PAK-FA and FGFA Thread

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 26 Jul 2013 13:05

engine controls? non mission avionics? cable runs?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Jul 2013 13:27

smaller and lighter landing gear and enlarged depth of internal bay could be in the list. the wheels and legs are outsize, perhaps needed for landing on icy siberian bases not so indian bases. the internal bay if enlarged would be better suited to handle western & indian munitions as-is.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 26 Jul 2013 17:01

+1 on the stores... we need the mission controls as we expect what went into MKI, can be the base line. not sure if they will give the landing gears a priority, but weapons integration would be at higher priority.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 26 Jul 2013 22:45

And some changes associate with Barhmos type missiles?

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Jul 2013 23:12

The PAK-FA has a new set of missiles.

Do not know about the FGFA, but the leaning is a mixed set - Russian and non-Russian.

No matter what the 5th Gens will need a leaner/meaner set of missiles.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 27 Jul 2013 02:24

brahmos porting to pak-fa should not be a problem, as the specs can be laid out much ahead (not as in mki). but the mission profile for brahmos and the platform means converting the brahmos-mki wala to brahmos-pak-fa wala.

basically, what i am saying is for pak-fa, stealth is vital.. so the current brahmos can't be the one.. they have to make a stealth version of the brahmos for pak-fa. point to be noted also, that it can't be an internal one. so, it must be on a mission where it takes down couple of large industrial or mil production base, and returning should be able to engage few awacs, and a bunch of chip blunders and thundars.

Sujata · Post by **Sujata** » 30 Jul 2013 11:05

Question,If India is investing 30 Billion to buy the Pak-Fa does it get a discount in spare parts? Thinking about how much India is investing in Sukhoi company ,and I don't see a discount in the overall lifespan of the Pak-Fa for India.Will India spend another 10 to 15 Billion on spare parts and software upgrades for the life span of the Pak-Fa?

Why shouldn't India wait and let russia spend it's own 30 Billion in development cost and new retool machines ,and funding for the next 10 years for Sukhoi?

I think you could buy Sukhoi Company for less then 5 Billion,and spend the rest of the 25 Billion building up India's manufacturing capabilities.

I don't understand how India is a 50% partner ,and just like a being a silent business partner you don't get a discount of you own product that you paid 50% for ,and not get a better deal overall.

All the Pak-Fa is right now is just 4 jet fighters. That India will pay 50% of funding in upgrading the Sukhoi manufacturing plant and buying raw materials for the nest 10 or 15 years.

India loses twice if it doesn't get some kind of discount overall if they putting so much more then somebody just waiting for the finish product.If the Pak-Fa cost 100 million doesn't India just have to pay 14 Billion instead of 30 Billion,and spend the rest for parts,supply and enhancements?

kshirin · Post by **kshirin** » 05 Aug 2013 00:17

Let us buy foreign companies indeed! Chian is doign this to get backdoor entry to technologies.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Aug 2013 02:08

can't do that in mil space../period

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 07 Aug 2013 03:32

Euphoria of being partner in PAK FA / FGFA program is wearing off. Just for 144 FGFAs how wise it is of us to spend 30 billion dollars? Which will go higher as is russian nature, already there are reports of escalation in price. By 2025 it can easily go upto 50-60 billion dollars. That too for just 144 fighter jets.

We aren't going to get engine tech in this package.

No AESA tech in this package.

Neither IRST tech in this package.

If we had spent this 50 billion dollars to set up organisations all around nation to make engines, lighter stronger materials and design for landing gear, Astra Mk III missile on the lines of Meteor. Gone with JV development for few things to be used for AMCA.

That would have been pure gold investment. Now 60 billion dollars gone down in russian drain for just 144 jets

Through Tejas experience our designers already know the areas where we need help, in those areas we could have thrown money to get help + knowhow and made AMCA. But all sorts of kanjoosi will be shown by bean counters at MoD etc. while usual people will see the whole tamasha and make saintly remarks like "some people might remember I'd been saying since 2013 that AMCA should be cancelled and all the funds should be diverted to buy 30 more FGFAs for 15 billion dollars...."

As usual russian peddling network did its job with efficiency. First they offered a JV assuring that a separate FGFA will be created according to Bharat's needs like 2 seater version. Once we got hooked by paying 5 billion dollars they told us "ahem 2 seater isn't possible as it would affect the stealth........ so you only get 1 seater, no choice."

