Found this para written by a guy on another forum.
"Not needed, really. USAF's F-35 don't really use anything other than medium range missiles. It's understandable that for the next generation designers concluded that the number of times short range missiles would be beneficial is not worth the effort (added weight, space)."
Maybe the reason amca doesn't have side bays for WVR Missiles.
So I'm confused.
Why do next generation of fighters don't need to carry WVR missiles?
Given they are stealth, tracking and even detecting them(using x band) at distances more than wvr will be hard.
I think the argument is that datalinked BVR weapons with HOB and active seeker heads can handle the rare instances of WVR engagements without compromising missile load with smaller munitions and smaller side bays that have rare use cases.
It was previously the case that getting a radar lock and firing a BVR AAM at a target required specific orientations and ranges, as well as time delays for creating a firing solution. IR guided WVR weapons had faster reaction times with less limitations on relative position and velocity (at close range). These weapons were mounted in side bays to allow the seekers to see targets on either side of the aircraft for lock on before launch. But if you can just look at a target and kick a BVR AAM onto it, with the missile locking on after launch, that removes a lot of need for separate missile types and dedicated bays.
ETA: as someone else noted in another thread, the F-22 side bays were originally to be AIM-120 sized to give an all BVR option. This requirement was relaxed for weight/volume reasons.
Another reason for probably why amca doesn't have side bays.
2 things here:
1> use of CCM or not.
2> SWB on medium jets like F-35, AMCA, etc or not.
1st some generic points:
- Sword vs Shield, Offence Vs Defence, Attack vs Countermeasure, both sides have developed.
- Layered defence of SAMs are developed - SR-SAM, MR-SAM, LR-SAM, VLR-SAM.
- Naval ships have variety of offence & defence.
- Soldiers carry machine gun + pistol. Sniper also carries something for close combat.
- Both sides desire their offensive weapons to defeat enemy & defensive countermeasures to stop enemy's weapons.
1> There have always been a debate on use of CCM.
- Earlier RF & IR AAMs needed some minimum strength/signal for detection & lock-on, it was LOBL mode.
- RF-IFF & IRST-ID were there for target/friendly distinction, but limited.
- With time, H/w & S/w improved a lot.
- Bcoz now LOAL mode is developed for BVR-AAM & CCM, hence they can be launched whatever way is desired, from central IWB or SWB, by HMDS or just w/o it also due to spherical sensor coverage & networked fusion.
- Earlier only F-22 & F-35 were true 5gen stealthy jets whom the 4gen enemy would detect very late at close ranges. By that time F-22/35 would have fired AIM-120 AMRAAM & enemy would get hit before detecting them. Hence they were confident of BVR-AAMs only. But F-22 being developed 1st had CCMs in case BVR-AAMs either miss or get depleted.
"Prevention is better than cure".
- Today multiple nations have made their versios of RAS, RAM, LPI radar, etc & people can only guess their performance. Although USA is still leader, but others would also have considerable stealth.
- Bcoz BVR-AAM climbs up to increase range, there are maneuvering tactics to try to stay out of its NEZ & evade it. Dual-pulse AAMs are made to counter evasion tactics.
- EW have improved, but HoJ (Home on Jammer) technique also developed.
- Better EOTS/IRST are R&Ded for longer passive EO detection. Better IIR AAMs made.
- 6gen jets aim to have DEW-CIWS, means more BVR & WVR shots will be needed. It also means just like MBT's APS, a fighter jet wil also need spherical coverage of RF+EO sensors to detect, intercept incoming AAMs & SAMs.
- Smaller CCMs have been researched like MSDM(
Miniature Self-Defense Missile), MHKM(Miniature Hit-to-Kill Missile), Martlet or the Lightweight Multirole Missile (LMM), etc. If it is difficult to detect stealthy enemy at long ranges anyhow then at close ranges these CCMs + DEW-CIWS would be last line of defence.
So overall, as i said - offence & defence both improved, so it is still cat & mouse game. Hence
IMO some type of CCM is still required, especially for those who will take decades to implement DEW-CIWS.
A movie dialogue "Chance favors the prepared mind".
If i was a fighter pilot, i would prefer being prepared for every scenario & die if i've to after successfuly using my weapons, rather than being overconfident &/or help-less, wasting my life & tax payer's money on jet, bcoz DoD didn't make a proper survivable jet with sufficient weapons.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2> SWB on medium jets like F-35, AMCA, etc.
-
Su-75, 1-engine design, is showcased to have SWB. So it depends what example we project.
- For F-35 & AMCA, ATWR could be reason for not having SWB. 1x F135 engine is equivalent of 2xF414 engines. So if F-22 is reduced to medium size jet in ratio with 1xF135 or 2xF414 engines, while maintaining ATWR, then airframe volume & weight reduces to 50%, so the IWB capacity also reduces from 8 AAMs to 4 AAMs. But adding 2-4 AAMs weighing 80-90 Kg or 150-170 Kg doesn't impact ATWR of 20+/- tons gross weight jet in a destabilizing way, as i already showed calculation.
- But practicaly IMO that won't suffice due to points mentioned above.
- F-35 is getting 6 AAMs upgrade + ECU for more thrust & power, probably for DEW-CIWS. We don't know full details of JV engine for AMCA, 130+/- KN is being said.
- Bcoz NGAD & F/A-XX are being made, so no use modifying F-35 airframe. While AMCA is still in prototype parts metal cutting stage.
- China showcased folding-fin PL-15 BVR-AAM + SWB in its diagrams for J-31/35 for VSR-CCM. We've to wait & see if that would be true.
- Otherwise
Su-57 style SWB out of wing root can also be made, if not from fuselage. The ultimate thing is to cover the CCM to hide its RCS, that's all.
- SWB can also be made
MODULAR like F-15 CFTs. The Silent Eagle concept replaced same space with SWB for 2 BVR-AAMs. This wat AMCA won't need EDT (External Drop Tank).
- Bcoz 6gen aims to have DEW-CIWS + LOAL AAMs, means no ballistic CCIP aiming for gun-fight, means high agility & ATWR may not be required. So
SWB should not be a problem, especially if AMCA is quoted to be 5.5gen jet. For some people 5.5gen means only MUMT & UCAVs will take care of everything.
-
F-22's 6+2 AAMs = 1.1 tons, while AMCA is quoted with 1.5 tons IWB capacity mainly for A-G mode, but not willing to utilize for A-A mode.
- Last but not least, our DoD PSUs enjoys totalitarian monopoly w/o competition & have given evidence of decades of being late, over-optimistic, etc, it is difficult to expect something unique ON TIME. But let's be optimistic. Our ISRO doing well, we've variety of missiles, so let's hope that GTRE & ADA will also improve.
AMCA design gives the vibes of a twin-engines stealthy & larger F-16. A full-on energy fighter
