Read the forum code of contact
By: - 31st January 2013 at 14:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
After years of progress for both projects, I wonder why they are not joining hands together.
The AMCA is merely at a study phase at this point with the Indian industry having their hands full with Su-30MKI, PAK-FA, Rafale, and LCA productions, whereas the KFX is actually moving forward, about to enter a full-blown development phase.
Another issue is the politics. A multinational fighter project works the best when there is a lead country to pull the project forward. Having a bunch of nations with "equal" stakes drags the project down in politics. For example, Turkey left the KFX project over the stake dispute where Turkey wanted 40:40:20(Indonesia), but Korea's line on the sand was 51:29:20. Turkey only returned to the negotiation table after having tried its own study.
By: - 31st January 2013 at 14:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
...whereas the KFX is actually moving forward, about to enter a full-blown development phase.
Oh really... have they chosen the layout yet ? :rolleyes:
By: - 1st February 2013 at 02:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The AMCA is merely at a study phase at this point with the Indian industry having their hands full with Su-30MKI, PAK-FA, Rafale, and LCA productions, whereas the KFX is actually moving forward, about to enter a full-blown development phase.Another issue is the politics. A multinational fighter project works the best when there is a lead country to pull the project forward. Having a bunch of nations with "equal" stakes drags the project down in politics. For example, Turkey left the KFX project over the stake dispute where Turkey wanted 40:40:20(Indonesia), but Korea's line on the sand was 51:29:20. Turkey only returned to the negotiation table after having tried its own study.
India is a country that has 25x South Korea's population and an economy that is much bigger. They certainly have the financial and human resources to do more projects than South Korea.
Also from the looks of it.
India = finalized AMCA design
S.Korea = can't decide between Canard or Conventional lay out for the last 10 years.
India will probably get farther first. Design looks more or less similar.. South Korea should make itself a Jr. Partner for India. After all the goal of the fighter will be the same. Beat China. However India has a history of beating China.. South Korea has a history of losing to China.
By: - 1st February 2013 at 02:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You could consider AMCA design finalized if it was entering production now.
It isn't. It isn't close to, that will be past 2020, closer to 2030.
That the program is so far in the future that concrete decisions don't need to be made now, doesn't mean the design is finalized.
India runs large numbers of development programs beyond what Korea considers.
This isn't about denigrating either countries endeavors.
By: - 1st February 2013 at 03:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
However India has a history of beating China..
We do ? :confused:
By: - 1st February 2013 at 04:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
At cricket?
By: - 1st February 2013 at 06:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No kabadi... Don't think the current Indian cricket team can beat chinas
By: - 1st February 2013 at 11:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You could consider AMCA design finalized if it was entering production now.
It isn't. It isn't close to, that will be past 2020, closer to 2030.
That the program is so far in the future that concrete decisions don't need to be made now, doesn't mean the design is finalized.
India runs large numbers of development programs beyond what Korea considers.
This isn't about denigrating either countries endeavors.
The difference is that there were KFX's prototype parts, including the AESA radar, EO sensor, avionics computer system, a working cockpit, and a bunch of other parts on display at the parliament waiting to go into the airframe a couple days ago, meant to pressure the parliament to approve $20 billion+ funding.
AMCA is still on the design study phase, with most of it still in computer files.
By: - 1st February 2013 at 11:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Regardless of where AMCA is at relative to KF-X right now, I'd put money on the Koreans reaching IOC first.
Another issue is the politics. A multinational fighter project works the best when there is a lead country to pull the project forward. Having a bunch of nations with "equal" stakes drags the project down in politics.
+1 to this as well.
By: - 1st February 2013 at 11:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The difference is that there were KFX's prototype parts... AMCA is still on the design study phase, with most of it still in computer files.Of course... I consider KFX to be vastly closer to a final product than AMCA, even if it's not finalized in every aspect yet.
They both are aiming for mostly the same 'tier' of aircraft, and will have certain similarities due to standard aerodynamic/RCS practice,
but AMCA is still quite a ways off, more than KF-X... Academic computer models are a long ways off from a funded program of record.
It makes as much sense as comparing NGAD or hypothetical future European developments with planes in development now.
AMCA may well be better in several ways when it's done, but 10 years advantage in development tends to do that.
On the other hand, the idea to use Kaveri engines in a plane entering service near 2030 is kind of astounding.
I can't believe that even a 'Product 30' derivative single-engine configuration wouldn't be superior.
By: - 1st February 2013 at 12:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We do ? :confused:
Hehehe.... i was also confused about the same.
I think J-31 must have eaten too many jalapenos with his enchiladas. :D
(j/k)
By: - 1st February 2013 at 12:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Regardless of where AMCA is at relative to KF-X right now, I'd put money on the Koreans reaching IOC first.
Yep, agreed on that.
By the time the IAF decides on a design (they have a lot of foreign brochures to first look at... :rolleyes:) and Indian govt provides approval, KF-X would be well into flight testing.
By: - 1st February 2013 at 13:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Regardless of where AMCA is at relative to KF-X right now, I'd put money on the Koreans reaching IOC first.
KF-X block-1 or block-2? The AMCA program goals are more in vicinity of KF-X block-2.
By: - 1st February 2013 at 13:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
AMCA is better placed simply because of the ever increasing number of joint ventures, R&D collaborations and partnerships with top western defence firms and technology enterprises clamouring for a share of the huge Indian defence pie:
http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/cio/256530837
It will be an interesting AeroIndia 2013. Don't rule out the Russkies joining the AMCA party in the form of MiG and Klimov (yet).
Also, given that HAL will be involved in next to zero design effort on the FGFA, what's with all the rapid prototyping and wind-tunnel testing?* Could it be that the relatively major concessions from the Indian side [on the FGFA]are being offset by Russian training of engineers and access to facilities that would be of immense value for this baby?
Pic c/o Twinblade.
*http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1984458&postcount=694
By: - 1st February 2013 at 20:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It will be an interesting AeroIndia 2013. Don't rule out the Russkies joining the AMCA party in the form of MiG and Klimov (yet).
being offset by Russian training of engineers and access to facilities that would be of immense value for this baby?
hmm yes yes, i would not rule out Russian help either..
and if MiG and Klimov involved.. its as I thought.. AMCA would be a perfect MiG-29 replacement and Russia should pick up a few too!
By: - 5th February 2013 at 22:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
AMCA model is out and it looks like Indians are finalizing the design.
with the aircraft designed to combat threats from China, good opportunity for Koreans to join in. India has the ability to pump lots of money into the program with reduced US influence over the design.
By: - 6th February 2013 at 00:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
After years of progress for both projects, I wonder why they are not joining hands together. It suits both parties very well: techinally, financially and in terms of requirements they are roughly equal to each other, so no need to worry of being ripped off. I think it's win win situation for both countries.
lol. What does Korea bring to the table? They have even less experience than India. At least India has the LCA to learn from. South Korea can't even develop a trainer without Taiwanese help. ;)
Honestly, India would be better off cooperating with France. Aside from extensive experience in aircraft design, they also have ENGINES. The only things the French lack is the willingness to pour money into a stealth fighter. This is something India can help resolve. Furthermore the fruits of such a partnership can be exported, unlike a partnership with Korea which would crumple like toilet paper against US objections. I've been anticipating a Franco-Indian stealth fighter ever since Rafale won the MMRCA. France has the expertise. India has deep pockets. It all fits nicely. South Korea has neither, except overweening ambition beyond their native capabilities.
By: - 6th February 2013 at 04:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The best way forward in my opinion will be this.
1. An EJ200 derived Engine ordered in significant numbers and with a bit of indigenisation.
2. Partnership with the Koreans and SAAB for the airframe and export.
3. Ensuring minimum American content (SK version may have link 16 and what not).
4. Carrier variant.
By: - 6th February 2013 at 09:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I reckon India would be better off partnering with Japan.
IMHO, Japanese aerospace is currently more advanced than the Koreans while also Koreans will not accept less than 51% ownership of a stealth program.
SK wants to develop their own aerospace sector while Japan just wants a worthwhile replacement for F-15 (/ f-2 ? ).
By: - 6th February 2013 at 10:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The best way forward in my opinion will be this.1. An EJ200 derived Engine ordered in significant numbers and with a bit of indigenisation.
2. Partnership with the Koreans and SAAB for the airframe and export.
3. Ensuring minimum American content (SK version may have link 16 and what not).
4. Carrier variant.
At first blush this sounds ridiculous. But to be honest ... it's probably almost as good as an indigenous fighter from a strategic independence PoV.
So ... this is as an alternative to both AMCA and the Kaveri program? Doesn't reflect much confidence in Indian domestic capabilities.
One question is whether either of the proposed KF-X designs are at all amenable to carrier adaptation, as at first glance it does not appear that AMCA will be.
A radical change in direction, but if enough pieces fell into the right places I could be persuaded that this is a reasonable path to take.
I reckon India would be better off partnering with Japan.IMHO, Japanese aerospace is currently more advanced than the Koreans while also Koreans will not accept less than 51% ownership of a stealth program.
SK wants to develop their own aerospace sector while Japan just wants a worthwhile replacement for F-15 (/ f-2 ? ).
Japan isn't making anything, don't kid yourself. They're already petitioning Washington for access to US 6th gen programs, with F-3 merely as a fallback to provide 'leverage'. Yeah, some leverage when you have systematically caved at every turn to date. They'll bow and take whatever scraps Uncle Sam feeds them. No, Japan is not a viable partner for India.
Posts: 57
By: vario2012 - 31st January 2013 at 11:46
After years of progress for both projects, I wonder why they are not joining hands together. It suits both parties very well: techinally, financially and in terms of requirements they are roughly equal to each other, so no need to worry of being ripped off. I think it's win win situation for both countries.
Just compare the latest KFX C103 design and the latest Indian AMCA design. Or, maybe they are working together under the table?
AMCA images belong to http://tarmak007.blogspot.in/2013/01/express-exclusive-indias-stealth.html