Indian AMCA proposal

[Martian2]

Your all theory is BS if you can't prove AMCA has 13.2m lenth.

Takeoff weight and powerplant specifications limit AMCA to LCA size

Do you know how to use deduction? The specifications in the source below does not permit the AMCA to be much bigger than a LCA, because of the weight and powerplant requirements.

The LCA has a maximum takeoff weight of 15 tons. The AMCA will have 16-18 tons with an enclosed weapon bay (including the added weight of the RAM coating). Therefore, the two aircraft must be virtually the same size.

The engine is specified at 90kN, which means it can't power an aircraft much larger than a LCA to achieve supercruise.

SP's Aviation - SP’s Exculsive

"With aerodynamic design optimisation near complete, the AMCA's broad specifications are final. The aicraft will have a weight of 16-18 tonnes [16-18 tons with 2-tons of internal weapons and four-tonnes of internal fuel with a combat ceiling of 15-km, max speed of 1.8-Mach at 11-km. The AMCA will be powered by 2 x 90KN engines with vectored nozzles—likely to be the new GTRE-Snecma engine under development."

----------

These are the first official DRDO images of fabrication of compact advanced serpentine air-intakes, intended for preliminary studies on performance

Failed design: Squished tube stops blood flow and airflow

The weird and squished airduct design won't work. What happens when you step on a garden hose? The water backs up. Similarly, when you squish the airduct, all of the air backs up and there's virtually no airflow.

Let me give you another analogy. What happens when you crush an artery (in an accident)? The blood can't flow through it. This problem also happens when someone has clogged arteries. Similarly, under the principles of fluid dynamics, air cannot flow at fast speeds or supersonically through a squished airduct.

You will never achieve supercruise with a squished airduct.

 

[S-DUCT]

Do you know how to use deduction? The specifications in the source below does not permit the AMCA to be much bigger than a LCA, because of the weight and powerplant requirements.

The LCA has a maximum takeoff weight of 15 tons. The AMCA will have 16-18 tons with an enclosed weapon bay. Therefore, the two aircraft must be virtually the same size.

The engine is specified at 90kN, which means it can't power an aircraft much larger than a LCA to achieve supercruise.

SP's Aviation - SP’s Exculsive

----------

AMCA MTOW is around 20T and MTOW is expected to be equivalent to that of the F-16 B60.

AERO INDIA: Advanced medium combat aircraft first flight likely in 2020New Delhi has adopted a go-slow approach for its planned Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), which is in the early stages of being designed by India's Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA).

"We plan on finalising the configuration by 2018, with a first flight in 2020," says an ADA representative. "The AMCA will draw from what we learn with the [Hindustan Aeronautics-built] Tejas MkI and Tejas MkII."

The 20t AMCA is envisaged as a twin-engined fighter with similar stealth characteristics to the Lockheed Martin F-35. For the first time, the ADA displayed a model of the proposed design for the future fighter at the Aero India show. Outwardly, the aircraft resembles the F-35, with twin canted tails and shaping optimised for low observability.

It will be powered by a future variant of the indigenously developed Gas Turbine Research Establishment Kaveri engine. The Kaveri was originally intended as the powerplant for the Tejas, but was detached from the programme owing to weight and performance issues

First get your facts correct,the Engine that will power AMCA will have 75KN/110KN configuration

 

[Martian2]

AMCA MTOW is around 20T and MTOW is expected to be equivalent to that of the F-16 B60.
First get your facts correct,the Engine that will power AMCA will have 75KN/110KN configuration

Did you bother reading my citation in the original post? The AMCA has been halted. I have simply conducted an analysis of the AMCA based on the best previously available information.

Here is what I'm saying in plain English. If the AMCA is the size of a LCA then it can't have S-ducts.

I'm also saying that an AMCA with the size of a F-35 may have S-ducts that do not allow supercruise. The F-35 has S-ducts, but it can't supercruise.

In conclusion, I'm making the point that a stealth fighter probably has to be 19 meters or 20 meters in length to permit S-ducts that allow supercruise.

 

[S-DUCT]

Did you bother reading my citation in the original post? The AMCA has been halted.

Relax you are taking a load of garbage of an article way too much seriously nothing is being "put on hold" as the dork reports, scientists in DRDO work on multiple projects at the same time. It's nothing new, obviously the dork journo has no idea how DRDO functions and is making up junk based on "sources" in la la land. I am sure both the programmes are running as planned.

I have simply conducted an analysis of the AMCA based on the best previously available information.

First of all analysis of any fighter is not that simple and use the latest available information before making any conclusion.

Here is what I'm saying in plain English. If the AMCA is the size of a LCA then it can't have S-ducts.

I'm also saying that an AMCA (that is the size of a F-35) may have S-ducts that do not allow supercruise. The F-35 has S-ducts, but it can't supercruise.

these is no chance that AMCA will have same size as that of LCA.Any supersonic engine is capable of surviving supercruise conditions, but they must have high dry thrust to achieve supercruise capability.

F-35 is heavier than AMCA and has less dry thrust than proposed AMCA engine(125KN vs 150KN)
F-35 MTOW-31.8T TWR(dry):.3
AMCA MTOW-20T TWR(dry):.75

 

[Martian2]

Whether 16 or 20 tons, the proposed AMCA is too small a fighter

The AMCA is supposed to be a stealth fighter. A stealth fighter has the added weight of enclosed weapon bays. Also, a stealth fighter has the additional weight of RAM coatings.

The latest claim is the AMCA will be a 20 ton fighter. That's still too small.

A Chinese J-10 fighter is 21 tons and it is 15.49 meters in length.

A French Rafale is 25 tons, 15.27 meters in length, and it only has a partial S-duct.

Thus, a 20-ton AMCA (with the additional weight of enclosed weapon bays and RAM coating) is more like a 19-ton fourth-generation fighter. This means the AMCA will be smaller than a Chengdu J-10 or French Rafale. The AMCA will be 15 meters or less. This is still not enough length to build a S-duct that allows supercruise.

----------

The F-22 is a 38-ton fighter.

The Chengdu J-20 is a 36-ton fighter.

I'm saying that it is doubtful that a 20-ton fighter can be built that can supercruise, because the plane is not long enough to permit a S-duct for supercruise.

 

[Srinivas]

@Martian the design is not freezed yet and it is a top secret project. Donot conclude that early.

 

[S-DUCT]

Whether 16 or 20 tons, the proposed AMCA is too small a fighter

The AMCA is supposed to be a stealth fighter. A stealth fighter has the added weight of enclosed weapon bays. Also, a stealth fighter has the additional weight of RAM coatings.

The latest claim is the AMCA will be a 20 ton fighter. That's still too small.Any supersonic engine is capable of surviving supercruise conditions, but they must have high dry thrust to achieve supercruise capability.



A French Rafale is 25 tons, 15.27 meters in length, and it only has a partial S-duct.

Thus, a 20-ton AMCA (with the additional weight of enclosed weapon bays and RAM coating) is more like a 19-ton fourth-generation fighter. This means the AMCA will be smaller than a Chengdu J-10 or French Rafale. The AMCA will be 15 meters or less. This is still not enough length to build a S-duct that allows supercruise.

----------

The F-22 is a 38-ton fighter.

The Chengdu J-20 is a 36-ton fighter.

I'm saying that it is doubtful that a 20-ton fighter can be built that can supercruise, because the plane is not long enough to permit a S-duct for supercruise.

If 15.7m F-35 can have serpentine intake then why can't 16-17m class AMCA.As i said before, Any supersonic engine is capable of surviving supercruise conditions in any intakes, but they must have high dry thrust to achieve supercruise capability.
F-35 MTOW-31.8T TWR(dry):.3
AMCA MTOW-20T TWR(dry):.75
F-22 MTOW-38T TWR(dry):.54
J-20 MTOW-36 TWR(dry):.413
If you consider F-22 as a benchmark,then even j-20 falls a bit short to have supercruise.

 

[Martian2]

If 15.7m F-35 can have serpentine intake then why can't 16-17m class AMCA.As i said before, Any supersonic engine is capable of surviving supercruise conditions in any intakes, but they must have high dry thrust to achieve supercruise capability.
F-35 MTOW-31.8T TWR(dry):.3
AMCA MTOW-20T TWR(dry):.75
F-22 MTOW-38T TWR(dry):.54
J-20 MTOW-36 TWR(dry):.413
If you consider F-22 as a benchmark,then even j-20 falls a bit short to have supercruise.

I've already told you. F-35 has S-ducts, but it can't supercruise.

You need a long airplane, where the S-duct shifts gradually to permit supercruise.

----------

There are two different concepts.

1. Can you build a S-duct? Firstly, a plane as long as the French Rafale can only manage a partial S-duct. It is worth remembering that the Rafale can't supercruise. Secondly, the F-35 has S-ducts, but it also can't supercruise.

Thus, you need a plane longer than a French Rafale or at least as long as a F-35 to supercruise. You're looking at 16 meters minimum length.

2. Now, you need to build a gradual S-duct that allows supercruise. The F-22 shows that you probably need a minimum of 19 meters in length to have a S-duct that permits supercruise.

Do you understand now?

 

[Srinivas]

If 15.7m F-35 can have serpentine intake then why can't 16-17m class AMCA.As i said before, Any supersonic engine is capable of surviving supercruise conditions in any intakes, but they must have high dry thrust to achieve supercruise capability.
F-35 MTOW-31.8T TWR(dry):.3
AMCA MTOW-20T TWR(dry):.75
F-22 MTOW-38T TWR(dry):.54
J-20 MTOW-36 TWR(dry):.413
If you consider F-22 as a benchmark,then even j-20 falls a bit short to have supercruise.

J20 is just an airframe, engines, radar and avionics are not yet developed and they rely on Russia.

Do not expect J20 to be an affective fighter jet.

 

[Anony]

Proposed Indian AMCA is the same length as the Indian LCA (light combat aircraft)

The proposed Indian AMCA (advanced medium combat aircraft) has the same 13.2m length as the Indian LCA (light combat aircraft) prototype. Both fighters are extremely small and they're really only point-defense fighters.

Anyway, we'll use the LCA to analyze the viability of a S-duct on the AMCA.

In this LCA cutaway, we can see the engine (which I have highlighted in red) extends beyond the vertical stabilizer.

Looking at the underside of a real LCA, we see that the fuselage in front of the airduct is longer than the engine compartment behind the airduct.

Let's calculate the approximate length of the airduct on the LCA (and hence the AMCA). The LCA is powered by the GE F404 engine, which is 3.9m. The fuselage in front of the LCA is about 5m.

Thus, the length of the LCA/AMCA airduct is:

13.2m - 3.9m (for engine) - 5m (for radome and cockpit) = 4.3m

I believe it is virtually impossible to build a S-duct that permits supercruise in 4.3 meters.

From where you get the shi t, that AMCA will be of same length of LCA. Even LCA mk2 will be 13.7m.

Secondly length of AMCA will be 16.8 m and not 13.2m.

Thirdly, who told you that fighter need to be 19m+ to have complete serpentine shape air induct. Complete Bullshit. Even F-35 is somewhat a little over 16m.

Fourthly, the straight line that you have drawn is even less than 1:32 part of original. And if you had any idea of mathematics, even the two closest point of a circle fits a straight line into it. A straight line can always be drawn on a very small scale down model.

Fifthly that model is also only the frontal part of the diagram.

Lastly for other members, AMCA will also have stealth features from rear part and that is the reason for wing moving towards middle of the craft and angular in shape from rear end as well.(Though I doubt India's ability to make a true fifth gen engine, which will complement it's design to enable stealth from rear end)

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

I'm saying that it is doubtful that a 20-ton fighter can be built that can supercruise, because the plane is not long enough to permit a S-duct for supercruise.

When did S duct become a requirement for supercruise?

 

[perplexed]

AMCA project whose funding has been temporarily put on hold .. and here is this pathetic troll posting crap one after another .. I guess he thought no one knew how he got owned in that stealth debate ! Op doesnt know hack shyte about stealth PERIOD! He has repeatedly demonstrated this symptom !

 

[Martian2]

Agreed you managed to draw a straight line through those unrealistic cartoon of ours, but hey for a radar to catch the signal the straight line of yours must also come out of the air-intakes somehow. Looking at the way you have drawn a line, It seems that the line of yours should have artificial intelligence to find its way out.

This is my last response, because you guys are starting to irritate me with your thick-headedness.

Come on, radar is an electromagnetic wave and it travels at the speed of light. If I can draw a line directly to the engine, it bounces right back out at 300,000,000 meters per second. Don't they teach these basic facts in Indian high schools?

When did S duct become a requirement for supercruise?

If you don't have a S-duct, you're not stealthy.

To build a fifth-generation fighter, you need:

1. Stealth. This means S-duct to high engine fan blades.
2. Supercruise. This means supersonic speed without using fuel-guzzling afterburners.
3. Supermaneuverability. Thrust vectoring.
4. Short-takeoff.

 

[BlueDot_in_Space]

This is my last response, because you guys are starting to irritate me with your thick-headedness.

Come on, radar is an electromagnetic wave and it travels at the speed of light. If I can draw a line directly to the engine, it bounces right back out at 300,000,000 meters per second. Don't they teach these basic facts in Indian high schools?

When did S duct became a requirement for supercruise? Dont post crap like you post in chinese thread about your supadupa weapons like the junk 20 and 31.

 

[Srinivas]

This is my last response, because you guys are starting to irritate me with your thick-headedness.

Come on, radar is an electromagnetic wave and it travels at the speed of light. If I can draw a line directly to the engine, it bounces right back out at 300,000,000 meters per second. Don't they teach these basic facts in Indian high schools?
If you don't have a S-duct, you're not stealthy.

Do you even know why an engine needs an S-Duct??

What is the primary purpose of S-Duct??

I seriously doubt your views and technical know how.