DAC clearance doesn't mean a thing until the IAF moves the case file. Currently, the IAF is in wait and watch mode. CDR w/o user involvement is just bizarre.
Last edited:
Ghatak and Rustom Indigenous UAV Programs
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
DAC clearance doesn't mean a thing until the IAF moves the case file. Currently, the IAF is in wait and watch mode. CDR w/o user involvement is just bizarre.
Unmanned Fighter-Bomber would also be an apt term as it is also supposed to carry Astra BVRs internally along with various air-to-surface munitions. Anyways, there is confusion about FUFA & IUSV. Maybe, the first derivative stealth-flying wing is for air-to-air role while the latter is only for strike. Let's see.
There is no fighter in a flying wing design. There is no confusion; FUFA is the name of the engine demonstrator prototype. It's all the same thing. Renaming while exchanging files between DRDO labs.
DRDO chief is not wrong in calling it a stealth-fighter if FUFA= Futuristic Unmanned Fighter Aircraft. So your point is already countered by the project name
If history is any indication, they are not very bright when it comes to naming things.DRDO chief is not wrong in calling it a stealth-fighter if FUFA= Futuristic Unmanned Fighter Aircraft. So your point is already countered by the project name
Check this video on clarification on FUFA.
_> Hey u all can u tell me what ada not decided to have side weapon bay for amca to carry 2 wvr missile ?
-> And is it confirmed that AMCA will carry 6 astra mk2/3 (with folding fins )?
-> And why not add astra mk2/3 in ghatak ? Ghatak is more stealthy than even f22
In ere for long range bvr fights, do we we even need vertical tail ?
Do we even need super menurabality when 2 pulse/ramjet missiles exists who have high enemy in end game hence hard to dodge by menurabality (ecm can only be effective along with stealth)
-> And is it confirmed that AMCA will carry 6 astra mk2/3 (with folding fins )?
-> And why not add astra mk2/3 in ghatak ? Ghatak is more stealthy than even f22
In ere for long range bvr fights, do we we even need vertical tail ?
Do we even need super menurabality when 2 pulse/ramjet missiles exists who have high enemy in end game hence hard to dodge by menurabality (ecm can only be effective along with stealth)
How many astra mk3 ghatak can carry ?
Hope it can carry 6.
Ghatak with flying wing design will be far far more stealthy than amca and can go much closour and launch missiles guided via awacs
Hope it can carry 6.
Ghatak with flying wing design will be far far more stealthy than amca and can go much closour and launch missiles guided via awacs
Like b2 but with a2a mode ?? And i guess we should develop ghatak with a radar. I dont think it will be as huge as amca, but still can be fitted in it
And it can still fire missile and then guided by amacs or amca
As per the unofficial information GHATAK / Stealth Flying wing UCAV will have an onboard GaN based AESA + EW suite. Though the number of TRM is not confirmed.
I think this is FUFA precursor TD program towards Ghatak.
Is there any bigger ghatak in design/concept phase ?
Like using 2*AMCA mk2 engine (>70kn dry thrust each) ??
As ghatak from specs looks like it can not carry any weapon weighing more than 500kg, so pretty much useless for anti-ship role.
None that I know of.
Max payload capacity is 1100 kg.
Ghatak is meant for SEAD/DEAD & maybe for some limited BVR support. It was never meant for anti-ship role.
You can't know that without looking at the internal bay architecture.
The only thing I can tell from the photo is that the bays (or a single bay) may be around 6 meters long at the max.
Photo indicative only -
Ghatak UCAV : The Future and more.. - AlphaDefense.in
By Shreedhar Singh India’s Ghatak UCAV is emerging as a true game-changer in the future battlefield. Engineers are primarily developing…
alphadefense.in
Ghatak has a serpentine intake which came from upper side to lower(as thats the only way possible) when it connects to engineYou can't know that without looking at the internal bay architecture.
The only thing I can tell from the photo is that the bays (or a single bay) may be around 6 meters long at the max.
Photo indicative only -
Ghatak UCAV : The Future and more.. - AlphaDefense.in
By Shreedhar Singh India’s Ghatak UCAV is emerging as a true game-changer in the future battlefield. Engineers are primarily developing…
So no way we will have any single large central weapon bay, it will must feature a dual small weapon bay.
And if its max payload is 1100kg, i think it includes pylons as well, so it can then only carry 500kg HSLD/TARA bombs at higher side of weight.
Rafael Icebreaker weighs <400kg at a 4m length. NGARM weighs 600kg at 5.5m. Even at conservative estimates, the bays should be long enough to accomodate a 4m long munition.
IMO, a platform that advanced would be able to carry payloads in an assymetric configuration. No reason to limit each hard-point to 500kg max.
Yeah IceBreaker is good option to buy for anti-ship if we can not develope any other by ourself.
Yeah they can, but making bear higher load means much more weight gain for strengthening the points.
And a flying wing design should easily be able to taken off even with 15 tonnes of load, so if they are explicitly mentioning that max payload is 1100 tonnes, then i doubt it can accomodate more than 550kg of payload at each pylons