Medium Combat Aircraft Will it be a reality?

shivap_24

New Member

A speculative drawing on the Medium Combat Aircraft
The Medium Combat Aircraft [MCA] is projected as the replacement for the Jaguar and Mirage 2000 fleets in the IAF. It is under design at the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) in Bangalore. The MCA will cost $2 billion to develop and will be a tailless delta design with two engines, combined with a thrust vectoring control capability. It is hoped that the engines on the aircraft will develop a thrust-to-weight ratio of 7.8:1. Although it is unclear which company will be selected to supply the engines; SNECMA, Klimov and General Electric have been identified as potential suppliers.
 

Attila

New Member
A tailless aircraft...

I've often thought about it, but the first thing that comes to mind is that it won't be as maneouvreable as regular combat aircraft. Looking at the aircraft, in many ways it resembles the nose portion of an F111 with the wing of a Mirage.

To me, I just don't see the advantages of developing a Medium Combat aircraft when all the conflicts that take place in the world are often engaged over several miles of terrain. In developing a medium combat aircraft, one would also have to supply more air-to-air refueling platforms, and with the cost of petrol being as high as it is and with militaries looking to cut spending, I just don't see this kind of expenditure as worthwhile.

Attila
 

dalden

New Member
Deltared075 said:
Does anyone have other drawing for the MCA? And please don't need to show us the FB-22 drawing...
I have some very speculative pictures of MCA, but sorry, buggered if I now how to attach to these e-mails and cant remember where i got them from.:(
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Attila said:
A tailless aircraft...

I've often thought about it, but the first thing that comes to mind is that it won't be as maneouvreable as regular combat aircraft. Looking at the aircraft, in many ways it resembles the nose portion of an F111 with the wing of a Mirage.
and the B2 isn't manouvreable?

Attila said:
one would also have to supply more air-to-air refueling platforms, and with the cost of petrol being as high as it is and with militaries looking to cut spending, I just don't see this kind of expenditure as worthwhile.

Attila
but planes don't run on petrol. ;)
 

highsea

New Member
Deltared075 said:
Does anyone have other drawing for the MCA? And please don't need to show us the FB-22 drawing...
B-R credits that drawing to HAL, so it's probably the most "credible" one out there. You can see a lot of the LCA, the double delta wing, forward fuselage, etc, but where are the intakes? Lol.
Concept studies on the twin-engined Medium Combat Aircraft (MCA) have been under way for some time. It is a stealth aircraft optimised for the ground attack role. About the only components common with the LCA will be part of the wing, the Kaveri engine, and some systems and subsystems.

"The LCA wing gives good performance, we understand its aerodynamics well, and would like to retain it for the MCA," says Dr. Harinarayana. It will operate at a much higher wing loading than that of the LCA. The MCA will be in the 12 ton clean weight class, with a maximum take-off weight of about 18 ton. With the emphasis on stealth, the MCA will have two small, outward-canted fins. For stealth reasons, the Kaveri engines will be without afterburners. They will have a slightly higher dry thrust than the LCA engine. These engines will also have thrust-vectoring nozzles for manoeuvring. A super cruise capability is not being sought for the MCA. The MCA will use the radar-absorbent material to reduce RCS.

Also for stealth reasons, external fuel tanks will be mounted above the wings, as is being considered for the LCA. Stores will be carried externally, however, possibly conformally under the wing & fuselage, and will therefore increase radar cross section until released. If all goes well, the LCA and the MCA, along with the indigenously developed Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH), which is approaching certification, will put India on the map as a major aerospace manufacturing country.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Info/Aircraft/LCA.html

No afterburners and no supercruise, so we are talking subsonic semi-stealth. I'm not getting too excited about this AC.
 

Rolex

New Member
No supercruise and no after burners mean the a/c is not crossing mach 1. He has cleared stated it baadal...
 

baadal

New Member
From what I remember, initially there were reports that 'supercruise not being sought'. If they do away with afterburners I would expect ADA to seek supercruise for sure, if that's the only option. Since MCA is still in conceptual stage, it is quite possible to assume that India would not like to have a land-based subsonic semi-stealthy fighter. But that's just my opinion...
 

Attila

New Member
Patience Manager...man, I love that title...lol

A maneuvrable B-2...if I remember the accounts of the plane, it cannot turn at an angle greater than 45 degrees, which means that there is no way on this earth it could ever survive in air to air combat...lol

I concede...they run on gas..lol

All things aside, whatever the agility of the plane it really doesn't matter given that it will never get picked up by radar anyways...thoughts??

Attila
 

redsoulja

New Member
All things aside, whatever the agility of the plane it really doesn't matter given that it will never get picked up by radar anyways...thoughts??
Attila almost all planes get picked up on radar, this one probably would be capable of evading radar, Im no expert but i doubt India has advanced that far in terms of military technology, so agility does make a difference in air-air combat i guess...
 

highsea

New Member
Well, here's my impression.

You start hanging weapons on pylons, and there goes your RCS. What do you do when your RWR goes off? Dump all the weapons and try to sneak away? You are not going to beam a missile or outrun anything that comes up after you with no burners. You might break a missile lock if you sacrifice your warload. This is not an A2A machine, it's a strike platform only, as far as I can see. As such it might be fine, as long as it operates with an escort of MKI's wherever it goes. But it doesn't look like a good standalone platform for penetrating enemy defenses, because all that damn ordinance is external.
 

dalden

New Member
Absolutely agree, external weapons carriage precludes the effective use of any design stealth technology. Plus non afterburning 'medium' thrust engines,of which the Kaveri is still along way from operational capability, do not bode well for its future. I have severe doubts as to the viabilty of the MCA, witness the long delays in getting the LCA programme into service (powered by GE engines intially). Stealth in general has lost its ring of `invicibilty' lately, it may be good at evading radar, but not other forms of detection, specifically Infra-red. I still see it at as a `good' though. I am no pilot or aerodynamisist but doesnt a flying wing have problems with direcional stability in the horizontal plane (yaw?), so a B-2 can manouver in the same way as a bus or truck compares to a sports car (fighters). But it not designed to engage in air combat so these parameters are of little importance (although any features that add to survivability are welcomed).:)
 
Top