AHCA (Advanced Heavy Combat Aircraft) concept, 5/5.5/6gen? Su-30MKI replacement? TEDBF 2.0?

[Bhartiya Sainik]

CAUTION/DISCLAIMER:
- This thread is inspired by global tech evolution, R&D & big jets like Su-3X including Naval variant Su-33.
- On casual forum, there is no need to wait for official govt. or DoD statements.
- Neither global tech evolution waits for lagging countries, nor Discussions for every component to mature & be available.

>Some day upgraded Super-Su-30MKI will need replacement by similar size & weight jet due to technological advancement, requirement of 5th-6th gen. Even after Super-Sukhoi upgrade which is analogous to Su-35-S, the RCS & IRS will be quite high.
>The radars, SAMs, AAMs have improved a lot. The latest ones are made aiming 5th gen jets.
>The frontline jets have to be latest gen/tech to act like spies & snipers, which can be supplemented by previous gen jets following behind.
>When the engine &/or airframe design are inadequate, a new airframe & new/modified components are required then a gen leap occurs, who's R&D takes time in decades, hence EU dumped 5th gen & moved to 6th gen FCAS & GCAP to catch up with USA. That's the answer to how can we make 6gen w/o 5gen.
>Hence AMCA & similar jets also may not have adequate thrust, volume for payload, fuel & advanced equipments, range/endurance. Otherwise AMCA in stealth config w/o any CCMs should be expected to use 4 BVR-AAMs with 100% Pk & then kill any adversary with gun.
>Bharat's attempt to make AMCA is sluggish like LCA, bcoz we couldn't get good engines, or even average engines, by self/import/JV to experiment with prototypes, but we are fine with using average engines on active duty jets.
>Bharat exited PAKFA/FGFA project with Russia due to lack of ToT of Su-57. Now there are speculations to get some as stopgap measure.
>China has good numbers of J-20, will have more of it, & will have derivatives of J-31/35.
>S.Korea producing KF-21 Boramae has population of 51.7 million & around 100,000 sqKm. KF-21 will most likely improve like X-35 became F-35.
>Sweden with area 450,000+ sqKm has population 10.6 million with history of making good jets. They were studying on their 5gen Flygsystem 2020. Later there were talks to join GCAP or FCAS. They may announce some surprise any day.
>Turkey with area 783,000+ sqKm & population 86.2 million had its 1st flight of Kaan.
>Kaan & J-31 can be offered to Pakistan.
>Pakistan & China might attept to make 1-engine PFX to replace JF-17.
>Su-57's local numbers are less & no export orders. Russian Su-30/33/35 might get replaced by Su-57 but Russia may develop another jet to counter Western 6th gen designs but may not share ToT with us.
>We already know an outline of differences b/w 5th & 6th gen features, some of which can overlap.



>An empty 5th gen jet also added weight due to permanent inbuilt sensors, EW antennas, fuel tanks, OBOGS, HXs, decoys, etc.
>An empty 6th gen jet also adds more weight due to inbuilt DEW, more computing, C3 system, variable-cycle engine, longer range missiles, stronger EW, etc.
>Increased stealth also demands sufficient weapons carried internally, higher stand-off launch range, bigger NEZ, higher Pk.
>The NAVY jets are not going to face obsolete SAMs, AAMs, radars. Huge anti-surface weapons cannot fit internally. New gen compact weapons with folding fins are needed which can may not sink a surface vessel but immobilize or handicap it. Stronger landing gears, bigger folding wings may add 10-20% more weight depending upon airframe design. But a common airframe/fuselage design can save lots of money. The current TEDBF design is overall 4.5 gen with some components of 5th gen as per present day technologies, but if a next gen follow-on can be made by 2040s then it would be great. So a N-AHCA will be TEDBF 2.0 supplemented by current design.
>At present people say that NAL, ADA, DRDO don't have enough professionals to handle more than AMCA, LCA, MWF, TEDBF & upgrades of current jets.
>All above points puts pressure on Bharat to develop 5.5gen jet at least with adequate weapons, fuel, in a cost effective way.
>Whether funds are cleared for GTRE or JV or import, engines are need for AMCA, MWF, TEDBF & a future advanced heavy jet.
>ISRO has progressed well. If they can contribute anything like for Variable Cycle Engine, materials, compacting avionics, etc something which ADA, NAL, DRDO would take much more time, then IMO it should be considered.

Since days of T-10 prototype & other jets like MiG-25, F-15, our scientists & engineers might have at least discussed if some day they could also make such a home grown jet. And now IMO the R&D should proceed with whatever we have & can avail bcoz reaching Western quality levels will take decades.
I'm using edited cross-section of F-22, a jet flying well, rather than imaginery 6gen models.
CAUTION - The notional depiction doesn't mean all indicated weapons to be carried internally at once. Otherwise it will become a bomber. But a future customized fighter will need future customized weapons & multiple IWBs (Internal Weapons Bays).

We will try to examine individual aspects like payload, avionics, sensors, airframe, engines including Naval requirements but in new gen ways.



The above picture has been compiled similar to an older one comparing medium weight 1-engine jets of 4.5 generation F-16 & 5th generation F-35.

 

[AGNI 6 ICBM]

4.5 Gen fighters are advanced /"upgraded" version of their initial variants
Like Super sukhoi will be 4.5 gen while baseline su 30 mki is 4 th gen

4 th gen jets
1.su 30 mki
2.M 2000
3.mig 29
4.f16 initial variants

4.5 gen jets
1.super su 30 mki
2.Tejas mk1a
3.Tejas mk2
4.rafale

4.75 gen jets (Role: Anti stealth aircrafts) (have canards/levcons)
1.su57
2.TEDBF
3.j20

4.75 gen jets are not true stealth jets , they are optimised for to have less RCS in operation cost of 4.5 jets category

5 gen jets
1.f22
2.f35
3.AMCA mk1
4.Kf21
5.j31

5.5 gen jets (5 th gen jets with wingmans, DEW & next gen technologies)
1.AMCA mk2


5.75 gen jets (Nations which are trying to jump 5 th gen jets) (5th gen without stabilizers)
1.Tempest
2.su 75
3.FCAS


6 gen let them arrive



Replacement of super sukhoi won't be similar size and weight as of su30 mki !

Bombing role of su30 will be handed to ghatak or future bomber after su 30 retirement

By 2040 we might be having highly fuel efficient variable cycle engines which gives fighter jet similar or even higher range than su30, That too In small dimension than su 30 mki

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

CAUTION/DISCLAIMER:
- This thread is inspired by global tech evolution, R&D & big jets like Su-3X including Naval variant Su-33.
- On casual forum, there is no need to wait for official govt. or DoD statements.
- Neither global tech evolution waits for lagging countries, nor Discussions for every component to mature & be available.

>Some day upgraded Super-Su-30MKI will need replacement by similar size & weight jet due to technological advancement, requirement of 5th-6th gen. Even after Super-Sukhoi upgrade which is analogous to Su-35-S, the RCS & IRS will be quite high.
>The radars, SAMs, AAMs have improved a lot. The latest ones are made aiming 5th gen jets.
>The frontline jets have to be latest gen/tech to act like spies & snipers, which can be supplemented by previous gen jets following behind.
>When the engine &/or airframe design are inadequate, a new airframe & new/modified components are required then a gen leap occurs, who's R&D takes time in decades, hence EU dumped 5th gen & moved to 6th gen FCAS & GCAP to catch up with USA. That's the answer to how can we make 6gen w/o 5gen.
>Hence AMCA & similar jets also may not have adequate thrust, volume for payload, fuel & advanced equipments, range/endurance. Otherwise AMCA in stealth config w/o any CCMs should be expected to use 4 BVR-AAMs with 100% Pk & then kill any adversary with gun.
>Bharat's attempt to make AMCA is sluggish like LCA, bcoz we couldn't get good engines, or even average engines, by self/import/JV to experiment with prototypes, but we are fine with using average engines on active duty jets.
>Bharat exited PAKFA/FGFA project with Russia due to lack of ToT of Su-57. Now there are speculations to get some as stopgap measure.
>China has good numbers of J-20, will have more of it, & will have derivatives of J-31/35.
>S.Korea producing KF-21 Boramae has population of 51.7 million & around 100,000 sqKm. KF-21 will most likely improve like X-35 became F-35.
>Sweden with area 450,000+ sqKm has population 10.6 million with history of making good jets. They were studying on their 5gen Flygsystem 2020. Later there were talks to join GCAP or FCAS. They may announce some surprise any day.
>Turkey with area 783,000+ sqKm & population 86.2 million had its 1st flight of Kaan.
>Kaan & J-31 can be offered to Pakistan.
>Pakistan & China might attept to make 1-engine PFX to replace JF-17.
>Su-57's local numbers are less & no export orders. Russian Su-30/33/35 might get replaced by Su-57 but Russia may develop another jet to counter Western 6th gen designs but may not share ToT with us.
>We already know an outline of differences b/w 5th & 6th gen features, some of which can overlap.

View attachment 6677

>An empty 5th gen jet also added weight due to permanent inbuilt sensors, EW antennas, fuel tanks, OBOGS, HXs, decoys, etc.
>An empty 6th gen jet also adds more weight due to inbuilt DEW, more computing, C3 system, variable-cycle engine, longer range missiles, stronger EW, etc.
>Increased stealth also demands sufficient weapons carried internally, higher stand-off launch range, bigger NEZ, higher Pk.
>The NAVY jets are not going to face obsolete SAMs, AAMs, radars. Huge anti-surface weapons cannot fit internally. New gen compact weapons with folding fins are needed which can may not sink a surface vessel but immobilize or handicap it. Stronger landing gears, bigger folding wings may add 10-20% more weight depending upon airframe design. But a common airframe/fuselage design can save lots of money. The current TEDBF design is overall 4.5 gen with some components of 5th gen as per present day technologies, but if a next gen follow-on can be made by 2040s then it would be great. So a N-AHCA will be TEDBF 2.0 supplemented by current design.
>At present people say that NAL, ADA, DRDO don't have enough professionals to handle more than AMCA, LCA, MWF, TEDBF & upgrades of current jets.
>All above points puts pressure on Bharat to develop 5.5gen jet at least with adequate weapons, fuel, in a cost effective way.
>Whether funds are cleared for GTRE or JV or import, engines are need for AMCA, MWF, TEDBF & a future advanced heavy jet.
>ISRO has progressed well. If they can contribute anything like for Variable Cycle Engine, materials, compacting avionics, etc something which ADA, NAL, DRDO would take much more time, then IMO it should be considered.

Since days of T-10 prototype & other jets like MiG-25, F-15, our scientists & engineers might have at least discussed if some day they could also make such a home grown jet. And now IMO the R&D should proceed with whatever we have & can avail bcoz reaching Western quality levels will take decades.
I'm using edited cross-section of F-22, a jet flying well, rather than imaginery 6gen models.
CAUTION - The notional depiction doesn't mean all indicated weapons to be carried internally at once. Otherwise it will become a bomber. But a future customized fighter will need future customized weapons & multiple IWBs (Internal Weapons Bays).

We will try to examine individual aspects like payload, avionics, sensors, airframe, engines including Naval requirements but in new gen ways.

View attachment 6698

The above picture has been compiled similar to an older one comparing medium weight 1-engine jets of 4.5 generation F-16 & 5th generation F-35.

View attachment 6705

Nice spreadsheet. Few things to add:-

• Communications:-
  • THz Comms for higher data thoroghput, but will be severely range limited......
  • Tightbeam comms. for LPI and ECM-proof. Well, ECM-proof to current jammers and even future ones at least until the enemy starts to track you and direct a jamming laser at you. Still, tracking a stealth platform is inherently difficult, so its still orders of magnitude more difficult for the enemy to not only ESM but even ECM your signals.
  • QKD. Would work on a tightbeam, but enemy can jam as long as they can track you.
• Stealth: Ceramic Matrix Composite-based radar absorbent materials instead of Polymer Composite-based as in 5th gen
• Avionics: Moving away from Electronics to Photonics as much as possible? Much higher processing speeds, particularly useful for ML-based systems. Data read-write is gonna be the bottleneck, unless Holographic Data Storage tech improves. (which reminds me, do we have a thread to track progress of India's national push towards Photonics which was announcned couple of years ago?)
• Engines: Possibly a TBCC built around an RDE? Is much more fuel efficient and also allows hypersonic flight. Although I feel this is more of a 7th gen tech

 

[SlayingHell]

Nice spreadsheet. Few things to add:-

• Communications:-
  • THz Comms for higher data thoroghput, but will be severely range limited......
  • Tightbeam comms. for LPI and ECM-proof. Well, ECM-proof to current jammers and even future ones at least until the enemy starts to track you and direct a jamming laser at you. Still, tracking a stealth platform is inherently difficult, so its still orders of magnitude more difficult for the enemy to not only ESM but even ECM your signals.
  • QKD. Would work on a tightbeam, but enemy can jam as long as they can track you.
• Stealth: Ceramic Matrix Composite-based radar absorbent materials instead of Polymer Composite-based as in 5th gen
• Avionics: Moving away from Electronics to Photonics as much as possible? Much higher processing speeds, particularly useful for ML-based systems. Data read-write is gonna be the bottleneck, unless Holographic Data Storage tech improves. (which reminds me, do we have a thread to track progress of India's national push towards Photonics which was announcned couple of years ago?)
• Engines: Possibly a TBCC built around an RDE? Is much more fuel efficient and also allows hypersonic flight. Although I feel this is more of a 7th gen tech

Something about Munitions also
Boeing and Raytheon to develop high-power microwave missile
Works Like a CHAMP: The non-explosive missile known as CHAMP completed a flight test over the Utah desert, successfully knocking out electronic targets with its high-powered-microwave-emitting payload while causing no collateral damage, announced contractor Boeing. "Today we turned science fiction into science fact," said Keith Coleman, Boeing's CHAMP program manager, in the company's Oct. 22 release. He added, "In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy's electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or aircraft arrive." Boeing and the Air Force Research Lab's directed energy directorate conducted the test on Oct. 16 at the Utah Test and Training Range, according to the company. CHAMP "successfully knocked out" the targets—personal computers and electrical systems—in a two-story building on the test range during the one-hour test, according to a separate company release. Boeing is developing CHAMP, which stands for Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile Project, under an Office of the Secretary of Defense-sponsored project. (See also Getting to the Point.)

 

[SlayingHell]

Something about Munitions also
Boeing and Raytheon to develop high-power microwave missile
Works Like a CHAMP: The non-explosive missile known as CHAMP completed a flight test over the Utah desert, successfully knocking out electronic targets with its high-powered-microwave-emitting payload while causing no collateral damage, announced contractor Boeing. "Today we turned science fiction into science fact," said Keith Coleman, Boeing's CHAMP program manager, in the company's Oct. 22 release. He added, "In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy's electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or aircraft arrive." Boeing and the Air Force Research Lab's directed energy directorate conducted the test on Oct. 16 at the Utah Test and Training Range, according to the company. CHAMP "successfully knocked out" the targets—personal computers and electrical systems—in a two-story building on the test range during the one-hour test, according to a separate company release. Boeing is developing CHAMP, which stands for Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile Project, under an Office of the Secretary of Defense-sponsored project. (See also Getting to the Point.)

This Basically is a EMP type device that is airborne and can be used multiple times until the energy in it runs out. So, i envisage something installed on Fighter Jet Airframe directly 360 degrees and acting as Missile Defense. Supercapacitors would also may be used as Power Sources with they being charged by Engine. Its like a Electronic Forcefield.

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Something about Munitions also
Boeing and Raytheon to develop high-power microwave missile
Works Like a CHAMP: The non-explosive missile known as CHAMP completed a flight test over the Utah desert, successfully knocking out electronic targets with its high-powered-microwave-emitting payload while causing no collateral damage, announced contractor Boeing. "Today we turned science fiction into science fact," said Keith Coleman, Boeing's CHAMP program manager, in the company's Oct. 22 release. He added, "In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy's electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or aircraft arrive." Boeing and the Air Force Research Lab's directed energy directorate conducted the test on Oct. 16 at the Utah Test and Training Range, according to the company. CHAMP "successfully knocked out" the targets—personal computers and electrical systems—in a two-story building on the test range during the one-hour test, according to a separate company release. Boeing is developing CHAMP, which stands for Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile Project, under an Office of the Secretary of Defense-sponsored project. (See also Getting to the Point.)

First time I read about this. But it sounds kinda similar to DRDO's under-development non-nuclear EMP warhead. It is a type of Explosively Pumped Flux Compression Generator.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

4.75 gen jets (Role: Anti stealth aircrafts) (have canards/levcons)
1.su57
2.TEDBF
3.j20

4.75 gen jets are not true stealth jets , they are optimised for to have less RCS in operation cost of 4.5 jets category

IMO, TEDBF can't be said to be RF optimised. The only thing it will have is composite materials. May be some of our "Adrishya" RAM & other materials would be applied. But it has vertical rudder, big bumpy round body, ideal for radar reflections, wingtip pylons, etc.
I'm not blind supporter of USA but it is a coincidence that in this era they are leading certain technologies like supercomputing, networking, aeronautics, etc. If F/A-XX gets the canards then i would be astonished, but we can see the contrasting self-explainatory difference b/w notional F/A-XX & TEDBF.

5 gen jets
1.f22
2.f35
3.AMCA mk1
4.Kf21
5.j31

5th gen primary focus are RF stealth & sensor fusion.
As most of us know, F-22's RCS is 0.00015 sqm, F-35's RCS is 0.0015 sqm.
We will have to wait & see what AMCA MK1, KF-21 evolution, J-31 RCS are projected.

5.75 gen jets (Nations which are trying to jump 5 th gen jets) (5th gen without stabilizers)
1.Tempest
2.su 75
3.FCAS

Why not considering them 6th gen?

6 gen let them arrive

You mean they are not defined yet?

Replacement of super sukhoi won't be similar size and weight as of su30 mki !
Bombing role of su30 will be handed to ghatak or future bomber after su 30 retirement
By 2040 we might be having highly fuel efficient variable cycle engines which gives fighter jet similar or even higher range than su30, That too In small dimension than su 30 mki

These boomerang & delta shaped UCAVs are like unmanned F-117, cannot fly supersonic when required for interception, evasion & gives higher range to certain type of weapons. Their dogfighting capability is questionable. While a fighter needs to be versatile, multi-role.
To defeat 4.5gen, 4.75gen & 5gen jets, we'll need at least 5.5gen jet.
Longer range BVR-AAMs means bigger IWB, more payload. If 8 of them can be carried then great!
DEW requires very high KW range to damage enemy missile & airframe. At least 2-3 turrets will be required. So extra space & weight.
If 4 shorter CCMs can be carried then good!
Long range EO/IR sensors + EW/ESM antennas, some more space & weight.
Su-3X have internal fuel of 11 tons, F-35C has 9 tons, F-22 has 8.2 tons, J-20 has 12 tons, MiG-31 has 16 tons. So people can guess how much NGAD/FCAS/GCAP, etc would have.
If you add all the weights of above features then the 6gen jets would be 30-60% heavier & voluminous than 5gen jets.
Hence after GE XA-100, PW XA-101 prototype engines, GE XA-102 & PW XA-103 are being developed which are also heavier & bigger than F119 & F135 engines. They are speculated to be around 3 tons with 200KN class wet thrust. But F-135 already has 191 KN wet thrust, so IMO the VCEs might have much more thrust in rtio of the increased weight.

So the concept who's feasibility i'm projecting here could turn out to be b/w F-22 & NGAD.
Obviously i can't conclude now. This is just the beginning.

 

[SlayingHell]

IMO, TEDBF can't be said to be RF optimised. The only thing it will have is composite materials. May be some of our "Adrishya" RAM & other materials would be applied. But it has vertical rudder, big bumpy round body, ideal for radar reflections, wingtip pylons, etc.
I'm not blind supporter of USA but it is a coincidence that in this era they are leading certain technologies like supercomputing, networking, aeronautics, etc. If F/A-XX gets the canards then i would be astonished, but we can see the contrasting self-explainatory difference b/w notional F/A-XX & TEDBF.

View attachment 6721


5th gen primary focus are RF stealth & sensor fusion.
As most of us know, F-22's RCS is 0.00015 sqm, F-35's RCS is 0.0015 sqm.
We will have to wait & see what AMCA MK1, KF-21 evolution, J-31 RCS are projected.


Why not considering them 6th gen?


You mean they are not defined yet?


These boomerang & delta shaped UCAVs are like unmanned F-117, cannot fly supersonic when required for interception, evasion & gives higher range to certain type of weapons. Their dogfighting capability is questionable. While a fighter needs to be versatile, multi-role.
To defeat 4.5gen, 4.75gen & 5gen jets, we'll need at least 5.5gen jet.
Longer range BVR-AAMs means bigger IWB, more payload. If 8 of them can be carried then great!
DEW requires very high KW range to damage enemy missile & airframe. At least 2-3 turrets will be required. So extra space & weight.
If 4 shorter CCMs can be carried then good!
Long range EO/IR sensors + EW/ESM antennas, some more space & weight.
Su-3X have internal fuel of 11 tons, F-35C has 9 tons, F-22 has 8.2 tons, J-20 has 12 tons, MiG-31 has 16 tons. So people can guess how much NGAD/FCAS/GCAP, etc would have.
If you add all the weights of above features then the 6gen jets would be 30-60% heavier & voluminous than 5gen jets.
Hence after GE XA-100, PW XA-101 prototype engines, GE XA-102 & PW XA-103 are being developed which are also heavier & bigger than F119 & F135 engines. They are speculated to be around 3 tons with 200KN class wet thrust. But F-135 already has 191 KN wet thrust, so IMO the VCEs might have much more thrust in rtio of the increased weight.

So the concept who's feasibility i'm projecting here could turn out to be b/w F-22 & NGAD.
Obviously i can't conclude now. This is just the beginning.

USAF is already moving towards Tailless. It is definitely going to be tailless whether its Lockheed or Boeing. There is no doubt in that. FCAS initially featured a DSI+Swept Wings + Ruddervators. But later reports are confirming of a test model with LEVCON+Caret+ No-TAIL. GCAP is DSI+Delta Wing+ Angled Rudders. Maybe Jav-Britain decided that they need maneuverability. The thing why tailless supersonic were never introduced until now is because
1. Fighter Jets become stealthier by iterations obviously they would go from F-15 to F-18 like Semi-Stealth to F-22 and finally Tailless,
2. Not enough Computing Power and actuators aren't that advanced
3. The Electro Hydraulic Actuation System in F-35 is highly advanced leaping to next generation. May be the crucial thing in supersonic maneuvers for control surfaces like spoiler slot deflectors for yaw control.

I really don't under the F-135, it weighs in some whooping 3 Tons and produces 190kN where as AL-31 size class engine weighing in around 1500kg produces 150kN. Wouldn't it be beneficial to have two of these engines producing 300kN total in wet thrust. Even if you combine dry thrusts of 75kNx2, it would have 150kN more than 125kN of F-35 for the same engine weights. Its not about the advancements in Material Science or Turbine Inlet Temperature in F135. Its about design choices. If they had implemented same technologies in a lighter engines, then they would have got a excellent plane.

Doesn't matter if F-35 fanboys got offended or their akshually arguments that get spewed on every forum, in terms of design, US MIC could have done better. In my view it was primarily designed for Air-to-ground combat on 3rd world countries in a post soviet collapse environment where USAF thought they would have advantage of Air Superiority for next half century not envisaging China's rise. Adding on their tri service retarded logic, it is not actually worth the returns USA spend in. If only they separated the USAF from USMC and USN, the USAF would gotten a better plane. Sometimes i think, its similar to ADA-MoD-IAF beating dead horse Tejas with one engine.

 

[Kedar]

This Basically is a EMP type device that is airborne and can be used multiple times until the energy in it runs out. So, i envisage something installed on Fighter Jet Airframe directly 360 degrees and acting as Missile Defense. Supercapacitors would also may be used as Power Sources with they being charged by Engine. Its like a Electronic Forcefield.

This is crap claim just like many white elephant projects. It is not impossible in theory but its just something to steal more money and nothing else. As you mentioned an aircraft probably makes more sense but manned aircraft are unlikely to see any EMP cannons powerful enough for risks to pilot. Hard to get this kind of energy in a size of missile for it to be effective and not shotdown by AD and if not shotdown then regular missile can do the same thing as this...you can see why mobile EMP ones don't carry any particular advantage as a missile.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Nice spreadsheet. Few things to add:-

• Communications:-
  • THz Comms for higher data thoroghput, but will be severely range limited......

I'm not sure if THz is required bcoz video stream consumes highest bandwidth. A 4K resolution dish TV requires 15-30 Mbps whose transmission frequencies are in high MHz to low GHz range. So that would suffice to transmit or receive EOTS/DAS video stream.
5G cellular N/w use MMW band, have download speed upto 10 Gb/s.
S/w Codecs like H.265 cuts half the space & bandwidth required.

• Avionics: Moving away from Electronics to Photonics as much as possible? Much higher processing speeds, particularly useful for ML-based systems. Data read-write is gonna be the bottleneck, unless Holographic Data Storage tech improves. (which reminds me, do we have a thread to track progress of India's national push towards Photonics which was announcned couple of years ago?)

Mainframe & Supercomputing already addresses this. Optical cables used instead of copper to connect avionics computer to radar & other sensors & antennas. Sufficient internal bandwidth remains available - 10/40/100 Gb/s. Customized military standards would be used.

• Engines: Possibly a TBCC built around an RDE? Is much more fuel efficient and also allows hypersonic flight. Although I feel this is more of a 7th gen tech

Yes, RDE or PDWE for hypersonics would be for 7gen probably. In this century we might be able to make hypersonic missile out of our HTV but hypersonic jet is highly unlikely. Currently it is not even clear what & how exactly would a hypersonic jet attack.
For now, with JV if we can make VCE in 10-15 years hat would be great.

 

[shauryaman65]

I really don't under the F-135, it weighs in some whooping 3 Tons and produces 190kN where as AL-31 size class engine weighing in around 1500kg produces 150kN. Wouldn't it be beneficial to have two of these engines producing 300kN total in wet thrust. Even if you combine dry thrusts of 75kNx2, it would have 150kN more than 125kN of F-35 for the same engine weights.

Its not as simple as just comparing numbers. You have to take into consideration the space that an additional engine would use, decreasing the space in the airframe that could be used for more fuel for more range, electronics etc. Furthermore, 2 engines are not quite as fuel efficient as 1, needless to say, further decreasing the range.

More importantly, you are overlooking the context in which F35 was designed. Having 2 engines increases complexity of the aircraft, increasing maintainence complexity, logistical support complexity partly due to the supply chain complexity that comes with managing and refurbishing 2 seperate engines etc. (Bonus point: more costly)
This would have made it essentially like the F22 due to the similar logistical complexity that aircraft brings. The same aircraft F35 was designed to succeed.

When they were designing the F35, USA was not trying to make the best fighter jet possible, they achieved that when they made the F22.

They were trying to make a viable successor with more broad capabilities(A2G, Anti Ship) that is- cheaper, easier to maintain, and has a lesser logistical burdern on the US supply chain.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Something about Munitions also
Boeing and Raytheon to develop high-power microwave missile
Works Like a CHAMP: The non-explosive missile known as CHAMP completed a flight test over the Utah desert, successfully knocking out electronic targets with its high-powered-microwave-emitting payload while causing no collateral damage, announced contractor Boeing. "Today we turned science fiction into science fact," said Keith Coleman, Boeing's CHAMP program manager, in the company's Oct. 22 release. He added, "In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy's electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or aircraft arrive." Boeing and the Air Force Research Lab's directed energy directorate conducted the test on Oct. 16 at the Utah Test and Training Range, according to the company. CHAMP "successfully knocked out" the targets—personal computers and electrical systems—in a two-story building on the test range during the one-hour test, according to a separate company release. Boeing is developing CHAMP, which stands for Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile Project, under an Office of the Secretary of Defense-sponsored project. (See also Getting to the Point.)

This Basically is a EMP type device that is airborne and can be used multiple times until the energy in it runs out. So, i envisage something installed on Fighter Jet Airframe directly 360 degrees and acting as Missile Defense. Supercapacitors would also may be used as Power Sources with they being charged by Engine. Its like a Electronic Forcefield.

Yes, i have also seen the directional MW concept in USAF, LM advertisements & documentaries since a decade now.

This is crap claim just like many white elephant projects. It is not impossible in theory but its just something to steal more money and nothing else. As you mentioned an aircraft probably makes more sense but manned aircraft are unlikely to see any EMP cannons powerful enough for risks to pilot. Hard to get this kind of energy in a size of missile for it to be effective and not shotdown by AD and if not shotdown then regular missile can do the same thing as this...you can see why mobile EMP ones don't carry any particular advantage as a missile.

He said EMP-type, not EMP itself.
Only top tier leader nations do top secret R&D. And until they make & reveal to public, such things remain "white elephant" for common citizens, especially in lagging nations.
YF-22 & YF-23 were "white elephants" till 1991.
Microwave Weapons, MASER & many types of DEW are being researched. Please go through following page:
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon)
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-electronics_High_Power_Microwave_Advanced_Missile_Project)
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Frequency_Directed_Energy_Weapon)
ETC.

LASER was invented in 1960. Then HPL needed a factory.
That factory size reduced to B-747 in form of YAL-1 ABL jet.
DIRCM already part of military helicopters, cargo & VIP jets.
Now LASER pods have been tested, ready to replace DIRCM.
Similarly MASER could replace a typical EW/jammer antenna.
A good 6gen jet will be like a big flying antenna.

But low power EMP is enough to fry household & some commercial electronics.
Directional EMP R&D also going on.

 

[Kedar]

Yes, i have also seen the directional MW concept in USAF, LM advertisements & documentaries since a decade now.


He said EMP-type, not EMP itself.
Only top tier leader nations do top secret R&D. And until they make & reveal to public, such things remain "white elephant" for common citizens, especially in lagging nations.
YF-22 & YF-23 were "white elephants" till 1991.
Microwave Weapons, MASER & many types of DEW are being researched. Please go through following page:
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon)
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-electronics_High_Power_Microwave_Advanced_Missile_Project)
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Frequency_Directed_Energy_Weapon)
ETC.

LASER was invented in 1960. Then HPL needed a factory.
That factory size reduced to B-747 in form of YAL-1 ABL jet.
DIRCM already part of military helicopters, cargo & VIP jets.
Now LASER pods have been tested, ready to replace DIRCM.
Similarly MASER could replace a typical EW/jammer antenna.
A good 6gen jet will be like a big flying antenna.

Yes, that is why I said white elephant, based on recent US or Western lead technologies most from LCS to Zumwalt to even nuke subs have proven to be a massive challenge to build and work as expected and suck money like bottomless pit. F-35 being one with israel signing on for f-15 rather in new deal.

Yes, in theory you can have portable iron heart like nuclear reactors that can power too.....recent evidence isn't much to go by when it comes to white elephants. We are in parallel 2 dimensions one in cope cage armor and other in 1nm chip building with AI and very precise applications. Back to trench warfare. Let's see rail guns first put to some battle tests. Last I have seen they were firing SM-2s to take out modified soviet missiles in gulf of aden.

 

[Okabe Rintarou]

Mainframe & Supercomputing already addresses this. Optical cables used instead of copper to connect avionics computer to radar & other sensors & antennas. Sufficient internal bandwidth remains available - 10/40/100 Gb/s. Customized military standards would be used.

I am not talking about the connections between sensors/actuators to processor ICs. Those will be OFC even in AMCA (fly-by-light). I am talking about within the processor itself.

You know how these days, multiple semicon ICs are manufactured on a 300 mm wafer? And then those wafers are cut into individual chips? Each wafer has around 300-400 chips that are then sliced into individual chips to be packaged. Now why do we slice them at all? Why not just take the entire wafer and package it as a single massive processor? Instead of 400 individual quad core processors, having a single massive 1600 core processor would be better for supercomputers surely.

^Imagine a single chip the size of a dinner plate.

Well, one limiting factor here is that photolithography always produces at least some defects at a wafers
scale, so your chip will have at least some cores defective more often than not. Normally, since you are making 300-400 chips on a wafer and later slicing them up and packaging separately, its not a problem because 297 of your chips are still defect free and can be sold. But this is a single chip, so defects are intolerable. But there is a new innovation that solves this problem: Silicon Interconnect Fabrics.
The other major limiting factor here is the nature of the interconnects themselves. Currently, we use copper, which has a limit in heat dissipation and bandwidth. But what if we could use a kind of OFC (its actually Optical waveguides, not OFC) instead of the copper within the chip itself? Enter Photonic interconnects. Bye bye heating, bye bye bandwidth limitation, bye-bye your Processors clock limits of 3-5 GHz, hello clock speeds of tens of GHz, hello energy efficiency, etc.

And this is just the first step, a step folks are already beginning to make. Now imagine what if we start replacing multiple components on a chip with photonics instead of electronics. One major electronic component that is going the photonic way and will have major STRATEGIC implications (at a national level) is the Tensor Core. Photonic Tensor Cores will supercharge ML learning. Another such set of components can be those used in Signal Processing, which is of particular interest in fighter jets. Indeed, already in the telecom sector, data centers and HPC clusters are leveraging all-optical switches. All these components will now have the benefits of photonics over electronics: lower heat, higher bandwidth, higher clock speeds, higher energy efficiency, etc. And these advantages become doubly important in SWaP optimized LRUs used on fighter jets (and spacecraft). Eventually, imagine replacing the MOSFET and all of digital electronic logic itself with Photonic logic! A slow march towards purely photonic systems. Bye bye to electronics.


^This screenshot is from The Expanse. Ever since I first saw this scene, I've been enamoured by what such a piece of tech could do. This is a Tightbeam Encryption Module of the Martian Navy. Signal conditioning done almost without electronics. All components of this IC might be photonic.

Now how much of this we can achieve in the AHCA or any 6th gen fighter we make? At least the interconnects we realistically can, maybe even Photonic Tensor Cores by next decade, not sure about other components on the various SoCs and processors.

Point here is, we at DBF need to track the progress of Photonics tech both abroad and in India and constantly understand how such tech can translate into tactical benefits to the military. Even strategic benefits, considering the fact that photonics supercharges ML learning, which will be a key to winning on the future battlefields.

I'm not sure if THz is required bcoz video stream consumes highest bandwidth. A 4K resolution dish TV requires 15-30 Mbps whose transmission frequencies are in high MHz to low GHz range. So that would suffice to transmit or receive EOTS/DAS video stream.
5G cellular N/w use MMW band, have download speed upto 10 Gb/s.
S/w Codecs like H.265 cuts half the space & bandwidth required.

For one to one connections, you're right we won't need to. But 6th gen will rely extensively on a large air fleet (swarm) of unmanned wingmen of various types, acting as everything from scouts, vanguards, EW platforms, missile trucks, refuellers to even a type of CIWS drone whose job will be to keep perimeter security around the fleet, carrying a bunch of tiny HTK CIWS missiles and being sacrificable, colliding with incoming threats to protect the fleet if its HTK CIWS missiles run out tackling a saturation attack. A single 6th gen Fighter (or maybe a flight of them) will therefore be the nucleus and will coordinate a sizeable UAV fleet centered around itself.

They may all be sharing sensor data in a hub-spoke topology with very little cross-communication between the UAVs (as they'll likely only share data to maintain formation or conduct manuevers like a swarm). The decisions will likely be made in the manned platform and therefore the bulk of data flow will be to and from the 6th gen fighter.
The data will include sensor data of ALL types (DAS feed of many drones, EW and radar feeds of many drones and other instructions, firing solutions, mid-course corrections during peak battle where who knows how many missiles will be flying simultaenouosly, etc; all of which combined will likely be much higher than a 4K video streaming) directly streamed into the Fighter at all times, not only when the human demands for it. This continous massive data flow will likely flow into the Fighter's Decision-Support AI that will be the only AI on the fleet to have the requisite computational power to continously learn and adapt to the fast changing tactics of the enemy (who will also be using the same setup). Since the human-in-loop is neccessary in decisionmaking, and because the other UAVs of the fleet will be considered attritable and thus lower cost platforms, it makes sense to have the bulk of AI computing be done on the Fighter with the UAVs only being capable of self-defence and minimal tactical planning in absence of the Fighter's directions.

On top of it all, the Fighter will also be connected to the HAPS and then other Fighters and through them the fleets of those other Fighters. And they ALL might also be sharing a substantial amount of data for a wide area Cooperative Engagement Capability. Their individual Decision Support Systems will also likely be coordinating on an operational level among multiple fleets of Fighters and their UAVs.

Such high data flows in an already dynamic environement where bandwidth maybe limited due to the sheer amount of clients on the network during peak moments in the combat (each UAV and Fighter will be a client along with ground units, etc) will likely neccessitate a high throughput which will require the best-in-class MIMO technology. This is where THz and its large bandwidth along with its UltraMassive-MIMO (UM-MIMO) might become necessary.

One more advantage of THz is that its beamforming resuts in very narrow pencil beams, harder to tackle for enemy EW and ESM alike.

Problem with THz is more to do with range. And I honestly have no idea if they'll ever manage to solve it, but current situation doesn't look promising at all. In case it fails, then maybe MMW and its MIMO will be enough for all but the most crowded airspaces. The tactics will have to evolve to reflect that. It might neccessitate more automation, or less cooperation among the aircraft. Maybe we should do a calculation of the bandwidth requirements....... frankly I am too lazy for that.

 

[AGNI 6 ICBM]

IMO, TEDBF can't be said to be RF optimised. The only thing it will have is composite materials. May be some of our "Adrishya" RAM & other materials would be applied. But it has vertical rudder, big bumpy round body, ideal for radar reflections, wingtip pylons, etc.
I'm not blind supporter of USA but it is a coincidence that in this era they are leading certain technologies like supercomputing, networking, aeronautics, etc. If F/A-XX gets the canards then i would be astonished, but we can see the contrasting self-explainatory difference b/w notional F/A-XX & TEDBF.

View attachment 6721

Compare FRONTAL structures of TEDBF , SU57 & J20 you will get what I meant . Tedbf has single fixed vertical stabiliser while su57 & j20 has all moving structures which increase RCS while in use

5th gen primary focus are RF stealth & sensor fusion.
As most of us know, F-22's RCS is 0.00015 sqm, F-35's RCS is 0.0015 sqm.
We will have to wait & see what AMCA MK1, KF-21 evolution, J-31 RCS are projected.

AMCA's frontal shaping is similar to F35 , If our RAM paint is on par with American RAM paint then AMCA's frontal RCS will be similar/close to F35's RCS

To defeat 4.5gen, 4.75gen & 5gen jets, we'll need at least 5.5gen jet.
Longer range BVR-AAMs means bigger IWB

Advancement in propellent materials will make the dimensions and weight of AAM's remain constant

, more payload. If 8 of them can be carried then great!
DEW requires very high KW range to damage enemy missile & airframe. At least 2-3 turrets will be required. So extra space & weight.
If 4 shorter CCMs can be carried then good!
Long range EO/IR sensors + EW/ESM antennas, some more space & weight.
Su-3X have internal fuel of 11 tons, F-35C has 9 tons, F-22 has 8.2 tons, J-20 has 12 tons, MiG-31 has 16 tons. So people can guess how much NGAD/FCAS/GCAP, etc would have.

FCAS will have 2 engines of 120 kn class so you can place fcas and amca in same weight category

Tempest would be traditional medium weight category as NATO members have / had in past

If you add all the weights of above features then the 6gen jets would be 30-60% heavier & voluminous than 5gen jets.

Let them come , My assumption is they will be flying wing designs so poor maneuverability so they would invest more in stealth aspect

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

I really don't under the F-135, it weighs in some whooping 3 Tons and produces 190kN where as AL-31 size class engine weighing in around 1500kg produces 150kN. Wouldn't it be beneficial to have two of these engines producing 300kN total in wet thrust. Even if you combine dry thrusts of 75kNx2, it would have 150kN more than 125kN of F-35 for the same engine weights. Its not about the advancements in Material Science or Turbine Inlet Temperature in F135. Its about design choices. If they had implemented same technologies in a lighter engines, then they would have got a excellent plane.

> Jet engine is among the trickiest things humans made. There is no standard best way to make it. There are multiple parameters affecting its performance like its weight, volume, air mass flow, OPR, BPR, TIT, etc. Hence it is difficlt to comapre similar size or weight engines also.
> Some people would like to use T/W ratio but there is debate over what components contribute to engine weight - just the components inside the cylinder, or all the plumbing, electronics surrounding it also, EMAD/gearbox, etc.
F-135 weight was quoted 1st as 1.7 tons in 2010, then 2.45 tons in 2019, now it is 3.3 tons.



So the question is what is real weight of F135? 1.7/2.4/3.2 tons? What has been added?
I thing which i can think is extra ceramic-stealth exhaust vanes shielding the turbines.



Another is recent AETP-ECU upgrade. IDK exactly what is modified in the core.
What else?

But 1 thing is clear that engine weight is tricky factor to compare engines unless they have all similar components. Hence T/W ratio is also tricky.

> A noob like me would consider volume - how much thrust can be generated given a space of diameter & length. But the engine diameter also changes at intake to mid-body to exhaust. For easy calculation intake diameter can be taken as that decides amount of intake air.

- AL-31 engine volume = 3.14 x (495/100) x (91/2)^2/10,000 = 3.21 M^3
Dry T/Vol = 77.3 KN / 3.21 = 24.08 KN/M^3
Wet T/Vol = 123 KN / 3.21 = 38.31 KN/M^3
Dry weight = 1,520 Kg (I'm not adding +2% due to TVC actuators)
Dry Engine density = 1,520/3.21 = 473.52 Kg/M^3
Dry T/W = 77.3 KN /9.8 /1520 = 5.19
Wet T/W = 123 KN /9.8 /1520 = 8.25
- F135 engine volume = 3.14 x (559/100) x (109/2)^2/10,000 = 5.21 M^3
Dry T/Vol = 128 KN / 5.21 = 24.56 KN/M^3
Wet T/Vol = 192 KN / 5.21 = 36.85 KN/M^3
NOTE - Dry T/Vol values are identical & Wet T/Vol values are nearby, AL-31 better.
Dry engine weight = 1.7//2.4//3.2 tons?
Dry engine density = (1.7//2.4//3.2 tons) / 5.21 = 326.3 // 460.65 // 614.2 Kg/M^3
Dry T/W = 128 KN /9.8 / (1.7//2.4//3.2 tons) = 7.68 // 5.44 // 4.08
Wet T/W = 192 KN /9.8 / (1.7//2.4//3.2 tons) = 11.52 // 8.16 // 6.12
CAUTION - Engines are not supposed to match T/W ratio bcoz their dry, wet thrust vary a lot. The reheat/wet/AB % varies from 30-70% of mil. power.
But still for the sake of calculation if we apply AL-31 dry T/W ratio then F135 weight = 128 KN /9.8 /5.19 = 2,516.6 Kg
If we apply AL-31 density to F135 then its weight = 473.52 x 5.21 = 2,467 Kg. So we can safely say that F135 weighs around 2.4-2.5 tons at least. Beyond this weight of ceramic stealth blocker & other things can be added.

Its not as simple as just comparing numbers. You have to take into consideration the space that an additional engine would use, decreasing the space in the airframe that could be used for more fuel for more range, electronics etc. Furthermore, 2 engines are not quite as fuel efficient as 1, needless to say, further decreasing the range.

More importantly, you are overlooking the context in which F35 was designed. Having 2 engines increases complexity of the aircraft, increasing maintainence complexity, logistical support complexity partly due to the supply chain complexity that comes with managing and refurbishing 2 seperate engines etc. (Bonus point: more costly)
This would have made it essentially like the F22 due to the similar logistical complexity that aircraft brings. The same aircraft F35 was designed to succeed.

When they were designing the F35, USA was not trying to make the best fighter jet possible, they achieved that when they made the F22.

They were trying to make a viable successor with more broad capabilities(A2G, Anti Ship) that is- cheaper, easier to maintain, and has a lesser logistical burdern on the US supply chain.

Yes, it is not that simple comparing numbers.
> I think in every gen there are 1 & 2 engined jets made by every maker. It is mix of performance & economy. Everything has +/- points, what matters is objective & priority. If something has to be done after long research then logistics will be created or the nation might suffer, simple.
>I've already written that from 4 to 5 & 5 to 6 more fuel, payload, avionics get added to the permanent part of airframe bcoz it is objective & priority now.
>So 1 engine provides less cost but may not provide enough T/W ratio, agility, electricity, etc initialy. It doesn't provide redundancy, so assured loss of airframe due to engine malfunction. If newer better variant of engine is made then performance can improve. Butif 1 engine alone is made very powerful then its IRS will also increase due bigger nozzle.
>Addition of 2nd engine automatically widens the airframe doubling space for fuel & electronics in the fuselage.
>Cost of 2nd engine acts like an insurance premium, giving better T/W ratio, agility, electricity, speed, chance to save airframe when 1 engine malfunctions, etc. BTW using two 2-wheeler is far economical than a 10x costly AC car, occupies less parking space, but car has its own strong points when & where needed.
> If it is question of increased engine space then we should see if thrust increased in same ratio at least & if we can still maintain the SFC. F119 is a big engine but with lowest SFC of 17gm/KN/s.
>Scientists & engineers are not afraid of complexity. They get well paid. We are afraid
>F-35 is not successor of F-22 but its supplementor. Afterwards USA & apparently entire world realized that next 6gen jets need to be omni-role rather than primary/secondary.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Compare FRONTAL structures of TEDBF , SU57 & J20 you will get what I meant . Tedbf has single fixed vertical stabiliser while su57 & j20 has all moving structures which increase RCS while in use

> Only front RCS is not important but from all angles. If enemy is also stealth then it can sneak from any angle.
> There are many things which can increase RCS. The levcons of Su-57 & canards of J-20 are criticized, but that doesn't mean we have to make those same mistakes again for next 40-50 years. The effectivenss of Su-57 & J-20 RAS & RAM may not be good enough.
> 90 degrees are very bad.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That's not the statement, diagram shared by me on this forum. When i out it in Google Images i can't find it. You can link other forum statements also.
Only DRDO can tell how close they are to F-35's front RCS of 0.0015 sqm.

Advancement in propellent materials will make the dimensions and weight of AAM's remain constant

Yes that will be good news. let's see some specs of current missiles.
AIM-120-C/D AMRAAM - 161.5 kg, 12 ft. long, 18cm diameter, 49cm wingspan, 160-180 Km range.
AIM-260 JATM - 154 Kg, 12'3" long, 18cm diameter, 40-45cm wingspan, 200 Km+ range, Mach 5
Meteor - 190 Kg, 12 ft. long, 18cm diameter, 200 km range, NEZ 60Km, Mach 4
PL-15 - 200-250 Kg, 13'4" long, 20cm diameter, 200-300 Km range, Mach 4+
Astr MK1 - 154 Kg, 12.5' long, 18cm diameter, 110 Km range, Mach 4.5
Astr MK3 SFDR - 220 Kg, 12'8" long, 20cm diameter, 60cm wingpan, 350 Km range@20Km altitude, 190Km@8Km altitude, Mach 2-3.6 interception

So we have Meteor to counter AIM-120.
Our Astr MK3 SFDR would counter PL-15.
We'll need something to counter following 2 missiles:
PL-21 - 250 Kg, 300-400 Km range, 25-30cm diameter,
PL-17 - 20 ft long, 300-500 Km

USA got MAKO hypersonic missile. let's see when we get our HySo-AAM.

FCAS will have 2 engines of 120 kn class so you can place fcas and amca in same weight category
Tempest would be traditional medium weight category as NATO members have / had in past

Where did you read this? Currently, there is no way a medium jet would satisfy 6gen specs

Let them come , My assumption is they will be flying wing designs so poor maneuverability so they would invest more in stealth aspect

The current NGAD, F/A-XX, FCAS, GCAP are not flying wing like B-21. But If DEW-CIWS works well then it can shoot down any incoming AAM & deter enemy jets. Then it can be placed on many types of airframes.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

I am not talking about the connections between sensors/actuators to processor ICs. Those will be OFC even in AMCA (fly-by-light). I am talking about within the processor itself.

You know how these days, multiple semicon ICs are manufactured on a 300 mm wafer? And then those wafers are cut into individual chips? Each wafer has around 300-400 chips that are then sliced into individual chips to be packaged. Now why do we slice them at all? Why not just take the entire wafer and package it as a single massive processor? Instead of 400 individual quad core processors, having a single massive 1600 core processor would be better for supercomputers surely.

^Imagine a single chip the size of a dinner plate.

Well, one limiting factor here is that photolithography always produces at least some defects at a wafers
scale, so your chip will have at least some cores defective more often than not. Normally, since you are making 300-400 chips on a wafer and later slicing them up and packaging separately, its not a problem because 297 of your chips are still defect free and can be sold. But this is a single chip, so defects are intolerable. But there is a new innovation that solves this problem: Silicon Interconnect Fabrics.
The other major limiting factor here is the nature of the interconnects themselves. Currently, we use copper, which has a limit in heat dissipation and bandwidth. But what if we could use a kind of OFC (its actually Optical waveguides, not OFC) instead of the copper within the chip itself? Enter Photonic interconnects. Bye bye heating, bye bye bandwidth limitation, bye-bye your Processors clock limits of 3-5 GHz, hello clock speeds of tens of GHz, hello energy efficiency, etc.

And this is just the first step, a step folks are already beginning to make. Now imagine what if we start replacing multiple components on a chip with photonics instead of electronics. One major electronic component that is going the photonic way and will have major STRATEGIC implications (at a national level) is the Tensor Core. Photonic Tensor Cores will supercharge ML learning. Another such set of components can be those used in Signal Processing, which is of particular interest in fighter jets. Indeed, already in the telecom sector, data centers and HPC clusters are leveraging all-optical switches. All these components will now have the benefits of photonics over electronics: lower heat, higher bandwidth, higher clock speeds, higher energy efficiency, etc. And these advantages become doubly important in SWaP optimized LRUs used on fighter jets (and spacecraft). Eventually, imagine replacing the MOSFET and all of digital electronic logic itself with Photonic logic! A slow march towards purely photonic systems. Bye bye to electronics.

View attachment 6903View attachment 6904
^This screenshot is from The Expanse. Ever since I first saw this scene, I've been enamoured by what such a piece of tech could do. This is a Tightbeam Encryption Module of the Martian Navy. Signal conditioning done almost without electronics. All components of this IC might be photonic.

Now how much of this we can achieve in the AHCA or any 6th gen fighter we make? At least the interconnects we realistically can, maybe even Photonic Tensor Cores by next decade, not sure about other components on the various SoCs and processors.

Point here is, we at DBF need to track the progress of Photonics tech both abroad and in India and constantly understand how such tech can translate into tactical benefits to the military. Even strategic benefits, considering the fact that photonics supercharges ML learning, which will be a key to winning on the future battlefields.



For one to one connections, you're right we won't need to. But 6th gen will rely extensively on a large air fleet (swarm) of unmanned wingmen of various types, acting as everything from scouts, vanguards, EW platforms, missile trucks, refuellers to even a type of CIWS drone whose job will be to keep perimeter security around the fleet, carrying a bunch of tiny HTK CIWS missiles and being sacrificable, colliding with incoming threats to protect the fleet if its HTK CIWS missiles run out tackling a saturation attack. A single 6th gen Fighter (or maybe a flight of them) will therefore be the nucleus and will coordinate a sizeable UAV fleet centered around itself.

They may all be sharing sensor data in a hub-spoke topology with very little cross-communication between the UAVs (as they'll likely only share data to maintain formation or conduct manuevers like a swarm). The decisions will likely be made in the manned platform and therefore the bulk of data flow will be to and from the 6th gen fighter.
The data will include sensor data of ALL types (DAS feed of many drones, EW and radar feeds of many drones and other instructions, firing solutions, mid-course corrections during peak battle where who knows how many missiles will be flying simultaenouosly, etc; all of which combined will likely be much higher than a 4K video streaming) directly streamed into the Fighter at all times, not only when the human demands for it. This continous massive data flow will likely flow into the Fighter's Decision-Support AI that will be the only AI on the fleet to have the requisite computational power to continously learn and adapt to the fast changing tactics of the enemy (who will also be using the same setup). Since the human-in-loop is neccessary in decisionmaking, and because the other UAVs of the fleet will be considered attritable and thus lower cost platforms, it makes sense to have the bulk of AI computing be done on the Fighter with the UAVs only being capable of self-defence and minimal tactical planning in absence of the Fighter's directions.

On top of it all, the Fighter will also be connected to the HAPS and then other Fighters and through them the fleets of those other Fighters. And they ALL might also be sharing a substantial amount of data for a wide area Cooperative Engagement Capability. Their individual Decision Support Systems will also likely be coordinating on an operational level among multiple fleets of Fighters and their UAVs.

Such high data flows in an already dynamic environement where bandwidth maybe limited due to the sheer amount of clients on the network during peak moments in the combat (each UAV and Fighter will be a client along with ground units, etc) will likely neccessitate a high throughput which will require the best-in-class MIMO technology. This is where THz and its large bandwidth along with its UltraMassive-MIMO (UM-MIMO) might become necessary.

One more advantage of THz is that its beamforming resuts in very narrow pencil beams, harder to tackle for enemy EW and ESM alike.

Problem with THz is more to do with range. And I honestly have no idea if they'll ever manage to solve it, but current situation doesn't look promising at all. In case it fails, then maybe MMW and its MIMO will be enough for all but the most crowded airspaces. The tactics will have to evolve to reflect that. It might neccessitate more automation, or less cooperation among the aircraft. Maybe we should do a calculation of the bandwidth requirements....... frankly I am too lazy for that.

Although i am computer engineer by qualification & experience but i am low IQ guy
I work with datacenter devices (switch, router, storage), sys-admin, tech support, not hardcore level.
2 decades back in college we read 8085 & 8086 with some related peripheral microcontrollers & assembly language programming. Beyond that a post graduate, PhD or a person closely following computing developments can comment better.
> I can't comment anything deeper on AI, ML except that they are being used by latest army, navy, AF platforms & developing further.

What i can understand is that -
> Transisters size has reduced to nanometer level & with each successive generation of chips the size is reducing.
> The diameter of laser optical fiber, single/multimode are in micro-meter range, 1000x more than CPU transister fabrication. Laser needs electro-optical convertors, in Datacenter devices it is known as SFP (Small Formfactor Pluggable) the size of finger, required for every pair of optical channel just few microns wide. Optic cables also suffer from "modal dispersion". So photonics may not be suited to CPU.
> The PCB bus protocols are like PCIe. Latest version 7 can deliver 242 GB/s per direction in x16 lanes configuration.
> Some inter-controller protocols are I2C, Infiniband, etc.
> An Electronics & Telecom grad/professional can comment better on wireless tech. But RF stealth also means emmissions control. F-22 & f-35 already have many MADL antennas but too many simultanious transmissions may not be good, even if directional. Depending upon formation type with wingmen or their position & situation in general, the wireless topology can change dynamically - hub-spoke, tree, mesh, ring, etc.

> If you can use some infographic, pic, diagram, links, that would be helpful to all members.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

@AGNI 6 ICBM
You are mixing your comments inside the Quotation box. It gives wrong message about what other members actually replied. Try to put your response in next line.

 

[Kedar]

You know how these days, multiple semicon ICs are manufactured on a 300 mm wafer? And then those wafers are cut into individual chips? Each wafer has around 300-400 chips that are then sliced into individual chips to be packaged. Now why do we slice them at all? Why not just take the entire wafer and package it as a single massive processor? Instead of 400 individual quad core processors, having a single massive 1600 core processor would be better for supercomputers surely.

May be I am missing the context here or question here, but you already mentioned heat factor. If you look at mother boards or any other circuit board, heat zones are designed and additional components are also attached to dissipate heat. Proximity to memory from the CPU and many other things. You also mentioned failure rate. Besides IO and other systems also play a part in getting to an optimal layout and limits. Having a 1600 core processor but not having bandwidth to use them due to other components.....monoliths vs distributed and both have design use cases but in general distributed has more merits at the cost of complexity and cost.