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 07 Aug 2013 03:45

It's not OT here so posting:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 0#p1492628

NRao wrote:^^^^^

You do have a point - based on the current status.

[OT]
When the "FGFA" effort was first mooted, the idea was to actually design a dual seat plane for the IAF. Granted it was based on the Russian PAK-FA, yet the design of the FGFA meant a very good deal of actual "design".

The initial idea, therefore, involved design + testing. Two areas that the Labs (not the IAF) thought they could stand to gain a lot of knowledge.

In fact to cover the mistakes that made in the MKI program India -- as seen today -- got the Russians to mix Indian and Russian teams, hardware/software/etc, so the Russians could not do anything in isolation.

Well, with the dual seater was shot down -- due to cost and time, things changed dramatically. While the IAF got a great plane, the Indian Labs did not get what they wanted out of this deal: Design and testing experience. (One reason why I THINK the Labs are willing to ditch the 50% work that the IAF is now complaining about.) (Since the Labs are getting much less out of it, I would bail out too.)

I would expect the cost to be readjusted for the 144 planes. Which I would think would tick off the Russians - it should throw their computations for funds off a LOT.

But, I am of the opinion that the FGFA is great for the IAF but not for the Labs. Not something that the Russians will like due to a dramatic reduction is funds they will receive. I expect the costs to reduce to around $20 billion. A 1/3 "loss" to them. (I am not sure if this is what is making them escalate the "cost" right now.)
[\OT]

Not much chance of cost readjustment can be expected, natasha is too well entrenched in the system.

But we can start pointing this out to media. Maybe Shukla or somebody can pick it up and start screaming.........

vina · Post by **vina** » 07 Aug 2013 05:44

I think India should get out of the PAK FA program. There is nothing much in it for us and we are just paying money to Russia to develop it's industry at our expense.

First, sign up for engines (GE 414 enhanced power versions / EJ200 growth versions on a ToT / Lic Mfg) get that in place and go for the AMCA. It will be much quicker because we took all the learning pain (FBW, composites , testing, and everything else) with the LCA and have come through. Get an IRST system off the shelf (Isreali /Euro) and similar with the AESA if the local one is not ready by then, atleast in the initial Mk1 version.

We will have it in place in around a decade or so if we put in the same kind of money we are willing to give to the Russians. As a spin off, we possibly will have a Naval derivative as well!

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Aug 2013 06:09

FGFA:

* Phase I: preliminary design contract (PDC)
* Cost: $295-million
* Signed: December, 2010
* Work order: Under the PDC contract Sukhoi has also trained Indian engineers and provided HAL with the data and software needed to create a single working environment. A team of HAL engineers and IAF experts has been working at Sukhoi’s design bureau in Moscow, while Russian engineers have been assigned to HAL
* Expectations: The customised FGFA version will have “some differences” from the Russian prototype to meet “specific requirements of the Indian Air Force,” the Sukhoi announcement said.

Russian experts said the FGFA will differ in “mission hardware and software,” as well as weapons.
* Phase completed: Around April, 2013
* Source: April, 2013 :: Fifth generation fighter crosses milestone

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Aug 2013 06:20

FGFA:

* Phase II: Research and Development (a bilateral contract)
* Cost: $5.5 billion per party, total of $11 billion
* Signed: As of Aug, 2013: TBD
* Work order: the cost of designing the FGFA, infrastructure build-up at Ojhar, prototype development and flight testing
* Expectations: “The first prototype of the FGFA, scheduled to arrive in India by 2014 to undergo extensive trials at Ojhar and we are hopeful that the fighter would be ready for induction eight years later” ACM Browne declared in August 2012 following his return from Moscow after reviewing the advanced fighter programme. He said two subsequent prototypes to be flown by the IAF would arrive in India in 2017 and 2019 and thereafter, based on all inputs the 30-tonne ‘swing role’ platform’s final design would be confirmed.
* Phase completed: N/A
* Source: Feb, 2013 :: INDIAN AIR FORCE

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Aug 2013 06:28

FGFA:

* Phase III: Serial production
* Cost: $35 Billion (estimated cost fro 220-250 dual seater). $N/A Billion (Cost for 144 single seater N/A)
* Signed: N/A
* Work order: Build between 220-250 FGFA (this number and the cost figure of $35 billion were for dual seater FGFA). Numbers for single seater: 144
* Expectations: Production to start in 2022
* Phase completed: N/A
* Source: N/A

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 07 Aug 2013 07:08

the cost is sure to double or triple up.. even for getting the old gorshkov, it went 3 times up. it is a bad planning to consider any kind of joint effort without clear definitions of tasks, and deliverables. i can see a lot of risks already.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Aug 2013 07:17

radar for AMCA is not going to be an issue. in worst case Frenchies(ie Thales europa) would be happy to sell 100s of units of a upsized RBE2-AA which would even generate some back end commonality with Rafale though front end would be larger aperture.
in best case israeli knowledge could get us over the hump in making a deployable product out of the skeletal aesa protos the LRDE has managed so far.
either way, its not going to be an issue.

engine also in worst case , off the shelf 414-EPE and EJ200 is available in that thrust range (big AMCA) and M88-3 (small AMCA).

we can cobble this thing together and make it fly if we master the airframe design, internal bay and FCS of the AMCA..that anyway is the bare minimum needed for a domestic product.

unless some secret TOT arihant type arrangements are ongoing in pakfa deal, not sure how much it differs from above proposal.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Aug 2013 07:28

Nope, I very much doubt that the Russians will provide any meaningful assistance any more.

More in AMCA thread

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 07 Aug 2013 07:35

About 174million$ per 5th gen plane, how many we need - For 144 -235 planes total would be around 25.5-40.8 billion$. If I am not mistaken it is going to be done well and serviced well - as a project. Plus more as needed in future as other jets are retired.

Also, just for the record, not discounting anything from AMCA project.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Aug 2013 09:16

Look,let's be realistic.If we are to dump a project at the first sign of doubt,nothing would ever materailse.Take the LCA for example.3 decades of effort and still on-going.Granted it experienced sanctions,etc., that cost us about a decade,but one has to persevere.Here,we have an aircraft that is flying with 4 prototypes and within a year, we will get our very own first of three.It is a terrific opportunity for us to get in at the cutting edge level of a 5th-gen fighter,something that even the US's closest allies have been denied with the JSF. That bird is certainly no alternative,given the huge controversy about its development,its performance and elastic limit cost! As the proponents of the AMCA have it,the programme should assist us in the development of our own stealth bird. If we have asked for 40+ modifications of the FGFA for our version,it indicates the level of insight that we have been given for the aircraft.Our task is now tweaking the basic Russian design into meeting our own unique needs as far as possible within its structural parameters.

An interesting point has been raised in above posts regarding our differing munitions.Reg. Brahmos,wasn't there a report some months ago about a "baby" Brahmos under development,which would be smaller in size and allow smaller aircraft than SU-30s to carry it? Any compaison of ASTRA's size and other Russian AAMs?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Aug 2013 09:23

New G-suit gives PAK-FA higher operational ceiling than the Raptor?

Russian Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA pilots will be equipped with a new g-suit that will allow them to eject from the aircraft at altitudes of 75,000ft (23,000m). If the PAK-FA is able to fly at those altitudes operationally, that would mean that it has a significantly higher operational ceiling than the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptort-50-4_1200.jpg.

The F-22 is limited by US Air Force regulations to 60,000ft because of the Armstrong Limit, which is found at roughly 62,000ft. The USAF never developed a full pressure-suit for Raptor pilots to wear; instead those pilots wear the Combat Edge ensemble, which counts as a partial pressure suit. Other fighters like the Boeing F-15 or F/A-18, for example, are typically restricted by regulations to 50,000ft (that includes the German Luftwaffe, their Eurofighter Typhoons, as one of their pilots told me, are also limited by regulations to 50,000ft operationally).

There are some very good reasons for those altitude restrictions. Above the Armstrong Limit water will boil at the same temperature as the human body. Basically, if you lose cabin pressure, you will die a slow and horrible death as bodily fluids (except those under pressure inside blood vessels) start to boil unless you have a pressure suit–like the guys flying U-2s (except they don’t inflate those suits normally, which has led to problems in the past–but that’s a whole different story).

IF the Russian Television story is correct–it could mean the Russian have developed a full pressure/g-suit that is capable of operating at those altitudes. Or they’re completely insane–which is also a possibility I suppose.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Aug 2013 11:25

the type of suits SR71 pilots used to wear were bulky and involved complex procedure. not suitable for just pulling on in a high alert scramble. most similar to astronaut suit as the requirement is the same. that box likely had a emergency air supply to keep them alive should they be forced to eject at 100,000ft....they would have to fall for minutes on that air supply before atmospheric air became enough to breathe in. probably the entire seat would fall out and retain the pilot until sensors detected it going below a safe altitude, then it would release the pilot with chute.

micro-brahmos would likely be no more than 750kg to be suitable for inboard or centerline pylons of all IAF fighters. this means it just cannot be a stubby brahmos, but a new airframe and engine of smaller diameter.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Aug 2013 11:48

Do you think that that the seat could therefore have an integrated air supply device,and detach itself as you've suggested,after descending to a safe alt.?
In any case,operating at that high an alt. will give the FGFA a considerable extra capability over the Raptor,which has been beset with problems itself,alleged hypoxia problems reportedly responsible for the crashes which led to grounding of dozens of Raptors..

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Aug 2013 11:50

at the cost of considerable fuel burn in thin air.
imo better to let missiles do their work....i dunno if ramjet engines will work at such high alt (meteor concept...)...maybe good old solid fuel dual pulse motor

member_26622 · Post by **member_26622** » 07 Aug 2013 21:31

Since our 'International' Air Force has to buy everything Flying and Foreign out there, split the order between F-35 and PAK-FA. F-35 acquisition will make Panda think twice before engaging India in next 10 years while we wait for PAK-FA.

My two cents: We paid in for PAK-FA to keep it out of Chinese hands which seems to be wishful thinking today. Given the Su-35 sale, can we be ever 100% sure that Russia will not do a repeat. The Chinese can drop a billion USD easy as a bribe and the Russians will dance all over the place. As crazy as it may sound, India is actually helping China bridge the technological gap by investing in anything Russian.

All the hype surrounding PAK-FA needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. PAK-FA will be at least a decade later than F-35, costing 175 million today, likely cost twice as much in 2025 and be technically+Stealth wise sub-par (since it's Russia first attempt). F-35A costs USD 150 million and is flying today. Plus the team behind it have been at it for over two decades.

Imagine the edge IAF would have over the Chinese+Paki combo if we have F-35 by 2015~17 timeframe. Lockheed will set-up a line in India for 100 odd planes and potentially source components for supplying the rest of the West.

As usual, we are in a mess like Vikramaditya acquisition. Russia will never ship us PAK-FA prototypes in next 5 years since the veil will be pulled off over PAK-FA's real capabilities and development time. Meanwhile, Panda will keep making us squirm using their stealth edge.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 08 Aug 2013 06:12

well mostly it might be used for stealth bombing missions.. the missiles could actually begin the burn phase after it has reached a height and triggered based on O2 sensors and/or remote controlled.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 10 Aug 2013 22:19

Time of T-50 / PAK FA

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 11 Aug 2013 07:33

NIK F-35 by 2017? Even the most optimistic of the US services-USMC do not see the bird arriving in service before 2019/2020.There are huge tech. difficulties at the moment,engine,helmet,software,which without the incremental "Blocks" cannot function.The IAF has clearly said that it does not want the JSF.Pl. follow the FGFA td. for latest news.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 11 Aug 2013 07:44

nik wrote: F-35 acquisition will make Panda think twice before engaging India in next 10 years while we wait for PAK-FA.

How can this be concluded.
Japan will have them and it is not stopping PRC from confronting Japan.

Imagine the edge IAF would have over the Chinese+Paki combo if we have F-35 by 2015~17 timeframe. Lockheed will set-up a line in India for 100 odd planes and potentially source components for supplying the rest of the West.

No American company will setup any line in India and source from India. One person I know who saw the Lockheed team visit Indian 'facility' heard them make comments on how behind Indian mfg is really.

Only a Lockheed lobby would come up with this kind of imagination.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 11 Aug 2013 09:58

Is the F-35 any good? If IAF wants an American fighter then it perhaps should be the F-22. Some feel that F-22 would wipe the floor with the F-35.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 11 Aug 2013 10:14

One of the good documentary on PAK-FA details History , Interview with Test Pilot , Chief Designer and many unseen previous footage.
Since its in Russian change the caption translator to English for subtitles.

John · Post by **John** » 11 Aug 2013 19:14

Vivek K wrote:Is the F-35 any good? If IAF wants an American fighter then it perhaps should be the F-22. Some feel that F-22 would wipe the floor with the F-35.

Sure why not while we are at lets order a squadron of B-2s as well. Lets' be serious here IAF doesn't have $$ to buy F-35 if it where to go PAK-FA even MCA is very much question mark. I don't see any AF other than USAF and PLAAF operating more than one type of 5th generation aircraft.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 11 Aug 2013 20:19

exactly.. the pak-fa is like the money spent with no idea what capability that it brings on the table when compared to f-22. we have only seen sukhoi marketing videos.. as is the cost of pak-fa is all about redesign of sukhoi 35 platform ++. the frontal RCS factor is better than teh rear. again, there are lot of tall promises, and that remains to be seen.

for the public, these secretive projects will even hide many things we don't we get for even an operational a/c and only at the time of retirement we may get some real sense. RCS, sensors, capabilities, engines, features, et al are wide open to questions.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Aug 2013 01:13

The F-22 hasn't even been offered to long-term allies like Japan.There is no chance of it being offered to India,at about $200m a pop too! Is the US going to open the production line too for a few dozen fighters? It is the JSF that is being offered instead,and that turkey has yet to experience its "Thanksgiving Day".Its acquisition has alos been rejected by the IAF and MOD. What we have with the FGFA is an ongoing stealth fighter programme ,far more advanced than either the SU-30 or SU-35,where we have the option in the 50:50 JV to orient the basic design to suit our needs.Being the logical extension and development from SU-30 Flanker base,the FGFA is a continuum of the best Russian 4++ gen fighters which have spanked the best western aircraft at exercises,including the F-15s ,etc.That too coming in at about 50-60% the price of a modern western 4++ fighter. Given that a certain commonality will exist between all types,it was logical for the IAF to sign onto the FGFA,to preserve our air dominance seamlessly.In 2014 we will get our first prototype,it is too far down the stream to be cancelled as some want it.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Aug 2013 06:53

There are two basic dimensions to any of these planes (F-35, FGFA, AMCA) (F-22 is not something to even to think about):

* The IAF: Who I would think would be happy with any of these, assuming that they are made to their requirements (a very broad term, granted). Getting the IAF one of them is what is critical.
* The Indian Labs: What do they get out of a plane. I would think these guys would naturally gravitate towards the AMCA and I suspect they have no interest other than what techs they get out of an import.

There should be a few more: political angle is an example (too complex for a bullet point)

The original two, two very different things to discuss.

(F-22 is out. F-35 is out too IMHO, some technologies, in the extreme case may filter in, but not too much beyond that. The FGFA, I feel has slipped from 100% to 50% at this point in time. This does not mean that the IAF will not get it, but my feel is that even if the IAF gets a few, they will not involve any other Indian efforts, including production. I think the AMCA is the crown jewel. Again, at the risk of belaboring the point, the IAF would be delighted with any of these aircrafts, provided they are built-to-order.)

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Aug 2013 07:45

LCA success is the key to the future of the AMCA.Every effort should be made to support the LCA programme.As a former IAF officer said,such programmes should be declared "national" projects,brought to fruition without them being factored into the services regular re-equipment plans.With the need for all three services expanding both in numbers of units as well as capability,there will be orders enough.If one looks at the success of the IGDMP and Agni series ,their induction into the services was only after they were perfected.There was no stringent timeframe as these were mostly strategic misssiles -apart from Prithvi,and were being inducted for the first time.Our nuclear deterrent was initially only air-launched N-munitions from M-2000 aircraft.In stages we graduated to IRBMs and now ICBMs with A-5 and shortly once the first ATV completes her sea trials will have the sub-launched capability too.

If we involve ourselves to the hilt with the FGFA,where 50% is within our sphere of development,with the experience gained,we will be able to succeed faster and more effectively with the AMCA.

srin · Post by **srin** » 12 Aug 2013 08:53

For a change, I agree with Phillip

PAK FA is russian built. I don't think there is much that we can contribute towards airframe or weaponry or engines or radar. FGFA is going to be PAK FA MKI at best as far as we are concerned. It will give us one of the best air superiority aircrafts. It will also give us counters to Chinese apparent progress in stealth aircrafts. Is it worth the money that we've paid (or will) is an open question.

AMCA is ours. Like building Mig-21s or even Sukhois doesn't guarantee the assimilation of technology, so we needed an LCA to find out exactly where we stand and learn the hard way by making mistakes. Similarly, building FGFAs won't help us. AMCA will force us to invest in basic research and build knowledge the hard way.

I don't know much about the Aura project but that seems to be heading the way of the bomber (though it would probably need a spec upgrade).

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Aug 2013 18:17

From IDRW (a web site that I do not trust pre se):

Aug 5, 2013 :: Russian Air Force to Get First T-50 Fighter Jet This Year, IAF Next Year

............................................. FYI:

July 19, 2013 :: Russia Delays India’s 5th-Gen. Fighter Program

After initial joint development in Russia and the inking of a preliminary design contract, the final design and R&D contract was to be signed in 2012. However, The Times of India now reports, citing industry sources, that as a result of the additional costs and delays imposed by Moscow, there is little likelihood that the final design and R&D contract will be signed during FY 2013, or even in 2014, which will inevitably have implications for the consortium’s ability to deliver the first aircraft by 2022.

IF they had signed the phase II (R&D contract) in 2012 India could have expected the first prototype in 2014. Now with the signing postponed to at least this year, if not the next (2014!!!), the prototype has to come somewhere between 2015-2016, if not after that. With production moved from 2022 to at least 2025. Just around the time that the AMCA would be out.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 12 Aug 2013 19:43

What engine is the AMCA going to use? What radar too? We haven't developed anything indigenous as yet for the LCA,so imagining that we can within a decade develop a 5th-gen AMCA is being very optimistic.The key decision is going to be the choice of engine.It will determine the speed with which the project moves.If the MOD/IAF are serious,they should start looking abroad for the engine right now.Let's not have another Kaveri fiasco delaying the AMCA too!

Let's also see which prototype arrives first for the IAF.I'm not sure that they want,or can afford two simultaneous programmes. Logically,after the LCA is perfected,work should start on the AMCA.I still feel that it should be a larger aircraft with a bombing/strike role as priority,equipped with stand-off missiles like BMos and LR cruise missiles,not duplicate the air dominance role of the FGFA. AWST reports that "mutiple thinktanks including the (US's) Centre for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments,is recommending reducing the number of JSFs to be acquired and some tactical fighter forces too,in favour of "longer-range systems"

As for delays/dates.etc.,I would rather go by the CoAS's statements made not too,long ago that we would get our first prototype in 2014.Perhaps it may slip a little,but the way in which the Russians are focussing effort on making the FGFA a success,with Putin behind their backs,one can expect results.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 12 Aug 2013 21:06

I'm not sure that they want,or can afford two simultaneous programmes

The FGFA is NOT a "program" for India as it is for Russia. The AMCA is a complete program for India.

That is the difference.

Affordability: the estimated cost of $35 billion has to come down - India is not going to participate in any R&D/Design effort (have stated this multiple times). Since it is a system integration (stated this TOO multiple times) there is really not much Phase II R&D costs.

So, for one the scope of the FGFA is FAR reduced. The cost will be too.

Then, this from a IAF officer:

“Let's be clear: the HAL-Sukhoi program isn't a joint effort,” says an air force officer with Bengaluru-based Training Command. “The airframe will be identical to the ones the Russians currently have in flight-test. Our decision to go with a single-seat configuration is principally to avoid potential time overruns that will almost certainly be part of designing such a configuration. The maximum that HAL will do is insert a few systems of our choice and play lead integrator for the 'MKI,' if you will,” he says, alluding to the MKI version of the two-seat Su-30 developed by Sukhoi for India.

As stated multiple times before, there is really nothing to learn from the FGFA - the CURRENT version has morphed into a system integration effort.

“Therefore, it is imperative that India look ahead and begin developing technologies and platforms like the AMCA,” the officer adds. “We cannot forever be a buyer of aircraft that are conceptualized, designed by others and simply assembled or license-built here.”

Then:

A senior scientist at the AMCA directorate in Bengaluru says, “we have the fourth-generation Tejas on the one hand. But evolutionary technologies we are developing for the AMCA are on the cutting edge. They hope to be comparable with the best in the world. If we need a little help along the way, in the interests of pragmatism, cost and time, we will study the feasibility of cooperation. But this ideally needs to be a fully Indian program. Sensitive stealth technologies will not be shared by foreign technology companies.”

FGFA will NOT provide any such details, they cannot, India cannot expect it and India is not. Those wet dreams that Russia loves India and is willing to part with great techs is just that - wet dreams. (NOT a knock on the Russians, they are behaving perfectly as one would expect them to. I do NOT expect them to part with leading edge techs.)

The point being, there are no two "programs". The IAF would be thrilled with the FGFA, which will be better than the Su-30 - at best. Nothing more.