ADA AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

[randomradio]

The clean weight includes the IWB load. The internal fuel figure is around 6tons.

The DRDO Chief had pointed out earlier than the internal fuel will be 6.5T. But clean load generally means without weapons.

If we assume it's 6.5T for fuel, then the internal weapons load will be 1.5T. But that puts it in the same class as the Rafale, at 25T MTOW. If that's the case, then it's just a smaller version of the F-22. Even though officials said the MTOW will be much closer to 30T.

This old presentation from Chief Saraswat put AMCA's normal takeoff weight, whatever that means, at 18.5T and internal fuel at 6.5T. The empty weight seems to be 11T, can't make out, perhaps 10T, perhaps 12T. Internal carriage is only 1.5T in this.

So I suppose we are back to medium weight category.
Empty = 12T
Fuel = 6.5T
Internal load = 1.5T
External load = 5T
MTOW = 25T
Total thrust = 220KN

This is pretty weird considering the F-15C's specs.
Empty = 13T
Fuel = 6T
Payload = 7T
Actual MTOW = 26T
Published MTOW = 30T
Total thrust = 210KN

 

[vstol Jockey]

The DRDO Chief had pointed out earlier than the internal fuel will be 6.5T. But clean load generally means without weapons.

If we assume it's 6.5T for fuel, then the internal weapons load will be 1.5T. But that puts it in the same class as the Rafale, at 25T MTOW. If that's the case, then it's just a smaller version of the F-22. Even though officials said the MTOW will be much closer to 30T.

This old presentation from Chief Saraswat put AMCA's normal takeoff weight, whatever that means, at 18.5T and internal fuel at 6.5T. The empty weight seems to be 11T, can't make out, perhaps 10T, perhaps 12T. Internal carriage is only 1.5T in this.

So I suppose we are back to medium weight category.
Empty = 12T
Fuel = 6.5T
Internal load = 1.5T
External load = 5T
MTOW = 25T
Total thrust = 220KN

This is pretty weird considering the F-15C's specs.
Empty = 13T
Fuel = 6T
Payload = 7T
Actual MTOW = 26T
Published MTOW = 30T
Total thrust = 210KN

AMCA is a medium weight fighter. The higher TWR is to factor in thrust loss due to very high temperatures and high altitude operations. Just reduce the total thrust by 13% as was planned for Kaveri engine and see where we are. 220x0.87=191.4KN.

 

[Ashwin]

AMCA is a medium weight fighter. The higher TWR is to factor in thrust loss due to very high temperatures and high altitude operations. Just reduce the total thrust by 13% as was planned for Kaveri engine and see where we are. 220x0.87=191.4KN.

Also supercruise.

 

[randomradio]

AMCA is a medium weight fighter. The higher TWR is to factor in thrust loss due to very high temperatures and high altitude operations. Just reduce the total thrust by 13% as was planned for Kaveri engine and see where we are. 220x0.87=191.4KN.

This makes FGFA more important though.

 

[Parthu]

 

[Bali78]

View attachment 2441
View attachment 2442
View attachment 2443

Wing area looks small. I guess wing loading number must be high.

 

[Indian Jatt]

Like we have seen before modular construction by different members or private companies and final assembly and stealth coating tech with HAL will definitely become a quick process, since it an MCA and not an heavy aircraft like F22 and J20, it will be a quick process.
And we will still need an air superiority fighter jet in place of sukhoi's....
Future looks promising if it's made in India and dark if it FGFA from Russia and F16 as light combat fighters...

 

[Parthu]

Wing area looks small. I guess wing loading number must be high.

Speaking of wings, note how the planform is developing over time: becoming more and more like an F-22.

The newer model (top) has its horizontal stabilizers neatly integrating into the trailing edge of the mail wing, unlike the older model (below) where there is a huge gap between the two surfaces.

Also, the new model has a more angular fuselage under the cockpit, very similar to a J-20's...compared to the old model which didn't have much shaping in that part.

 

[randomradio]

Speaking of wings, note how the planform is developing over time: becoming more and more like an F-22.

The newer model (top) has its horizontal stabilizers neatly integrating into the trailing edge of the mail wing, unlike the older model (below) where there is a huge gap between the two surfaces.

Also, the new model has a more angular fuselage under the cockpit, very similar to a J-20's...compared to the old model which didn't have much shaping in that part.

There are two designs displayed. One has the F-22's basic design, the other has the F-22's fuselage and YF-23's wing form.

 

[Parthu]

There are two designs displayed. One has the F-22's basic design, the other has the F-22's fuselage and YF-23's wing form.

From what I understand, there is only one actual model being pursued right now. The one on top, which looks closest to an F-22.

The AMCA design has evolved greatly over time, and I believe the image on the bottom that I posted is based on one of those older designs, which has now been understandably discarded. The reason why they showed two models is that the Raptor-like model is displaying the configuration with external stores while the other model is displaying without any external load. That's the only intended difference afaik. It's possible they just brought in an older model that they already had for display purposes.

 

[randomradio]

From what I understand, there is only one actual model being pursued right now. The one on top, which looks closest to an F-22.

The AMCA design has evolved greatly over time, and I believe the image on the bottom that I posted is based on one of those older designs, which has now been understandably discarded. The reason why they showed two models is that the Raptor-like model is displaying the configuration with external stores while the other model is displaying without any external load. That's the only intended difference afaik. It's possible they just brought in an older model that they already had for display purposes.

Yeah. The RFI for the TDs had the F-22 type design in it.

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

I know Just wanted to know from the member who suggested internal bays in a stealth plane cannot carry more than 2 missiles.

Is AMRAAM considered a missile? Missile means 1.5-2ton heavy missile for strike, not Air-to-Air missiles. Obviously, these 150kg missiles can be stuffed in larger numbers. So, don't take things out of context.

take off clean is 20,000 kg
external pylons is 5000kg
weapon bay should be then 5000kg too.

so total MTOW would be 30 tons.

No plane has 5ton internal payload. It will be 1-2ton and not more.

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.

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 .... "

Please stop speaking of SCBs as if they are a big problem. India has made SCBs too. The only problem with latest generation (3rd) SCB is the use of rhenium. We don't have rhenium and wish to have blades without it. So, we prefer to use the 1st generation SCB or 2nd generation DS blades instead of rhenium and still get a TWR of 8-8.2. By using rhenium, we can get TWR of 9+. The idea os to not use rhenium and hence be independent in jet manufacturing. Rhenium is extremely rare and there is a possibility of supply cuts during war. Also, normal engines can be made in large numbers to help in making large number of planes for war.

The DRDO Chief had pointed out earlier than the internal fuel will be 6.5T. But clean load generally means without weapons.

If we assume it's 6.5T for fuel, then the internal weapons load will be 1.5T. But that puts it in the same class as the Rafale, at 25T MTOW. If that's the case, then it's just a smaller version of the F-22. Even though officials said the MTOW will be much closer to 30T.

This old presentation from Chief Saraswat put AMCA's normal takeoff weight, whatever that means, at 18.5T and internal fuel at 6.5T. The empty weight seems to be 11T, can't make out, perhaps 10T, perhaps 12T. Internal carriage is only 1.5T in this.

So I suppose we are back to medium weight category.
Empty = 12T
Fuel = 6.5T
Internal load = 1.5T
External load = 5T
MTOW = 25T
Total thrust = 220KN

This is pretty weird considering the F-15C's specs.
Empty = 13T
Fuel = 6T
Payload = 7T
Actual MTOW = 26T
Published MTOW = 30T
Total thrust = 210KN

Stealth fighter has not so aerodynamic design and hence needs somewhat greater TWR to fly in the same speed and maneuverability as F15. So, the AMCA will have 2 Kaveri engine @100kN and still fly in supersonic speed as its weight will be just 25tonnes.

The internal load can also be replaced by fuel tanks in case of Naval AMCA as Navy does not need stealth but longer distance and greater fuel carrying ability. To strike the targets hard, Navy will need large external stores and hence stealth is difficult. The Air-to-Air ability is not relevant in Naval warfare as there is little requirement for achieving aerial supremacy over oceans

 

[Ashwin]

 

[screambowl]

No plane has 5ton internal payload. It will be 1-2ton and not more

I doubt, not 1-2 tons but more than that. The over all MTOW would be between 29ton-30tons That I am sure.

 

[suryakiran]

Is AMRAAM considered a missile? Missile means 1.5-2ton heavy missile for strike, not Air-to-Air missiles. Obviously, these 150kg missiles can be stuffed in larger numbers. So, don't take things out of context.

AMRAAM is not a missile? I learn something new, everyday, on this forum. And I will remember this as part of my re-education. Cheers!

P.S : Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile, guess what this is commonly called?

 

[bonobashi]

AMRAAM is not a missile? I learn something new, everyday, on this forum. And I will remember this as part of my re-education. Cheers!

P.S : Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile, guess what this is commonly called?

Good luck with this expert.

He has an opinion on everything, and it is usually wrong, but he soldiers on without a pause for breath.

 

[Bon Plan]

No plane has 5ton internal payload.

No today fighter, may be.
A B1B or B2 can carry far more (and a bomber is a plane).

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

AMRAAM is not a missile? I learn something new, everyday, on this forum. And I will remember this as part of my re-education. Cheers!

P.S : Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile, guess what this is commonly called?

I have said that you are taking me out of context. I have clearly stated that the missile and PGM are for Naval AMCA or NAMCA. I think it is obvious that Naval AMCA is mainly oriented to bombing enemy ground rather than maintain air superiority. It is impossible to maintain air superiority with just 40-50 fighters of 2 carriers. So, in this context the missile means A2G missile.

I don't have infinite time and energy to continuously type sentences over sentences by repeating all the previous words I said in the conversation. A conversation must have continuity and what was said earlier must also be considered instead of taking every sentence as separate. This is something which you must learn.

I have no more time for your insane, pointless and contentless bullshit

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

No today fighter, may be.
A B1B or B2 can carry far more (and a bomber is a plane).

I meant fighter plane. For that matter, even planes like C130J hercules has 20ton internal payload. B2 is a big plane with empty weight of 72tons, MToW of 172Tons and fuel capacity of 76tons. It is a big plane and powered by 4 non after-burner engines. B2 is even heavier than planes like C130J Hercules.

 

[STEPHEN COHEN]

https://twitter.com/x/status/985517468587261957