Postby Philip » 01 Sep 2019 18:44
I watched the SS weekly feature.Nothing in it gives me total confidence that we've learnt from the LCA torturous experience.There are so many advanced features for stealth aircraft that even the US and Russia, the two leading aircraft nations are still grappling with , with their JSF and FGFA programmes.
Firstly, as was mentioned in the discussion, the timeline is absurd.First flight in 2032 only! Take another 5+ years and production teething issues and 2040 is when it will be in serial production.That is a whole TWO decades when the US, China and Russia would've had operating their stealth birds and well on their way to fielding their successors including UCAVs in larger numbers. Already the advanced nations ard talking of the 6th- gen. tech
for their future combat aircraft.Even Pak will certainly field Chinese stealth fighters within this period as the Chinese will always try and maintain Pak's capability against India.
Secondly, the key component has yet to be mastered by us.The engine.The lack of a capable engine killed the HF-24 and has also cast its shadow over the LCA flying with an underpowered engine in its first avatar. Kaveri meant to power the LCA has been a failure.
The number of assurances that it was almost ready has been heard for two decades ad nauseum and the engine is still unborn This makes us dependent upon a foreign engine manufacturer who must be chosen with utmost care , with no threat of sanctions whatsoever. An alarming point in the discussion was revealed by the Air Marshal, that AMCA's weight had gone up from 22t to 29t. Is history going to repeat itself on the weight issue with AMCA as the tendency to pack in as much bells and whistles in long gestating programmes is rife.
The cut- off point between an effective payload both for strike and air defence and weight has to be established given the selected engine's performance and the design factoring in the dimensions of the weaponry still to be perfected like BMos- NG and Aastra- ER.Is it also being planned to carry Meteor, etc.? Anything underwing defeats stealth. What we've achieved with the LCA programme, and it has been substantial, is composites, fly-by-wire controls, a lot of avionics, some EW systems but IRST, conformal radars and a suitable AESA radar and the earlier mentioned engine remain.The art of aerospace engineering packing the fuselage with the various components in a manner easy to service, remove ( engines) and repair is a Q.Vayu had in the past some stories about the LCA "packaging" requiring much improvement.
Since the LCA Mk-2 is now larger and is being classified as a medium fighter, I've said before that we should aim higher and attempt to make it as stealthy as possible, as our SE stealth fighter before AMCA . The FGFA/ SU- 57 is entering service with the RuAF.We've said we would re- examine its acquisition once it entered service. That is the sensible option for the coming decade along with MKIs Rafales, upgrafed legacy medium fighters and LCAs, including as suggested an advanced LCA Mk-2.
Ultimately it is the payload factor that will determine .the value and relevance of the programme and product.As the former chief of the USN , Adm.Greenert famously said," why by a sports car when a bomb truck can do the business? Larger "flying wing" stealth bombers expected to enter service in the next decade , capable of carrying large loads of ordnance , both manned and unmanned, may change attitudes in air forces worldwide.For the AMCA to succeed and be relevant in the technological advances timeframe, it has to be hugely accelerated to enter service post 2030.
