AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

[Blademaster]

Orca would not have been the right fit as Amca is in the same class, similiar cost, has already been in development for quite some time and will far superior than orca.

What should have been the ideal case-

AF and Navy should have been onboard for Amca af and Amca marine from day one.

For a country like India with limited resources and manpower, 3 projects ie Tejas mk2, Orca and Amca is just plain stupidity.

Also for Navy to have three platforms ie mig 29k, Rafale and Orca all in extremely limited numbers is also beyond comprehension.

Once we get the orca we dump the mig-29s and use the rafales as aggressor aircraft’s for top gun training purposes.

 

[Dieversion]

Orca won't be available till late 2030s,

Imho developing and inducting a new 4.5 gen platform in extremely limited numbers with 0 export potential is just absurd.

There is a huge developmental cost implication for a new platform and that too for a 4.5 gen aircraft for deployment in 2035-40 while the same thing happening for Amca is just wrong.

India neither has the excess manpower nor the funds for this misadventures.

Had tedbf and Orca been developed instead of mk2 right after Tejas mk1 then I would have had a different opinion.

 

[shauryaman65]

ORCA is a great replacement for overpriced Rafales and MKIs. I really don't understand why IAF refused to back ORCA. It would really place IAF on a top footing.

Tejas Mk1A&2 would replace all the single engine fighters of every caliber due to its multirole functionality and better engines.
ORCA would replace all the twin engine fighters including M-29s, MKIs, and Rafales.
AMCA would be the 5th generation fighter.
And a follow on single engine ASLCA (Advanced Stealth Light Combat Aircraft) would be the stand in for F-35A & C types.

There is simply no need for the already stressed HAL to make another variant of the TEDBF.
Especially when Tejas mk2 is 90% of the capability of ORCA.

Mig29 is hilariously bad imo. It's payload capacity is about as much as tejas mk1a while having 2 less hardpoints, worse target and tracking pods, worse ECM capabilities, worse radar etc. etc.
Tejas mk2 would be a huge leap in comparison to Mig29.

 

[scholar of war]

Airforce is not showing interest in orca because they don't want to fund its development.

Once development of tedbf is finished Airforce will buy Airforce version of tedbf as orca.

For example Airforce was claiming that they will only buy 83 tejas mk1a but now we are seeing them buy 97 more mk1a.

The success of a 29 super tucano has prooved that not every country need fifth gen fighter. Good 4.5 gen planes will always have a market at least till the end of this century.
4.5 gen planes are cheap to operate and easier to maintain compared to fifth gen planes. There are so many missions where stealth is not needed. Even U.S. had realized near the end of afgan war that using 5th gen plane to bomb jihadi on trucks and in huts is not economical.

Fifth gen planes will be necessity in contested airspace but for many missions 4.5 gen planes are more desirable and economical.


Hypothetical role of orca in IAF.

As we know by the beginning of 2040s when IAF start replacing early SU30MKI models we would need something thing similar. TEDBF being designed specifically for naval strike role and will have capabilities comparable to superhornet and will have similar MTOW or around 30 TON. It most likely will have at least 80% range and payload capacity of su 30mki.

Probable role of Orca wil be as bomb truck and deploy stand off munitions.

 

[Dieversion]

When I said orca platform is unnecessary I meant to say that tedbf/Orca platform is unnecessary. Tejas mk2 will full fill all roles.

Developing tedbf and Orca is a mistake. They bring nothing to the table that Tejas mk2 can't.

Orca/tedbf and Amca will be in similar weight class with Amca being far superior in capabilities.

Developing a 4.5 gen along with 5gen aircraft with the aim of reducing operational cost is hilarious. As if the development cost is nothing for a new platform.

Orca for Af and Tedbf for Navy is just flawed. If Navy wanted a next gen aircraft then it should have gone with Amca marine. No body in their mind will develop an aircraft with potential orders for just 50-60 aircraft.

We just need mk2 and Amca for AF
Navy will have to go more Rafales.

 

[shauryaman65]

When I said orca platform is unnecessary I meant to say that tedbf/Orca platform is unnecessary. Tejas mk2 will full fill all roles.

Developing tedbf and Orca is a mistake. They bring nothing to the table that Tejas mk2 can't.

Orca/tedbf and Amca will be in similar weight class with Amca being far superior in capabilities.

Developing a 4.5 gen along with 5gen aircraft with the aim of reducing operational cost is hilarious. As if the development cost is nothing for a new platform.

Orca for Af and Tedbf for Navy is just flawed. If Navy wanted a next gen aircraft then it should have gone with Amca marine. No body in their mind will develop an aircraft with potential orders for just 50-60 aircraft.

We just need mk2 and Amca for AF
Navy will have to go more Rafales.

TEDBF is not comparable to mk2. It is a carrier based aircraft to replace the shitty mig29Ks that we currently operate.

ORCA is the version that air force could use, that is pretty unnecessary as it would have to directly compete with mk2.

 

[scholar of war]

What tejas MK1 has taught us is that Developing naval version of airforce jets is not easy, while the development of rafale has prooved that it is far easier to develop airforce version of naval aircraft.

Indian navy have plan of 3 carriers so considering 30 planes for each carrier and some extra for shore based facilities navy easily will need 100+ tedbf. Plus considering the reality that futures conflict may take place in indian ocean instead of Himalayas and government is even developing lakshdweep Island for deploying naval strike planes we may practically need 150+ dedicated naval strike planes.

Tejas MK 2 will neither have range or payload capacity or dual engines needed for naval strike missions.

Stealth aircraft are very expensive to maintain or operate and will have even more wear and tear in naval environment.

The worse issue is AMCA is being optimized for air to air role that means it will have 4 or at most 6 air to air missile in internal weapons bay and most likely will carry at most 2 500kg bombs in internal weapon bay.

But for naval strike mission internal weapon bays capacity of amca is grossly insufficient.
And it is better to use a dedicated plane for naval strike mission then Amca with weapons on external hard points.

So now my question is either to use a expensive to buy and maintain stealth plain in non stealth mode or use a cheap to buy and maintain dedicated strike platform.

In my opinion logical choice is using non stealth platform.

It is logical why navy decided not to develop amca naval and instead focused the development on tedbf.

The requirements of naval strike missions (suitable for tedbf) are completely different from air superiority missions (suitable for amca).

 

[Blademaster]

There is simply no need for the already stressed HAL to make another variant of the TEDBF.
Especially when Tejas mk2 is 90% of the capability of ORCA.

Mig29 is hilariously bad imo. It's payload capacity is about as much as tejas mk1a while having 2 less hardpoints, worse target and tracking pods, worse ECM capabilities, worse radar etc. etc.
Tejas mk2 would be a huge leap in comparison to Mig29.

The only benefit of MiG-29 is that it has two engines and has more power, enabling the fighter to have more thrust when needed. The Soviets designed the MiG-29s to be cheap, rugged, and can take off from hastily prepared airfields and provide needed combat capabilities on short notice in far flung areas. It fitted Soviet needs perfectly but not other countries that had different priorities and needs.

 

[Dieversion]

N

TEDBF is not comparable to mk2. It is a carrier based aircraft to replace the shitty mig29Ks that we currently operate.

ORCA is the version that air force could use, that is pretty unnecessary as it would have to directly compete with mk2.

Never said mk2 was comparable to tedbf.

But developing a new platform for 50-60 jets (considering we are also going for Rafales) is gross wastage of taxpayers money.

It's far better to go with more Rafales.

Going for tedbf because of its possibility of it being cheaper than rafale Is flawed.

Unit cost of 50-60 jets might be lower but what will happen when you bring in the developmental cost. Also the conversion cost of the carrier for being able to use tedbf instead of rafale.

I will always prefer indigenous product but the numbers are too low to make the project viable. Hope saner heads prevail.

 

[Kedar]

N


Never said mk2 was comparable to tedbf.

But developing a new platform for 50-60 jets (considering we are also going for Rafales) is gross wastage of taxpayers money.

It's far better to go with more Rafales.

Going for tedbf because of its possibility of it being cheaper than rafale Is flawed.

Unit cost of 50-60 jets might be lower but what will happen when you bring in the developmental cost. Also the conversion cost of the carrier for being able to use tedbf instead of rafale.

I will always prefer indigenous product but the numbers are too low to make the project viable. Hope saner heads prevail.

If you are investing in carriers then its a logical choice to spin research and expertise in building naval aircraft especially when we have the Tejas program. Either we see carriers as continuous strategy meaning building more in numbers or replacements over decades....in either case depending on France like power whose financial capabilities and technical ones are also trending downward (their supply chains and tech base is not that independent either) is not a smart move. These are incremental costs and we should have this program.

 

[Dieversion]

If you are investing in carriers then its a logical choice to spin research and expertise in building naval aircraft especially when we have the Tejas program. Either we see carriers as continuous strategy meaning building more in numbers or replacements over decades....in either case depending on France like power whose financial capabilities and technical ones are also trending downward (their supply chains and tech base is not that independent either) is not a smart move. These are incremental costs and we should have this program.

Investing in carrier and investing in carrier aircraft are two very different things.

Building even one or two carrier of the type is financially viable because no one else will do that the way you want it too.

But the same cannot be said for the carrier aircraft. India will have max 3 carriers and for that she needs 150 ac max. Already having Rafale brings that number down to around 100. This making the project unviable.

If we had 5 carriers and a requirement for 100-150 shore based ac then developing a new platform for the FLEET made sense... And right now it doesn't.

 

[Kedar]

Investing in carrier and investing in carrier aircraft are two very different things.

Building even one or two carrier of the type is financially viable because no one else will do that the way you want it too.

But the same cannot be said for the carrier aircraft. India will have max 3 carriers and for that she needs 150 ac max. Already having Rafale brings that number down to around 100. This making the project unviable.

If we had 5 carriers and a requirement for 100-150 shore based ac then developing a new platform for the FLEET made sense... And right now it doesn't.

France is not a power to look for carrier aircrafts, they have one that spends most of time in refit, don't expect them to have any continuity. UK is nowhere in this anymore but they have US and same with Japan.....Russia, unless they build another carrier they are not in the game in all practical aspects. China is not a partner for us, leaves us with US which is a partner that India can never trust. So carriers without a carrier aircraft program is nonsense.....all naval aircrafts comes as offshoot of primary programs of AF. We should absolutely invest till carriers themselves become obsolete. Drone's are the only thing that may actually reduce the need for this program but even they may need navalized versions.

 

[Blademaster]

N


Never said mk2 was comparable to tedbf.

But developing a new platform for 50-60 jets (considering we are also going for Rafales) is gross wastage of taxpayers money.

It's far better to go with more Rafales.

Going for tedbf because of its possibility of it being cheaper than rafale Is flawed.

Unit cost of 50-60 jets might be lower but what will happen when you bring in the developmental cost. Also the conversion cost of the carrier for being able to use tedbf instead of rafale.

I will always prefer indigenous product but the numbers are too low to make the project viable. Hope saner heads prevail.

No it is not better to go with more Rafales and getting ORCA is not a gross wastage of taxpayers money. Where are you from? France? Then your country is making billions of dollars that could have fed an entire industry.

The French are charging us a fortune for these Rafales. With ORCA, all that money stays in India, not in France. And besides it won't be for an order of 50-60 but in hundreds.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

TEDBF+ORCA thread :
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/tedbf-or-orca-updates.59/

Thread 'HAL ORCA Discussions'

Jun 30, 2024

a thread to discuss about ambitious project of making twin-engine fighter jets by HAL
TEDBF - Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter; for the Indian Navy
and
ORCA - Omni-Role Combat Aircraft; for the Indian Air Force

• johny_baba
• Replies: 1
• Forum: Indian Air & Space Forces

• 

Tejas MK1/1A LCA thread:
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/lca-tejas-mk-i-mk-ia-news-and-discussion.112/unread
Tejas M2/MWF thread:
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/ada-tejas-mark-ii-medium-weight-fighter.123/unread
Su-30MKI thread:
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/iafs-sukhoi-su-30mki.128/

@SKC @haldilal @hit&run
I request admins & members to move TEDBF, ORCA, LCA, MWF, MKI replies to above appropriate thread.

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

Amca eventually replacing the Su30mki.

+

AMCA and tejas mk2 could very well easily replace the su30MKIs.

+

ORCA is a great replacement for overpriced Rafales and MKIs.

Leave 4.5 gen ORCA, MWF or even Rafale, not even 5th gen AMCA can replace Su-30MKI with its massive, size, payload, range, agility, sortie time, especially after Super-Sukhoi upgrade. In BVR, AMCA will have advantage. In Dogfight, MKI will win most of the times IMO. Unfortunately its airframe design is obsolete.
Just like tejas MK1 LCA -> Tejas MK2 MWF, we need AMCA -> AHCA to replace MKI.

For a country like India with limited resources and manpower, 3 projects ie Tejas mk2, Orca and Amca is just plain stupidity.

Our country is most populous now with many technical colleges in even small cities. We have abundant resources & manpower but economical & R&D management is not proper overall. ISRO succeeding, rest all lagging. Latest news shows stampede like situation for jobs. What happend in Bangladesh in last week can happen in our country also.
It has been 3 decades+ now for our IT industry to work with West.
>S.Korea producing KF-21 Boramae has population of 51.7 million & around 100,000 sqm.
>Sweden with area 450,000+ sqm has population 10.6 million with history of making good jets.
>Turkey with area 783,000+ sqm & population 86.2 million had its 1st flight of Kaan.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short note - Until we make/JV/import a strong engine like F-135 for F-35, AL-51 for Su-75, IMO from tech PoV i don't see its genuine future in IAF, hopeless for IN with SEDBF.
I will reply in MWF thread about future of 1-engine IAF jet.

 

[Dieversion]

No it is not better to go with more Rafales and getting ORCA is not a gross wastage of taxpayers money. Where are you from? France? Then your country is making billions of dollars that could have fed an entire industry.

The French are charging us a fortune for these Rafales. With ORCA, all that money stays in India, not in France. And besides it won't be for an order of 50-60 but in hundreds.

French are charging us a fortune because they have a matured bleeding edge tech and we are not just paying for the platform, we are paying for the training, maintanence facilities, spares and consumables to keep a very high availability rate for the platform and it's weapons, all this for a few aircraft.

Once the number goes up, this cost will come down.

And because of this we should not spend another fortune developing Tedbf just because the money stays in india. Our defence development works with a limited budget and skilled manpower. Any new project will have an obvious impact Amca and Tejas mk2.

 

[BON PLAN]

No it is not better to go with more Rafales and getting ORCA is not a gross wastage of taxpayers money. Where are you from? France? Then your country is making billions of dollars that could have fed an entire industry.

The French are charging us a fortune for these Rafales. With ORCA, all that money stays in India, not in France. And besides it won't be for an order of 50-60 but in hundreds.

The Rafale dry price is nearly the same for all customers.
India has the more advanced Rafale so far, with some specific developpments made.
The whole bid included 2 air base accomodation, a multiyear high availability contract including even the fuel !

We presented the bill, India inked the french bill despite hard bargainings, and despite 5 other birds available on the market. India choose the Rafale because it has the best cost vs performances ratio. It's as simple as that.

It is so true that you now want to purchase Rafale M, despite a very aggresiv dumping from Boeing for SH18....

 

[BON PLAN]

not even 5th gen AMCA can replace Su-30MKI with its massive, size, payload, range, agility, sortie time, especially after Super-Sukhoi upgrade.

Don't forget it's farm door radar cross section.....

 

[125mm_Smoothbore]

Don't forget it's farm door radar cross section.....

Thats why they are planning to apply ram coatings to at least bring it down to acceptable levels

 

[Dieversion]

TEDBF+ORCA thread :
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/tedbf-or-orca-updates.59/

Thread 'HAL ORCA Discussions'

Jun 30, 2024

a thread to discuss about ambitious project of making twin-engine fighter jets by HAL
TEDBF - Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter; for the Indian Navy
and
ORCA - Omni-Role Combat Aircraft; for the Indian Air Force

• johny_baba
• Replies: 1
• Forum: Indian Air & Space Forces

• 

Tejas MK1/1A LCA thread:
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/lca-tejas-mk-i-mk-ia-news-and-discussion.112/unread
Tejas M2/MWF thread:
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/ada-tejas-mark-ii-medium-weight-fighter.123/unread
Su-30MKI thread:
https://defenceforumbharat.com/threads/iafs-sukhoi-su-30mki.128/

@SKC @haldilal @hit&run
I request admins & members to move TEDBF, ORCA, LCA, MWF, MKI replies to above appropriate thread.

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


+

+

Leave 4.5 gen ORCA, MWF or even Rafale, not even 5th gen AMCA can replace Su-30MKI with its massive, size, payload, range, agility, sortie time, especially after Super-Sukhoi upgrade. In BVR, AMCA will have advantage. In Dogfight, MKI will win most of the times IMO. Unfortunately its airframe design is obsolete.
Just like tejas MK1 LCA -> Tejas MK2 MWF, we need AMCA -> AHCA to replace MKI.


Our country is most populous now with many technical colleges in even small cities. We have abundant resources & manpower but economical & R&D management is not proper overall. ISRO succeeding, rest all lagging. Latest news shows stampede like situation for jobs. What happend in Bangladesh in last week can happen in our country also.
It has been 3 decades+ now for our IT industry to work with West.
>S.Korea producing KF-21 Boramae has population of 51.7 million & around 100,000 sqm.
>Sweden with area 450,000+ sqm has population 10.6 million with history of making good jets.
>Turkey with area 783,000+ sqm & population 86.2 million had its 1st flight of Kaan.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short note - Until we make/JV/import a strong engine like F-135 for F-35, AL-51 for Su-75, IMO from tech PoV i don't see its genuine future in IAF, hopeless for IN with SEDBF.
I will reply in MWF thread about future of 1-engine IAF jet.

Don't forget it's farm door radar cross section.....

Being a super maneuverable hmrca it's bigger so it has internal volume for all possible avionics, massive fuel load, flies higher, faster and turns on a dime. Dynamically less affected by a given payload when compared to mca or lca.

And boy does it look good while doing all that. It goes without saying that we all have a soft corner for this jet, it will be really hard letting this one go when the time finally comes.

For years to come Super Sukhoi upgrade will make it a huge threat even for 5th gen jets.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

AGENDA - Will Naval AMCA be good or bad?

CAUTION - some images have multiple watermakrs. IDK original source. I use Google Image Search.
CAUTION - I never meant to dump all 4.5 gen jets & we should have only 5gen, that's impossible for few more decades.



> Some people criticize "Oh! so new design, new R&D, new wind tunnel test, new timeline, etc..." Well, that's the paid job of any type & level of engineering teams - IT, electronics, civil, mechanical, electrical, aeronautical. Govt. or private job, at least 8hrs of sincere effort has to be given. But good & bad management are seen everywhere.

> AMCA (along with LCA, MWF, ORCA, TEDBF) should be treated as generic acronyms only rather than product designation. The AMCA design visible today could/should evolve in MK2 with JV engine, like X-35 evolved to F-35, YF-22 to F-22, FC-31 to J-31/35. We have infographic how AMCA-AF MK1/TD has evolved so far but that cannot be end of journey for MK2/MK3/MK4.



> Ideally, a common production line for Navy & AF is best, already proven by Rafale, F-35, etc.
I vouched for idea of N-AMCA in beginning bcoz the future is with stealth. On internet there were concepts of AMCA fuselage used for TEDBF & add canards, or basically move the wing backwards & bring the tail forward as canard like in J-20. This config allows more lift & hence lower takeoff & landing speeds on carriers.



After looking at N-LCA with levcons, i edited AMCA drawing like Su-57.

If people are ok with TEDBF canards then an enthusiast can do this much at least but i guess not possible with DSI.

> Navy cannot & should not risk with 1 engine. F-35 with 1 engine was mistake due to joint requirement, many other compromises, already accepted. But does this mean AF can/should risk with 1 engine? 1-engine AF-jet on malfunction cannot land just anywhere.
Although 1 engine means less maintenance, but bcoz we are not making good jet engines, yet, future 5th & 6th gen requirement cannot be fulfiled by us with 1 engine - not enough thrust & electricity.
F-35 failed even in meeting some 5th gen characteristics & now it is getting ECUin ICU
So until a country can get a single powerful engine by self/JV/import, its future in 1-engine jet in AF is slim & in Navy is hopeless.
We pay Insurance premium for :-
- cars (those who have car),
- bikes,
- medical hospitilization & surgery,
- life loss cover,
NOTE - Many wan't powerful overbudgeted bikes, cars, phones, etc.
but don't wan't to invest in extra engine with more maintenance cost but also more capability.
What is more important - insured chance to save airframe with extra engine & maintenance cost OR reduced maintenance cost with 1 engine with assured loss of airframe?
> Next point is cost of 5th gen is greater than 4.5gen. Then why making AMCA-AF in 1st place but making Navy suffer & how long it should suffer?
For 1st gen till today & eternity it has & will always be said that current gen costlier than previous gen & future gen costlier than current gen. It is a cycle - as new gen arrives it is supplemented by older gen with MLUs & then retured some day. So it is not a point to stop/stall/delay R&D. The point of corrosion by salty moisture is covered in R&D, again not an excuse. There will always be minority newer gen & majority older gen initially & then later majority newer gen & minority older gen, then again cycle will repeat. Let's get over this point.
Also, cost in capitalist nation should not be compared to cost in communist & socialist mixed economies.

> Another point is naval strike weapons. We feel that AMCA's IWB is inadequate bcoz we are not ready even to imagine that :-
1> Already said above - current AMCA design can/should evolve & adpat to Navy. Common production line means catering to heavier Naval version due to stronger MLG & bigger wing. Empty weight diff. b/w F-35A&C is 2.4 tons. Is that a reason to stop/delay R&D on stealthy Navy jets?
2> current naval strike weapons can also evolve. Our mind is stuck with old Harpoon, Exocet & new but huge kind of weapons. Ok then, their makers will keep supplying old weapons till eternity.

But elsewhere R&D is going on newer weapons, newer jets, to be compatible with eachother.


Also anti-radiation missile AGM-88G AARGM-ER



> Medium jet will obviously have payload limitations, another reason for AHCA. So be it. We should be requirement & performance oriented. NGAD & F/A-XX requirement will weigh 30-60% more than current flagship jets. So IAF & IN should also get new appropriate engines by self/JV/import. Airframe R&D should not suffer.

> SAM & AAM technology have also improved a lot with much better Pk. Will Navy jets face far less deadly SAMs & AAMs from previous era, than AF jets? So be it USA, Russia, China, Europe, their 4/4.5gen like F-15EX, F-16 Bl-70/72, F-18 SH, Su-3X, MiG-29/35, Rafale, EF-2000, our Su-30MKI, MiG-29K, Mirage-2000 will be gone in few decades, but in a symmetrical war they will be shot down like mosquitos. So the 5th gen will spearhead an offence for SEAD/DEAD objective followed by 4.5gen.

> DoD recruit the best minds, only hindered by funds, right? Then keep the design part ready. GoI/MoD/CCS should never stop for CAD, CFD, wind-tunnel tests. Just like small-scale UAVs are tested, may be fighter jets can also be tested like X-36.



In the end i would say that Navy also should develop some kind of true 5gen jet supplemented by 4.5gen jet.

In our school books we read about "green revolution", "5 year plans". Now our country need political & technical revolution.
War erupts suddenly. Either adpat & defend or keep giving reasons & die. Another invasion & slavery waiting for us later in this milennium.​