Indian Military Aviation; News, Updates & Discussions

[Bhartiya sainik]

It is very difficult to decipher some elements in the demo cockpit display. Those who play DCS, MSFS & other simulators might be able to guess better.

Top row:



> AP - Auto Pilot
> AHLD - Altitude Hold?
> ASEL - Altitude Select?
> FD - Flight Director?
> L | G ?
> AT - Auto Thrust?
-------------------------
> NAV - Navigation map/mode active?
> 0.35 206, 0.25 151 ?
> FUEL 2931, 2350 - remaining fuel.
> 027 degree ?
> 6090, 5080 - Altitude?
-------------------------
> SPOO1?
> RT1, RT2?
> VOR - VHF Omni-directional Range?
> TAC - Tactical air navigation?
> IFF M3 - Interogate Friend or Foe frequency select?
> M?
> DISP - Display options?
> 50X TR?
--------------------------
> 02 PKTS BULLS?
> 068 / 102 NM, 273 / X88 NM - may be navigation beacons bearing, distance.
> AMCA TAKE EASTERN PKT ??

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple systems status



> 2 circles at top corners with 52, 17 - could be nozzle position open %.
> A/ICE - Engine Anti-ice heating OFF / AUTO.
> Vertical white scale & green bar, range 1-10, AB (After Burner), value 82%, 88% - Engine RPM %.
> Vertical yellow scale & greenbar, range 2-10, value 610, 671 - could be engine temperature.
> Small vertical white cale & green bar, range 0-200, FF value 31, 83 - could be Fuel Flow.
> REMN 2931 - Remaining Fuel?
> INT 2350 - Internal Fuel?
> BINGO 400 - Bingo Fuel mark.
But INT should be total & REMN should be less than that, right?
> HYD1, HYD2 280 BAR - Hydraulic pressure.
> DC 28.0 V, AC 114 V - Electricity.
> OIL 6.6, 6.9 BAR - Engine oil pressure.
> LPL, LPR ON - LP no idea, but on Left & right are ON.
> BPL, BPR - BP no idea, but on left & right.
May be LP, BP are pumps.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Navigation, Map display



> LOC - Localizer?
> DCN? - Display Contrast?
> DCL? - Display Color?
> SCL? - Symbols Color?
> DAN?
> FD?
> FPI?
> OVR? - Overlay?
> OBL?
> Lower left corner, blue color : ETA 11:30:55 - Estimated Time of Arrival at waypoint?
> Lower center, blue color : EF with some number - no idea
> Lower right corner, 096/3.42 NM, 058/2.4 NM - Waypoint bearing/distance?
> Top right corner, 6100, 4550 - Altitude?

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

There is an unofficial tweet that AMCA will have 6 AAMs in IWB

x.com

x.com

He mentioned IDAX24 & ex-tarangshakti-2024. Do we have any official link confirming 6 AAMs in IWB?

Some static models, CAD, infographic showcase Astr-Mk1 AAM with large fins. Clearly this version is not fit for IWB.




With a little tight fit, 2 SAAW bombs might fit in.
If Astr-1 are staggered then IWB needs to be elongated, but then also neither # of Astr-1 AAMs nor SAAW bombs increase.
Longer the fins of a weapon, longer is the IWB extension required.
If 2 Astr-1 AAMs are removed then total 8 SAAW bombs can be fitted.
W/o any AAMs, 12 SAAW bombs can be loaded.

Continued...

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

...continued from previous post due to 4 attachments only.

Similar is the case with Astr-2 AAM with short fins.



There is another CAD online showing that only 4 Astr-2 AAMs or 8 SAAW bombs can fit in.
With little tight adjustment perhaps 2 folding-fin SAAW bombs can be pushed in with 4 Astr-2 AAMs, or 6 SAAW bombs with 2 Astr-2 AAMs.
Maximum 12 SAAW bombs might fit in. Staggering the AAMs would require lengthening the IWB little but that doesn't increase capacity.
If 4 AAMs & 4 SAAW bombs are arranged then it would require to lengthen the IWB more.
But 6 AAMs doesn't seem to fit in.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

...continued from previous post due to 4 attachments only.

Similar is the case with Astr-2 AAM with short fins.

View attachment 52070
View attachment 52071
There is another CAD online showing that only 4 Astr-2 AAMs or 8 SAAW bombs can fit in.
With little tight adjustment perhaps 2 folding-fin SAAW bombs can be pushed in with 4 Astr-2 AAMs, or 6 SAAW bombs with 2 Astr-2 AAMs.
Maximum 12 SAAW bombs might fit in. Staggering the AAMs would require lengthening the IWB little but that doesn't increase capacity.
If 4 AAMs & 4 SAAW bombs are arranged then it would require to lengthen the IWB more.
But 6 AAMs doesn't seem to fit in.

View attachment 52072

If AMCA's IWB can be widened & Astr-2 AAMs staggered then similar to F-22, 6 Astr-2 AAMs can fit.
In A-G only mode, it may allow total 16 SAAW bombs.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

There is a perpendicular bottom view CAD available for Astr-1 in IWB of AMCA


And there is one for Meteor or Astr-3 SFDR but angled, not clear.


If someone has a perpendicular bottom view for Astr-2 or Meteor/Astr-3 SFDR then kindly share, Thanks.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

If AMCA's IWB can be widened & Astr-2 AAMs staggered then similar to F-22, 6 Astr-2 AAMs can fit.
In A-G only mode, it may allow total 16 SAAW bombs.
View attachment 52073

In persuit of improvements, there might be some good news
The unofficial tweet might be true. I lately got an infographic showing AMCA's IWB dimensions to be 4.2m long, 2.2m wide, 0.75m height. The dimension is not mentioned in many other posters.



The Astr-1,2,3 AAMs have same length 3.84m. But unfortunately due to big fins of Astr-1, even staggering doesn't help to fit 3 AAMs/bay, total of 6.
But the Astr-2 with shorter fins can easily fit with staggering.
Bcoz of limited info coming out gradually, the older CADs couldn't show the actual weapons capacity. If we superimpose the actual IWB dimensions to match with Astr-1,2 AAMs then we can see the difference.




In latest CAD by artist Kuntal Biswas, the IWB seems to have been widened, although a bottom view with exact dimensions & capacity is not available yet. The below pic is 2.5 months old now but nobody posted.



Perhaps we all can do small party, i mean wherever we are living. More good news to come gradually.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

In persuit of improvements, there might be some good news
The unofficial tweet might be true. I lately got an infographic showing AMCA's IWB dimensions to be 4.2m long, 2.2m wide, 0.75m height. The dimension is not mentioned in many other posters.

View attachment 52108

The Astr-1,2,3 AAMs have same length 3.84m. But unfortunately due to big fins of Astr-1, even staggering doesn't help to fit 3 AAMs/bay, total of 6.
But the Astr-2 with shorter fins can easily fit with staggering.
Bcoz of limited info coming out gradually, the older CADs couldn't show the actual weapons capacity. If we superimpose the actual IWB dimensions to match with Astr-1,2 AAMs then we can see the difference.

View attachment 52105
View attachment 52106

In latest CAD by artist Kuntal Biswas, the IWB seems to have been widened, although a bottom view with exact dimensions & capacity is not available yet. The below pic is 2.5 months old now but nobody posted.

View attachment 52107

Perhaps we all can do small party, i mean wherever we are living. More good news to come gradually.

Fitting Ramjet missiles is a challenge bcoz of their long intakes, it becomes difficult to stagger them.
There is an early render by artist Kuntal Biswas of 2 Astr-3 SFDR /bay, total 4 AAMs, but pic is angled, the bay is short with big gap in between.


He has also made multiple CADs of Astr-3 SFDR BUT with different fin & ramjet intake dimensions.

The 3rd one is the only one with bottom view so if we resize it with IWB then still it will be a TIGHT UNSAFE fit of 3 staggered AAMs/bay.
And if we consider 3 staggered Meteors (AAM CAD by artist "AkelaFreedom") then although it is 6" shorter but its intakes & fins seem to be wider & overflows out of bay.


Editing in MS Paint, Photoshop, etc can produce inaccurate errors.
It is best accurate if the artists themselves produce this kind of images. But most of them don't.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

News channels & elsewhere people are talking abot MRFA & only 2 final candidates - Su-57 Vs F-35.
While F-35 would be the most tempting honey trap so far, the Su-57 is under fire too not seen as proper full 5gen stealth. There are many things which can be learnt from current 5gen jets. Some of us are also concerned that it may impact AMCA program. The following is a brief comparison. The "possible" features have to be TIMELY implemented expecially when global tech evolution is at 6gen R&D level.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

Fitting Ramjet missiles is a challenge bcoz of their long intakes, it becomes difficult to stagger them.
There is an early render by artist Kuntal Biswas of 2 Astr-3 SFDR /bay, total 4 AAMs, but pic is angled, the bay is short with big gap in between.
View attachment 52114

He has also made multiple CADs of Astr-3 SFDR BUT with different fin & ramjet intake dimensions.
View attachment 52115
The 3rd one is the only one with bottom view so if we resize it with IWB then still it will be a TIGHT UNSAFE fit of 3 staggered AAMs/bay.
And if we consider 3 staggered Meteors (AAM CAD by artist "AkelaFreedom") then although it is 6" shorter but its intakes & fins seem to be wider & overflows out of bay.
View attachment 52116

Editing in MS Paint, Photoshop, etc can produce inaccurate errors.
It is best accurate if the artists themselves produce this kind of images. But most of them don't.

If the Ramjet intake is shortened then 6 Astr-3 SFDR AAMs might fit relatively better. But there could be military safety specs which may or may not allow this.


We see Akash-1 SAM also has Ramjets which don't extend all the way backwards.


The intake fairing in Meteor is long bcoz it houses some electronics, fin actuators. Same could be with Astr-3 SFDR. But if the AAM body can be adjusted then it can favor AMCA.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

If the Ramjet intake is shortened then 6 Astr-3 SFDR AAMs might fit relatively better. But there could be military safety specs which may or may not allow this.
View attachment 52134

We see Akash-1 SAM also has Ramjets which don't extend all the way backwards.
View attachment 52135

The intake fairing in Meteor is long bcoz it houses some electronics, fin actuators. Same could be with Astr-3 SFDR. But if the AAM body can be adjusted then it can favor AMCA.
View attachment 52136

Continuing on this agenda of internal load, 2 days back someone shared PL-15E AAM with folding fins from Zhuai airshow. AFAIK big/heavy missile do have folding fins but a medium missile is yet to be seen with AIM-120 AMRAAM, Meteor, etc. R-77 have folding grid fins.


Now there is no CAD of Meteor, Astr-3 SFDR with folding fins & i can't use PL-15E to depict in AMCA :crazy:
So i'm just clipping the fins in SFDR pic. IDK the safety gap spec but this looks like a safe fit, that too w/o staggering.



And i had already shown that 6 staggered AAMs of short fin version of Astr-2 could easily fit. So if we use folding fin version of it now then total 8 staggered AAMs or 16 SAAW bombs could fit. The ejectors shoud be firm & free from vibrations.



If this config is considered unsafe then in worst case 6 AAMs or 12 SAAW bombs can fit easily.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

The new J-36 is probably just a tech demonstrator but a derivative is/are probably coming next before 2030 perhaps & our Su-30MKI is our only heavy big fighter & will have to deal with it.
Su-30MKI is 21.9m/72 ft long, empty weight 18.4 tons + internal fuel 9.6 tons, + 6 Astr-3 SFDR (1,320 Kg) + 2 R-73 (210 Kg) = almost 31 tons, MTOW 38.8 tons.
J-36 has many speculations on size, weight, etc. One of them is estimated at 22.8m/75 ft long
I took their drawings from Google search, resized & superimposed & it looks like this:



Just look at J-36 span engulfing Su-3X



I superimposed their front views at their nose tip.



That's a BIG gappu jet
If we think Su-3X to be Elephant then J-36 is Mammoth

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

Geometric shaping came out publicly with USAF's ATF project in 1990.
Many documentaries in 1990s shared interviews of their test pilots, chief designers, engineers, program managers, etc who said geometry alone reduces RCS a lot. Some of those videos are still available on Youtube. So in 30-35 years also MWF didn't get geometric shaping, although TEDBF seems to have some, and RAM paint is ready now. How difficult was this to do in 35 years:

 

[swerve]

Pyotr Ufimtsev published a book on the theory in 1962 - & was allowed to do so by the Soviet authorities. An engineer at Lockheed read it (it was translated into English by the USAF in 1971) & realised its significance. It contributed greatly to the development of stealth shaping, e.g. in the F-117.

Ufimtsev was still alive, last I heard.

The Germans started developing their own stealth combat aircraft in the 1980s, also using Ufimtsev's theory. They told the British, who knew about the F-117, & they asked both the Americans & Germans if they could tell the other - & both said yes.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

Pyotr Ufimtsev published a book on the theory in 1962 - & was allowed to do so by the Soviet authorities. An engineer at Lockheed read it (it was translated into English by the USAF in 1971) & realised its significance. It contributed greatly to the development of stealth shaping, e.g. in the F-117.

Ufimtsev was still alive, last I heard.

The Germans started developing their own stealth combat aircraft in the 1980s, also using Ufimtsev's theory. They told the British, who knew about the F-117, & they asked both the Americans & Germans if they could tell the other - & both said yes.

Yeah much before actually, but i was refering to the stealth fighter only. There was controversy over using "F" for F-117 when it is Attack or very Light Bomber, not with AAMs or gun.

 

[Bhartiya sainik]

Geometric shaping came out publicly with USAF's ATF project in 1990.
Many documentaries in 1990s shared interviews of their test pilots, chief designers, engineers, program managers, etc who said geometry alone reduces RCS a lot. Some of those videos are still available on Youtube. So in 30-35 years also MWF didn't get geometric shaping, although TEDBF seems to have some, and RAM paint is ready now. How difficult was this to do in 35 years:
View attachment 52165

I'm avoiding DSI due to more stealth hence the only other option is of F-22.
- 1 engine of F414 class or AL-31/41/F-100/110 class initially. If USA gives just the F135 engine then nice But still F-35 TWR is not like F-22.
- 2 side intakes to make some IWB & SWB.
- IWB can carry 4 BVR-AAMs or 2 AGMs. Each SWB can carry 1, may be 2 CCMs, depends on size.
- half length all-moving rudder which can be researched into tail-less or rotating rudder-stab.
- Wing shape & size not determined yet.
- Some people might want canards for Naval model.
The 1st/top one's fuselage outline looks like cousin of Su-75 (F-22 inlet cut half width-wise)
The middle one like child of Su-57 + F-22 (F-22 inlet cut half height-wise)
The below one like younger sibling of F-35 (F-22 inlet reduced to 1/4th quadrant)
NOTE: These are notional & not to scale.