That's why we need a 6th gen fighter that we can get while we focus on developing indigenous 4.5 gen and 5th gen tech. The su-57 and f-35 are stop gaps till our fifth gens come online. What will we do when we are facing hundreds of j-20,j-36 and j-50's?
British/Italian Tempest (GCAP) Fighter : News and Discussion
- Thread starter Shekhar Singh
- Start date
As Dr. Jaishankar puts it, the West also buys more oil and gas in an afternoon from Russia than India does in a fortnight. But that doesn't stop them from pointing fingers at us. Under Biden, the US has already sanctioned some of our companies for selling tech items to Russia.
My point is we shouldn't join a consortium where we'd be junior partners or sub-contractors at best and subsidise production costs for the founding members while getting no IP or dev experience in return.
The UK, and Sweden have among the most unpredictable export control regimes. The Brits in particular are known to pander to the Pakistanis because of domestic politics. I'd rather sign up with France or Russia as they are more predictable. As it did with Rafale, France may decide to go it alone on the SCAF project sooner or later. Perfect opportunity for India to pick up a stake and get a good bargain I say.
> Fighter jet tech is somewhat a half century project, while political regimes can change every few years. Political diplomacy, trade & commerce are always there but so far only France has shown to take independent decisions hence more reliabe. For others currently it is difficult to rely on in long term for big critical platforms. From their Pov also it is tough to trust us being close to Russia, although we stay non-alligned & just interested in business aspect.
> Western/European currencies are much stronger. So our financial contribution can hit us a lot. While Russian Ruble & INR are almost at same level. But we don't know what 6gen jet Russia is planning &/or will it suit our geography, geopolitics, doctrine, etc or not.
> People should be more specific when talking about Technology, ToT. Although from diagrams we can see that there are 100s of components of military aircraft, but broadly -
- We can make glass cockpit & avionics easily now.
- In future LCA kind of jets will be mosquito, but it is a stepping stone giving us experience for auxilliary components.
- DRDO needs to tell us where our EO/DAS sensors capability stand. EOTS we are making.
- DRDO is working on DEW, demonstrated on ground vehicle, working for aircrafts also, will definitely mature in 10-15 years.
- We have RAM, RAS, which will improve further.
- The radar & sensors tech are improving continiously.
- We have made good progress in variety of missiles. We need custom weapons for any future stealthy platform.
- Perhaps ISRO can help in thermal materials, which we need to combone with RF stealth.
> We need a virtual cockpit & HMDS. DRDO needs to comment on this.
> We need constellation of military or multi-purpose satellites with EO, IR, RF sensors. ISRO can do this.
> Most importantly we need a 200-250 KN VCE which can power any future 1 or 2 engine design. This should be 1 of the JV goals.
The DAMN engine thing has single-handedly delayed our every jet.
Now try to compare what can we contribute to GCAP & what can we get something for AMCA & our own 6gen design.
And whether will it be worth the money & political risk.
You are overestimating the immediate need for 6th gen airframe and engine in our context.
AMCA will give us 6th gen capabilities via its avionics. It's more than enough. Think about it this way, the AMCA airframe is a generation ahead of the Rafale, but the French are fine with the Rafale until the 2050s, when SCAF comes in. So we will be in an even more comfortable position than the French by operating both Rafale and AMCA. If SCAF fails, the French plan on modernizing Rafale into a Super Rafale and continue that for a few decades until a better replacement comes along.
The only reason we need a stopgap is if we find some performance deficiencies at the upper level, like high speed/high altitude, or an endurance mismatch with the enemy. For example, if the Chinese end up with a near-hypersonic/hypersonic jet by 2040 or even transition into space, we will need to compensate for that in some ways via a stopgap. So that's the qualifying factor for a next gen jet. The Mig-41 should be able to operate up to 80 km altitude, so 2 squadrons could act as deterrence until we make our own. Until then, LCA, Rafale, AMCA/AMCA NG etc are sufficient for altitudes below 25 km. They are enough to take us into the 2070s. And this is not a decision we need to make today, we can wait until 2035-40.
The IAF's next ASF will naturally be hypersonic.
Ah, one more thing to add here. GCAP's avionics objectives aren't as advanced as AMCA's. So that needs to be taken into account.
While the primary sensors will be bigger and the engine will spit out more electrical power, the jet functions in a silo, it's not being designed with advanced MUM-T in mind like AMCA is. That's why it's not on the same level as NGAD and SCAF either. It's just a Typhoon and F-2 replacement program.
The only thing that would interest us is the engine, but we do not have a use case for it.
While the primary sensors will be bigger and the engine will spit out more electrical power, the jet functions in a silo, it's not being designed with advanced MUM-T in mind like AMCA is. That's why it's not on the same level as NGAD and SCAF either. It's just a Typhoon and F-2 replacement program.
The only thing that would interest us is the engine, but we do not have a use case for it.
Sweden isn't a part of the project. They pulled out of talks a couple of years ago. UK. JP and IT are the partners.
The French aren't facing a an adversary with a 20 trillion dollar economy with two active 6th gen projects and two active fifth gen aircrafts in its service. The French aren't facing two nuclear armed nations with one having over a 200 fifth gen aircrafts on its borders. The French aren't facing two military force of a combine 4 million personnel across a 1000km border. The French aren't constantly having multiple internal and external security threats with the hopes of infiltration.
Let's stop comparing ourselves to France. The French are an active imperial power with a neo-colonial empire spanning from Africa to little islands in the Indian Ocean. They have no real peer threats.
We on the other hand have a decaying air force. An army that still has problems modernising and a tiny navy relative to its size.
If you manage to knock some sense into him which is highly unlikely I owe you a bottle of Johnny Walker .
On the other hand if you're not careful this could end up in a roller coaster ride down a rabbit's hole with lots of twists & turns aka goal post shifting which if you aren't alert enough to spot would usually result in him drifting so far off from his original position so as to resemble yours in different wording of course 10 pages from here.
Happened all the while with him irrespective of whomsoever he tangled with. For starters you can ask him when's MiG-41 going to make first flight. We've been hearing about the Su-75 Checkmate since at least 3 years now. It's not even on the drawing board & this guy has already trialed the MiG-41 coming up with this gem of an equation - GCAP < MiG-41 < AMCA.
Talk about low quality posts. The only reason he gets a pass I reckon is nobody in moderation team reads his short stories.
You are relating one wrong thing to another. None of what you said has any bearing to baseline military capabilities.
And the problem is you guys do not understand what the IAF is trying to do. Everbody wants some thing or the other without knowing how it all fits into what they are creating.
India's goal is to establish a global ISR system that can seamlessly integrate all our sensors and effectors into a single unified system with access to the finished information in real time, a global combat cloud, to establish tri-services synergy.
What it means is our entire combat system will be software-driven and not restricted by individual hardware performance.
GCAP is harware-driven and regional. While AMCA will achieve 100% synergy with our network, GCAP won't, it will be restricted to its theater of operations. For example, an AMCA commander over the Arabian Sea can run a UCAV mission over the SCS, whereas a GCAP over the Arabian Sea is restricted to that sea.
So yeah, the GCAP's radar will be superior to the AMCA's, but AMCA will tap into a unified feed of 30+ radars within its sector in real time, rendering the hardware-driven model of the GCAP moot.
There are other areas of NCW too. For example in conditions where terrestrial systems are jammed, a satellite can pick up a previously undiscovered enemy ground unit headed towards our own. The satellite would inform ground control, which will then send that information out to a survivable air asset for surveillance, like an AMCA. The AMCA would then coordinate with the ground units to defeat the enemy units. For example, AMCA will act as a relay to pass on a satellite's targeting coordinates fused with its own supporting sensors like EOTS to an ATHOS artillery system for fire control since the ATHOS' own sensors are jammed.
Another important area is EW and CW. Since everything's going to be software-driven and AI-run, there's a constant need for over-the-air updates to maintain operational capabilities that an individual effector cannot manage on its own. For example if AMCA's radar is jammed, it may need offboard processing coming in from the ground or drones to offset the enemy's superior processing. The same if unknown signals are discovered, then a response needs to be generated in real time and a security update needs to be sent out to all AMCAs.
Basically, GCAP in British hands will be 6th gen, but GCAP in Indian hands will remain 5th gen, with some localized MUM-T. AMCA in Indian hands with a global ISR network and joint C4ISR will give us superior capabilities even relative to GCAP in British hands because GCAP is hardware-driven and won't have the same support structure as AMCA. NGAD, AMCA, and SCAF are software-driven and provide true system of systems capabilities. So GCAP won't add anything to our capabilities.
Anyway the IAF has already announced their plans. They only want LCA, MRFA, and AMCA. Their indigenous plans for the future are a hypersonic jet and/or AMCA NG (as stopgap). And any new stopgap depends on circumstances prevailing during the time, so that means there's nothing new for another decade (2035+). So all foreign 5th gen and higher jets do not matter to India today. Let's worry about it after LCA Mk2 and MRFA production runs are coming to an end and AMCA Mk2's begins, that's when our next plan will be set in stone.
PS: The French have 2 peer threats (direct with Russia and indirect with China) and they are completely blind to the second one (China). We just have to deal with one peer threat and we are still a tertiary threat to them. So we are in a better situation.
I usually give up in the initial arguments. So I don't try too hard. I Just want exchange of information and he occasionally does drop small bits of useful info.
The French won't allow us and we will be a junior partner like we were in the FGFA. Atleast with GCAP we will have a bigger say in the design and development of the aircraft. The only flaw is that unlike the SCAF it won't have a naval variant. But it will most likely be the more powerful cousin in terms of engine thrust. Plus the Italians and Swedes have the best EW capability in Europe. That's the areas we do lag quite a bit. Swedes also have the best datalink in Europe. With Selex and SAAB being partners on top of BAE, Mitsubishi we cannot go wrong. The only issue is that the British love to sell dreams that might never become reality.
The British and Japanese are already doing that with the F-35. Infact they already have experience with that technology and have pilots that actively use that technology. We on the other hand can't even properly datalink the astra with the phalcon or netra.
The AMCA is nowhere near the endurance of the GCAP. In aircraft terms AMCA is mig 29 while the GCAP is a Su-30.
They are already doing this with the F-35. USAF is doing this already.
Why can't we make GCAP 6th gen if we do Indian specific enhancements. If everything is software based we could just make the software and mission computer of the GCAP compatible with the IACCS.
The LCA mk2 will come online only in 2030's. The MRFA order if it even happens will also pick up in around 2028-2030. So we are effectively screwed.
Let's be real. Russians can't handle the sophistication of a military like France. They will zergrush and force them into an artillery battle. The French will be depended on the Yanks facing the Russians. In case of China the French will be riding the coattails of the USN. The French have 7000 ton destroyers.
The PLA has 10000 ton destroyers that they can chuck out within a span of 3 months and are far more heavily armed than the average French FREMM frigate.
The average French "destroyer" has 48 VLS for air-defence and 8 anti-ship missiles. The average PLAN Destroyer has 112 VLS on top of that 24 more for anti-air.
The projected in-service date for GCAP is 2035. The design is almost frozen. Before we sign up for GCAP, let's see how the RR MT-30 based IEPS and 110kn engine proposals pan out.
SAAB is a known offender when it comes to exaggerating capabilities. Iirc they were the first to exit P-75I because our ToT demands proved too much for them. There is a trust deficit with the Italians after the AW-101 kickbacks scandal though they are off the MoDs blacklist. That may change in future but things are at a very early stage right now.
SAAB has proven tech and a history of making proven tech. The Gotland class is the most silent out of all SSK's in service. What they do is overselling the technology transfer but the Koreans are famous for that too.
Maybe but the Aussie experience (with the Collins class) shows serviceability is a problem. The specs of SAABs A26 SSK look amazing but it is still a paper design.
The British and Japanese use American comm systems.
Our datalink tech is more robust than what the Americans currently have. Phalcon and Netra use L band, not suitable for Astra. At least S band is necessary, the type Pakistan uses.
AMCA will outrange Su-30 quite comfortably, that's sufficient for us. We have very different requirements. Making it bigger and heavier for more endurance means sacrificing turnaround time. And TT is more important to us because we plan on employing more weapons at a faster rate than fly longer with larger payloads. If greater endurance is necessary, a tanker drone will refuel the jet. Our objective is to sortie 2 or 3 times more than bigger Chinese jets on a daily basis.
GCAP will be more interesting if, like the Mig-41, it can deal with hypersonic threats at high altitudes. Then, even if it's operating in a silo, it can still defend our air space, like an addition to our BMD and ASAT capabilities.
F-35 is not even fully integrated with its basic TR-3 hardware that will allow it to use its own sensors fully, never mind advanced NCW. Only by 2026-27 will the process begin, then it will need an engine upgrade in 2029-30 to gain full B4 capabilities. They can think about NCW after that, with loyal wingmen and whatnot.
Someday the F-35 will do it, but not anytime soon. NGAD will get it first alongside B-21.
F-35 and GCAP are similar in terms of what they are being designed for. Both are hardware-driven at the moment.
Because we need full access to the radar, EW, and comm suite, all of its source codes, we also need all computers to be Indian, even flight controls. For example, AI will have to take control of the jet in many cases in order to increase mission success rate. That's the only way to make it fully software-driven to the same scale as AMCA. That's what we are doing with the MKI MLU, at least to a certain extent.
One of the biggest differences between GCAP and AMCA is AMCA will have FBL, whereas GCAP still retains FBW. So even its basic design is insufficient for information exchange.
ISEs are just add-on features. Some capabilities we needed which were normal on other older jets were simply missing on Rafale, that's all.
GCAP is said to be 2035, but that's with basic Tranche 1/2 capabilities. The real date is 2040. And by the time we order and induct one, we are gonna be in 2045. If we have to Indianize it, then 2050.
What differentiates champs from chumps will be a global ISR network, not this jet or that jet.