Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

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.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 10 Jul 2017 20:20

JayS wrote:
NRao wrote:^^^^^^

:( . I searched for the word "Software" and did not find it.

I would think they have used some software to develop the LCA. And, would *expect* to build a more robust one for the AMCA. One which will actually simulate, at the very least, real estate issues at a very granular level. On top of that CFD, etc would be just much greater (which I think they have). VA would be absolutely crucial for an AMCA project.

Its implied Saar, in LCA project, ADA/NAL built a lot of SW base from literally ZERO capability, CAD, CAF, FEM all. One of their Composite lay up SW is even being used by like of Airbus. Now they have free access to all commercial tools. But that has made them overly relying on them. Yes they still lack the depth to in-house tools which only come with a lot of RnD and experimentation. That will come only over time. But even now its impressive I would say.


Yeah. Silly on my part. Apologies.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 10 Jul 2017 20:30

^^^
ADA - Information and Computing (ICT)

ADA - Virtual Reality (VR)
Image

ADA - ASMS
Image


Also, take a look at ADA Annual Report 2015-2016. Search for CAD or CFD. Page 78 has expenditures amounts on various software activities.

Cybaru
BRFite
Posts: 1920
Joined: 12 Jun 2000 11:31
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Cybaru » 11 Jul 2017 00:44

ArjunPandit wrote:A noob pooch, what all capabilities of LCA can be utilized or ported to AMCA
1. Radar
2. FBW
3. Armament: Missiles, Bombs
4. Experience in flight testing
5. Aircraft Design


ALL!

Eric Leiderman
BRFite
Posts: 318
Joined: 26 Nov 2010 08:56

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Eric Leiderman » 11 Jul 2017 01:01

Hi in reply to Jay S as to why engines spaced apart would assist effect TVC
Please note the below is conjecture

There are two centres as far as an aircraft goes on is centre of gravity the other one I know exists however cant get the acronym now.
Both these are located along the centre line of the aircraft.
Using basic grade 9 physics if the engines thrust is off the centre line (by an angle in a TVC mode) the moment created That is force x distance fm CG would be greater. This is very a simplistic assumption but it is commonsensical.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 554
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby ArjunPandit » 11 Jul 2017 02:46

Cybaru wrote:
ArjunPandit wrote:A noob pooch, what all capabilities of LCA can be utilized or ported to AMCA
1. Radar
2. FBW
3. Armament: Missiles, Bombs
4. Experience in flight testing
5. Aircraft Design


ALL!

Thanks, but is there any way that i can research on this further, to may be prepare a small write up that those 33 years havent gone down the drain. Any guidance in this regard will be very helpful

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 11 Jul 2017 06:37

^^^
Start by looking through ADA website and their annual reports. Look through DRDO website and publications to find out related activities from various labs. Read up on BR posts (use search keywords). Find out what tools and facilities have been created and are being (or could be) used on AMCA. And so on...

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 11 Jul 2017 07:00

srai,

Thanks!!!!!!

Will look at them when I have some time.

But, all said and done, I am very bullish on the AMCA. I am betting it will be better than anything the Chinese can field.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10672
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Gagan » 12 Jul 2017 18:44

Most likely:
The chinese want a flying prototype out in a hurry. The PLAAF chief was not very pleased with their first stealth design, and said that the plane in its present form was not acceptable
ADA is digging deeper and doing a lot of R&D. I will expect their end product to be a world beater

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 12 Jul 2017 23:56

Ran across this Feb, 2017 article. So, as a FYI:

Aviation Week :: Feb 23, 2017 :: India’s AMCA Fighter Targets Mid-2020s First Flight

BENGALURU, India—Preliminary design of India’s proposed Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) will begin in March, with a target of flying the aircraft in 2024 and making it ready for service as early as 2030.

As the defense ministry’s Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) awaits approval for full-scale development, an upgraded version of the General Electric F414 has become the likely engine for the twin-engine indigenous fighter.

“We have completed the configurations and the feasibility study, and proposed users are happy with them,” says an official involved in the project at ADA. The agency, part of the ministry’s Defense Research and Development Organization, has until now been working on concept design of the AMCA, presented in the form of a model in 2015, by which time the general configuration was frozen.

The decision on whether to launch the program is with the office of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a defense ministry official says. Saab and Boeing have expressed interest in helping with development. The ADA official says preliminary design will begin in March.

ADA is allowing at least six years between flight testing and entry into service, in part because of its experience in developing the Tejas light fighter, which needed 14 years of flight testing. Experience in verifying Tejas systems will support the shorter period for the AMCA, the ADA official says.

But the schedule is elastic. Although the official says the fighter will fly in seven years and be ready as early as 2030, the clock cannot start running until the government approves program launch. Another program source points out that the duration of flight testing is hard to predict. Further, ADA has shown a timeline that envisions a first flight in 2025 and serial production from 2036. The Lockheed Martin F-35A needed nine years of flight testing before it became initially operational.

The engine will be chosen soon, the ADA official says, giving no specific date. The choices are the Eurojet EJ200 of the Eurofighter Typhoon, Safran M88 of the Dassault Rafale, and the GE F414, used in the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, KF-X, Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen and the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) Tejas Mk. 2.

ADA sees advantages in choosing the F414, the official says, without elaborating. Two are obvious: experience working with GE in the Tejas program and the F414’s thrust.

ADA says the AMCA needs an engine of 110 kN (24,700 lb.), well above the ratings of the EJ200 and M88. The F414-404, installed in the Super Hornet, generates 22,000 lb. of thrust, but GE is offering an enhanced F414 that it says is in the 26,000-lb. class. GE also has remarkably rich experience in integrating the F414 and its predecessor, the F404, in different airframes.

Like most modern fighters, the AMCA will be a multi-role aircraft. Although it will be shaped for stealth, a non-stealthy version has also been planned. Features will include a weapons bay, serpentine engine intakes, thrust vectoring, modular avionics, integrated aircraft health management, and a radar with an active electronically scanning array using gallium-nitride technology. The aircraft is intended to fly supersonically without afterburning.

ADA proposes that AMCA will replace the Mirage 2000 fighter and Jaguar strike aircraft in Indian air force service. A carrier-borne version is also proposed. AMCA design work began informally in 2008 and became official in 2011.

The configuration has features that have become familiar on stealth fighters: apart from the weapon bay, these features include fuselage faceting, canted twin tail fins, edge alignment, and a forward-swept trailing edge of the main plane.

`“Everyone’s stealth fighter looks the same,” says an engineer who is in charge of designing another.

Rishi_Tri
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 74
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Rishi_Tri » 13 Jul 2017 13:50

First flight in 2024 or 2025! Didnt know that Tejas Mk 2 is already flying.

Anyway, if production starts in 20236, that is a leisurely 30 years of design and development. We seem to be taking LCA experience in an entirely different direction i.e., take as much time as possible.

Lets hope things are little faster, else more Rafales or other planes shall get ordered.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17598
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Philip » 13 Jul 2017 14:00

A lot hinges on the success of the LCA.If the LCA is sidelined,AMCA will suffer.Unless we make a complete success of the LCA,the AMCA will suffer the same fate,where we are struggling to achieve a grand total of just 8 aircraft/yr prod. rate!

Secondly,the piece which says that both a non-stealthy and stealthy aircraft will be produced makes little sense,or it already acknowledges even before the aircraft has flown,that it will have limited ordnance capability in internal weapons bays. If this is the case,where the AMCA carries even less munitions than the M2K/Jags which it is supposed to replace,it will be a v.expensive joke! We will need twice the number of costly AMCAs to replace legacy upgraded M2Ks,Jags and 29UGs. :rotfl:

Some trailing thoughts. In another report seen elsewhere,it was mentioned that a stealth version of the LCA was being considered. That would be a logical step forward to success in the AMCA programme. if the stealth LCA leapfrogged over the MK-2,much dev. time could be saved. Whatever we can leverage out of the FGFA deal (if it goes through),would be available simultaneously,assisting parallel prorgammes.

However,the fundamental requirement of any multi-role strike aircraft is to shoot down enemy aircraft and deliver munitions/PGMs,LRCMs,whatever carrying a decent payload. Stealth imposes internal weapons' bay size and accompanying limitations. What therefore will be the "bang for the buck" equation for AMCA? To my mind,it should be an even larger aircraft,giving us extended range,tactical bombing capability at the very least. A stealth bomber programme associated with AMCA would be extremely valuable.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2176
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Marten » 13 Jul 2017 14:22

Rishi_Tri wrote:First flight in 2024 or 2025! Didnt know that Tejas Mk 2 is already flying.

Anyway, if production starts in 20236, that is a leisurely 30 years of design and development. We seem to be taking LCA experience in an entirely different direction i.e., take as much time as possible.

Lets hope things are little faster, else more Rafales or other planes shall get ordered.

1. LCA Mk 2 flying? Please do not make bad jokes. No funds are sanctioned. Feel free to ping Shri Jaitley on Twitter and let us know if he intends allowing this model to develop.
2. Sanction for AMCA FSED phase 1 was in late 2015. How does your timeline say 30 years? If you have seen a sanction or firm order for prototypes, please do share the source. The configuration study itself has only recently completed.

Gurus, we need to build the timeline for AON to Sanctions from MoD at every stage to illustrate the delays that are caused by our illustrious babucracy. Could anyone help with data points? I shall research but time is a constraint.

PS: Philip saar, finally! :-)

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 13 Jul 2017 15:47

I would say go full speed on the AMCA. First flight around 2025 would be a great achievement! Flight testing would require minimum 10-years (or between 1200hrs (IOC) to 2000hrs (FOC) flight hours). Production starting or first deliveries by 2036 sound feasible. Keep the Mk.1 simpler for quicker induction. Futuristic features (takes time to R&D) should be iteratively added in Mk.2 etc.

As for LCA Mk.2, I would say make that Mk.1A but with Kaveri-Safran engine and Uttam AESA. Target production for 2025 onwards. Order 200 units and setup private assembly line for half the orders.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 13 Jul 2017 16:17

srai wrote: Flight testing would require minimum 10-years (or between 1200hrs (IOC) to 2000hrs (FOC) flight hours). Production starting or first deliveries by 2036 sound feasible. Keep the Mk.1 simpler for quicker induction. Futuristic features (takes time to R&D) should be iteratively added in Mk.2 etc.


As a reference, the F-22A (program not including YF-22 or any of the non EMD stuff) had an Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase that conducted 7600+ flight test hours with nearly 3500 sorties (not including the radar-test-bed). This was with minimal air-to ground capability since a lot of it came later in increments.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 13 Jul 2017 16:42

brar_w wrote:
srai wrote: Flight testing would require minimum 10-years (or between 1200hrs (IOC) to 2000hrs (FOC) flight hours). Production starting or first deliveries by 2036 sound feasible. Keep the Mk.1 simpler for quicker induction. Futuristic features (takes time to R&D) should be iteratively added in Mk.2 etc.


As a reference, the F-22A (program not including YF-22 or any of the non EMD stuff) had an Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase that conducted 7600+ flight test hours with nearly 3500 sorties (not including the radar-test-bed). This was with minimal air-to ground capability since a lot of it came later in increments.


I remember those 1200 hrs (IOC) and 2000 hrs (FOC) from Eurofighter/Rafale program a long while ago. If you look at the LCA Mk.1, IOC-2 happened around that 1200 hrs mark and FOC is happening around 2000 hrs.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 13 Jul 2017 16:56

Right but this is a 5th generation fighter. Lots of added test points to cover dynamic RCS and IR testing, weapons bays, weapons integration, and other sensors on board. Plus what is to be a significantly larger software footprint which also requires increased operational testing on the actual hardware.

Even though the F-35 is not a good reference program (three variants, large and diverse SDD weapons integration requirement etc) AF2 (second CTOL test aircraft for the SDD phase) which just does flight-sciences work for the USAF version clocked in 1000 hours by itself well before IOC and will likely clock 1500 or so hours (if not more) by FOC. Again, it is not the only CTOL aircraft contributing to the SDD phase.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP0tsNszz7I
Last edited by brar_w on 13 Jul 2017 17:21, edited 1 time in total.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 13 Jul 2017 17:13

^^^
I remember reading a bit on F-22 science aircraft doing the most flight hours.

In terms of number of flights, the LCA program has managed around 3400 sorties so far but each sortie averages around 35 minutes or so. With larger AMCA, we can probably expect a test sortie to average 60 minutes or more. That would make it around 4000 hrs with the same number of flights.
Last edited by srai on 13 Jul 2017 17:19, edited 1 time in total.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 13 Jul 2017 17:18

Flights don't scale like that since its not just about sorties and hours but also about test-points that need to be hit. On some occasions you hit multiple test points per sortie, while with others you need multiple sorties to hit a test point. Since the heart of the 5th generation is an integrated sensor fusion you are closely tied to maturity and stability as has been demonstrated on mission systems testing with both the operational US 5th gen. aircraft. On flight sciences bit as I said you add bay dynamics both from a pure test point perspective and then once the product has a mature software from weapons testing perspective. Dynamic RCS testing is another 5th gen unique component and requires upgrades to the range infrastructure. AIAA has some detailed reports on the F-22 program, and early F-35 Flight testing observations have also been published by folks involved with it. Its not a simple scale up from 4th gen programs..

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 13 Jul 2017 17:23

^^^
Flight programs are driven by test points. No disagreement there. Flight sortie and hours are meant as a rough guide ;)

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 13 Jul 2017 17:43

Correct and performing FTA on a fifth generation aircraft has so far proven to be quite challenging for those that have done it. Can a combined AMCA test force conclude its developmental program with a quarter of the F-22As test footprint? Perhaps. But it is highly unlikely. I most certainly wouldn’t assume that to be the case.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 13 Jul 2017 19:31

Mark Pearson addressing, what he, in his slide, calls "F414-AMCA", the engine for the AMCA.

This is from Feb, 2017. at Aero India 2017


Rewind to 59:00 to watch teh entire presentation. Provides a history of GE in India and more interestingly the contributions GE Bangaluru is making. How they have matured. And, the Pune facility to manufacture GE engines.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35358
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 13 Jul 2017 22:45

IAF would be definitely interested in thrust vectoring for AMCA. GE must note that - AMCA is a captive market for GE. Their 414-enhanced will get in for sure. A 15* 3D nozzle has already matured with Russia. An integration point that needs to be considered.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 13 Jul 2017 23:04

SaiK wrote:IAF would be definitely interested in thrust vectoring for AMCA. GE must note that - AMCA is a captive market for GE. Their 414-enhanced will get in for sure. A 15* 3D nozzle has already matured with Russia. An integration point that needs to be considered.


viewtopic.php?t=3351&start=2880#p2012004
viewtopic.php?t=3351&start=2640#p1821825

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35358
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 15 Jul 2017 21:59

From engineering management to manufacturing and marketing, we need to learn from these two countries
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/12 ... ighter-jet

ashish raval
BRFite
Posts: 1142
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 00:49
Location: London
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby ashish raval » 15 Jul 2017 22:11

SaiK wrote:From engineering management to manufacturing and marketing, we need to learn from these two countries
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/12 ... ighter-jet

Clearly French will dig their heals for their design, engines and avionics while Germany will only end up with manufacturing wings. This was primary reason France have Rafale in first place because they insisted on Rafale platform to be main fighter while German and UK wanted their design and components and this is why France refused to join eurofighter consortium. There is a reason why everyone hates France in Europe..

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 17 Jul 2017 12:44

SaiK wrote:From engineering management to manufacturing and marketing, we need to learn from these two countries
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/12 ... ighter-jet


...
The Franco-German plan actually sounds very similar to Airbus Defence and Space’s Future Combat Air System (FCAS) concept. The European aviation consortium, headquarters in Germany, first revealed this proposal in July 2016. FCAS itself was a response to a joint German-Spanish requirement, dubbed the Next Generation Weapon System (NGWS), which those two countries unveiled six months earlier. That proposal envisioned the new aircraft entering service sometime in the 2030 to 2040 time frame.
...


That's AMCA timelines as well!

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19750
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Austin » 17 Jul 2017 13:49

I think it is better for us to cancel the AMCA program in current form and join either the European , SoKo or other countries who are building a medium class 5th Gen Fighter , that way it wont meet the fate of LCA program and takes care of delays and risk mitigation & funding issues ..Forces too are happier via JV approach to any program

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 17 Jul 2017 15:03

The European program is in very early stage and it will take some time for them to settle down and come to an agreement. They signed a bunch of documents and had a bunch of meetings before the French walked out the last time around so this will need some form of discipline between the Germans and the French in the next 2-4 years. Only then once they have a framework of a program can others decide whether to join or not. South Korea on the other hand is probably most advanced as far as moving along on the program...they've picked an engine, signed a contract, have received technical assistance as part of their F-35 deal, and are testing sensors already. I don't think the AMCA needs to be cancelled just because of the LCA. In fact as a nation there needs to be lessons learned from the LCA and they need to move on at a faster rate on the AMCA.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19750
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Austin » 17 Jul 2017 15:22

Even if this is at early stage EU has tons of experience under its belt and most certainly far greater and higher than we have here not just Development but Production too.

AMCA will meet the same fate as LCA either it will be delayed , the user will reject it for xyz reason and time line will keep shifting , its better to have a partner who can mitigate preferably an experience one at that.

Armed force have accept JV venture more positively ( Barak/Brahmos ) and are happy to have a foreign partner assisting Indian one to meet technical deadlines and MOD will be happy that they have to fund not the full program.

LCA is just a symptom of problem and it wont dissapear just because we name it as AMCA ...So better to mitigate risk at early stage , Else post 2030 we will have a RFP for medium twin engine 5th gen fighter

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 17 Jul 2017 15:26

There is no program to gather "experience from" at this moment. They have merely signed agreements and will take a good number of years to actually develop a programatic structure and begin discussing the technical details of the proposal and how to go about it. Agreeing to pursue something together wasn't there problem the last time around..actually agreeing on the details were what caused them to depart in two different directions the last time. There were capability requirements, and work share disagreements that were insurmountable the last time they tried to make this work. The next time they will discuss this will be post German election but don't expect them to formalize anything in terms of an actual aircraft program till perhaps closer to 2020. If they can make this work then they would have learned their own lessons learnt but it would not be easy. France has divergent requirements (carrier ops) and Dassault is their primary concern given its privately held still.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2611
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 17 Jul 2017 15:46

Austin wrote:I think it is better for us to cancel the AMCA program in current form and join either the European , SoKo or other countries who are building a medium class 5th Gen Fighter , that way it wont meet the fate of LCA program and takes care of delays and risk mitigation & funding issues ..Forces too are happier via JV approach to any program


I think its a bad idea to get into the European programs. That too link our key fighter program with that. Partnership programs in Europe tend to get bogged down by too many political considerations rather than technical or economical points. Also the point about too many cooks and all. It would rather make sense to have JV with individual countries or companies on sub-system level such as Jet engine, AESA radar, sensor fusion or enabling technologies such as composites, 3D printing if they can offer good terms.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5893
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 17 Jul 2017 15:58

Jay, that is a lot like South Korea did by pairing certain key capabilities to their 5th generation acquisition (they got some, but were denied others) and this is also the approach Japan seems to be leaning towards.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2611
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 17 Jul 2017 19:32

brar_w wrote:Jay, that is a lot like South Korea did by pairing certain key capabilities to their 5th generation acquisition (they got some, but were denied others) and this is also the approach Japan seems to be leaning towards.


Quite so. I have worked with SKoreans for a while in defense domain. They seem to collect building blocks fomr outside for any new tech they want to make and then try to improvise from there. Japanese are a curious case. Despite being world leader in economy and technology elsewhere, they laggard in aerospace. But they are slowly and surely making it up, mostly with US' help. I do not follow much on the defense front but I see how MRJ/Hondajet is being developed.

It simply does not make sense to let go system design/integration ownership for a key defense program. And IMO its not necessary too. I would rather want India to go solo and launch AMCA project as a National project on a massive scale which could be used to disburse funding in key sectors of technology from top to bottom. In India, top down works better than bottom up. But clearly something is amiss and current dispensation is superslow on AMCA. So far all we have seen is a handful of scientists seating in ADA working on conceptual design, some basic level work on a few building blocks and merely 200 odd crores of funding for 5th Gen specific tech development for AMAC + UCAV. With government itself being so lethargic, and so much ground still needed to be covered, I doubt we will be in a situation to build AMCA in quick time. And we all know where this is heading. As a saving grace, rather than giving up on system ownership, it would be prudent to get the building blocks to fill the capability gaps. This would help keep AMCA strategic independence to a large extent.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35358
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 17 Jul 2017 21:59

2020, hopefully by which time, Snecma will help get those noise issues resolved and port the 81kN Kaveri into LCA and certify it. If this happens, folks, we all can be thrilled. Of course, we must learn from these two EU giants, and there is no gap there to keep. Ours is a maturity program issue without looking at certain detailed aspects. This would be a major step and an oomph factor for LCA Mk2/AMCA or other Russian upgrades.

Will a version following that for 95kN or even 110kN is anybody's guess here. Nothing but the engine tech will satisfy the biggest gaps we have. Of course, for AMCA, we might look at even 30 years beyond for a cruise capable dry thrusts that are beyond any project scope now. GE414++ is a given.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1000
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 18 Jul 2017 01:02

Would there be a merit in partnering with Israel in the development of AMCA ?

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15814
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby NRao » 18 Jul 2017 01:07

But their version of the F-35?

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3960
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Rakesh » 18 Jul 2017 01:26

Khalsa wrote:Would there be a merit in partnering with Israel in the development of AMCA ?

Khalsaji, Israel is a very budget strapped country. And therefore they will only develop what is unique to them or suits their operational needs - take a look at Barak 8 as a clear example. The missile will be fitted on the Sa'ar 6 corvettes of the Israeli Navy. With the induction of the Adir, the AMCA will serve no meaningful role. And what they buy off the shelf, they will swap most - if not all - the critical components with their own tech. They are masters at that. Gives them total autonomy to do what they want i.e. optimal utilization of the platform. They did that with the F-15, F-16 and will do that with the F-35 as well.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3556
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 18 Jul 2017 05:47

AMCA project should be Indian-led and driven by the IAF/IN requirements and participation. Where partnerships might make sense would be JV on some challenging technologies such as engines, stealth materials or sensor-fusion etc.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1000
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 19 Jul 2017 02:37

Read into the message of autonomy of over a platform.
I retract .... yes let AMCA be an Indian only project.

Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1000
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 22 Jul 2017 12:57

Image

Hello from MiG

that landing gear look Navalised to you ?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashok Sarraff, Google [Bot] and 24 guests