AMCA News and Discussions

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7635
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 09 Jan 2015 16:19

Sagar G wrote: Given you ignorance about AMCA about the things which are already being done to achieve success for the same I pardon you for "hyperventilating" and pray that the "bucket load of salt" that you will take each time "dates" are given is iodised.


Make-in-India: Plan to develop 5th-generation fighter aircraft

Top defence sources on Wednesday said the preliminary design stage of the futuristic fighter called the advanced medium combat aircraft (AMCA), with collaboration among IAF, DRDO and Aeronautical Development Agency, is now "virtually" over.

"Once the project definition and feasibility is completed in the next few months, the defence ministry will go to the cabinet committee on security for approval. It will require Rs 4,000-5,000 crore for the initial design and development phase," said a source.

The aim is to fly the first twin-engine AMCA prototype by 2023-2024, which will be around the time deliveries of Tejas Mark-II fighters will be underway. <SNIP>


Damn! Guess what caused the timeline for first prototype to slip from 2020-2021 to 2023-24 given that 'so much work' has already been done on the project??? :mrgreen:

Or maybe, they realized that when you've only spent INR 100 crore of the projected INR 4,000-5,000 crore planned, there is only so much which could have been achieved in the project.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby deejay » 09 Jan 2015 17:42

RV in the link provided by NRao, the time line slips further to 2025 for the first flight. Both articles appeared on the same day on different sites. Yet both have different dates. I do not think anything concrete has been committed but a general idea has been given and folks are manufacturing their own datelines.

Somehow, after the CG coverage, I will take every news piece with a lot of filtering. Better to look for exact quotes or dismiss it as speculation.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16242
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 09 Jan 2015 18:53

There are a 3-4 article, that have come out in the past few days, on the AMCA, FGFA, this and that, that confuse acronyms, dates, everything else. Bad authorship, terrible editorials.

Having said that given that the GoI has stated that the FGFA arrival around 2024+ is not acceptable, I am assuming that the AMCA coming that late is OK with them. My feeling is that they would like the FGFA to be inducted around 2020 and the AMCA around 2025.

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby deejay » 09 Jan 2015 19:55

^^^ That makes sense. Get the FGFA in by 2020 and keep working on the AMCA.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7486
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 09 Jan 2015 19:57

Are there any credible or detailed (or both :) ) plans for the production ramp up of the T-50 and subsequently the FGFA? All I have read is that the Russians expect around 55 deliveries by 2020. There hasn't been much about delivering the product to the IAF or about the delivery time-lines.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16242
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 09 Jan 2015 21:24

brar_w wrote:Are there any credible or detailed (or both :) ) plans for the production ramp up of the T-50 and subsequently the FGFA? All I have read is that the Russians expect around 55 deliveries by 2020. There hasn't been much about delivering the product to the IAF or about the delivery time-lines.


{OT}
My feeling, as stated multiple times, the Russians need Indian infusion of funds. Actually for both this fighter and their transports too. Now with all this oil price and sanctions, etc the situation must be even worse.

Also, seems to me, that the Indians are trying to base the FGFA on the PAK-FA, but make them two separate efforts when it comes to production. ?????
{\OT}

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 911
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby sivab » 11 Jan 2015 01:15

:D :D :D Good news from DMRL via Saurav Jha

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/553 ... 36/photo/1
Image

Don't miss the last line in picture.

:D :D :D DMRL now has SCB tech. BETTER than what is used in AL31!!! :D :D :D

This will now go into next gen Kaveri (~110KN) for AMCA and possibly LCA MkII.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16242
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 11 Jan 2015 02:22

This will now go into next gen Kaveri (~110KN) for AMCA and possibly LCA MkII.


They are issuing a RFP, this March, for an engine for the AMCA. Right?

Besides "Kaveri" as we know it, I thought, was terminated.

Someone had talked about (in one of the recent articles) about TV being the major challenge.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 911
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby sivab » 11 Jan 2015 02:42

NRao wrote:
They are issuing a RFP, this March, for an engine for the AMCA. Right?

Besides "Kaveri" as we know it, I thought, was terminated.



That RFP will decouple Kaveri-NG risk from AMCA. Kaveri-NG will be a parallel effort and is expected to come online by 2020 followed by testing. Kaveri is not completely dead, just will not be used in LCA in current form. Pieces will be used in UCAV, KMGT and NG. The kabini core from Kaveri will probably get slightly modified and reused in Kaveri-NG. They have put out a tender for redesign of LP stage for this new engine, see Kaveri thread. I dont think they are going redesign core from Kaveri in major way, hence accelerated timelines. This was hinted by Saurav Jha as well.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2595
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Sagar G » 11 Jan 2015 18:30

rohitvats wrote:Damn! Guess what caused the timeline for first prototype to slip from 2020-2021 to 2023-24 given that 'so much work' has already been done on the project??? :mrgreen:


Please give me the source from where this new date has come from and no not a DDM "sources" type source but one that of official nature with name and designation. Even if the new date is right what's the problem ??? Still 7 yrs. time till production, although I would worry about the 2030 production date if the first flight slips to 2025 if another news item posted before is to be believed.

rohitvats wrote:Or maybe, they realized :rotfl: that when you've only spent INR 100 crore of the projected INR 4,000-5,000 crore planned, there is only so much which could have been achieved in the project.


Most of the planned expenditure will go into creating infrastructure to support our R&D for next gen technologies, production or expansion of existing labs they might have planned but if you think that work on AMCA isn't ongoing even when much data has been posted indicating the opposite then I don't have anything further to add. You remain happy with your beliefs I will remain happy with facts.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17952
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 11 Jan 2015 18:38

deejay wrote:


Okay, here we go. There is some differences from an earlier link posted today but this time I am quoting some parts of the article here instead of the full piece:

The main purpose of the AMCA is to replace the aging SEPECAT Jaguar & Dassault Mirage 2000.


Features of fifth generation fighter aircraft AMCA
• Single seat, twin engine with a diamond-shaped planform and an internal weapons bay
• High maneuverability which tends to include short-field capabilities
• Advanced avionics
• Networked data fusion from sensors and avionics
• Multirole capabilities
• Complement HAL Tejas, the Sukhoi/HAL FGFA, the Sukhoi Su-30MKI and the Dassault Rafale
• AMCA would be powered by K 9 or K 10 Engine with Super cruise capability without after burner.


The amount required for the initial design and development phase is 4000 crore rupees and the initial design of AMCA is expected to be ready by 2018. The first flight of the AMCA though will only be possible by 2025.


Difference between Sukhoi-T50 and AMCA
It will be unlike the joint HAL –Sukhoi initiative between India and Russia to produce FGFA. This multi-role fighter aircraft is expected to be two-seater derivative of the in-development Russian Sukhoi T-50.
Fifth Generation Fighter Aircrafts (FGFA)
It is a fighter aircraft classification encompassing the most advanced jet fighter generation. FGFAs are designed to incorporate numerous technological advances over the fourth generation jet fighter.
Main features of FGFA
• Low Probability of Intercept Radar (LPIR)
• High-performance air frames
• Advanced avionics features
• Highly integrated computer systems capable of networking with other elements within the theatre of war for situational awareness


Awesome, first source i am seeing which says FGFA will have LPI radar. Till date it was merely assumed.

member_23694
BRFite
Posts: 732
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby member_23694 » 11 Jan 2015 19:26

http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... india.html

Tejas MK.2
According to Dr Tamil Mani 'The final Mk-II drawings will be completed by December 2015.'
The IAF wants the first flight of the prototype to happen by 2017, but Dr Tamilmani says that given the extensive instrumentation
and system check out requirements, it could be that first flight spills over into 2018. A total of four test vehicles will be built and all of these will be of production standard. At least three of these at a minimum will be in airborne testing before the end of 2019 and FOC is likely to be achieved in another 2-2.5 years from then.

Tejas MK.2 induction according to the above : best case 2022-23

AMCA
http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... rt-ii.html
Saurav Jha: At the same time given that the Americans, have started preliminary studies on sixth generation fighters, and are
producing their second fifth generation fighter, what is the status of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) project?

Avinash Chander: AMCA is going to be a fifth plus generation aircraft. Once again, the design is getting completed.
And we are making a detailed feasibility study which has to get accepted. Broad parameters and configuration have
been generally agreed upon. We are looking to complete this part within a year or two and then move further.
------------------
The project has been taken up on the basis of a preliminary staff qualitative requirement from the Indian Air Force (IAF) and is currently in the project definition phase. Dr Tamilmani believes that for around Rs 4000 crore it would be possible to build 3 or 4 flying prototypes, the first of which should take to the skies by 2020-21.

So Tejas MK.2, 4 to 4.5 gen makes first flight in 2018 and then a true blue 5th gen fighter with all aspect stealth flies in 2021 or even 2024, i.e with next 3-6 years.

Bring in the Sukhoi/HAL FGFA in the picture between 2020-25 and we have 3 fighter aircrafts in development phase which will supposedly be the backbone of IAF.

Questions that still remain :
- What is the current state of FGFA, future visibility and timelines. Its 2015 and nothing concrete yet. Is IAF happy with the current T-50 ? and how much time will it take to adapt the plane for IAF requirement.
- Will ADA-HAL be able to develop two advanced fighter in Tejas MK.2 and AMCA around 5-6 years of each other.Plus dedicating resources for FGFA around the same time.
- IAF being dependent for fleet augmentation on platforms which are currently either in design phase or feasibility study phase.

Objectively speaking I am not sure how the product delivery will happen to actual users while meeting the quality and timelines. Yes, R&D is activities are important for the country, but how it is prioritized and mapped to product delivery to meet user's requirement should also be taken into consideration.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7635
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 11 Jan 2015 20:47

Sagar G wrote:<SNIP>Please give me the source from where this new date has come from and no not a DDM "sources" type source but one that of official nature with name and designation. Even if the new date is right what's the problem ??? Still 7 yrs. time till production, although I would worry about the 2030 production date if the first flight slips to 2025 if another news item posted before is to be believed.


Well, if you believe everything else in that report coming from DDM, then this is also likely to be correct, no?

I've no problem with date - my problem is with people at senior most level giving timelines which seem to have no sanctity. So, within less than a year, the AMCA first flight timeline (coming from Dr. Tamilmani) changed from 2018 to 2020-21. And now we have another report talking about 2023-2024.

I'd be happy if the plane starts entering full squadron service by 2030 because that is the time IAF would be reach timeline for next phase of transition when next series of large scale squadron numbers would start to retire or would already have started to retire. And that will be even bigger challenge because you're talking here about Mirage-2000-5/Mig-29UPG/Jaguar DARIN III in service. A total of ~12 squadrons.

rohitvats wrote:Or maybe, they realized :rotfl: that when you've only spent INR 100 crore of the projected INR 4,000-5,000 crore planned, there is only so much which could have been achieved in the project.


Most of the planned expenditure will go into creating infrastructure to support our R&D for next gen technologies, production or expansion of existing labs they might have planned but if you think that work on AMCA isn't ongoing even when much data has been posted indicating the opposite then I don't have anything further to add. You remain happy with your beliefs I will remain happy with facts.


I never said anything about work not happening on AMCA or anything of that sort.

Just that when you consider the time we're taking with Tejas Mk-II - which is supposed to be an iterative development - the timeline of 2020-2021 for PV1 of AMCA to fly seems incredulous. And regrettably, we've had many such instances of senior people giving timelines and getting proved wrong in a matter of months even.

member_20317
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3170
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby member_20317 » 11 Jan 2015 20:47

dhiraj wrote:Tejas MK.2 induction according to the above : best case 2022-23

<snip>

So Tejas MK.2, 4 to 4.5 gen makes first flight in 2018 and then a true blue 5th gen fighter with all aspect stealth flies in 2021 or even 2024, i.e with next 3-6 years.




With the amount of work they are doing for LCA Mk-2, even a kaccha-pakka, auna-pauna version of AMCA flying in that time frame should be a very satisfying achievement. If they get the money in time and manage better then they surely would be able to achieve as they desire.

The first AMCA would be like the first LCA KH-2001 - not a usable article. But LCA Mk-2 is supposed to be tested as usable. So they do have good time in their hands for both.

Last time when the Ballastic missles were a priority they did come up with Agni-TD and then with Prithvi, in fairly quick succession 5 odd years. First flight to final articles may be an entirely different journey hence again they have enough time on their hands. But somebody has to keep pushing both ADA and HAL in lock step.

Reference:
Sagar G wrote:The Radiance of Tejas: A bright prospect for 'Make in India'

The Mk-II will have some 25-30 percent commonality in parts with the MK-I and these parts (i.e not requiring any modification) are already in production. For the MK-I parts that have to be modified, thousands of new drawings are being worked upon jointly by DRDO-HAL and the private sector. According to Dr Tamil Mani 'The final Mk-II drawings will be completed by December 2015.'

member_28108
BRFite
Posts: 1854
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby member_28108 » 11 Jan 2015 20:58

Its always crossing a stumbling block that holds up a program .Kaveri has still not overcome that critical technology block.Once we cross such blocks things generally move fast.

Sagar G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2595
Joined: 22 Dec 2009 19:31
Location: Ghar

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Sagar G » 12 Jan 2015 20:31

rohitvats wrote:Well, if you believe everything else in that report coming from DDM, then this is also likely to be correct, no?


Who said to you that I believe everything in that report ??? Especially the ones containing information citing "sources". For the time being we have a date given by CCR&D Aero himself so lets stick with that until he or somebody higher up gives us another date. For your solace yes I think the date will change but I don't see the point whining over it.

rohitvats wrote:I've no problem with date - my problem is with people at senior most level giving timelines which seem to have no sanctity. So, within less than a year, the AMCA first flight timeline (coming from Dr. Tamilmani) changed from 2018 to 2020-21. And now we have another report talking about 2023-2024.


SoP of our defence scientific community to push a new program. Make the initiation of a program public and create pressure on the invested parties to begin it ASAP. I don't take dates given by them to be cast in stone unless and until the program officially begins and as said before giving dates is a part of their job so can't really fault them there.

rohitvats wrote:I'd be happy if the plane starts entering full squadron service by 2030 because that is the time IAF would be reach timeline for next phase of transition when next series of large scale squadron numbers would start to retire or would already have started to retire. And that will be even bigger challenge because you're talking here about Mirage-2000-5/Mig-29UPG/Jaguar DARIN III in service. A total of ~12 squadrons.


That's what is the goal and hence I said that I would be worried if the date slips to 2025 because 5 yrs is too short to get AMCA into production. If the first flight happens by 2021 then they will have almost a decade to overcome technical challenges that they will face during the development process, even if we consider 2023 for first flight still seven yrs. for R&D. A decade will give them the required cushion to overcome any unforeseen challenges, so they must target the 2021 date provided all necessary clearances come in time.

rohitvats wrote:Just that when you consider the time we're taking with Tejas Mk-II - which is supposed to be an iterative development - the timeline of 2020-2021 for PV1 of AMCA to fly seems incredulous. And regrettably, we've had many such instances of senior people giving timelines and getting proved wrong in a matter of months even.


When you are working on creating new production standard drawings for 70-75% parts then it is no easy task. They have to model afresh and look for any possible problem, fix it, be sure of the new design and then start releasing part by part production standard drawings. First release of production drawings will surely undergo revision based on the feedback from HAL and this to and fro will take some time and only after all the kinks have been removed we will have our final set of production drawings which will be used for serial production of Mk.2. This modification and removing error part is pretty frustrating. So don't think that just because it is an "iterative development" a quick fix here and there and few upgraded LRU's will give you your new aircraft.

I think it will be TD-1 but good if it is PV-1 for first AMCA and AMCA only draws from the LCA infr and knowledge pool hence I expect them to stick to their timelines but still a couple of yrs here and there won't cause much harm.

What happened with LCA is past and I have been told that in the higher ups (both DRDO and IAF) a group knew that LCA isn't going to meet the timelines given by them but to keep the program from being killed by politicians and vested interested they lied through their teeth. Given the conditions and contempt our scientists/engineers had to go through to make LCA a reality I find absolutely no fault in their continuing that tradition :mrgreen: I fault our society which forces our scientists to lie so that they can empower Indian armed forces even at the risk of being tagged as liers.

sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1795
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby sunilUpa » 13 Jan 2015 05:12

Some white lies are order of the day for greater good.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4123
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 13 Jan 2015 05:26

For complex R&D projects, dates being thrown around should be taken as rough target dates to align funding and development efforts. The completion dates will likely change when unplanned/unexpected difficulties crop up during development. The initial target dates are "best case" scenarios, which rarely occurs in complex efforts. It may also only be highlighting partial completion dates (i.e. prototype ready which occurs much earlier and exclude unfavorable dates, such as FOC/squadron acceptance).

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7635
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 13 Jan 2015 16:17

dhiraj wrote:<SNIP> So Tejas MK.2, 4 to 4.5 gen makes first flight in 2018 and then a true blue 5th gen fighter with all aspect stealth flies in 2021 or even 2024, i.e with next 3-6 years. Bring in the Sukhoi/HAL FGFA in the picture between 2020-25 and we have 3 fighter aircrafts in development phase which will supposedly be the backbone of IAF.

Questions that still remain :
- What is the current state of FGFA, future visibility and timelines. Its 2015 and nothing concrete yet. Is IAF happy with the current T-50 ? and how much time will it take to adapt the plane for IAF requirement.
- Will ADA-HAL be able to develop two advanced fighter in Tejas MK.2 and AMCA around 5-6 years of each other.Plus dedicating resources for FGFA around the same time.
- IAF being dependent for fleet augmentation on platforms which are currently either in design phase or feasibility study phase.

Objectively speaking I am not sure how the product delivery will happen to actual users while meeting the quality and timelines. Yes, R&D is activities are important for the country, but how it is prioritized and mapped to product delivery to meet user's requirement should also be taken into consideration.


Thank you bringing out the issue in detail.

When did the IAF re-equipment challenge exercise, I had realized that a bigger challenge still faced the IAF post MMRCA/Tejas Mk-1/Tejas Mk-2.

Broadly, IAF is faced with two challenges over next 16 years till 2030 (2015 included):

- Re-equipment dealing with phasing out of old aircraft type and induction of new a/c.

- Raising Squadron strength.

(a) The re-equipment challenge is in two phases:

(i) Phase 1:

Deals with Mig-21/Mig-27 replacement and this will continue till 2023-24 time frame. This is where MMRCA numbers (at they stand today), Su-30, Tejas Mk-1 and Tejas Mk-2 are important. Because of two very important factors - delay in Tejas induction and MMRCA negotiation - we've reached a stage that there will be next reduction in Squadron numbers as induction and phasing out is out of synchronization.

This Phase is likely to be taken care of by induction of Su-30MKI, Tejas Mk-1, Tejas Mk-2 and MMRCA/Equivalent. We’ll see phasing out of ~12 squadron worth of aircraft and induction of ~14 Squadron worth of a/c between the types listed above.

However, it is important to understand that except Su-30MKI production schedule, everything else is on shaky grounds so far. Tejas Mk-1 production will take time to stabilize and first two squadrons will be used more to sort out the issues between IAF, DRDO and HAL. Tejas Mk-2 development is still out in the future with production likely to start by 2022. And we all know where we stand on MMRCA.

I think when looking at the above scenario, one can understand why IAF is so desperate to get on with MMRCA – it has far lesser risks than a new project like Tejas Mk-2 and is more likely to be available on time, even with accepted delay levels like in Su-30 MKI program. Though, I think we’re trying to rectify short-falls in our contract negotiations and documentation. HAL has a much better chance of delivering a project under ‘ToT’ given the past record in this segment.

(ii) Phase 2:

This is when Jaguar DARIN III, Mirage-2000-5 and Mig-29 UPG will start getting long in the tooth. IAF will need at least 5+3+3 = ~12 squadron worth of aircraft at minimum. And this will happen towards latter part of coming decade. This is where AMCA becomes extremely important. The neighborhood would’ve gone drastic change over next 15 years as would have the technology. IMO, Chinese would start transitioning to next level technology on mass scale in another ten-years time and by 2030, we’d in midst of higher threat levels.

(b) Increase in squadron strength

The induction of Su-30MKI, Tejas Mk-1, Tejas Mk-2 and MMRCA/Equivalent will allow IAF to simply maintain 39-40 squadrons.

For the IAF to reach 45 squadrons force for two front wars, it will need 5-6 fresh squadrons. This is going to be a toss-up between Tejas Mk-2 and MMRCA/equivalent to fill these numbers.

The talk of another ~60 MMRCA over 126 number points to MMRCA filling up at least three squadrons. So, further 03 squadron worth of a/c is more than likely to come from Tejas Mk-2.

However, whatever be the case, IAF will NOT reach 45 squadron mark before 2028-2030 timeframe. If everything goes OK, it will simply stabilize the Squadron numbers by 2026-27.

Therefore, when people talk about timelines or discuss about IAF not having Plan B, please do keep these ground realities in mind. R&D projects are important but important still is the security of the country. Unless we manage the operational requirement and imperatives of R&D, we will continue to face such challenges.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17952
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 13 Jan 2015 17:08

>>Therefore, when people talk about timelines or discuss about IAF not having Plan B, please do keep these ground realities in mind. R&D projects are important but important still is the security of the country

Problem is the imports made in the interests of security rarely deliver the required capability or eat it from elsewhere. For instance, whats the true price of the Rafale deal and why did the IAF not press for more funds for the Su-30 MKI fleet and its upgrade as a priority as versus a new acquisition?

deejay
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3858
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby deejay » 13 Jan 2015 17:39

RV while I see the logic in your post above, we must also take in to consideration the Naval air arm in calculations of 2030 to check our sqn numbers. A 40 /45/50 sqn fleet need not be all with the IAF.

IAF's own fighter fleet will need to be counted with respect to new doctrines and net work centric war making potential. All present calculations appear very conventional and justifications are not available.

A major boost to air arm will be addition of UCAV's to the fleet of (probably) all 03 services. This means conventional aircraft dependance will reduce.

Another important consideration: The journey from 'import' to 'desi' will be long, complicated and full of 'labour pains'. We may just have to buckle under and accept the design phase aircraft as possible replacements. This can be mitigated with the knowledge that LCA Mk1 is ready and we can ramp up productions if push comes to shove. But Rafale is an industry killer. The amount of money we will pay Dassault is certainly not going to add the desired benefits. The medium role with AMCA is desirable. If we can invest 1/3 the amount of USD 30 Billion on AMCA development, I am sure time lines can move up.

If we take the time of initial MMRCA consideration (around 2004); the LCA Mk1 was not ready fully, LCA Mk2 was not talked of and fifth gen aircraft proliferation in the neighbourhood wasn't a reality. 2014 presents new realities and Rafale with its cost as constraint 1 and its 4.5 gen as constraint 2 does not justify itself. So if we have to invest in 4 or 4.5 gen LCA and Su 30 MKIs are better bet (IMVHO).

A more rationalised sqn strength will be required for IAF and planning for fleet levels for 02 front war, meaning 45 -50 sqn may be far fetched. I am not sure that all the hulla gulla on fleet strength is well researched or thought of (my thoughts and no source).

Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Cosmo_R » 13 Jan 2015 19:51

^^^"The induction of Su-30MKI, Tejas Mk-1, Tejas Mk-2 and MMRCA/Equivalent will allow IAF to simply maintain 39-40 squadrons. "

But this makes MMRCA a gap filler. At $20bn? If the idea is squadron strength, HAL with its 'deep license' can surely do incremental upgrades like F-15 'Silent Eagle' stuff as well bringing availability from 58%to 85% (that like adding 25% more planes).

JMT

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36303
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 13 Jan 2015 21:19

Tejas Mk-2 and AMCA MUST HAVE common platform components. Towards this componentry, is where most DRDO funds must be spent.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7635
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 13 Jan 2015 21:43

Karan M wrote:<SNIP>Problem is the imports made in the interests of security rarely deliver the required capability or eat it from elsewhere. For instance, whats the true price of the Rafale deal and why did the IAF not press for more funds for the Su-30 MKI fleet and its upgrade as a priority as versus a new acquisition?


Karan - upgrade to capability of Su-30 MKI will still not address the number issue.

Secondly, whatever be the ground situation with respect to domestic R&D, Services have to answer on their main charter - that is the maintaining the territorial integrity of the country. And permutation and combination thereof.

I've stated this before and I will repeat this again - in absence of any national security strategy which encompasses all the inter-related aspects like requirement of Services, domestic R&D capability, production capability etc. Services have to look out for themselves. And be able to perform their primary duty. So, it isn't a surprise that they try and go for a proven platforms.

MMRCA/Equivalent and Su-30 MKI are the only surety as far as the replacement and transition requirement is concerned.

Someone like you is best positioned to do this - just look around for projects developed by DRDO which are not running against the clock as far as replacing an existing system in service is concerned. These projects have minimum pressure from Services concerned. Pinaka, Dhruv, Akash Mk1, EW equipment and various radars come into mind.

It is easy for people to talk about F-35 not firing gun for X years or Eurofighter attaining incremental capability in tranches - but have people ever wondered what is (a) threat facing the European countries and ecosystem of support which USA gives them under aegis of NATO (b) What is the squadron strength of USAF and the a/c type it operates presently?

What is common to both situations above is lack of replacement pressure which allows for absorbing timeline delay. Not so in our case. We're on a razor thin margin.

If you've time, do this exercise for fun - I've listed the number of squadron per a/c type (in the IAF Re-equipment thread) along with retirement schedule till 2024-25. And you've some ball numbers for 2025-2030 scenario.

What would you do differently to ensure transition, ensuring increment in capability which survives 10 years at least into future and increase in Squadron strength to fight two-front war?

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7635
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 13 Jan 2015 21:47

Cosmo_R wrote:^^^"The induction of Su-30MKI, Tejas Mk-1, Tejas Mk-2 and MMRCA/Equivalent will allow IAF to simply maintain 39-40 squadrons. "

But this makes MMRCA a gap filler. At $20bn? If the idea is squadron strength, HAL with its 'deep license' can surely do incremental upgrades like F-15 'Silent Eagle' stuff as well bringing availability from 58%to 85% (that like adding 25% more planes).

JMT


First - we're on a razor thin margin as far as replacement requirement and time-line is concerned. So, you need project(s) which you know will for sure add numbers in a given timeline. That is MMRCA and Su-30 MKI for you.

Second - whatever enters service over next 10 years has to remain relevant - with periodic upgrades - for another 15 years minimum. That is where something like Rafale comes in.

For IAF, Su-30 MKI, MMRCA/Equivalent and Tejas Mk-2 are the pivot around which transition to 5th and 5+ generation happen.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7635
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby rohitvats » 13 Jan 2015 22:15

deejay wrote:RV while I see the logic in your post above, we must also take in to consideration the Naval air arm in calculations of 2030 to check our sqn numbers. A 40 /45/50 sqn fleet need not be all with the IAF.

The fighter component of Naval Air Arm (NAA) will be developed and evolved basis the role which IN is likely to play in the region. As it is, their first priority is to develop a Carrier based fleet which can address all the requirements of the fleet - both air defense and surface attack as extension of naval strategy. Unless, NAA reaches a level where it has land based fighter assets - like couple of Mig-29K/Su-30 MKI/Rafale squadron - I don't think we can count the NAA as part of the equation.

IAF's own fighter fleet will need to be counted with respect to new doctrines and net work centric war making potential. All present calculations appear very conventional and justifications are not available.

Well, IAF would've given the justification to the GOI and it is GOI in it's wisdom which will accept or reject these justifications. Unless, you present a comprehensive analysis (either yours or from third party), I don't think it makes any sense to even go down this line of reasoning. BTW, we're just about scratching the surface with these factors. Be it NCW or PGM or AWACS. And we also need to understand that threat is evolving. Where will be PLAAF in 2030 and what composition it is likely to have?

A major boost to air arm will be addition of UCAV's to the fleet of (probably) all 03 services. This means conventional aircraft dependance will reduce.

Again, we're going down the fantasy lane. We have no clue how this will play out when it does. For example, can you answer either ways that IAF will raise it's first UCAV Squadron by 2040 before we start bringing them into equation?

Another important consideration: The journey from 'import' to 'desi' will be long, complicated and full of 'labour pains'. We may just have to buckle under and accept the design phase aircraft as possible replacements. This can be mitigated with the knowledge that LCA Mk1 is ready and we can ramp up productions if push comes to shove. But Rafale is an industry killer. The amount of money we will pay Dassault is certainly not going to add the desired benefits. The medium role with AMCA is desirable. If we can invest 1/3 the amount of USD 30 Billion on AMCA development, I am sure time lines can move up.

There is no argument against your point above. Question is this - what happens to capability of the force which is supposed to guard the skies for you? What good will a R&D project be if your adversary can use the deterioration in your capability to smack you?

My submission is pretty simple: Whatever decision the government takes, it should address all the concerns in a 360 degree manner. If the GOI of the day is OK with IAF numbers going down, not import a/c and fund only domestic product, then so be it. But one would expect the same GOI to send an unambiguous message that we'll rain down a couple of hundred cruise missiles and Agni if anyone gets ideas.

You cannot look at issues in isolation.

If you're trying to address the matter of national security by developing domestic R&D capability and curbing imports, than you should also be ready with national policy to deal with external threats. Especially, given the state of your armed forces.


If we take the time of initial MMRCA consideration (around 2004); the LCA Mk1 was not ready fully, LCA Mk2 was not talked of and fifth gen aircraft proliferation in the neighbourhood wasn't a reality. 2014 presents new realities and Rafale with its cost as constraint 1 and its 4.5 gen as constraint 2 does not justify itself. So if we have to invest in 4 or 4.5 gen LCA and Su 30 MKIs are better bet (IMVHO).


Honestly, I find this talk of generations and technology obsolescence quite funny. I could understand technology gap between a Mig-21 and F-16 having a serious enough impact on overall operational capability of an AF but not between '4.5' Gen Rafale and F-35. Especially, when the electronics inside an a/c are upgraded to keep pace with technology. And as you said, with a/c becoming part of overall capability profile of an AF.

A more rationalised sqn strength will be required for IAF and planning for fleet levels for 02 front war, meaning 45 -50 sqn may be far fetched. I am not sure that all the hulla gulla on fleet strength is well researched or thought of (my thoughts and no source).

I've answered this above. Frankly, unless you are willing to do some serious number crunching to address this point, I would not encourage to this argument route.


Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Cosmo_R » 14 Jan 2015 00:07

SaiK wrote:Tejas Mk-2 and AMCA MUST HAVE common platform components. Towards this componentry, is where most DRDO funds must be spent.


LCA Mk1 and Mk2 only have 45% commonality. Perhaps the 55% is the basis for the AMCA?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36303
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 14 Jan 2015 01:04

I am excited by SC blades maturity from midani. Hopefully they get the jigs ready for production and begin to incorporate into an up-thrusted K10/11 to produce a 110kN variant soon. This will satisfy both AMCA and Mk2 upgrades. Also a series of Migs can be upgraded to the K11/12 variants.

I sincerely hope modi gov sack GTRE team head, and get a new mgmt team to take over, and engage our lab boys to perform better. much better than they have been engaged with. Salary hike should not be a concern.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36303
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 15 Jan 2015 19:05

so, it is going to be CAMEL, DLJ and IITJ to work on stealth! nice to know current work is going on in DLJ

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16242
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 15 Jan 2015 19:57

Salary hike should not be a concern


Supposedly India saved (or will save) something to the tune of $50 billion due to the current slide in oil prices. That amount is being rerouted to other areas of the budget. This should help with the Def component too.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4123
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 19 Jan 2015 07:55

rohitvats wrote:
Karan M wrote:<SNIP>Problem is the imports made in the interests of security rarely deliver the required capability or eat it from elsewhere. For instance, whats the true price of the Rafale deal and why did the IAF not press for more funds for the Su-30 MKI fleet and its upgrade as a priority as versus a new acquisition?


Karan - upgrade to capability of Su-30 MKI will still not address the number issue.

...


Order more Su-30MKI to address the number issue while simultaneously perform MLU and increase its fleet availability. The ecosystem to do this already exists; costs and timelines are known; integrated weapons are in inventory.

Same can't be said for a new type in Rafale, especially with a complex contract that is being negotiated for over 3 years. As with the Su-30MKI experience, we will only really know when a CAG report comes out a decade later pertaining to the Rafale ToT, production, lifecycle costs and among other things its hidden costs. One can only imagine the costs of Rafale's weapons package--French weapons are not cheap and it doesn't use the ones in service (exceptions: MICA).

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7486
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 19 Jan 2015 08:29

It is easy for people to talk about F-35 not firing gun for X years or Eurofighter attaining incremental capability in tranches - but have people ever wondered what is (a) threat facing the European countries and ecosystem of support which USA gives them under aegis of NATO (b) What is the squadron strength of USAF and the a/c type it operates presently?

What is common to both situations above is lack of replacement pressure which allows for absorbing timeline delay. Not so in our case. We're on a razor thin margin.


Eurofighter issue is that of partner non-committal (until perhaps, recently). For the F-35, it is simply a case of deliberate spin and/or poor reporting. There is no good reason for the USMC, or the USAF to send the F-35 out into battle with the ISIS post IOC. IOC simply gives them more deployment flexibility to go out and get more people to touch the jet, get it to the bases where it is going to operate on a forward deployed basis and get feedback before high tempo ops closer to or post FOC which for the USAF is a couple of years later. Furthermore, 2-4 months post IOC (USAF), every F-35 delivered is going to have the software required to fire the gun and would also carry the gun therefore if for some reason the weapons system is asked to go to war before reaching FOC there is no good reason why it cannot operate the gun because it would have all the software and hardware to enable it. All F-35's delivered starting January of 2017 would have the required software and hardware to use the gun. Soft IOC was decided back in 2010, as there was really no good reason to wait for the full Systems development build to be certified before the services could begin to use the aircraft at a more "operationally" relevant tempo. The Marines and the Air-force would both for example deploy the aircraft to Iwakuni in Japan, and Alaska respectivly for it to start building experience of working with assets in the region even before it gets its full SDD capability around 2018. It would most likely also get a go at red flag or northern edge before the full capability for the SDD is delivered. This was done after a long hard look at the program and both the services that had mature platforms (The F-35C enterprise is quite immature in terms of maintainers, depot's, capability, testing and syllabus) thought that it made a heck of a lot of sense to send operational jets that they have had to operate under "development" pre-conditions for a few years (the program uses a watered down concurrency model of the f-16) to front line squadrons and unshackle them from the constraints that exist Pre-IOC.

member_28911
BRFite
Posts: 537
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby member_28911 » 25 Jan 2015 13:25

Image

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7255
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Prasad » 25 Jan 2015 13:27

To my nonaeronautical engg eyes, that wing looks very similar to the lca wing. Is it?

member_28640
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby member_28640 » 25 Jan 2015 16:41

Respected gurus,
Any idea if this model being displayed to our rm is the model that was frozen...

Sumeet
BRFite
Posts: 1380
Joined: 22 May 2002 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Sumeet » 25 Jan 2015 17:42

Prasad wrote:To my nonaeronautical engg eyes, that wing looks very similar to the lca wing. Is it?


That is more of trapezoidal shape wing and not a delta shape which is the case with LCA.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5100
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby jamwal » 25 Jan 2015 17:56

Prasad wrote:To my nonaeronautical engg eyes, that wing looks very similar to the lca wing. Is it?


Tejas is cranked delta
Image

AMCA is somewhat like this

Image

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16242
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 25 Jan 2015 18:19


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16242
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 25 Jan 2015 18:21

A larger model of what has been displayed a year or so ago.

Is that the only incomplete picture?

No ones from the rear or the front?

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17952
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Karan M » 25 Jan 2015 20:35

dislike the square rudder fins at the AMCA rear. dont look great. :((


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Shakthi and 53 guests