ADA AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

[vstol Jockey]

That seems to be an experimental design especially when you have added the fuel tanks on top of the fuselage to have the canard stall first then the main wing in simple words. But then it's requires thorough tests during combat sorties and dog fights especially to study the chaotic dynamics of the fuel inside the tank and air flow during flights.

because normally you can't simply add fuel tanks anywhere on the fuselage to balance the aerodynamics. The placement of fuel tank would work well with the aerodynamics but then due to chaos in the fuel tank during flights the metacentre and CG would drastically change at different fuel lvl. Also the outside temperature of the fuel tank has an important role, in this design some coating would be required so that fuel doesn't freeze inside the tank due to water molecules present in tank and higher airflow over the fuselage. Or the tank heater has to intake the heat from engine or over work of the tank heater which adds up to the power consumption. Or sometimes the design of the fuel tank doesn't fit with the fuselage for a proper flow, even with the pumps.

You already know things get very complicated due to minute changes. But it's all to be tested. Can't prejudice any thing beforehand.

You got it all wrong. I meant internal fuel tanks and not D/Ts. Plus my design is not a canard design. It is some what as shown below.

This is not the exact one but somewhat close to it.

 

[screambowl]

I meant internal fuel tanks and not D/Ts.

Even when internal fuel tanks are installed on top of the fuselage it requires experimental tests to understand the chaos dynamics + fuel inflow and thermodynamics. It would be baseless for me to debate without any experimental data.

And the design you show has no canards. I thought your design is canard based.

 

[zinswinsin]

 

[zinswinsin]

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

Stop living in your own world. France made their M88 engine in 10 years flat. This was in 1985-1995. Now you are ranting that India will need another 10 years to just finalise the engine despite all the efforts? Just because you are retarded does not mean everyone else is retarded too.

Not going to happen in next 7-8 years make it 10. We are still not been able to have mastered material technology especially single crstal/tensile strength with rapid increase decreas in temperature and pressure of the material and surroundings.

 

[screambowl]

Stop living in your own world. France made their M88 engine in 10 years flat. This was in 1985-1995. Now you are ranting that India will need another 10 years to just finalise the engine despite all the efforts? Just because you are retarded does not mean everyone else is retarded too.

Your confidence seems to have exaggerate your hopes.
Kaveri program was officially launched in 1986 and it's 2018 now and we are still not ready. We just don't have to develop it but also make it reliable/tested state of art technology.

M88 even after France bein way ahead in technology and material sciences took more than a decade to completely master the M88 and call it tested technology.

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

1986? Are you joking? India wanted to start then but initially India was trying to make different type of engine. But now the Kaveri engine is different from what was started in 1986. This Kaveri project was started in 1996 and given a full sanction in 1999. It is 2018 and you must subtract UPA era 7 years as only minimal work happened then. So, you get a net time period of less than 15 years.

Unless and until UPA era time is subtracted, you will only get junk predictions

Your confidence seems to have exaggerate your hopes.
Kaveri program was officially launched in 1986 and it's 2018 now and we are still not ready. We just don't have to develop it but also make it reliable/tested state of art technology.

M88 even after France bein way ahead in technology and material sciences took more than a decade to completely master the M88 and call it tested technology.

 

[smestarz]

That is a very wise thing to do, see how common sense works for you when you use it well?
Hope the framed words give you the right pressure when you are sitting in the toilet seat.

Thank you for those golden words . It was sorely needed .I actually took a screenshot , printed and laminated it and now keep it on my toilet flush . It's extremely inspiring .For appropriate endeavours. Please do provide more such pearls of wisdom .One never knows where might one need it.

 

[_Anonymous_]

That is a very wise thing to do, see how common sense works for you when you use it well?
Hope the framed words give you the right pressure when you are sitting in the toilet seat.

Your words are truly inspiring . And effective too Even when you don't intend them to be so .As most people here would testify. It just hasn't anything to do with common sense .Your words are a natural purgative. That's a pretty rare talent. Congratulations & God bless you.

 

[randomradio]

Impossible. To carry 3xAMRAAM with 45cms wingspan in staggered configuration, you need at least a main bay size of 4x0.9x0.55m. The missile itself may fit within a square of 32x32cms but the clearance between the bay doors with bay door thickness and the height of the pneumatic launched also need to be taken care of.

The diameter of the Aim-120 is less than 0.2m with the wings folded. A 0.35m deep bay is plenty for the missile.

 

[zinswinsin]

Let's not forget, USA hasn't put out a new A2A missile since the 90's. The next two missiles are gonna be super long range and a missile with the range of the aim9x but 1/3rd the size.

A factor when talking internal bays.

 

[vstol Jockey]

The diameter of the Aim-120 is less than 0.2m with the wings folded. A 0.35m deep bay is plenty for the missile.

AIM 120D has clipped tips of the wings reducing its span to 45cms. AND it does not have folding wings. The bay door thickness plus clearance between missile and bay doors need at least 10cms space. so the total clearance needed is 15cms for the launcher+25cms for the missile+10cms for the bay door and missile separation from bay doors. making it a total of 50cms.

 

[randomradio]

AIM 120D has clipped tips of the wings reducing its span to 45cms. AND it does not have folding wings. The bay door thickness plus clearance between missile and bay doors need at least 10cms space. so the total clearance needed is 15cms for the launcher+25cms for the missile+10cms for the bay door and missile separation from bay doors. making it a total of 50cms.

Yeah, you are correct about the whole thing.

 

[BadBoi]

I am sorry to say that what you have suggested is sure shot recipe for disaster like LCA. We must know each and everything which we want to fit into the aircraft before hand. The design must satisfy the needs of internal space to house all the avionics and fuel volume. After you decide the size of the aircraft, you should go for aerodynamic analysis. My concept is based on off-the-shelf avionics already operational. This gives me the advantage to know before hand the exact dimensions of every equipment which goes in my aircraft and decide the shape and size of it. Once the design complies with the goals, we should go for detailed CFD and wind tunnel testing of the design. The final design must also comply with take off and landing speed and field length required requirements including desired ITR and STR values. LCA was supposed to land at speeds below 230kmph or 130kts but it lands at 307kmph or close to 165kts. Why such a big difference in the ASQR and final product?
AMCA is another disaster in making as the final configuration for line flying has not been decided and we do not know what additional kind of avionics we will have in 2030. In fact we do not even know where to fit which equipment to finalise the final line product. many of you post comments of some very high ranking test pilots from LCA program. I talk to them at will. In my last chat with them I questioned what their motive is in making an AMCA TD and if they have designed it from inside out or outside in like LCA. They had no clue of it. I asked them have you decided how you will ensure 360* coverage of sensors? all they could tell me was that they will think about it once the TD is made.

Regarding Naval AMCA, more than anyother service, Navy needs internal bays and very large amount of load carrying ability. Please go thru what happened in vietnam. The largest amount of load was delivered on target not by F-4 phantoms but by a small single engine aircraft called A-4 Skyhawk. A-4 could undertake multiple mission and yet show up for duty whenever needed.

NAMCA will never happen. I have also studied the design and I can tell you that the TWR of the aircraft is far low, wing loading far higher, fuel volume too low and so unfit for operations at sea and from 66% of Carriers to be fielded by IN in 2030 time frame which will include Vikky+IAC-1 & 2. AMCA is purely an AF aircraft and not fit for IN. NAMCA will be able to go with good load only from a CATOBAR carrier.

You seem to be living in a world of your own and not in touch with reality. And of course filled with grandiosity. Please see a psychiatrist.
However, you seem to have a good knowledge on tech stuffs about aircrafts, like a few others who have a lot of free time in hand and read a lot about those things online.

For last 2-3 years, you have been talking about your super design, how its going to be the best and how it'll be made in a few years, how you are being sponsored by some secrete people/organizations, how there will be talks about your plane in the news (which has never happened so far) etc etc... Time to get down to earth. Please see a psychiatrist and get a real life.

Sorry, not trying to hurt anyone.

 

[vstol Jockey]

You seem to be living in a world of your own and not in touch with reality. And of course filled with grandiosity. Please see a psychiatrist.
However, you seem to have a good knowledge on tech stuffs about aircrafts, like a few others who have a lot of free time in hand and read a lot about those things online.

For last 2-3 years, you have been talking about your super design, how its going to be the best and how it'll be made in a few years, how you are being sponsored by some secrete people/organizations, how there will be talks about your plane in the news (which has never happened so far) etc etc... Time to get down to earth. Please see a psychiatrist and get a real life.

Sorry, not trying to hurt anyone.

I really do not know what exactly is wrong with you. have you or anyone else spent even a penny on this? I have myself called it a concept aircraft. Do you understand the meaning of a concept? I am pursuing it on my own. I may or may not succeed. I will pursue it till I make it or die. How are you bothered about it?
You do not understand this point buddy and its you who is in need of serious psychiatric treatment.
regarding my knowledge of technical stuff, I have been flying aircraft since Feb 1983. And I acquired the knowledge as part of my profession in Indian Navy.

 

[screambowl]

This Kaveri project was started in 1996 and given a full sanction in 1999. It is 2018 and you must subtract UPA era 7 years as only minimal work happened then. So, you get a net time period of less than 15 years.

UPA BJP etc are all excuses.
The kaveri project and Cryogenic motor were stalled in 1998 and then all the developments began again from where it was left with more indegenous inputs. We somehow developed the cryogenics which was more of a priority and slowed down with the Kaveri.

M88 is full french technology where as Kaveri project had foreign consulatancy too and other sort of help prior to nuclear test.

 

[Bon Plan]

I did not even tell you the concept, why are you speculating the distance? Why are you in the habit to talk of something that you really dont understand? I think 200 metres is optimum distance for this Active protection system.
What you are talking of is the proximity fuse detonating the warhead and where the velocity of the moving missile also adds to the velocity of the frags and thus giving it a better range,
The concept here about the system is to hit the incoming missile and to destroy the missile or to try and divert the missile by the exploding "bomb"

BTW which air defence missile detonates 200 metre from a plane to destroy the plane? I do hope to know it.

You THINK... Thinking doesn't make dream real.

It's a fact SA2 missile blast destroyed US plane at 200m. The blast is one thing, the shells another one.

But probably the pure and perfect mind of Smestarz can change this fact. After all, it's not the first time you deny facts... It's your specialty.

 

[Bon Plan]

Any idea how many missiles are carried by the Raptor in internal bays?

6 x AMRAAM and 2 AIM9

 

[TARGET]

A video from livefist on AMCA model looks awesome ...air intake ,wings,internal weapon bay ...Eagerly waiting to see this model as TD 2022

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1733652496673366

 

[randomradio]

UPA BJP etc are all excuses.
The kaveri project and Cryogenic motor were stalled in 1998 and then all the developments began again from where it was left with more indegenous inputs. We somehow developed the cryogenics which was more of a priority and slowed down with the Kaveri.

M88 is full french technology where as Kaveri project had foreign consulatancy too and other sort of help prior to nuclear test.

There was no foreign help on Kaveri. Kaveri and cryogenics have nothing to do with each other.