@randomradio @Gautam dont u guys think in amca mk2 it won't be possible to add new engine, DEW and all the certain 6th gen technologies being talked about in the same airframe due to space constraints.
We have to make clean sheet design from scratch so it's better to convert the whole program into 6th gen project, bcz by that time 6th gen aircrafts will start flying.
Defence Squad channel have reported that one of their representative have asked ADA official, and they replied that there is no program called AMCA Mk2 and ADA is separately working on sixth generation fighter program and technology under a separate project.
We have to make clean sheet design from scratch so it's better to convert the whole program into 6th gen project, bcz by that time 6th gen aircrafts will start flying.
Defence Squad channel have reported that one of their representative have asked ADA official, and they replied that there is no program called AMCA Mk2 and ADA is separately working on sixth generation fighter program and technology under a separate project.
AMCA will carry whatever the IAF wants it to carry. The new engine is obvious, the engine is specifically being developed for AMCA, or it will end with just 2 squadrons with F414s.
AMCA is in theory a 6th gen program. It is only using a tried and tested airframe design. It's a 5th gen airframe with 6th gen avionics. We are yet to see if programs like NGAD, J-20 successor etc will look very different from current stealth designs. Even if they are different, the AMCA still sits in its own niche.
AMCA Mk2 is an unofficial name. It's basically AMCA with new engines. Which means, even AMCA Mk1 can be turned into Mk2 with the new engines, so there's only one AMCA design right now. Otoh, LCA Mk1 and Mk2 have obvious differences, even the original Mk2 was different from Mk1.
DRDO's "6th" gen likely refers to IUSAV, FUFA etc. I doubt they are talking about a whole new fighter jet program. FUFA could actually be a bit more advanced than people think.
MKI replacement would have to be beyond 6th gen, whatever that ends up being.
I am talking about amca mk2 we can't simply enlarge the airframe to accommodate new engine and sensors even if we do that there will be lot of compromises so it's better to utilize all the efforts for designing clean sheet 6th gen frame.
There is only one AMCA airframe. There will be no modifications to the airframe, the new engine will be a drop fit. All the avionics meant to be carried will have the necessary space right from the start.
Rajnath Singh said that US has agreed to transfer a niche technology which he cannot reveal currently. Now, there is a news that F 414 will be made in India with 100% TOT and AMCA will be powered by latest variant of F 414. I am just speculating if it may b possible that a higher thrust (probably 116 kN) F 414 is now available for AMCA and that too completely made in India with complete TOT, therefore, AMCA mk 2 will not be required. AMCA mk 1 FOC itself may now be targetted to be 5.5 gen fighter.
But ADA presentations sometime back did mentioned AMCA mk 2 project with advanced engine.
But ADA presentations sometime back did mentioned AMCA mk 2 project with advanced engine.
Last edited:
I agree with you. But I think AMCA project should continue and separately we should start to develop a 6th gen clean-sheet design right now. The plane needs to be a heavy-weight fighter that could replace SU30MKIs in the future and become our future flagship/premier fighter.
It could be a tail-less plane, AI, DEW, over mach 2.0 supercruise etc. We should also follow the Americans and Chinese programmes to see where they are heading. We could partner with the French or the Russians or go solo. Lets see:
the russians ha ha ha ha you seriously think the russians can even make something remotely similar to what NGAD will be. Their engine technology and stealth is at least 2 decades behind. Russians making tail-less planes. please stop joking.
F414 is an interim engine, even the higher thrust one. AMCA needs a new engine.
The Russians are known to be superior when it comes to aerodynamics, it's well within their ability to make tail-less designs. There's nothing special about a tail-less fighter design, it only means you are sacrificing agility for stealth.
Yeah u r right bt i was just speculating a possible scenario from recent news of no AMCA mk 2 were coming out. Anyways, a recent ADA presentation showed AMCA mk 2 so those news cannot be confirmed to be true.
Last edited:
US will not be supplying the ToT of engine per say, rather ToT of manufacturing..
Like we have ToT to manufacture the RD33. Similar thing.
Russians have made comparatively aerodynamically superior planes than USA in every generation. Their aerodynamic prowess is not the problem but sensors are.
Anyways, if we want our 6th gen plane in time then from engine to aero work needs to begin now. Otherwise the Chinese would again take the lead how they have took in acquiring and fielding a 5th gen plane before us.
Yes but that is all RR/Safran are also going to do while jointly developing advanced engine. 100% ToT of manufacturing F 414 is being mentioned which will atleast make us sound in manufacturing tech of engines. I doubt we make RD 33 100%. Know how & know why of advanced manufacturing tech is also important and meanwhile we can keep working on advanced engine by ourselves.
We had ToT of manufacturing of AL31. But we cannot develop something in class of AL31 again.
The same will happen with 414. We will be able to build the 414, but never be able to recreate something similar on our own.
France offer is different. Its costly, but we will be able to recreate something in that class again.
Shakthi engine of LCH/ALH & Vikas engine of PSLVs are of french origin. We failed to develop new variants from these two engines ( either France didn't provide enough ToT or we arr technically incapable to do it, i beleive later will be the actual cause. @Picdelamirand-oil be honest why India failed to follow up these two engine projects? Is it because of insufficient ToT or leck of technical capabilities of India ). We started searching for new partner for IMRH engine, you should ask why we didn't develop or started work for IMRH engine?
Similarly, ISRO is using a cluster of two vikas ingine on GSLV mk3 as on today instead of using an upscaled vikas engine. This two engine configuration seriously had a bad impact on GSLV mk3 as it limited to mount only two strap on engines on either side, thus limiting the lift off capacity.
We didnt want our engine to be AL 31 class or standard, we wanted better one akin to western standards of reliability and performance for single engine fighter. Infact HAL did made some improvements to Russian engines on its own. F 414 ToT will be helpful in further for our MIC in reliable manufacturing part of development of our own engine. Though we will have to do most of R&D on our own in terms of design.
Nobody is sure of detailed offer by France what we are likely to gain from it and I am not optimistic about it. Just like what they did with Scorpene or may be just like shakti engine co development is most likely to happen.
At this stage I would like both ToT for F 414 & co development with RR/Safran (preferably RR as British are more reliable and advanced). Together they shall enable for more technology absorption. Technology absorbed from F 414 ToT may enable us to contribute more in co development of advanced engine with RR/Safran.
Last edited:
Mazagon Dock CMD Vice Adm Narayan Prasad suggests bold steps in trials & testing of Scorpene submarines - ET Infra
The head of India’s biggest warship builder, the State-run Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd, wants the government to take “some bold steps” on submarine manufacturing in the country.
Read this and you will know how France does its business. France has never provided enough ToT to anybody. They have only extracted it from others.
If we would have been technically incompetent we wont be developing HTSE 1200 and made improvements to AL 31. We have built Arihant Sub from Russian ToT and now building its improved versions but we cant do it with Scorpene due to French.
Last edited: