ADA AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tarun
  • Start date Start date
F22 is ultimate tech in avonics, engine control and stealth and most advance comm encryption onboard and this is why it can't be exported. F35 is also a state of art due to VTOL and other new capabilities but the tech is of export version, can be exported. No comparison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
screambowl said:
F22 is ultimate tech in avonics, engine control and stealth and most advance comm encryption onboard and this is why it can't be exported. F35 is also a state of art due to VTOL and other new capabilities but the tech is of export version, can be exported. No comparison.
Click to expand...
What avionics are in f22 that are better than ones in f35?

And how is F22's IFDL data link for most *advance comm encryption*, superior to F35's MADL ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: batman, YoungWolf and Choice_of _inevitability
babablacksheep said:
What avionics are in f22 that are better than ones in f35?

And how is F22's IFDL data link for most *advance comm encryption*, superior to F35's MADL ?
Click to expand...
There are atleast claims that f-22 continues to have the lowest RCS in USAF fighter aircraft arsenal. It obviously has a superior radar detection after the APG-77v2 upgrade.
F-35 has the advantage of the EODAS but f-22 has superior IR signature reduction and 2D thrust vectoring due to the f119 design.
The problem remains that stealth is not exactly fool proof and EO/IR based detection can counter stealth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Choice_of _inevitability and Rajput Lion
babablacksheep said:
What avionics are in f22 that are better than ones in f35?
Click to expand...

F22 is the tip of the spear in USAF. They encryption of data fed to it's system is still the top notch, which firmware we don't know because it confidential. You have algorithm to encrypt the network protocols and pre fed or incoming data from all the sensors Radar and external sources whether it is using Link 16 or MIDS or MADL. It is this algorithm which enables the encryption whatever communication link it is. And this algorithm is very advance for all sorts of comm links.

The radars and sensors are highly encrypted and robust and made more sophisticated with introduction of new upgradations like Increment 3.2B upgrade for Block 30/35.

The repair and maintenance goes through so much of unlocking that you need to feed several keys to enter the system just for simple lamp repair.

Robust mechanical and kinematics capabilities. We all know.

F35 is more of battle management, where as F22 is the striker, actually introducing itself to enemy territory in more challenging air space.
 
screambowl said:
F22 is the tip of the spear in USAF. They encryption of data fed to it's system is still the top notch, which firmware we don't know because it confidential. You have algorithm to encrypt the network protocols and pre fed or incoming data from all the sensors Radar and external sources whether it is using Link 16 or MIDS or MADL. It is this algorithm which enables the encryption whatever communication link it is. And this algorithm is very advance for all sorts of comm links
Click to expand...

You yourself said its confidential, so we can't say for certain if its more advanced that f35.

Great, Another person with another claim they can't back up.

screambowl said:
F35 is more of battle management, where as F22 is the striker, actually introducing itself to enemy territory in more challenging air space.
Click to expand...
F35 is battle management but also a strike fighter, its program name literally was JSF( joint strike fighter)

Also, at the time of its induction and during development, Northrop Grumman publically promoted the AN/APG-81 AESA radar of the F35 as the most advanced, capable radar in the world, providing *unmatched capabilities*

The F-22 Raptor currently uses the older AN/APG-77(V)1 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar.

And while the AN/APG-77 of f22 will undergo upgrades, F35 will also get newer APG-85 GaN aesa.

Based on whatever publicly available info we have F35 is more advanced in terms on avionics, sensors, computation while F22 is more kinematically superior.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: South block, YoungWolf, Speedster1 and 2 others
Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik said:
IM🧅 we should go for dorsal receptacle like in F-22 with mixed tankers with drogue-chute for older gen jets & boom gears for future gen jets.
This will improve front & RHS cheek RCS.
Click to expand...
That would be even more incompatible. Only USAF uses boom. Even USN uses standard probe and drogue technique. Our AMCA would have something similar to F35B/C
 
  • Like
Reactions: babablacksheep
screambowl said:
F22 is ultimate tech in avonics, engine control and stealth and most advance comm encryption onboard and this is why it can't be exported. F35 is also a state of art due to VTOL and other new capabilities but the tech is of export version, can be exported. No comparison.
Click to expand...
Except for its raw performance and stealth and maybe size of radar. The F22 is not an impressive platform with critical design flaws by today's standards.
 
padira said:
That would be even more incompatible. Only USAF uses boom. Even USN uses standard probe and drogue technique. Our AMCA would have something similar to F35B/C
Click to expand...
Only USAF uses boom doesn't restrict the world to use it.
And we have a decade to get such tankers, hence I stated to use NEW mixed tankers having both system.
Who's RAM & RAS is better is obviously secret, hence in the geometric aspect it is best to reduce/hide surface discontinuities, gaps, bumps, etc as much as possible.
But it is ok for export version of AMCA if desired which needs to be inferior to domestic version.
 
Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik said:
Only USAF uses boom doesn't restrict the world to use it.
And we have a decade to get such tankers, hence I stated to use NEW mixed tankers having both system.
Who's RAM & RAS is better is obviously secret, hence in the geometric aspect it is best to reduce/hide surface discontinuities, gaps, bumps, etc as much as possible.
But it is ok for export version of AMCA if desired which needs to be inferior to domestic version.
Click to expand...
We had a hard time inducting a singl type of tanker , let alone a fleet of both types .
 
Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik said:
Only USAF uses boom doesn't restrict the world to use it.
And we have a decade to get such tankers, hence I stated to use NEW mixed tankers having both system.
Who's RAM & RAS is better is obviously secret, hence in the geometric aspect it is best to reduce/hide surface discontinuities, gaps, bumps, etc as much as possible.
But it is ok for export version of AMCA if desired which needs to be inferior to domestic version.
Click to expand...
Probe and drogue is an aerial refueling method that while slower, but allows for simultaneous refilling of 2 or even 3 fighter jets at one time.
Unlike boom where you are restricted to refuel only 1 aircraft at a time.




Probe & drogue
images (1).jpegscouting-for-6-mid-air-refuellers-iaf-begins-technical-v0-gsDawtcYF7wsheT88mON8hBNLLptg7PJMT9...jpeg

Boom
images (2).jpeg




Boom only makes sense when you have to refuel large aircraft( even in case of probe & drogue you can't simultaneously refuel more than 1 large aircraft due to proximity risk ) like bombers & awacs because your wars are on the other side of the planet.

So for India's & rest of the world that is not U.S., probe & drogue is a superior system, being more simpler, cheaper, slower refuelling compensated by the ability to refuel more than 1 fighters simultaneously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Speedster1, Sathya, PhotonVish and 2 others
Hey , i know amca design was remoured to be tweaked as compared to what shown in aero india 2025

But still dont understand why drdo(ada)/iaf cares so less about internal fuel capacity ??

I mean why develop internal bay fuel tank whn u can just design it to carry over 10 tonn of fuel.

In my opinion, amca should have over 10 tonn of fuel capacity when even j35 has over 8 tonn

-->As amca mk2(with 5th gen engine) will be coming when china will be inducting j36 with eadily over 20 tonn of fuel capacity

--> airfields near the border are venerable due to rocket artillary and drones ( atleast 500km) , and yyeah china will have unprecedented level of rocket artillary and drones , and much more during war economy with china level of industrialisation


--> hence we need aircrafts which can takeoff from central to south india and still can combat properly and utilize their weapon completely
 
babablacksheep said:
Probe and drogue is an aerial refueling method that while slower, but allows for simultaneous refilling of 2 or even 3 fighter jets at one time.
Unlike boom where you are restricted to refuel only 1 aircraft at a time.

Probe & drogue
View attachment 51426View attachment 51427

Boom
View attachment 51428
Click to expand...

Wow! what a scene! 📸 I think i saw these in 1990s in my school days.


babablacksheep said:
Boom only makes sense when you have to refuel large aircraft( even in case of probe & drogue you can't simultaneously refuel more than 1 large aircraft due to proximity risk ) like bombers & awacs because your wars are on the other side of the planet.

So for India's & rest of the world that is not U.S., probe & drogue is a superior system, being more simpler, cheaper, slower refuelling compensated by the ability to refuel more than 1 fighters simultaneously.
Click to expand...

> A drouge-chute tanker can refuel 2 fighters.
> But tankers like A330 MRTT, KC-46A, etc which have both systems, can refuel 3 jets same time - 2 jets of drogue-chute type & 1 needing boom. The boom services a jet at lower level, while drogue-chute at higher level. A pic/vid is not available yet i guess.

1777741990522.png

> At such slow speeds the jets/engines are running in high economy envelope & fuel transfer after contact happens very quickly.
> Many times during war, when many jets line up, the jets are given small fuel 1st enough to loiter & wait, then again topped up.
> Older gen can continue with drogue-chute.
> AI-UCAV would ideally be expected to refuel itself not by remote-control, hence automatic refuelling for both systems of drogue-chute & boom have been tested long back.
> In manned jets too the more time taken by pilots can be saved by such auto-reuelling aids.
> A future manned stealth jet can have IFRP behind the cockpit on spine, with auto-reuelling.
> But in our nation, hardly anything happens in time & we're way too much conservative after being most populous, any out-o-box thinking becomes out of Earth🛸👽, past reality based expectations also doesn't meet future reality.🤦‍♂️:ROFLMAO:
Anyways, keeping myself in place of pilots in cockpit, I would vouch for higher pilot survival chance with lower RCS & little more waiting time if needed with these dual mode tankers.

1777744867574.jpeg
1777745349851.jpeg

1777745052686.jpeg
 
Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik said:
Wow! what a scene! 📸 I think i saw these in 1990s in my school days.




> A drouge-chute tanker can refuel 2 fighters.
> But tankers like A330 MRTT, KC-46A, etc which have both systems, can refuel 3 jets same time - 2 jets of drogue-chute type & 1 needing boom. The boom services a jet at lower level, while drogue-chute at higher level. A pic/vid is not available yet i guess.

View attachment 51430

> At such slow speeds the jets/engines are running in high economy envelope & fuel transfer after contact happens very quickly.
> Many times during war, when many jets line up, the jets are given small fuel 1st enough to loiter & wait, then again topped up.
> Older gen can continue with drogue-chute.
> AI-UCAV would ideally be expected to refuel itself not by remote-control, hence automatic refuelling for both systems of drogue-chute & boom have been tested long back.
> In manned jets too the more time taken by pilots can be saved by such auto-reuelling aids.
> A future manned stealth jet can have IFRP behind the cockpit on spine, with auto-reuelling.
> But in our nation, hardly anything happens in time & we're way too much conservative after being most populous, any out-o-box thinking becomes out of Earth🛸👽, past reality based expectations also doesn't meet future reality.🤦‍♂️:ROFLMAO:
Anyways, keeping myself in place of pilots in cockpit, I would vouch for higher pilot survival chance with lower RCS & little more waiting time if needed with these dual mode tankers.

View attachment 51431
View attachment 51433

View attachment 51432
Click to expand...

1, this hypothetical tanker has no real world basis to show it works in an operationally viable way doing simultaneous boom & P&D refuelling of 3 aircrafts at one time.



2, is the advantages of 1 boom & 2 probe & drogue systems high enough compared of using 3 probe & drogue systems, to offset all direct, indirect & follow up costs in Indian context?

tnk3z.jpg
 
PhotonVish said:
Hey , i know amca design was remoured to be tweaked as compared to what shown in aero india 2025

But still dont understand why drdo(ada)/iaf cares so less about internal fuel capacity ??

I mean why develop internal bay fuel tank whn u can just design it to carry over 10 tonn of fuel.

In my opinion, amca should have over 10 tonn of fuel capacity when even j35 has over 8 tonn

-->As amca mk2(with 5th gen engine) will be coming when china will be inducting j36 with eadily over 20 tonn of fuel capacity

--> airfields near the border are venerable due to rocket artillary and drones ( atleast 500km) , and yyeah china will have unprecedented level of rocket artillary and drones , and much more during war economy with china level of industrialisation


--> hence we need aircrafts which can takeoff from central to south india and still can combat properly and utilize their weapon completely
Click to expand...

IM🧅 10 tons might be too much & make AMCA a very guppy jet, like F-35 with 9 tons fuel is called "Fat Amy". I wonder what AMCA'll be called.:LOL:
But some more fuel can be added in Mk2 iteration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhotonVish
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom