Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

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.
srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4874
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby srai » 08 Feb 2021 06:35

rajsunder wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/TheWolfpackIN/status/1358271196387753984?s=20 ---> Report: India's 5th generation stealth fighter AMCA will be manufactured at HAL Nashik, once it is ready for production.

was this not supposed to be built by a consortium of private players and government?
Making a 5th gen would need new manufacturing techniques to attain the low panel gaps that are required for maintaining stealth, why throw good money at makeup for a old horse?

Costs a lot of resources to have a novice setup an aerospace ecosystem.

What is lower risk and works in the Indian context is the approach with LCA production where more and more components and subassemblies are outsourced to private Tier-1-3 companies. Eventually, some of these private players will go on to become their own full-fledged vertical integrator over the next decade.

Image

It’s already happening: “built by a consortium of private players and government” :wink:

Image

Avinandan
BRFite
Posts: 229
Joined: 12 Jun 2005 12:29
Location: Pune

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Avinandan » 11 Feb 2021 20:48

Noob pooch,

Question 1 :
I was comparing Air intakes
Type 1 : Backward sloping diagonal cross section - as in F22 Raptor and KFX
Type 2 : Forward sloping rectangular cross section - as in F35 and AMCA

Ignoring the DSI aspect in Type 2 examples, could gurus provide the Pros and Cons of the shaping of both the Types ?


Question 2 :
What is the merit in having crooked tail fins (leading edges) of AMCA ?

Question 3:
many moons ago, the AMCA renderings were heavily inflenced from F23 Black Widow, especially the near perfect Diamond shaped Wings. At that time brfites were very happy. The diamond shaped wing is gone now. Wanted to get the feedback on the current wing shaping of AMCA

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8313
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Indranil » 12 Feb 2021 03:27

Q1. You can't ignore the DSI. DSI intakes would always have the outer lip ahead. The opposite is true for splitter plates. Can't go into the details.
Q2. Not ideal for RCS. Must have been an aerodynamic need.
Q3. That wing is ideal for RCS, not ideal for aerodynamics. In this compromise between stealth and aerodynamics, ADA has chosen a point of balance that they are comfortable with.

Rishi_Tri
BRFite
Posts: 512
Joined: 13 Feb 2017 14:49

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rishi_Tri » 12 Feb 2021 15:24

Shekhar Singh wrote:India Is Building 6th Generation Unmanned Fighter Jet



Thanks for posting this video.

Per Dr Deodhare in this interview, AMCA fabrication has already started with four parts already manufactured. Target date for AMCA to fly is 2024.

Rsatchi
BRFite
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rsatchi » 12 Feb 2021 16:43

^^^If that is the case is there a need for MWF
Should not all resources be pooled into AMCA for speedy trials
And if the IAF is happy with LCA Mrk1 and then jump to AMCA do we have to jump through the hoops of Mrk-II and MCF???, except for product testing and maturity of the assembly line/deliveries etc

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8318
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby nachiket » 12 Feb 2021 19:45

Rsatchi wrote:^^^If that is the case is there a need for MWF
Should not all resources be pooled into AMCA for speedy trials
And if the IAF is happy with LCA Mrk1 and then jump to AMCA do we have to jump through the hoops of Mrk-II and MCF???, except for product testing and maturity of the assembly line/deliveries etc

A program of AMCA's complexity will require at least 10-12 years after the first flight to reach a stage where full fledged induction into the IAF can begin. Look at how long it has taken the Su-57 to mature for example (despite the Russians having decades of experience in designing and building fighter jets of every possible size and class).

In the case of the MWF, the ADA is relying on the commonality with the Tejas Mk1 and Mk1A combined with the expertise they have gained during the Tejas testing and certification to reduce that timeline by quite a bit. If things go according to plan the MWF should be in serial production by 2030. It will take till the latter half of the 2030's if not more for the AMCA to reach a similar stage.


Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21322
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Philip » 15 Feb 2021 13:01

A vanilla AMCA ,LSP for at least one sqd. should be the immediate goal,if possible before 2030. While we've done well achieving considerable tech. gained with the LCA programme,we will have to import some components like the engines,etc. In order to get the aircraft in service asap,trying to reinvent the wheel all by ourselves will end up in another LCA tale of delay.Key components and tech,with deadlines for them and plan B imports/ JV if needed must be established. The goal should be to produce the fighter ready for combat asap. At the same time the UCAV RMA is taking place and we may soon see a demand for hundreds of UCAVs more urgently reqd. ( CATS) than v.expensive manned fighters. Even legacy Jags are being looked at as being drone carriers as well as transports. Deadlines for the AMCA programme must be met.

sooraj
BRFite
Posts: 1528
Joined: 06 May 2011 15:45

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby sooraj » 16 Feb 2021 11:48

Defence Decode®
@DefenceDecode
·
18h
1:1 Cockpit model of India's 5th Generation Fighter #AMCA.
#AeroIndia2021

Image

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2768
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby darshhan » 16 Feb 2021 11:49

nachiket wrote:A program of AMCA's complexity will require at least 10-12 years after the first flight to reach a stage where full fledged induction into the IAF can begin.


How does Spacex manage to induct its systems on such a short time frame. It will be worthwhile to study their efforts. These 2-3 decade programs are good for countries like US, France, Sweden etc who have no major external threats to worry about and just have to take care of their Military Industrial Complex and its various stakeholders.

In contrast it is a life and death situation for us with the Chinese wolf looking to devour us at the earliest available opportunity and it will do so if we do not pull up our socks. Our very survival is at stake. We should be testing and inducting systems extremely aggressively i.e testing on steroids. Just like Americans and Russians were doing in WW2.

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4874
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby srai » 16 Feb 2021 14:28

^^^
Good luck

WW2 technology (Spitfire) vs today’s/future technology (LCA/AMCA) ... can’t compare!

Shekhar Singh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 16 Sep 2018 14:55

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Shekhar Singh » 16 Feb 2021 15:36

A naive question to experts...
Can't we make stealth missiles( shaping, ram coating etc) so that weapons on external hardpoints do not increase RCS?

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4874
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby srai » 16 Feb 2021 18:17

^^^
Like this F-18 external stealthy enclosed weapons pod

Image
Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9720
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby brar_w » 16 Feb 2021 20:47

Shekhar Singh wrote:A naive question to experts...
Can't we make stealth missiles( shaping, ram coating etc) so that weapons on external hardpoints do not increase RCS?


Making something Low observable involves shaping, and materials and being able to integrate with the overall design so that any design decision you make either builds on, or does no harm to decisions taken elsewhere. So hanging a stealthy missile off of a stealthy aircraft won't mean that it will retain its LO characteristics to the same degree as if it didn't have a weapon in the first place. The individual items may be stealthy, but what matters is how the missile, pylon and the aircraft perform when attached so it is those interactions that you have to measure not the individual signatures of each components independently. The enclosed pod that Srai posted helps with that in that you design the pod for best (possible) RCS when it is coupled with the aircraft shape and carriage. The weapons inside don't need modifications. But even then you are constantly trading one thing for another (the pod still has to factor payload, drag, maintainability, weapon loading/unloading requirements etc and so just can't be a pure RCS play).

Your clean 5GFA or 6GFA will be the best RCS you can get with that aircraft. When you start hanging stuff externally, even if it is via these pod like applications you deviate from what was originally designed though you can most certainly do your best to make those impacts as minimal as possible. In the end it all comes down to what the requirements are, and what you need for specific missions assuming that we are talking about multi-role/mission aircraft. On the F-35 for example, the Marines only required a gun for Close Air Support, which doesn't need stealth so they built it into a pod instead. Even though the pod does have shaping and materials for signature management (it is a multi-mission pod so has future applications beyond a gun) it will, in the net, adversely impact the aircraft's overall signature so it is a question of for what missions is this degradation acceptable and for what it is not. Same for the new external pylon they developed for the AIM-9X on the F-35. It uses shaping and materials but only mitigates the RCS degradation and not prevent it, but since AIM-9 on the F-35 is a "transition" capability, it is consider an acceptable interim solution. So these things are operator driven with missions in mind. You can definitely do things externally to reduce impact but you will never be as capable as you are when you are clean.

Shekhar Singh
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 34
Joined: 16 Sep 2018 14:55

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Shekhar Singh » 16 Feb 2021 23:49

Thanks a lot. Now many things are clear.

brar_w wrote:
Shekhar Singh wrote:A naive question to experts...
Can't we make stealth missiles( shaping, ram coating etc) so that weapons on external hardpoints do not increase RCS?

Making something Low observable involves shaping.....

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7587
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Prasad » 22 Feb 2021 13:48

A very short chat with Dr Ghosh, PD AMCA


souravB
BRFite
Posts: 587
Joined: 07 Jun 2018 13:52

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby souravB » 23 Feb 2021 05:44

Prasad wrote:A very short chat with Dr Ghosh, PD AMCA

Prasad, as usual, great interview.
Dr. Ghosh reminded me of the quintessential Bengali uncle who'd become defensive while keeping a secret. I started laughing when he was stopping himself from mentioning Radar absorbing composites :rotfl:
So all in all we can infer
  • DAS is coming but whether it is MWIR or LWIR to be seen
  • Radar absorbant skin to reduce maintainance(meta material?)
  • IVHM would take care of the monitoring part (logistics part traditional?)
  • 4 BVRAAMs in IWB
am I missing anything else?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10944
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rakesh » 23 Feb 2021 23:03

Prasad wrote:A very short chat with Dr Ghosh, PD AMCA

you rock boss! added to page 1

rajsunder
BRFite
Posts: 698
Joined: 01 Jul 2006 02:38
Location: MASA Land

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby rajsunder » 25 Feb 2021 12:15

I was looking at the videos made by #AKM on the LCA Manufacturing at HAL series, the ones that he released before Aero India 2021. Saw some of the screw jacks where they has rods with sharp edges protruding from the screw jacks. I do not think that we can use the same manufacturing techniques for making AMCA. I am saying this because to build AMCA to the fault tolerances that are required for stealth planes would need a new generation of assembly techniques.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5483
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Kartik » 26 Feb 2021 16:43



2 new nuggets from this interview with Dr Girish Deodhare

1- The cockpit will be coated with radar absorbent material (indium tin oxide?) which has been developed within India.

2- The Internal Weapons Bay (IWB) has already been realised and the technology proven at R&D Engineers, Pune. Dr Deodhare mentions this at 3:05 in the interview.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3449
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Vips » 03 Mar 2021 20:41

Engine development for AMCA. Per a Defence AV:

-Rolls Royce has submitted a "financial cost report" to the Indian government and it is a $3 Billion "Co-development program" for developing the 110 KN engine with "Full transfer of technology and Intellectual Property Rights".
-"Majority of the testing" will be done at the new engine complex of HAL/DRDO which will be ready by end of 2021.
-New engine will be a "clean slate design" and will have a "new core section" but will use some of the technologies that have already been developed by India for the Kaveri program like new fan section and FADEC.
-The engine will have potential for 20% increased thrust generation (132 KN) with "minor changes" in the core section.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8492
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Pratyush » 03 Mar 2021 21:18

Only 3 billions. It is positively cheap if it gives us some more learning and full ownership over the intellectual property.

But what does it say about the in-house engine development efforts of HAL. I thought from available accounts that HAL had learnt how to design turbo fan engine with HTFE. That they tested last year in Leh.

hemant_sai
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 89
Joined: 13 Dec 2018 12:13

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby hemant_sai » 04 Mar 2021 00:44

"Only 3 billions. It is positively cheap if it gives us some more learning and full ownership over the intellectual property."
====================================================

If cost estimate is submitted for 3 billions it is bound to overrun to 4 billions. In any case if we are going to get rid of this final frontier, I am still in favor of this.

But by layman understanding real cost will be well below 2 billions considering any estimate is bloated for profit margins and countering negotiations. Please pardon me for this desi logic.

But why we refused to give 500 millions to Safran to resurrect Kaveri engine? If we can give 3-4 billions plus ready to wait for another 7-8 years to realize it without any guarantees. Why not give 500 mlns to achieve something of our own to completion in comparatively less time. If we had agreed to it, by 2024 we would have Kaveri ready.

We could have given 100 ml more as incentive to get the weight of Kaveri reduced below 1000kg. We would have our own hot-core tech to try for next 110KN version without need of giving 3 billions to Rolls Royce?

I would still bat for Safran deal to happen in parallel for resurrecting Kaveri. May be we can create smaller version which could give 50-55KN wet thrust and use it on Jaguar?

Specifications (Adour Mk 106)
Length: 114 inches (2.90 m)
Diameter: 22.3 inches (0.57 m)
Dry weight: 1,784 lb (809 kg)

Specification (GTX-35VS Kaveri)
Length: 137.4 in (3.49m)
Diameter: 35.8 in (0.9m)
Dry weight: 2,724 lb (1,236 kg)

astal
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 07 Jul 2005 03:06
Location: virtual back bench

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby astal » 04 Mar 2021 04:39

Vips, Pratyush and hemant_sai,

The jet engine market is a classic oligopoly. It is extremely unlikely that Safran, Rolls Royce or even NPO Saturn will give away any useful IPR and create a new competitor in this lucrative market. They will help along the fringes and try to extract money or/and waste time. The only way to get complete or even partial IPR control over an engine is to design, test and manufacture it ourselves with lessons from the Kaveri and a few hints and nudges from existing engine manufacturers for a fair bit of money.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3449
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Vips » 04 Mar 2021 20:00

With our experience of "Collaboration" and "Consultancy" for development of Kaveri so far with multiple engine makers and design houses it will not be easy for RR to play games and not part with TOT and IPR for the core sector if it is clearly mentioned in the agreement. India may have been very upfront in negotiations of core sector technology IPR with all manufacturers and hence GE and P&W have opted out.

India did not select Typhoon, had chosen Honeywell over RR for Jaguar Upgrade, did not fall for the EJ200/Kaveri tie-up ruse and has so far not agreed to be a part of UK's 6 Gen Fighter program. RR has come to realize that being a part of a cartel restricting technology to India will only result in gains for other engine manufacturers and it is losing out on lucrative business running into billions of dollars so it may have decided that a bird in hand (hundreds of engines for AMCA/other programs + replacement for those) is better then nothing in the bushes as otherwise India is only opting for US/Russian/French fighter jets.

karan_mc
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 02 Dec 2006 20:53

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby karan_mc » 04 Mar 2021 21:00

Vips wrote:Engine development for AMCA. Per a Defence AV:

-Rolls Royce has submitted a "financial cost report" to the Indian government and it is a $3 Billion "Co-development program" for developing the 110 KN engine with "Full transfer of technology and Intellectual Property Rights".
-"Majority of the testing" will be done at the new engine complex of HAL/DRDO which will be ready by end of 2021.
-New engine will be a "clean slate design" and will have a "new core section" but will use some of the technologies that have already been developed by India for the Kaveri program like new fan section and FADEC.
-The engine will have potential for 20% increased thrust generation (132 KN) with "minor changes" in the core section.


Original source

http://idrw.org/drdo-rolls-royce-engine ... y-studies/

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10944
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rakesh » 04 Mar 2021 22:37

If IDRW is the source, I will pass :)

@ Vips: There is business to be conducted (money to be made) and then there is Intellectual Property (IP).

No engine manufacturer will hand out their IP on a platter, no matter how much money is thrown at them. And if by some weird twist of events, such an event does come to pass...the other engine manufacturers will all lobby their governments to stop such a transaction. So when RR is saying that it will cost $3 billion to develop a clean sheet, 110kN turbofan for the AMCA...here is what will happen;

1) RR will promise the moon, just like GE did during JETJWG and Safran did during the Rafale offset.
2) Once the money has been transferred to RR, then RR will fall back and give every excuse under the sun.
3) And that $3 billion will be used to offset the cost of developing the next gen turbofan for Tempest.
4) India will be holding the short end of the stick....once again.

GE, P&W and Safran will move heaven & earth to ensure that RR transfers no ToT or IP of value.

When there are only four players in the western world, what is the plus point in adding a fifth player? Despite the economic downturn and the bleak outlook for RR, it still makes zero sense. Short term gain ($3 billion) for long term loss (future business) is not an effective strategy. When billions have been invested in 83 Tejas Mk1A, that much less money is available for phoren fighters. That share of the Indian market is now gone for good. In the same vein, if 100+ Indian turbofans are ordered for AMCA....how will RR or Safran or GE or P&W make money?

Apart from the loss of business, there is also a strategic reason to keep such technology out of India's hands. Geopolitical pressures can only be applied when India is reliant on foreign nations. Remove that rug and the options dwindle.

And by the way, $3 billion to develop a clean sheet design of a 110kN turbofan - with full ToT and IP - is laughable. RR must think the GOI is dumb and if the GOI indeed signs on the dotted line, then they would be worthy of that title. The western world is to this day, dismayed and angry over the UK Govt's decision to assist the then Soviet Union in the 1940s with engine technology. They are not about to repeat history.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3449
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Vips » 05 Mar 2021 00:11

Rakesh wrote:
1) RR will promise the moon, just like GE did during JETJWG and Safran did during the Rafale offset.
2) Once the money has been transferred to RR, then RR will fall back and give every excuse under the sun.
3) And that $3 billion will be used to offset the cost of developing the next gen turbofan for Tempest.
4) India will be holding the short end of the stick....once again.



Rakesh i do not think anybody is so naïve as to transfer $3 Billion "in advance" to RR based on a promise that they will deliver the TOT. Payments will be piece-meal based on clearly defined deliverables to be adhered by the vendor.

Russia/Sukhoi tried playing this game with India in the FGFA program and India pulled out from the deal after realizing that it is not getting any development experience. Sukhoi/Russia got $250 Million as advance but lost credibility and even the possibility to sell the fighters in a fly away condition.

If it does not have serious intention of sharing TOT then any any engine manufacturer will make just some amount of money from India before its game will be up and i do not think they will risk being black listed or being permanently out of military business worth billions with India.

RR will not be swayed by GE or PW or Snecma's pressure tactics in taking a decision. They do not have that kind of leverage on RR especially if they are gaining advantage from getting business from India. If Uncle Sam puts the pressure then yes it is a different ball game.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10944
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rakesh » 05 Mar 2021 00:43

Vips, along with what Russia/Sukhoi did....RR also remembers quite well what happened in the Rafale deal and with the JETJWG with the US. India was naïve enough to believe that the JETJWG with GE or the Rafale offset obligation with Safran would work. Neither bore any fruit.

The IAF does not want the GE F414 on the AMCA, beyond the first two squadrons. We all understand the IAF's apprehensions in not having a large portion of the fleet with GE turbofans. The IAF's apprehensions on the unstable foreign policy of the US is valid. They even said so clearly in the CAG report on MMRCA. And collaboration with a foreign (non US) partner - to develop a 110 kN turbofan - is also fine. But when RR states that they will provide full transfer of technology and intellectual property for said turbofan, that should raise the alarm bell.

When deliverables are not met by RR, India will be back at square one. RR knows that quite well and also realizes that the other manufacturers will do the same to India. At that point, whatever money (even if it is $250 million) invested will be lost. RR will not transfer anything of value to India. If this collaboration goes through, what will happen is RR will develop the core tech behind closed doors. We will assemble the turbofan and pay royalty to RR for that core tech in every turbofan manufactured. But in the annual MoD brochure and in written replies to Parliament, the GOI will state that the 110 kN turbofan is an Indian one. This is like HAL's claim that the AL-31FP turbofan is manufactured from raw materials in India.

Don't get me wrong. Collaboration is a good strategy, if the technology is being transferred. Why would RR transfer such technology and IP, when GE and Safran would not? In the JETJWG meetings, the main goal of GE was to find out from GTRE...how far along in the technology curve was the Kaveri turbofan. And if money is the motivating factor for RR, Amreeka will gladly lift it out of its financial doldrums or even better, just buy out RR's aircraft engine division and divide the spoils between GE and P&W. They will not allow China to do a similar collaboration with RR and neither will they allow India to do it. Why bottle feed and nurse, a future competitor?

Vips wrote:If it does not have serious intention of sharing TOT then any any engine manufacturer will make just some amount of money from India before its game will be up and i do not think they will risk being black listed or being permanently out of military business worth billions with India.

With turbofans, there is little risk. Take a look at all the current combat air platforms out there. The companies are many (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Airbus, Dassault, Saab, BAe)....but the turbofans come from one of four sources - General Electric, Pratt & Whitney, Rolls Royce and Safran.

Who all is India going to blacklist? That is not an effective strategy. And blacklisting will affect the civil airline industry as well. All the turbofans that power the A320s, A330s, B777s, B737s, etc either come from Rolls Royce, General Electric, Pratt & Whitney or Safran.

Vips wrote:RR will not be swayed by GE or PW or Snecma's pressure tactics in taking a decision. They do not have that kind of leverage on RR especially if they are gaining advantage from getting business from India.

GE, P&W or Safran do not have to do anything. Their govts will do it for them.

Vips wrote:If Uncle Sam puts the pressure then yes it is a different ball game.

If there ever existed an animated Pictionary book to describe the nations of today, this is what the UK would look like "geopolitically" in that book. At one point in time, the Sun never set on the British Empire. How the tables have turned on the UK!

Image

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10944
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rakesh » 05 Mar 2021 01:08

Vips, I admire your optimism. I really do. I am not being sarcastic when I say that.

And I would gladly & humbly bow down to you, if I am wrong. I am saying this on the forum, for you (and everyone to see).

I would be most happy if RR does what it claims it will do for $3 billion. I truly would be.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9720
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby brar_w » 05 Mar 2021 01:19

$3 Billion to develop and field a completely new (clean sheet) engine for a fifth generation fighter application seems completely unreasonable so I'm wondering if there is more to it (like RR only offering support on a few specific areas for example) than what's been reported. For example, the final "development" contact for the F119 (F-22) was around 2.5 Billion USD in today's money. And this was after the program had spent a decade plus designing, building, and putting >100,000 hours in component testing (all clean sheet components), and more than 3500 hours of full up Y series engine testing. If you add up the total propulsion bill there it will likely touch low double digit billions.
Last edited by brar_w on 05 Mar 2021 01:31, edited 1 time in total.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10944
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rakesh » 05 Mar 2021 01:22

The source of this news is IDRW. I am not sure brar, if you are aware of IDRW.

But in case, you are not...it is the Indian version of the "national interest" website :)

https://nationalinterest.org/tag/military

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21195
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Prem » 05 Mar 2021 04:07

What i heard is that RR-India venture will be total 16 Billion $ project.

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 973
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby V_Raman » 05 Mar 2021 04:16

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 10944
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Rakesh » 05 Mar 2021 04:42

Prem wrote:What i heard is that RR-India venture will be total 16 Billion $ project.

Now that is a realistic starting point, from where it will only go up. Source?

$3 billion for a clean sheet design for a 110 kN turbofan sounds way too little.

The folks at IDRW are smoking some strong stuff.

V_Raman wrote::shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Don't be shocked Sirjee.

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 973
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby V_Raman » 05 Mar 2021 04:59

I hope we get a portfolio of engines from this - Kaveri class, KMGT - essentially all military jet engines can be indian after this - but that might be too much to ask for...

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3449
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Vips » 05 Mar 2021 05:11

The AV i had mentioned as the source for the RR AMCA engine news was this:


Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19956
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Karan M » 05 Mar 2021 08:15

Vips most of these guys recycle public news to monetise YT videos. Please try for the original news instead.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8492
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Pratyush » 05 Mar 2021 09:05

Rakesh wrote:Vips, I admire your optimism. I really do. I am not being sarcastic when I say that.

And I would gladly & humbly bow down to you, if I am wrong. I am saying this on the forum, for you (and everyone to see).

I would be most happy if RR does what it claims it will do for $3 billion. I truly would be.


Given the forum's experience regarding the Mithai for Akula. I'd say he should pass on you bowing down for any one on the forum. :twisted: :P

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2850
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft: News & Discussion - 30 August 2019

Postby Prem Kumar » 05 Mar 2021 11:02

There is another risk with the RR JV approach. That could be a nice way for the West to sabotage our native engine program:

1) Offer "full TOT/IP"
2) String along for half a decade before India wakes up and realizes nothing of value is going to get transferred
3) We pay hard cash for this runaround & some screwdriver tech
4) Come 2026, we are back to square one with the realization that, we have to do the hard work ourselves
5) We buy proven engines off the shelf
6) West funds dalals to say that we are incapable of building own engines, even with foreign help. The Kaveri saga will also be flogged ad-nauseum
7) Scuttle the engine program forever due to negative press

We shouldn't repeat the FGFA mistake. We spent a crapload of money & wasted half a decade, before waking up one morning to the realization that we need to be the masters of our own destiny. Ever since that clarity, the AMCA project has been progressing well.

The right thing to do is to give the middle finger to RR and be ready to invest 1 decade & $10B to build our own engine - on a national mission mode (just like the Tejas or the AMCA or the Cryogenic engine)

This is so critical that I wouldn't even mind of PM Modi gives a clarion call for this project, under the Atmanirbharta scheme. Bring the entire national will & resources to bear!


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests