ADA AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tarun
  • Start date Start date
Developing a concept does not seem to be things that French can do unfortunately.
Like I said its a concept and like I said you really cannot understand the concept, just try not to poke your nose into everything if you dont understand how it works.

I think what you are referring to is SA-2 guideline shooting down U-2 spyplane? U-2 is a high flying spy plane and really not known for speed, In fact it was replaced by SR-71 for later missions deep into Russia, how many SR-71 shot down by Russian missiles? Maybe classified.

Planes are much different than what they were in 70s, planes no longer just depend on just flares for protection against IR missiles. Like I said active protection system for plane will be a requirement in near future because simply jamming a missile won't work. ECM .. ECCM,,,
Something that cannot be done in soft way has to be done the HARD WAY.

In your post, what are the "facts" If you really don't understand what I had written in Good English, I cannot be blamed for your lack of language skills. is it just you or all French are such crybabies who are infected with "we are the victims" syndrome?

Please feel free to ignore my postings henceforth, thanks


Bon Plan said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
randomradio said:
There was no foreign help on Kaveri. Kaveri and cryogenics have nothing to do with each other.
Click to expand...

Prior to 98 there were.

By the way cryogenics has more complex set of equations while modelling the motor way more complicated than Kaveri. It is not possible that India has capability to develop cryogenic motor but not a jet engine.
 
screambowl said:
Prior to 98 there were.
Click to expand...

Nope. There was zero assistance from anybody when we designed the Kaveri.

By the way cryogenics has more complex set of equations while modelling the motor way more complicated than Kaveri. It is not possible that India has capability to develop cryogenic motor but not a jet engine.
Click to expand...

Cryogenic engines were designed by an entirely different department. ISRO's been tinkering with rocket engines long before GTRE did, and they had a bigger budget.

Both engines have their own set of complexities.
 
randomradio said:
Cryogenic engines were designed by an entirely different department. ISRO's been tinkering with rocket engines long before GTRE did, and they had a bigger budget.

Both engines have their own set of complexities.
Click to expand...

dude I am post graduate in physics majors in classical mechanis from ZTH zurich, if you can design cryogenic engine then no one can stop you design a jet engine up to the mark. I tell you cryogenics is way more complicated, with similar pattern of modelling of turbopums which act as turbine. Yeah there are differences when it comes to material technology but if you can design a tubopump to function near absolute 0 temperatures then you can also design a turbine to work in STP and above and below STP conditions.
Cryogenics was already placed under MTCR guidelines and even Wassenaar Arrangement long ago under CAT1 , CAT2 and CAT9 and India was not a memeber. There was no scope of India getting any help. Somehow India built.

The initial test flight was planned in 1999, Kabini core was already tested for the first time in 1995. In 1996 it was ready for testing What exactly happened after 1998 that test flights were delayed? That means something stopped. And by the way the only valid reason is the fund and priority nothing else. They have no mood to develop this engine at all.
 
screambowl said:
dude I am post graduate in physics majors in classical mechanis from ZTH zurich, if you can design cryogenic engine then no one can stop you design a jet engine up to the mark. I tell you cryogenics is way more complicated, with similar pattern of modelling of turbopums which act as turbine. Yeah there are differences when it comes to material technology but if you can design a tubopump to function near absolute 0 temperatures then you can also design a turbine to work in STP and above and below STP conditions.
Cryogenics was already placed under MTCR guidelines and even Wassenaar Arrangement long ago under CAT1 , CAT2 and CAT9 and India was not a memeber. There was no scope of India getting any help. Somehow India built.
Click to expand...

The people and the departments designing the two engines are not the same. They are completely different and had no involvement with each other.

The initial test flight was planned in 1999, Kabini core was already tested for the first time in 1995. In 1996 it was ready for testing What exactly happened after 1998 that test flights were delayed? That means something stopped. And by the way the only valid reason is the fund and priority nothing else. They have no mood to develop this engine at all.
Click to expand...

Nothing was stopped and we had no help from anywhere. Tests continued throughout the late 90s and early 2000s. Nothing special happened in 1998. There was zero foreign involvement in the designing and testing of the engine.

The Kaveri suffered issues that wouldn't have been an issue if foreign players were involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bonobashi, Ironhide and Shekhar Singh
randomradio said:
The people and the departments designing the two engines are not the same.
Click to expand...

It's not about the people it's about technological absorving capability for the technology at disposal and way to approach a complex system of equation and developing building blocks through available systems.
 
screambowl said:
It's not about the people it's about technological absorving capability for the technology at disposal and way to approach a complex system of equation and developing building blocks through available systems.
Click to expand...
May be we have the capabilities but still we need to prove it.we went to Russia to test the Kaveri ...India never saw a flight test in the country, also till now not used in any kind of flying machine .All we listen talks like crystal blade ,variable compressor,blisk ....lol tired of listening.we should at least run a test flight what ever we have ... net practice will not take us any where we have to play a real match ,even though thrust is less we should have tested on the real flight .Nobody really knows what’s going on ...Kaveri is a dream project for India.
 
TARGET said:
May be we have the capabilities but still we need to prove it.we went to Russia to test the Kaveri ...India never saw a flight test in the country, also till now not used in any kind of flying machine .All we listen talks like crystal blade ,variable compressor,blisk ....lol tired of listening.we should at least run a test flight what ever we have ... net practice will not take us any where we have to play a real match ,even though thrust is less we should have tested on the real flight .Nobody really knows what’s going on ...Kaveri is a dream project for India.
Click to expand...

It's almost 150 kg heavier than planned and has got complaints that it's blades gets detached from axial rotor when run on high RPM. Lack of funds into material research is the only cause for such problems. They intentionally don't want to develop it and have been stalling it. Otherwise they won't get a reason to spend for western technology and maintain the strategic balance among countries while doing defence deals. But you can mark this post that the real info on the engine will never be out. What they are upto no one knows.
I fail to digest that India have developed a cryogenic engine and could not do well in jet turbine technology with respect to the problems they have mentioned, it's something tough to believe.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: smestarz
1523613070753.png


What will be the MTOW? My bet is 26-27 ton. (In between Rafale and Super Hornet)

@randomradio @Milspec @vstol Jockey

Pic credit @ni8mare
 
The enlightened said:
A slimmer version of F-35. Much disappoint. For an aircraft entering service in 2040, it should have at least matched F-22 in performance, at least in payload and range ;if not F-35. Too much to ask from DRDO I guess.
Click to expand...

The AMCA's fuel fraction is 0.4, the F-22's is 0.29.

Naturally, the AMCA's IWBs can carry heavier weapons.

The AMCA comfortably exceeds the F-22 in payload and range.
 
Rocket engines, Solid fueled ones are not that difficult to make
Where India actually has challenges is developing the technology and mastering the tech required for Single crystal blades,
The latest gen SCBs can withstand higher temperatures and pressures thus giving better fuel economy and also adding various advantages
With what engine we would have (Kaveri) we might be having a 5th gen design with 4th gen plane.

screambowl said:
It's not about the people it's about technological absorving capability for the technology at disposal and way to approach a complex system of equation and developing building blocks through available systems.
Click to expand...

You are going to compare a plane which is operational for almost 2 decades to a plane that is still not even a prototype?
Maybe you should have started with " .... just imagine this .... "

randomradio said:
The AMCA's fuel fraction is 0.4, the F-22's is 0.29.

Naturally, the AMCA's IWBs can carry heavier weapons.

The AMCA comfortably exceeds the F-22 in payload and range.
Click to expand...
 
randomradio said:
The AMCA's fuel fraction is 0.4, the F-22's is 0.29.

Naturally, the AMCA's IWBs can carry heavier weapons.

The AMCA comfortably exceeds the F-22 in payload and range.
Click to expand...
Looks like Clean Take-Off weight will have to be more clearly defined. I took it as including IWB's.

F-22 can carry 2x2000lb bombs with missiles. Can't carry more than that in a much smaller fighter.
F-22 has small bays but can carry 8 missiles.
 
Last edited:
The enlightened said:
Looks like Clean Take-Off weight will have to be more clearly defined. I took it as including IWB's.

F-22 can carry 2x2000lb bombs with missiles. Can't carry more than that in a much smaller fighter.
F-22 has small bays but can carry 8 missiles.
Click to expand...

We need to see the bay size of the AMCA, and the size of the missile that will go into it before we know if the main bays can carry 4 or 6 missiles.

The capability of the missile is also important. Like 4 Meteors is any day better than 6 AMRAAMs.
 
smestarz said:
With what engine we would have (Kaveri) we might be having a 5th gen design with 4th gen plane.
Click to expand...


With your assesment, well its not suited for Tejas any more I believe, if ever AMCA comes out, Kaveri would be the first choice. They always keep in mind the Moore's law too. With time upgrade the tech. If it was built for 4th gen and there are delays then make it suitable for 5th gen with upgrades, that's how they will compensate the loss to my best understanding.
This is the most logical thing which can be done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom