks India had the capability to plan for a 5 gen aircraft in the 1990s is definitely dreaming. Maybe the Chinese and US had the capability. Not India. or do you believe that India had the capability and that nobody planned because DRDO was dreaming?

sourab_c
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 14 Feb 2009 18:07
Location: around

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby sourab_c » 11 Mar 2011 20:51

If I am not wrong, the feasibility study would also incorporate establishing various suppliers/manufacturers for the parts and components for the aircraft before the project takes off, which will make the development of the AMCA much faster.

Unlike the LCA in which we simply jumped in without doing such extensive studies.

dsingh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 6
Joined: 17 Apr 2009 02:20

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby dsingh » 11 Mar 2011 21:04

I don't understand why is this fuss about? They decided to do AMCA project after Chinese J20. HAL/DRDO already has a very good FGFA project with Russians, and they would have FGFA ready for induction before J20 would be ready. It was very appropriate for India to think about AMCA after successful induction of LCA. They could only do the feasibility study after they had received ASR from IAF. I don't think DRDO had been sleeping either, they had been discussing about MCA from last 4-5 yrs, however without ASR and funding, it would be only on a concept. Different countries have different capability and requirements. Chinese are looking at USA in their rear view mirror, and India is looking at PUKISTAN and China.

Thanks,

DSingh.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 11 Mar 2011 22:34

aircraft programmes are the tip of the iceberg. massive amounts of industrial infrastructure and capabilities in a large range of disciplines are required before you can deliver a successful modern fighter aircraft

india did not have such a thing 20 years ago, and it only barely has one of the required standard now... there is still a long way to go

no one is dreaming, but what was started in the 80's for a range of missile, aircraft and weapons programmes is finally starting to bear fruit... some good, some ok, some not so

progress is hard won

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Samay » 11 Mar 2011 22:39

Project feasibility->Selected R&D areas-> integration->changing requirements->final iterations->testing->IOC ,,, is done when you have enough buffer till the final product is launched, we are relying too much on rusis .

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 11 Mar 2011 22:52

samay-ji, i dpont follow what you are saying, please help this unwashed abdul

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2199
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 11 Mar 2011 23:25

Ultimately, we are headed for a bipolar world with USA/NATO nations on the one side and China/NOKO/Pak/ (maybe even Saudi Arabia & Co.) on the other. India has to innovate and stay ahead technologically against a numerically superior China. If China pulls ahead technologically, then we all better start learning Mandarin.

The LCA program was a handy tool since it leapfrogs Indian Aerospace from the 60s to the 21st century. All attention should be on the Kaveri now for without it, future development will be tied to whims of vendors and the ever-changing geopolitical landscape. India remains a a timid industrial power as is evidenced by microscopic LCA and Arjun orders. These small orders belie a mindset that is afraid of believing in "Indian Products" or the belief that we cannot produce world-beating technology. Imports reign supreme still! Continue with this mindset and Indians will need Mandarin and a dose of Taoism.

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7251
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby disha » 11 Mar 2011 23:33

Samay wrote:Project feasibility->Selected R&D areas-> integration->changing requirements->final iterations->testing->IOC ,,, is done when you have enough buffer till the final product is launched, we are relying too much on rusis .


Nothing wrong in relying on rusis if it gets our job done. IMHO we should drop our pretentions on always the besht and 100% shudh desi maal. If tomorrow, Bangladesh is going to supply jute technology for our flexed conformal composite wings - so be it. (The later part was a rhetorical flourish to get a point in).

Coming to cutting corners and producing AMCA tomorrow, you may end up getting what is called a FatBox (tm). It will have 8 control surfaces like a skewered pig. It may fly. But will it be useful? Will its airframe design can be reused to last atleast across 2 decades? If you spend some time on the LCA thread you will realize that without the LCA, AMCA would never have come across. Now that we are confident about LCA, AMCA is a good start.

And if the GOI is going to put in billions (in USD) on it, why not make sure it gets its most bang for buck? For Shivering Dhoti Types (SDTs), GOI can put in a billion more and have say 600 Tejas Mk2s. I think that will more than take care of the fatbox threat, it will actually make it costlier.

All in all, I do not expect to see AMCA fly until 2025. And that is okay, since that will reduce the strategic tech gap between India and Massa by 20 years to 20 years. Something which can be overcome within a decade or so (as long as babus and politicos do not get carried away by the swan song).

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Samay » 11 Mar 2011 23:38

Lalmohan sir, I will give an example,
lets assume
someone is developing a car for the first time, while keeping a ferrari in his garage , whats the point of developing? Because he wants to learn how to make a car, isnt it?

But his basic motto was to win a F1 race, then why he started developing a car?He should have started developing a car much earlier ,then a super car, and still had got some time left to practice for the race.

But thats not what happened. He started developing a concept car late and then a super car even late...
Ultimately he had to rely on that imported ferrari , customized as he wanted,,
what lead to this situation?

Because he has no plans for future or cant think whats best to do...

Thats the state of DRDO and consequently, the Airforce .

Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Drishyaman » 11 Mar 2011 23:49

^^^ What kind of Analogy is that, Samay Ji?
Please, decipher.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2199
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 11 Mar 2011 23:49

And Samay, we find it very easy to criticize DRDO. Some of the criticism is warranted but most of the other is motivated by foreign lobbies wanting to hawk their products.

In the case of the IN, we are seeing building of latest gen carriers and the arihant in addition to design and development of lethal warships, sonars, propulsion (Kaveri Marine) etc. In the case of the IAF, I sometimes feel that LCA is used as a tool to keep off local development - ie keep the scientists occupied with little orders and buy major requirements abroad. When there is a chance why doesn't the IAF order LCAS in say increments of 50? That would spur the industry and bring about innovations.

In the case of IA, local development is seen as an enemy for reasons that have been discussed over and over. The IA and the IAF therefore really do not allow for local development to take hold. So some of the criticism does need to be on DRDO but a lot must also go on the services. The services should have a vision about the future and work closely with DRDO or local vendors to develop the requirements.

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Samay » 11 Mar 2011 23:58

In the case of IA, local development is seen as an enemy for reasons that have been discussed over and over. The IA and the IAF therefore really do not allow for local development to take hold. So some of the criticism does need to be on DRDO but a lot must also go on the services. The services should have a vision about the future and work closely with DRDO or local vendors to develop the requirements.
^^that's bullseye Vivek ji,
thats where all the R&D problem lies , attitude and work style of services towards local R&D
I'm not blaming DRDO ,just pointed out what its state is
we have enough brains to give some as a baksheesh to massa

Baldev
BRFite
Posts: 501
Joined: 21 Sep 2009 07:27

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Baldev » 12 Mar 2011 01:25

Samay wrote:
In the case of IA, local development is seen as an enemy for reasons that have been discussed over and over. The IA and the IAF therefore really do not allow for local development to take hold. So some of the criticism does need to be on DRDO but a lot must also go on the services. The services should have a vision about the future and work closely with DRDO or local vendors to develop the requirements.
^^that's bullseye Vivek ji,
thats where all the R&D problem lies , attitude and work style of services towards local R&D
I'm not blaming DRDO ,just pointed out what its state is
we have enough brains to give some as a baksheesh to massa
whatever armed forces given they just fight with that,infact there are lobbies in government who don't want this to happen.

if govt wants there would be hundreds of arjuns,army would not say anything in this
if govt wanted more su30 they could have set up additional facility to produce more number per years instead of buying from russia and giving jobs to our people.
if govt wanted mrca aircrafts could have been 4-5 years ago but they actually don't want and air force could do nothing in this

actually most of the jobs have come from private sector with equal opportunity for everyone with quota and the govt systems remains old and outdated.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2199
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 12 Mar 2011 02:18

So Baldev, what then are our powerless service chiefs doing? Sitting around twiddling their thumbs? This is our typical mindset - if GOI wnats then we can have this!! Manmohan Singh did not get up early enough so the sun stayed in bed a little longer too!

Why then does the Navy have a design house while the IAF and IA build castles in the air or maybe "swiss banks"?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 12 Mar 2011 02:19

split the budgets, since we all are like not able to do bad karma on all of the contending nations,and want to keep devo bava relationship with every possible frang.

one for DRDO, where x% of the defence purchase must be from home grown, while y% can be all sucked by men in black middlemen. Now, that would lead to asking more quota and such struggle.. but, we are any way quota nation, so okay to fight there.

At least, DRDO will have its share. :wink:

brvarsh
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 03 Mar 2011 20:29

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brvarsh » 12 Mar 2011 02:43

Its no sense to compare the Navy's approach to indigenous development with IAF's or Army's. In all the wars except one incidence Indian Navy has ruled the water practically unopposed. Indian Navy still enjoys the luxury to experiment with unproven platforms and bet on it. That may not be true with IA and IAF. An extra cautioun in their approach should not be inferred as their opposition to indigenous development. Comments like "they fight with whatever given to them" is demeaning. If you have courage and reason to continue you can invite and fight the enemy with AK47 in the streets. But would you really want our armed forces fighting that way?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 12 Mar 2011 02:57

So, who is asking IAF or IA to use weapons that is not proven? BTW, are you saying proving only by means by participated in a war?

don't understand the logic in supporting home grown products, and that has to do with proving something is better or good. Arjun was recently proved better than a firang one?

brvarsh
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 03 Mar 2011 20:29

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brvarsh » 12 Mar 2011 04:32

It should be left to the services to select the armaments they are comfortable with. By proven platform I do not mean proven in war but it has to prove how deadly it is. Just a presence of F-18s (as an example) will deter many enemies to attack US. And by no means I am suggesting pick one over the other but service chiefs should be given the space to pick and choose what they believe is good for them.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2199
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Vivek K » 12 Mar 2011 07:40

What a useless argument. You are expecting that the enemy has no intelligence. And what you bring up is the very mindset that is used as an excuse to indulge in corrupt procurement practices. The navy can achieve excellence because it USES domestic products. Talk about Delhi/Mysore/Mumbai or the Shivalik class? Not world beaters, eh? But seriously you need to think about what you said. If IAF knows how to define flight characteristics and the LCA can demonstrate the envelope to meet those then why would the enemy not be scared of it?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 12 Mar 2011 09:14

Samay wrote:
Because he has no plans for future or cant think whats best to do...

Thats the state of DRDO and consequently, the Airforce .


Talk is cheap.

Please state your vision for the future and say what India should do today. What do you think?

P Chitkara
BRFite
Posts: 355
Joined: 30 Aug 2004 08:09

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby P Chitkara » 14 Mar 2011 19:37

Its no sense to compare the Navy's approach to indigenous development with IAF's or Army's. In all the wars except one incidence Indian Navy has ruled the water practically unopposed. Indian Navy still enjoys the luxury to experiment with unproven platforms and bet on it. That may not be true with IA and IAF.


This is certainly one of its kind argument. You do great disservice to the navy by putting such arguments.

Coming back to the AMCA, in 80s/ early 90s the economy was in a poor shape, industrial base was none too good to support such project and we simply did not have the technology to aim for it. We have had a pretty tough time with the LCA and this is the next generation.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Lalmohan » 14 Mar 2011 20:29

samay-babu
you presume that GOI down to HAL were able to mobilise to do such a thing
if they had the capability and did not, then they were djerkov's
however, they did not posses the capability
and the economic state of the country could not afford to build that capability... until the 80's and not really until now
many steps in the long march...

Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1143
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Samay » 16 Mar 2011 22:02

shiv wrote:
Samay wrote:
Because he has no plans for future or cant think whats best to do...

Thats the state of DRDO and consequently, the Airforce .


Talk is cheap.

Please state your vision for the future and say what India should do today. What do you think?

I dont know what the planners think but all the action/reaction are based upon whether dhoti is wet or dry....

There seems to be no long term planning in this country except for politics

What we should do today is what anyone does when misses the bus, just run. I think they are planning to run but not running

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 17 Mar 2011 07:01

Samay wrote:I dont know what the planners think but all the action/reaction are based upon whether dhoti is wet or dry....

There seems to be no long term planning in this country except for politics

What we should do today is what anyone does when misses the bus, just run. I think they are planning to run but not running


Sorry Samay - your reply is typical of a person who is super-competent at criticism but does not even know what he is being critical about.

You accuse DRDO of not working on 5th gen tech in the 1990s, Fine. Let us say you are 100% correct.

But DO YOU KNOW what technologies DRDO should be working on today in 2011 so that we are up to date in 2025 and Samay Junior of BRF in 2025 does not have to whine the way you have whined? I put it to you that you do not know what technologies we should be working on in 2011 for 2025. You are sitting in 2011, looking at the US and Chinese - and criticising the Indians of 1996. But unless you can put your gyan where your mouth is you are no better than the people you are criticising.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby vic » 17 Mar 2011 09:04

AMCA is a good project but it requires a budget of something like US$ 20 Billion to be successful in reasonable time

Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Gaur » 17 Mar 2011 09:19

vic wrote:AMCA is a good project but it requires a budget of something like US$ 20 Billion to be successful in reasonable time

On what basis have you quoted this figure? Just curious.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 17 Mar 2011 09:24

So, who is going to wear Kota jis shoes for AMCA?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 17 Mar 2011 10:55

I wonder if we (on BRF) are approaching AMCA discussion from the musharraf side.

Let me explain that. I mean that the name "AMCA" puts a certain picture in or minds - and that picture reminds us of F-35/F-22/PAKFA/J-20. Then we work backwards and start getting disappointed by what we find. Like telling my family - I am going to become an actor. Everyone thinks "Ah shiv! Actor! Like Hritik Roshan. Like Aamir! Wow!" But when they discover that my potential and performance is more on the lines of a male version of Tuntun they are disappointed. But hey Tuntun was actor too and had a role.

We need top ask what are the technologies that are needed for AMCA? Make a list of technologies needed. Of that list, what do we have now? What can we achieve? Start from the beginning - the sperm and ovum. Not the musharraf - which produces the end product that we all see.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8152
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 17 Mar 2011 13:42

The lost decade of Indian Avaiation is will continue to extract a price from India and the IAF for a long time to come. The learning costs not paid in the 1970s were paid with the LCA. But 30 years too late. Now, that they have been paid, we can safely expect that the Indian R&D establishment can deliver a competitive product well within the established time lines for a project of this nature.

However, the Indian project in best case will still be 10 to 15 years behind a similar US effort (F 35).

The picture is dipressing but, it is the best we can do at the moment.


Return to “Mil-Tech Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests