CCS clears AMCA for IAF

[GatlingGun]

Issues of Mig-29K has made IN to look out for indigenous fighter and this made IN eager to develop TBEFA, this eagerness has allowed IN to test N-LCA on deck its flagship that shows their keenness on having Indigenous Twin Fighters.

If TBEFA become reality automatically IAF will start to investing on its future. If LCA, TBEFA & AMCA becomes reality by 2030s then just forget Rafales.

Let's hope MK2 does not get delaayed and Super sukhoi start ASAP. Otherwise IAF will keep harping about MRFA.

 

[Afif]

Bhaiya Ji, they don’t even have a RCS facility, then how they finalised airframe design without it and calling it stealth aka VLO. There are no shortcuts for these.

Turkish Aerospace Invests in Radar Cross Test Bed

Turkish Aerospace (TUSAŞ) is investing substantially in carrying out Radar Cross-Section (RCS) tests to develop aerial platforms. The test bed will be used primarily for Turkish Fighters (TF) and other indigenous projects. Turkey’s most prominent and the world’s 5th largest radar cross-sectional...

www.turdef.com

There are lots of dubious cases in KAAN, which we shouldn’t discuss here.

KF-21 is far more a believable story, they kept the things simple, even forging bulkhead with aluminium instead of titanium.

I have definitely felt something is strange about KAAN. I have felt for a while that this is a bull$hit program, but if I say it @Joe Shearer will say some nonsense and delete the post/ speed limit etc.


Look at this- who the f*** completes the complete complete flight testing in 1 year and starts production within 1 year?
nd qualifications carried out in the 2022-2029 period. The aircraft will roll out in 2023, critical design review (CDR) activities will be carried out in 2024, the production of the first aircraft, called Block-0, will be completed in 2025 and

Like you pointed out- how the hell do you do RCS testing without Anachoeic chamber testing? I haven't hard of tha about KAAN at all.

And the plane looks very wierd.

Lol, no. What's with all this salt? I have been following this program for a while and this is the most successful one I have seen so far. (Yes, it has a lot more to go)

CDR isn't campleted yet. And the first prototype wasn't even meant to be flying at all. It was originally meant for ground testing only, including real world RCS testing. But they flew it anyway, and got some additional testing done.

Also, a lot of it is done with simulations these days. They bought digital twin technologies from Dassault and Siemens for $80 millions to augment the development of KAAN.

 

[Guynextdoor]

Lol, no. What's with all this salt? I have been following this program for a while and this is the most successful one I have seen so far. (Yes, it has a lot more to go)

CDR isn't campleted yet. And the first prototype wasn't even meant to be flying at all. It was originally meant for ground testing only, including real world RCS testing. But they flew it anyway, and got some additional testing done.

Also, a lot of it is done with simulations these days. They bought digital twin technologies from Dassault and Siemens for $80 millions to augment the development of KAAN.

'most successful one I have seen so far'

 

[MirageBlue]

The problem with all these statements is that in essence its math not design.

There is math which solves to a particular design being the best balance for low RCS, maneuvering, payload and building ease.

So if the math is common - why would not everyone build around it.

The “copying” is simply everyone taking advantage of the math the US worked out 30 years before any competition

Absolutely.

The problems are the same for all 5th gen designs which lead to common solutions for the most part

- RCS has to be kept minimal from all angles but especially so from the frontal aspect which leads to nose chine, faceted edges, DSI. Side aspect RCS requirements mean smaller vertical stabilizers (and 2 instead of 1 to make it smaller than 1 single large vertical stabilizer)
- Internal Weapons Bay is required which means a boxy fuselage that can accommodate internally held weapons
- Serpentine air intake is required to hide the engine compressor face which again means a wider fuselage
- DSI means fixed top speed in the Mach 1.6-1.8 range which also kind of means they're mostly designed for best performance at similar flight envelopes
- Requirement for large internal fuel storage due to the restriction on carrying drop tanks during the early days of any conflict to reduce RCS. Again leads to a large boxy fuselage and large wings with lots of fuel storage capacity

There will be more such requirements that lead to common solutions as design teams iterate and try to work out the most optimum design for all these requirements.

And then we have even moderators of international forums coming out with tit for tat type "oh India copied a Chinese fighter whose grainy pictures only came out on the internet a year or two ago!"..As if hundreds of designers and engineers were sitting trying to analyze a few grainy images instead of trying to figure out solutions with the engineering tools they have been working on for over a decade.

Such a shame that even such people fall prey to the urge to troll and reduce themselves to the average non scientific person who hasn't any idea how much effort goes into something as complex as a fighter design.

 

[MirageBlue]

Isn’t this a bit too premature? The is flying in prototype form the other is a project. These is nothing like which one is better since for the moment only one „is“!

But do you know ANYTHING at all about the prototype and whether it is meeting it's targets or goals?? Or just that it's flying is enough for you to display your bias and claim that it is successful?

The lack of any solid data on Chinese programs is one of the biggest issues in any genuine exercise of evaluation.

Contrast it with the F-35 and the multiple major and minor issues known about it and the transparency shown in that program and it's reporting.

Ignorance is truly bliss. Don't reveal any of the truth and certain people will think that it means it is the best there is and there are NO PROBLEMS whatsoever! But they'll kick dirt on others who openly talk about their engineering, funding issues or whatever that causes problems in meeting schedules and deadlines, which is what happens to almost every program.

Must be marvelous to be like the Chinese and not be audited and have your dissected figures put forth for the world to admire and laugh at.

 

[That_Guy]

But do you know ANYTHING at all about the prototype and whether it is meeting it's targets or goals?? Or just that it's flying is enough for you to display your bias and claim that it is successful?

The lack of any solid data on Chinese programs is one of the biggest issues in any genuine exercise of evaluation.

Contrast it with the F-35 and the multiple major and minor issues known about it and the transparency shown in that program and it's reporting.

Ignorance is truly bliss. Don't reveal any of the truth and certain people will think that it means it is the best there is and there are NO PROBLEMS whatsoever! But they'll kick dirt on others who openly talk about their engineering, funding issues or whatever that causes problems in meeting schedules and deadlines, which is what happens to almost every program.

Must be marvelous to be like the Chinese and not be audited and have your dissected figures put forth for the world to admire and laugh at.

The truth is that we don't know much about the f-35 either. Only things that have either leaked, publically available basic data, or been speculated by experts.

The F-35 is absolutely not a transparent program.

The only thing that's transparent about it are the cost overruns and the cockpit.

The only ones who know anything worth listening to are the sellers and potential buyers. Everyone else is not worth telling any information to.

 

[Afif]

'most successful one I have seen so far'

Yeah, the pace of the program is incredible.

 

[Guynextdoor]

The truth is that we don't know much about the f-35 either. Only things that have either leaked, publically available basic data, or been speculated by experts.

The F-35 is absolutely not a transparent program.

The only thing that's transparent about it are the cost overruns and the cockpit.

The only ones who know anything worth listening to are the sellers and potential buyers. Everyone else is not worth telling any information to.

F 35 didn't become clear for production within one year of first flight. Plus, previous programs like f22 establish a track record that gives credibility.

 

[Guynextdoor]

But do you know ANYTHING at all about the prototype and whether it is meeting it's targets or goals?? Or just that it's flying is enough for you to display your bias and claim that it is successful?

The lack of any solid data on Chinese programs is one of the biggest issues in any genuine exercise of evaluation.

Contrast it with the F-35 and the multiple major and minor issues known about it and the transparency shown in that program and it's reporting.

Ignorance is truly bliss. Don't reveal any of the truth and certain people will think that it means it is the best there is and there are NO PROBLEMS whatsoever! But they'll kick dirt on others who openly talk about their engineering, funding issues or whatever that causes problems in meeting schedules and deadlines, which is what happens to almost every program.

Must be marvelous to be like the Chinese and not be audited and have your dissected figures put forth for the world to admire and laugh at.

You know I'm not sure (though am open to be corrected) that KAAN has serpentine intakes. It's one thing not to have it in 4th gen jet but a 5th gen? Front aspect stealth gets extremely compromised.

 

[That_Guy]

F 35 didn't become clear for production within one year of first flight. Plus, previous programs like f22 establish a track record that gives credibility.

Who told you it's been cleared for production?

The fighter wasn't even meant to fly this early, they just expedited the process for political points (original time-line was 2026 for first flight).

It's not going into full production until 2028-2030.

It's also been in development for over a decade, and TAI DOES have experience with the F-35 to help it along.

I don't understand this skepticism. It sounds like bitterness to me, rather than genuine disbelief.

[Edit] to add on, the biggest issue for the f-35 delays and cost overruns was that the air force and navy were trying to do too much. It ran into the same issues that the Tejas ran into with India. Too heavy, constantly evolving requirements by the services, too politically big and important to let fail, the "baked in" stealth coating being extremely toxic, the single crystal blades constantly breaking due to poor quality control, having Chinese components inside the f-35 to save money only to then be ordered to replace them with domestic US components, the lines of code needed to run the various programs within the fighter been bug ridden, with not enough programmers on the project to keep to deadlines..etc.

Needless to say, everyone looked at the F-35 (including the US), and learned from its mistakes.

 

[MirageBlue]

The truth is that we don't know much about the f-35 either. Only things that have either leaked, publically available basic data, or been speculated by experts.

The F-35 is absolutely not a transparent program.

The only thing that's transparent about it are the cost overruns and the cockpit.

The only ones who know anything worth listening to are the sellers and potential buyers. Everyone else is not worth telling any information to.

We know PLENTY about the various engineering issues that the F-35 teams and engine teams faced. There are literally dozens of articles on Aviation Week alone, that will lay bare many of the problems faced. And those were reported because that is how democracies work, with various agencies monitoring programs and reporting on issues that cause delays or require additional funding.

If the US were like China, people would be blissfully ignorant about any of the engineering challenges the F-35 teams faced and think that it was the best of the best of the best without any problems whatsoever.

 

[MirageBlue]

You know I'm not sure (though am open to be corrected) that KAAN has serpentine intakes. It's one thing not to have it in 4th gen jet but a 5th gen? Front aspect stealth gets extremely compromised.

It may.

But which program does not? Even the Su-57 does, although the underslung engines (podded engines) mean that it is extremely difficult to hide the compressor face completely from the frontal aspect.

 

[Deino]

But do you know ANYTHING at all about the prototype and whether it is meeting it's targets or goals?? Or just that it's flying is enough for you to display your bias and claim that it is successful?

The lack of any solid data on Chinese programs is one of the biggest issues in any genuine exercise of evaluation.

Contrast it with the F-35 and the multiple major and minor issues known about it and the transparency shown in that program and it's reporting.

Ignorance is truly bliss. Don't reveal any of the truth and certain people will think that it means it is the best there is and there are NO PROBLEMS whatsoever! But they'll kick dirt on others who openly talk about their engineering, funding issues or whatever that causes problems in meeting schedules and deadlines, which is what happens to almost every program.

Must be marvelous to be like the Chinese and not be audited and have your dissected figures put forth for the world to admire and laugh at.

Again you are funny! Truly funny!

The funniest point is, that I in no was praise the Chinese "things", that in no way I herald and hype them as "whatever". If you would carefully read, I only report what is seen and assumed, I rarely present anything as a fact as long as it is more or less proven unlike some Indian fan boys in certain social media groups are overhyping and announcing whatever the hell since years and in the end either it is often delayed, failed, too expensive, not capable as promised or a combination of these points!

Yes, China rarely tells us anything and a lot if not almost everything is speculative but concerning these two most similar fighters one thing at least NOW is an undeniable fact:

The FC-31 is flying since 2013, there are already two demonstrators and at lest three J-35 CONFIRMED flying their trials since years ... the the AMCA is a project, available at best in mock-up form, as a CAD-file and wind-tunnel models and based on all the delays of the Tejas Mk.1/1A & Mk.2 no-one here will hold his breath until the AMCA will be unveiled!

EDIT! I need to apologise for this stupid and in fact inappropriate remark!

 

[MirageBlue]

Again you are funny! Truly funny!

The funniest point is, that I in no was praise the Chinese "things", that in no way I herald and hype them as "whatever". If you would carefully read, I only report what is seen and assumed, I rarely present anything as a fact as long as it is more or less proven unlike Indians are overhyping and announcing whatever the hell since years and in the end either it is delayed, failed, too expensive, not capable as promised or a combination of these points!

Yes, China rarely tells us anything and a lot if not almost everything is speculative but concerning these two most similar fighters one thing at least NOW is an undeniable fact:

The FC-31 is flying since 2013, there are already two demonstrators and at lest three J-35 CONFIRMED flying their trials since years ... the the AMCA is a project, available at best in mock-up form, as a CAD-file and wind-tunnel models and based on all the delays of the Tejas Mk.1/1A & Mk.2 no-one here will hold his breath until the AMCA will be unveiled!

No one needs to hold their breath for anything, not the least the people on this forum. The customers to be answered to are the IAF and the MoD, not any tom, dick or harry on any internet forum, however important they think they are.

This AMCA program is not being done to have people boast on internet forums. It is for India to develop a viable 5th gen fighter that allows IAF to meet it's requirements, something the PAK-FA did not.

The service that needs this (i.e. the IAF) is fully aware of the challenges that the AMCA program has faced, due to the various procedural, requirements based and funding related issues. They are the ones driving this program's requirements and reviews (including CDRs and PDRs) after having withdrawn from the PAK-FA and are fully aware of what is involved in it and how it fits their needs and timelines.

Also, it is far better to wait, let certain technologies develop within the country, before jumping into the program and then facing delays due to an immature design or lack of indigenous tech. As of now, no particular area is considered a challenge that Indian industry cannot address, except for the ejection seat and engine, for which we have a GE F-414-INS6 that will be built in India in the hundreds already. The AMCA Mk2 engine will hopefully come on time, or we'll see a longer production run for the AMCA Mk1 (which is what I expect). It has taken several years to get to this phase.

Your skepticism for this program or any other Indian program versus the Chinese programs you so diligently follow isn't of any interest to me. But your mocking or being extremely skeptical of Indian programs constantly while immediately jumping to the defense of any Chinese program that is mocked is telling.

 

[Jayetsena]

Those elections are all but a formality based upon true progress but boosted with communal tactics and some accusations of opposition suppression.

Still elections are fair and we choose according to our aspirations. One of such aspirations is treat all fairly and equally. Hope it is not crime.