Involve Israel and Singapore in the MCA project

[Dash]

But you don't realize that the same IAF has officially given specs for AMCA already to HAL. I think they don't want to draw attention to this along the lines of Arihant and that's why they're all so tight lipped about it. Who told you that world will be fielding UCAVs by 2025-30?

Wasnt it IAF which gave specs for LCA too, speaking on the same line, wasnt it IA which gave the spec for Arjun too. I will not go into negetivity, however giving specs and inducting a platform are two different things.

We have to be practical here as to who we choose as our partners for our projects, and IMO Israel and Singapore are not the ideal partners.

First its not just about choosing anyone, by being practical I will always say, Israel will be bad choice because and trust me MOD or GOI will not do it.

1. You know the level off relationship we have with Israel, which is basically at lower level in terms of defence and higher level in terms of intelligence. If you scrutinize the history of our defence projects with Israel you will get it.

I will give you a hint, for a 4th Gen planec like LCA we didnt choose Israel as our consultant did we, we rather kept it low to only RADAR, wonder why? We could have taken their assistance for Engine, Airframe design etc....but we didnt.

2. Singapore will be a good option but they are not good in these fields. They can be a financial partner and some level in techs, not in all fields, a big 50-50 with them is simply not possible. May be an 80-20 but still I doubt.

That just a fantasy now and those who think of it real so eaary are only dreamers. Tests would be in full swing but not application. The JSF are there till 2035-40 along with the F-22s in USAF and NATO AFs. PAKFA will be there for 10 more years roughyl with Russians and us and AMCA would be very much there for 20 more years than that. Let's be practical; UK's Taranis UCAV is just a stealth bomber and if other manned stealth fighters detect its presence, its mince meat in the air. The same goes for the French prototype bomber UCAV.

Manned fighters will be there always, it will take the world a hundred years to replace the man to a unmanned one if you go on replacing by fighter to fighter.However the point here is

1. IAF is getting PAKFA, IN will get PAKFA and any time they can get their hands on F-35 too. So you are secured and ensured that you are not lacking behind in modern warfare. So that part of worry is over. so you can cleanly develope the 5th Gen fighter yourself. You have already built an infrastructure which can support the developement, why will pair with anyone else?...

UK Tarinis is a stealth bomber, imagine you have a deep penetration strike, and you use these bombers which has very low RCS. they would have already bombed the place before your ground SAM and fighters detect them supported by your own manned fighters will create havoc.

So AMCA has as much better future as the PAKFA/FGFA.

Yes a future, but my whole point is we have stick to our capabilities and we can develope AMCA on our own. What we can do here is we need to collaborate with some one to develope UCAVs, we dont have a proper UAV yet and we shouldnt be lagging behind in tech. So partneship for a UCAV will make more sense than AMCA.

You're needlessly worrying dude. Every fighter being developed now is a new platform for the entire world. Doesn't mean we can keep worrying and sit with our eyes shut. We have try stuff.

Thats a generic statement, and iam not worried here. What Iam talking is what is practical and nothing else.

That's interesting, can you provide the link? Good to hear that he is not falling into the hype of ADA and HAL, which really should focus on LCA development now.

here is the link Sancho, it was discussed here.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/43723-indian-mca-special-news.html#post616248

 

[sancho]

Face it man, UCAVs are a distant dream.

Is it?
LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: UAV INDIA Part 1: First Ever Impressions Of AURA, India's UCAV

Not to mention that AMCA would never be developed earlier.

Let's begin SOMWHERE. We can never be a significant power if we don't design and manufacture AMCA like stuff in-house.

True, but why not in the easier development, that also offers more advantages and less costs to IAF?
The UCAV has to be designed and produced in India too, with similar gen technologies, but for less development and operational costs and even for Israel it would be more interesting, because they won't get such an aircraft from the US anytime soon. So wouldn't Isreal and our industry would gain more from such a development?

It has a Russian base and with only 25% of our technical input it only gives us something to learn and assemble; slightly better off then our neighbours' JV on their joint fighter program in terms of learning outcomes.

And what is the reason for that? Because we don't have more knowledge now that would be useful for such a NG development, just like Pakistan can not offer more to a 4./4.5 development. But both developments are crucial for India and Pakistan, to learn and get the necessary experience for future developments.

I agree that indigenous developments are important, but if needed and if it offers advantages. AMCA is not needed for replacements, don't offer operational advantages and is costlier to develop than a UCAV.
Focusing on our actual indigenous LCA project and develop a UCAV in the mid, or long term makes simply much more sense, while we still get a capable 4.5 MMRCA, as well as participate in FGFA.

 

[Tshering22]

Is it?
LiveFist - The Best of Indian Defence: UAV INDIA Part 1: First Ever Impressions Of AURA, India's UCAV

Not to mention that AMCA would never be developed earlier.



True, but why not in the easier development, that also offers more advantages and less costs to IAF?
The UCAV has to be designed and produced in India too, with similar gen technologies, but for less development and operational costs and even for Israel it would be more interesting, because they won't get such an aircraft from the US anytime soon. So wouldn't Isreal and our industry would gain more from such a development?




And what is the reason for that? Because we don't have more knowledge now that would be useful for such a NG development, just like Pakistan can not offer more to a 4./4.5 development. But both developments are crucial for India and Pakistan, to learn and get the necessary experience for future developments.

I agree that indigenous developments are important, but if needed and if it offers advantages. AMCA is not needed for replacements, don't offer operational advantages and is costlier to develop than a UCAV.
Focusing on our actual indigenous LCA project and develop a UCAV in the mid, or long term makes simply much more sense, while we still get a capable 4.5 MMRCA, as well as participate in FGFA.

I agree that indigenous developments are important, but if needed and if it offers advantages. AMCA is not needed for replacements, don't offer operational advantages and is costlier to develop than a UCAV.

Are you sure? According to sources most often shown in defense news, AMCA was supposed to replace our MiG-27s and Jaguars while PAKFA opens up a new genre of fighters for IAF.

 

[Dash]

True, but why not in the easier development, that also offers more advantages and less costs to IAF?
The UCAV has to be designed and produced in India too, with similar gen technologies, but for less development and operational costs and even for Israel it would be more interesting, because they won't get such an aircraft from the US anytime soon. So wouldn't Isreal and our industry would gain more from such a development?

I agree that indigenous developments are important, but if needed and if it offers advantages. AMCA is not needed for replacements, don't offer operational advantages and is costlier to develop than a UCAV.
Focusing on our actual indigenous LCA project and develop a UCAV in the mid, or long term makes simply much more sense, while we still get a capable 4.5 MMRCA, as well as participate in FGFA.

Spot on Sancho. Agree with these points.

Tshering22 -
Developing a UCAV with Israel will make much more sense than AMCA. For AMCA we need to be on our own. Thats what I am trying to convey here.

 

[sancho]

Are you sure? According to sources most often shown in defense news, AMCA was supposed to replace our MiG-27s and Jaguars while PAKFA opens up a new genre of fighters for IAF.

Not in numbers, as I showed in an earlier post around 250 fighters will be phased out, but around the same number of FGFA will be added too.
The early reports suggested that AMCA should replace Mig 27 and Jags in the A2G role, but the latest plans shows that it won't have real advantages over FGFA there, while a UCAV is clearly superior in that role to both.

 

[Dash]

Not in numbers, as I showed in an earlier post around 250 fighters will be phased out, but around the same number of FGFA will be added too.
The early reports suggested that AMCA should replace Mig 27 and Jags in the A2G role, but the latest plans shows that it won't have real advantages over FGFA there, while a UCAV is clearly superior in that role to both.

As you can see from AMCA design, its a twin engine fighter, but yet medium class, iam not sure where is teh weight reduction..

in weapons??

 

[flanker143]

@ sancho

when can we expect to see a amca prototype ?

 

[Desi Sher]

@ sancho

when can we expect to see a amca prototype ?

Its still under Technology Evolution Stage..... AMCA work has Been Started In ADA

 

[flanker143]

Its still under Technology Evolution Stage..... AMCA work has Been Started In ADA

i know that sir .... i was just asking for an estimate .....

 

[Dash]

i know that sir .... i was just asking for an estimate .....

Expect a prototype in 2020, because it wont be any sooner than LCA Mk2

 

[Tshering22]

Except for the 150 odd MKIs we have in our fighter fleet, everything is going to be replaced in the forthcoming tenders. Right now we are around 700-800 fighters roughly. So its all simple mathematics. Not only replacement but adding squadrons.

According to PTI and statement given by AK Anthony and ACM Naik, they plan to operate 45 squadrons. Now if we take 20 fighters per squadron, that means ~900+ fighters.

The AURA UCAV is still on drawing board while considerable progress has been made with AMCA. Money has been spent on wind tunnel testing and CAD while barely any substantial amount has gone for AURA which will be a paper plane for at least the next decade.

Your intention is all good dude but getting AURA in instead of AMCA means stopping an entire project in the middle while we are thinking of increasing from current 34.5 squadrons to 45 squadrons.

Naturally, AMCA will not be stopped especially after being given the go-aheadby both the IAF and government. It is going to be the reality in the coming decade while AURA may or may not make it which is still ambiguous.

So what do we get partners on? Paper drones or wind tunnel tested fighter models?

 

[Dash]

The AURA UCAV is still on drawing board while considerable progress has been made with AMCA. Money has been spent on wind tunnel testing and CAD while barely any substantial amount has gone for AURA which will be a paper plane for at least the next decade.

Just know that there are serious design flaws in the wind tunnel model for AMCA. DRDO and ADA themselves have told that they are changing the existing model. A significant change is happening, basically to its stealth, As IAF has rulled out any option called as semi-stealth. They want a fully stealth plane. So if you just look from a lay-man eye, you can easily say that the rear plane in AMCA is not stealthy at all. so they proposed a redesign.

So consider AMCA as a paper plane only. AURA UCAV with a JV will have a better future coz, at least we have a know how and have made LCA which gives us a base for AMCA, what base do we have at all for AURA?, we dont even have a functional UAV (MALE) forget AURA...

This is a sixth gen design, and by bringing a partner here you are atleast reducing the tech gap for 10-15 years!!, who knows just after AMCA you have a parallel platform running which will give us AURA 5-6 years after we are done with AMCA??..

This is a feasible thing.

 

[flanker143]

here is a portion of the article that was posted by sri lankan ........ and i love it the most!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/43723-indian-mca-special-news.html#post616248

The most crucial part of the programme is of course the engine. The Kaveri-Snecma turbofan is being counted upon vigorously to be ready to power prototypes of the MCA by the middle of this decade. There is no Plan-B just yet as far as engines go. However, technologies such as single crystal and nickel-based superalloys in turbofans are still some way off as far as Indian development is concerned -- the IAF wants the use of both to be a given in the engines that power the MCA.

 

[sancho]

@ sancho

when can we expect to see a amca prototype ?

According to the link Dash provided, maybe in the mid of this decade, but it will depend on when Kaveri engine will be ready and mature enough. However, that's only the base engine side, they still need capabilities like SC, TVC, steralth, or the NG radar and avionics. I expect a real prototype only by the time when FGFA goes to serial production (2017?) and till the serial production could start it needs even more time.

@ Dash, thanks for the link mate, didn't knew that article and to some extend it freaks me out to see HAL and especially ADA wasting time and resources for a paperplane like AMCA, while they are not able to get LCA done.
I mean really, how can they propose a radar for MCA, which should be based on MMR, when MMR is not even operational in LCA, let alone an AESA for LCA? That's simply ridiculous and it shouldn't be surprising why we have such delays.

Except for the 150 odd MKIs we have in our fighter fleet, everything is going to be replaced in the forthcoming tenders. Right now we are around 700-800 fighters roughly. So its all simple mathematics. Not only replacement but adding squadrons.
According to PTI and statement given by AK Anthony and ACM Naik, they plan to operate 45 squadrons. Now if we take 20 fighters per squadron, that means ~900+ fighters.

Yes and as I showed you, that is easily possibly with 4 types of fighters(LCA, MMRCA, MKI and FGFA), no need to add another one.

The AURA UCAV is still on drawing board while considerable progress has been made with AMCA. Money has been spent on wind tunnel testing and CAD while barely any substantial amount has gone for AURA which will be a paper plane for at least the next decade.

There is no AMCA project officially runing from IAF, or MoD! ADA and HAL has proposed some studies and IAF says what they would expect from such a fighter, but it for now.
And once again, the Aura UCAV can be developed easier and faster than AMCA, because it don't need several of the capabilities that a stealth fighter needs.

 

[Dash]

@ Dash, thanks for the link mate, didn't knew that article and to some extend it freaks me out to see HAL and especially ADA wasting time and resources for a paperplane like AMCA, while they are not able to get LCA done.
I mean really, how can they propose a radar for MCA, which should be based on MMR, when MMR is not even operational in LCA, let alone an AESA for LCA? That's simply ridiculous and it shouldn't be surprising why we have such delays.

They not only did that, but if you look at the NGFA or AMCA, you can see that its design is not so good, So IAF said, they dont want a semi-stealth plane but a plane with complete stealth. I dont understand IAF here, but looks like they are looking for F-22 type plane too.....which is also a little humorous. However the sometimes "goli" giving nature of DRDO also puts IAF into tough stance.