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.
Khalsa
BRFite
Posts: 1338
Joined: 12 Nov 2000 12:31
Location: NZL

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Khalsa » 06 Mar 2018 13:58

Image
Japan's Scraps Domestic Development of 5th Generation Stealth Fighter Jet
https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/japans-scraps-domestic-development-of-5th-generation-stealth-fighter-jet/

Has F-35 production cancelled a domestic industrial product ?
A lesson to learn here.

American F-16s killed the Lavi
American F35 may have killed this too.

However unlike Israel and Japan we are not that close to Amreeka.
We must have more domestic products and more control of our destiny.

Apologies , I know its not AMCA but this is a major event in the aviation industry especially for 5th Gen fighters, hence posting it across multiple threads.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6926
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Prasad » 06 Mar 2018 17:06

Challenges that lie ahead for us too with our next-gen programs.

brar_w wrote:Not this particular article, but I have posted about the impact of these things on the amount of re-works and touch labor required to complete an aircraft.I was actually surprised that Lockheed was able to deliver all 66 aircraft on time (despite loosing nearly 3 weeks to a productions stop) in 2017 as prior to this each aircraft delivery was delayed by at least 10 days or so... This is also why each and every aircraft that is produced gets its RCS tested prior to delivery to customer. Doing VLO is hard, and if Lockheed, after producing nearly 300 F-35s, 180+ F-22's, and 60+ F117's is still going through the learning curve then one can imagine how challenging the tolerances and requirements are and how closely the customer measures them.



Prasad wrote:I think Brarji posted on this issue earlier.

Stealth features responsible for half of F-35 defects, Lockheed program head states

“That’s something that no other weapon system since the F-22 has had to do, and the F-22 never did it at the rates that we’re trying to do it. Once we get a handle on that, you’re going to see a dramatic reduction in the quality escapes that are made around the LO system,” he said.

In order to reduce the F-35’s signature, the panels making up its airframe must be precisely aligned. As each panel goes through the production process — build, then installation, then joining to other panels — small deviations can make it very difficult to meet standards, even for an experienced mechanic.


Still, he allowed that some human error remains.

“On the other hand, we inadvertently scratch the coating system, and we have to repaint it. Or when the mechanics spray the airplane [with LO coating], not all of it is robotically sprayed. There’s some overspray, and they have to go clean that,” he said.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1568
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Manish_P » 06 Mar 2018 17:59

And such high level 5th Gen aircraft have to spend longer times in the hanger, after each flight, to get back to their required V/LO spec level.

So they need to be in good numbers if you are going up against even a near peer opponent, in a high intensity war.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6687
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 06 Mar 2018 18:10

There has been a lot of work done on ruggedizing Low Observables by reducing the reliance on coatings and by baking RAM into the skin of the aircraft. Furthermore, margins have been built in so that you can have LO features degraded yet still meet requirements for signature.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LpX_1hV40aY/T ... ief+LM.jpg

On the F-22, they went from a signature-based approach to a combat effectiveness based approach after a while and would only restore RCS before it became a hindrance to overall combat effectiveness and this helped boost readiness. But the F-22 is a nearly 30-year-old design so a lot has advanced since then.

The point though is an important one. Much like we went with a couple of radios and a legacy radar, to EO/IR+RF active and passive sensors, multi-band data-links and voice communications, video downlink capability etc..signature reduction measures boost capability and as such much like anything else you have to invest to maintain that advantage. This then leads to a system to measure the RCS over the course of day to day operations and then develop strategies to restore it in a timely and cost-effective fashion. This has also created a role that did not exist with operational squadrons in the past which is one more thing operators must prepare themselves when introducing a LO capability into their fleets. It is also a lot different when you go from a silver bullet fleet (F-22, B-2 for eg.) to a LO design being the staple of your air-force.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 63318
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Singha » 06 Mar 2018 18:34

its impossible for a full rcs testing chamber at airbases, these are the province of central OEM labs. they must have developed some portable equipment to do spot checks on any part of the a/c and some test for the coating itself. must be highly classified kit

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6687
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 06 Mar 2018 18:46

No not complete RCS testing but there is equipment and an electronic database they maintain to track events and wear and then model how it impacts RCS over operational life. This is then used to determine sustainment and when to restore RCS and to use trained maintainers to go ahead and apply those processes to get back to the desired levels (which like I said may only be 80% to the possible value as readiness and capability is always balanced when you have finite O&S budgets). The USAF, which has moved through multiple generations of LO aircraft has carved out a niche area of LO Aircraft structure maintenance (LOASM) as a career field. I believe I had poster an article describing this in the old JSF thread.

http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-low-obs ... -aviation/

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1568
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Manish_P » 07 Mar 2018 09:23

Basically removing all the jargon, in one word - 'compromise'.

The 0.005 sq mtr RCS or whatever it is out of the factory will not be the same after the first flight on the field and will progressively deteriorate unless enough time is spent, on field or off field, to re-achieve the initial level.

My question - approximately what is this time, as compared to say an F15 strike eagle or an F18E/F or a Su30

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6687
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 07 Mar 2018 16:18

Manish_P wrote:My question - approximately what is this time, as compared to say an F15 strike eagle or an F18E/F or a Su30


This is a tough question to answer as there is never a true "apples to apples" comparison given disparate systems. If one focuses just on RCS and signature management then it is obviously not comparable since the F-15 or Su-30 doesn't really need anything routinely there other than basic RAM paint that has been used since the 80s and 90s. But overall there are many areas where 5th generation aircraft are easier to maintain and have components with higher reliability so the net result is what needs to be compared.

Another way to look at this is that the F-22A (stealth aircraft with signature requirements) in 2015 had a mission capability rate of 67% vs around 71% of that of the F-15C and E fleet. Similarly, the only USAF F-35A operational Unit (at Hill AFB Utah) is hitting a mission availability rate of 70% (2017) and I am willing to bet that these squadrons are cycling through Red-Flag or similar large force exercises, and are flying much more than an average F-22 or F-15 unit given they are at an early stage of their learning and have deployed abroad much more frequently and will be deploying even more through the course of the year.

The 0.005 sq mtr RCS or whatever it is out of the factory will not be the same after the first flight on the field and will progressively deteriorate unless enough time is spent, on field or off field, to re-achieve the initial level.


Since signature management and stealth are not exactly new, I am sure they have figured out ways to model dynamic RCS and its effects over time. In fact, the USAF keeps a couple of aircraft constantly kitted for dynamic RCS testing with both RF and IR sensors and many aircraft are seen alongside them from time to time. LINK LINK LINK. Others, as they build up their LO fleets would likely do the same as it is a good investment to make sure you are operating your equipment in the right way and optimizing the capability. It also feeds back into your design as you produce next generation systems.

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 1568
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Manish_P » 07 Mar 2018 17:18

brar_w wrote:
Manish_P wrote:My question - approximately what is this time, as compared to say an F15 strike eagle or an F18E/F or a Su30


This is a tough question to answer as there is never a true "apples to apples" comparison given disparate systems. If one focuses just on RCS and signature management then it is obviously not comparable since the F-15 or Su-30 doesn't really need anything routinely there other than basic RAM paint that has been used since the 80s and 90s. But overall there are many areas where 5th generation aircraft are easier to maintain and have components with higher reliability so the net result is what needs to be compared.


Yes. My bad.. i didn't formulate the question correctly (unfortunate effect of travelling in a rather bumpy public bus).

For a 5th Gen stealth/VLO is (or has been projected to be) the defining difference. I am finding it a bit difficult to formulate my question but it is basically this - say after a 2 hours flight over hostile territory, how much time (very approx), to do the next flight with the same level of RCS a) when stationed in the US b) when stationed on non US bases

brar_w wrote:Another way to look at this is that the F-22A (stealth aircraft with signature requirements) in 2015 had a mission capability rate of 67% vs around 71% of that of the F-15C and E fleet. Similarly, the only USAF F-35A operational Unit (at Hill AFB Utah) is hitting a mission availability rate of 70% (2017) and I am willing to bet that these squadrons are cycling through Red-Flag or similar large force exercises, and are flying much more than an average F-22 or F-15 unit given they are at an early stage of their learning and have deployed abroad much more frequently and will be deploying even more through the course of the year.


What is the difference in capability rate and availability rate. Is the baseline time (period unit) the same?

PS: Please take this over to the International or US military thread as it would be OT here (i am not very familiar with how to move posts)

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6687
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 07 Mar 2018 17:27

Manish_P wrote: say after a 2 hours flight over hostile territory, how much time (very approx), to do the next flight with the same level of RCS a) when stationed in the US b) when stationed on non US bases



I think the question is immaterial for a whole lot of operators out there because as I said (and as the interview I provided states) RCS margins are built into the design which allows for operational degradation. At the unit-level, you usually have more operationally oriented metrics that measure the overall capability of an aircraft to perform a mission. So an operator will have to see and certify that the aircraft is not Non-Mission-Capable after a few sorties on account of work that needs to be done to restore its RCS. The whole idea is to not have to do this after each and every 2-hour flight but allow it to gracefully degrade, with margin built in, so that combat effectiveness can still be maintained for a prolonged period of time. If the picture you have in your head is that after each and every flight the aircraft's RCS needs to be restored, then you are mistaken as this was perhaps something that needed to be done with first generation stealth aircraft... nowadays you do not have to do it. They measure overall fleet touch ours and present the data as such (like for every one hour I need X or XX hours as maintenance) but that is for the entire enterprise like taking the overall number of hours the fleet has flown and dividing it by the number of man-hours spent to sustain that fleet at the unit-level.

The rest I'll respond in the Int. Aero thread.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35950
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 10 Mar 2018 00:11

I'd not be going OT by posting here for discussions (hope).


Will America's Bombers Be Able to Defeat Russian Air Defense?

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... ense-24826


“The US is now developing its fourth generation of stealth aircraft. The computational capabilities that were available to design the F-117 and B-2 are dwarfed by the power now available to design teams,” writes the Mitchell Institute essay, by Maj. Gen. Mark Barrett, USAF (Ret.) and Col. Mace Carpenter, USAF (Ret.)

Stealth technology works by engineering an aircraft with external contours and heat signatures designed to elude detection from enemy radar systems. The absence of defined edges, noticeable heat emissions, weapons hanging on pylons or other easily detectable aircraft features, means that radar "pings" can have trouble receiving a return electromagnetic signal allowing them to identify an approaching bomber. Since the speed of light (electricity) is known, and the time of travel of electromagnetic signals can be determined as well, computer algorithms are then able to determine the precise distance of an enemy object.

However, when it comes to stealth aircraft, the return signal may be either non-existant or of an entirely different character than that of an actual aircraft. A stealth aircraft will, for instance, appear in the shape of a bird or insect to enemy radar.

Given the increased threat envelope created by cutting edge air defenses, and the acknowledgement that stealth aircraft are indeed much more vulnerable than when they first emerged, Air Force developers are increasingly viewing stealth capacity as something which includes a variety of key parameters.

This includes not only stealth configuration, IR suppression and radar-evading materials but also other important elements such as electronic warfare “jamming” defenses, operating during adverse weather conditions to lower the acoustic signature and conducting attacks in tandem with other less-stealthy aircraft likely to command attention from enemy air defense systems.

Given these factors, Air Force developers often refer to stealth configuration itself as merely one “arrow” in the quiver of approaches needed to defeat modern air defenses.

“Mixing stealthy aircraft with conventional aircraft, deception, air defense suppression, and electronic jamming will complicate an enemy’s defensive problem set by an order of magnitude,” the paper writes.

The authors of the paper explain that newer stealth technology able to outmatch advanced multi-frequency air defenses must utilize a characteristic known as “broadband stealth.”

Multi-band or “broadband” stealth, which is designed to elude both lower frequency area “surveillance” radar as well as high-frequency “engagement radar,” puts an emphasis upon radar cross section-reducing tailless designs such as that now being envisioned for the B-21.

“The B-21 image released by the USAF depicts a design that does not use vertical flight control surfaces like tails. Without vertical surfaces to reflect radar from side aspects, the new bomber will have an RCS (Radar Cross Section) that reduces returns not only from the front and rear but also from the sides, making detection from any angle a challenge,” the Mitchell Institute writes.



Stealth fighter jets, such as the F-22 and F-35, have an entirely different configuration and rely upon some vertical flight control surfaces such as tails and wings. Being more vulnerable to lower frequency surveillance radars due to having a fighter jet configuration, an F-35 or F-22 would depend upon its speed, maneuverability and air-to-air attack systems to fully defend against enemies. Given that fighter jets require tails, wings and other structures necessary to performance, they are naturally inherently less stealthy than a high-altitude bomber.


Newer methods of IR or thermal signature reduction are connected to engine and exhaust placement. Internally configured engines, coupled with exhaust pipes on the top of an aircraft can massively lower the heat emissions from an aircraft, such as the structure of the current B-2 - the authors of the essay say.

“Hot gases from the engine can be further cooled using mixing techniques in the exhaust system,” the paper writes.

Technical progress in the area of advanced computer simulations are providing developers with an unprecedented advantage in designing the new bomber as well.

“Simulations of interactions between designs and various threat radars are now far more accurate and realistic, allowing additional refinement of stealth design solutions before any hardware is actually built or tested,” the essay writes.

The new aircraft will be designed to have global reach, in part by incorporating a large arsenal of long-range weapons. The B-21 is being engineered to carry existing weapons as well as nuclear bombs and emerging and future weapons, Air Force officials explained.

It if's arsenal is anything like the B-2, it will like have an ability to drop a range of nuclear weapons, GPS-guided Joint Direct Attack Munitions and possibly even the new Air Force nuclear-armed cruise missile now in development called the LRSO - Long Range Stand Off weapon. It is also conceivable, according to Air Force developers, that the new bomber will one day be armed with yet-to-be seen weapons technology

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7839
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 10 Mar 2018 15:23

I have been reading with interest the discussion on the degradation of the stealth character of fifth generation jets with fascination.

Does any one know how many sorties before the stealth becomes completely compromised. That the aircraft is as visible on the radar at a 4th gen platform.

The other question that I have is after how many hours of combat flying the aircraft will have to be grounded for a full inspection.

Unless we know the answer to that all the discussion is irrelevant.

PS I am sure that if stealth coating was be all and end all of stealth. IAF would not be open to AMCA.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6687
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 10 Mar 2018 17:43

Pratyush wrote:Does anyone know how many sorties before the stealth becomes completely compromised. That the aircraft is as visible on the radar at a 4th gen platform.


Do you seriously believe anyone here would have an answer to that question? :) Regardless, as I said earlier "Stealth" is not the same on all platforms. An F-22 is much more labor-intensive than the F-35 and both are significantly less labor intensive than the F-117 and B-2. With advances in technology, and through experience they have been able to reduce the role of coatings and embed much of the RAM directly into the skin of the aircraft. Furthermore, with better analytics and modeling tools, they have been able to build margins so that you can still take damage and know whether your system is still suitable for a particular mission or not. This saves unnecessary work that could very easily be deferred. Also, much like advances in avionics, training aids and simulators, RAM and coatings also advance and as they do you can think about retrofitting them back into your older aircraft so that they become more resilient than with the older systems.

This is what is happening to the F-22 at the moment where the newer generation of the coating is being incorporated into the aircraft (rumoured to be influenced by the F-35's coatings), replacing completely the one developed specifically for it in the 1990s. But this isn't happening at the flight-line or at the squadron level. This is happening at the Depot level either by cycling the aircraft through the depots during their routine depot maintenance periods or accelerating that and getting them earlier in case they were having mission capability degradation on account of RCS at a higher pace than the other fleet. To that end, each individual aircraft or squadron would be slightly different depending upon where it is located, how often it is deployed and what sort of work (quality) is being done on the aircraft at the squadron level. Aircraft that regularly operate in harsher climate would naturally need more maintenance and a better crew than those that operate in moderate climates and aren't pushed around as much. But this is true for pretty much every other high-tech system on these aircraft, so if you are going to deploy with a "skinny" crew, expect to hit the depot faster and stay there longer etc.

http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-low-obs ... -aviation/

Does any one know how many sorties before the stealth becomes completely compromised. That the aircraft is as visible on the radar at a 4th gen platform.


Shaping plays a big role in RCS reduction on all LO aircraft. Coatings enhance this and wide-band RAM helps further but at the heart of it is the shape of the aircraft. So technically, you can lose a lot if not most of your coatings and have other dings but still have a much lower RCS compared to an older generation aircraft carrying external weapons, pods or fuel tanks.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7839
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Pratyush » 10 Mar 2018 18:39

I should have said I don't want Brar to respond to my post. :((

As I knew of all you said. It was for other members. :((

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6687
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 10 Mar 2018 18:48

Outside of the US the second largest operator of Low Observable aircraft has less than a dozen aircraft that have been operational for less than a year (weeks to months in some cases). So where will the data come from if not from what has been shared by the two US services?

pravula
BRFite
Posts: 221
Joined: 07 Aug 2009 05:01

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby pravula » 11 Mar 2018 00:45

Pratyush wrote:I have been reading with interest the discussion on the degradation of the stealth character of fifth generation jets with fascination.

Does any one know how many sorties before the stealth becomes completely compromised. That the aircraft is as visible on the radar at a 4th gen platform.

The other question that I have is after how many hours of combat flying the aircraft will have to be grounded for a full inspection.

Unless we know the answer to that all the discussion is irrelevant.

PS I am sure that if stealth coating was be all and end all of stealth. IAF would not be open to AMCA.


42. :P

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2750
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby fanne » 11 Mar 2018 01:26

23...F-22 has stealth, F-23 does not.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21975
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Austin » 12 Mar 2018 10:50

IAF speeds up hunt for new fighter jets to add muscle

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... aPGtN.html

This multi-billion-dollar project to build 114 jets will be “directly linked” to the development of an indigenous futuristic stealth fighter – the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), the person added.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4639
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Neshant » 12 Mar 2018 11:10

Austin wrote:IAF speeds up hunt for new fighter jets to add muscle

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... aPGtN.html

This multi-billion-dollar project to build 114 jets will be “directly linked” to the development of an indigenous futuristic stealth fighter – the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), the person added.


Excellent idea.

How about taking it one step further and getting the chosen country to absorb at least some of the AMCAs into their air force as well?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4087
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby srai » 12 Mar 2018 17:03

^^^
The belief that foreigners will give ToT and help India with its 5th Gen is laughable!

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 1325
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Bart S » 12 Mar 2018 17:38

srai wrote:^^^
The belief that foreigners will give ToT and help India with its 5th Gen is laughable!


Even more laughable is the idea that this needs to be publicly declared and put out in the open in writing :shock:

Typical socialist committee/bureaucrat style of working that puts all our cards on the table and gets nothing done.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21975
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Austin » 12 Mar 2018 18:06

I dont think we would need any specific technology for AMCA that we dont have via Tejas or cant be developed , Aerodynamics , Avionic etc we are there ,Radar we will reach AESA soon via IAI.

The only area which is a big bottle neck for AMCA is 5th Gen Engine Technology something DRDO may work with Snecma but thats a long project.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3528
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby JayS » 12 Mar 2018 18:51

Austin wrote:IAF speeds up hunt for new fighter jets to add muscle

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... aPGtN.html

This multi-billion-dollar project to build 114 jets will be “directly linked” to the development of an indigenous futuristic stealth fighter – the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), the person added.


Personally, I feel this is a junk article.

ArjunPandit
BRFite
Posts: 1402
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby ArjunPandit » 12 Mar 2018 20:21

^^Reporters can think what they want, i have high hopes that powers that be in, have realized this fallacy after negotiating with every fighter manufacturer. Hopefully they would have realized "home grown" fighters are the solution and these competitions are just to bide time and see if some apple falls in their laps

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6919
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Indranil » 12 Mar 2018 22:46

JayS wrote:
Austin wrote:IAF speeds up hunt for new fighter jets to add muscle

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-ne ... aPGtN.html

This multi-billion-dollar project to build 114 jets will be “directly linked” to the development of an indigenous futuristic stealth fighter – the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), the person added.


Personally, I feel this is a junk article.

Exactly. It is not even possible to collate everything that ADA/DRDO needs for AMCA in one month. In AESA radar, they would love GaN tech, will anybody give? In the engine they require material tech for the core. Will anybody give? Other than that, what else? Ejectors can't come from anybody but LM and UAC. F-35 and F-22 are not for sale to India. So ....

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5819
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Rakesh » 12 Mar 2018 23:00

ToT needs to banned from the MoD's vocabulary. JVs need to come in.

Mihir
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 863
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Mihir » 13 Mar 2018 02:48

It might have something to do with Boeing's earlier offer.

https://www.livefistdefence.com/2016/11 ... tener.html

...Boeing proposes that the manufacturing facility and supply eco-system that it builds up for the F/A-18 in India in the event it is chosen, could be used to produce the AMCA. The existing facility could be leveraged, precluding the need for a greenfield setup elsewhere...

..there is the suggestion that Boeing could be available to help along the AMCA programme directly as a partner or consultant in such a way that it makes the Block 2 Super Hornet -> Advanced Super Hornet -> AMCA flow more seamlessly from a development-to-manufacturing perspective.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2662
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby kit » 13 Mar 2018 03:19

brar_w wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Does anyone know how many sorties before the stealth becomes completely compromised. That the aircraft is as visible on the radar at a 4th gen platform.


Do you seriously believe anyone here would have an answer to that question? :) Regardless, as I said earlier "Stealth" is not the same on all platforms. An F-22 is much more labor-intensive than the F-35 and both are significantly less labor intensive than the F-117 and B-2. With advances in technology, and through experience they have been able to reduce the role of coatings and embed much of the RAM directly into the skin of the aircraft. Furthermore, with better analytics and modeling tools, they have been able to build margins so that you can still take damage and know whether your system is still suitable for a particular mission or not. This saves unnecessary work that could very easily be deferred. Also, much like advances in avionics, training aids and simulators, RAM and coatings also advance and as they do you can think about retrofitting them back into your older aircraft so that they become more resilient than with the older systems.

http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-low-obs ... -aviation/

Does any one know how many sorties before the stealth becomes completely compromised. That the aircraft is as visible on the radar at a 4th gen platform.


Shaping plays a big role in RCS reduction on all LO aircraft. Coatings enhance this and wide-band RAM helps further but at the heart of it is the shape of the aircraft. So technically, you can lose a lot if not most of your coatings and have other dings but still have a much lower RCS compared to an older generation aircraft carrying external weapons, pods or fuel tanks.


ok i suppose the RCS would degrade in adverse weather .. do the aircraft undergo any check after each flight as to whether to what degree the stealth would have degraded? Does the USAF allow the F22 to fly even if the stealth was not optimal ???

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby shiv » 13 Mar 2018 07:05

Pratyush wrote:Does any one know how many sorties before the stealth becomes completely compromised. That the aircraft is as visible on the radar at a 4th gen platform.

42 for western aircraft
72 for Chinese aircraft
420 for Paki aicraft
1/20 for Indian aircraft

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35950
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 27 Mar 2018 21:47

Sneak peek into 6th gen - I think it matters to be in this thread just to know what is ahead in this generation game.

https://youtu.be/
http://www.businessinsider.com/air-forc ... deo-2018-3

Vips
BRFite
Posts: 1092
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Vips » 27 Mar 2018 22:09

Massa Air Force has got be very afraid as Vodka guzzlers in Natasha Land are working on 6th & 7th and 8th Generation aircafts. :lol: :lol:

In 2030 on the eve of his re-selection as Russian President, Putin can sell these planes to Pakistan, in return pakistan will promise not to perpetrate acts of terrorism in Russia. :rotfl: :rotfl:

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4390
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby putnanja » 05 Apr 2018 06:40

India working on developing an advanced medium combat aircraft

India is planning to launch a programme to develop a stealth fighter named Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), according to Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman.

In a written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha, she said the feasibility study for the programme has been already completed.

"The Indian Air Force suggested Aeronautical Development Agency of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) to initiate AMCA technology demonstration phase before launching full scale engineering development," she said.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4639
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Neshant » 06 Apr 2018 20:41

Formally ask Japan if they are interested in cooperating on the project and inducting these planes into their AF.

Even if they say No for now, it will lead somewhere down the line.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35950
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 06 Apr 2018 20:51

We should not ignore the fact the aerodynamics are at higher importance while we tailor for stealth. Lo observability can be still achieved by making the skins permeate like the LCA radome and subcutaneously deflect or absorb the signals. We can work with a bunch of grad students and nail this problem as we had dicussed on this subject earlier(some moons back). We even considered for tie up with Ulan Bator for all outsourcing :mrgreen: (saab ji already blessed this).

But it is entirely upto tejas team to take the decisions.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2662
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby kit » 06 Apr 2018 21:06

SaiK wrote:Sneak peek into 6th gen - I think it matters to be in this thread just to know what is ahead in this generation game.

https://youtu.be/
http://www.businessinsider.com/air-forc ... deo-2018-3


Thats one reason to say invest the resources wisely ! .. 6th gen american stealth encompasses visual stealth as well according to flight global.. much akin to the Avengers plane !

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2662
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby kit » 06 Apr 2018 21:10

Vips wrote:Massa Air Force has got be very afraid as Vodka guzzlers in Natasha Land are working on 6th & 7th and 8th Generation aircafts. :lol: :lol:

In 2030 on the eve of his re-selection as Russian President, Putin can sell these planes to Pakistan, in return pakistan will promise not to perpetrate acts of terrorism in Russia. :rotfl: :rotfl:


For the time being, the designers can not say what kind of appearance the new aircraft will have. Quite possibly, the new planes will resemble space fighters from "Star Wars" films. The new aircraft will be created by several design bureaus at once. Therefore, it will not be called either Su or MiG, but will have its own original name.

pravda has outdid itself this time :rotfl:

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3930
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby Kartik » 07 Apr 2018 00:09

From AW&ST.

take it FWIW, since Jay Menon has in the past been wrong. Especially the part about the indigenous engine being ruled out.


NEW DELHI—India’s Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) reportedly has received approval for full-scale development of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) stealth fighter, with a target of flying the aircraft in 2024 and making it ready for service as early as 2030.

“Preliminary designs have been finalized after we successfully completed the configurations and the feasibility study,” says a person involved in the project at ADA, which is part of the Indian defense ministry’s Defense Research and Development Organization.

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 official says.

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. Use of an indigenous engine has been ruled out.

Like most modern fighters, the AMCA would be a multirole aircraft. Although it will be shaped for stealth, a non-stealthy version also has been planned. Features will include a weapons bay, serpentine engine intakes, thrust vectoring, modular avionics, integrated vehicle health management, and a radar with an active electronically scanning array using gallium-nitride technology. Maximum speed is intended to be Mach 2.5 with afterburning and Mach 1.6 without.


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


Engine choice not yet made..surprising, since we thought that for the TD phase, it'll be the F-414.

Non-stealthy variant would be similar to the stealthy variant, except that it'll carry weapons externally as well, like all other stealth aircraft can. So hardpoints will be built in, that could be used whenever needed.

Weapons bay, serpentine intakes, modular avionics, IVHM and AESA radar were known. But now proposed to be a GaN radar and not GaAs radar that the Uttam is based on. Max speeds seem ridiculously high. I don't believe those figures..I mean supercruise at Mach 1.6? That's the Tejas' top speed as of now with afterburners.

Since naval version is proposed, I hope the Navy gets dug into this program right from the start. This is what Cmdr Mao had mentioned to me at an Aero India as being necessary to get an optimized naval fighter. He wanted the naval variant to be designed first, and lead to an AF variant. But parallel development or keeping the naval variant's needs would have been hopefully done before the preliminary design was finalised.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35950
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby SaiK » 07 Apr 2018 05:20

It shouldnt just about the type of t/r modules (of course a vital sensor need for precision operations), but more on the capabilities it brings in - fusions for comms, passive scanning & tracking, lpi etc. This is where the APGs excelled

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6687
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby brar_w » 07 Apr 2018 17:51

The challenges with integrating a GaN radar on 5th and 6th generation fighters are more severe than legacy aircraft because there is more competition for both power, and thermal requirements both of which have to be balanced with the signature requirement. This isn't about creating a GaN AESA as much as about finding novel and innovative ways to reduce the thermal footprint and cooling requirements while also extracting ever increasing levels of power (3-5 times the increase in power density compared to GaA). New materials and micro-fluidic cooling would have to be explored, de-risked and implemented for the tight margins that occur on fighter airborne sensor applications.

Otherwise, performance gains would not be commensurate with the potential of switching to the new material, given the cost. This is not the same for larger radar applications such as ground and ship based systems to the same extent. Current GaN antenna applications (like what SAAB has proposed on the Gripen) at best introduce a more efficient material which would provide linear growth in power and also reliability but really does not address the hard part which needs to be done in order to extract the potential of the new material.

From a recent paper on the subject:

Significant advances in epitaxial growth, device fabrication and design have enhanced the electrical performance to a point where thermal management is now a primary limiting factor in device and circuit operation.

In order to mitigate thermally-induced performance and reliability degradation, useable power densities are limited to 5-8 W/mm . Military electronics reliance on “remote” cooling solutions has resulted in thermal management hardware accounting for a large fraction of the SWaPC of RF components. Overcoming the remote cooling paradigm requires reducing the thermal resistance of the near-junction region and heat sink without producing deleterious effects in electrical performance. The continued use of conventional thermal conduction and spreading techniques combined with remote cooling is limiting the realization of GaN’s intrinsic electronic capabilities. Improved thermal transport solutions capable of managing localized device hot spots are required to obtain peak performance and reliable operation.

Last edited by brar_w on 07 Apr 2018 17:57, edited 1 time in total.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2662
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: AMCA News and Discussions

Postby kit » 07 Apr 2018 17:56

brar_w wrote:The challenges with integrating a GaN radar on 5th and 6th generation fighters are more severe than legacy aircraft because there is more competition for both power, and thermal requirements both of which have to be balanced with the signature requirement. This isn't about creating a GaN AESA as much as about finding novel and innovative ways to reduce the thermal footprint and cooling requirements while also extracting ever increasing levels of power (3-5 times the increase in power density compared to GaA). New materials and micro-fluidic cooling would have to be explored, de-risked and implemented for the tight margins that occur on fighter airborne sensor applications. Otherwise, performance gains would not be commensurate with the potential of switching to the new material, given the cost. This is not the same for larger radar applications such as ground and ship based systems to the same extent. Current GaN antenna applications (like what SAAB has proposed on the Gripen) at best introduce a more efficient material which would provide linear growth in power and also reliability but really does not address the hard part which needs to be done in order to extract the potential of the new material.


@ brar SAABs Global eye with GaN AESA can supposedly detect stealth fighter aircraft ..whats your opinion ? is that a realistic scenario to detect stealth fighters at stand off range ?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 27 guests