India's 5th generation fighter programme - from MCA to AMCA

From January of this year, before the much delayed CCS approval:
www.livefistdefence.com

AMCA 'PPP' Proposal Stalled For 3.5 Yrs & Counting - Livefist

An unprecedented decision taken in 2020 to develop India's fifth generation fighter aircraft under a novel public-private partnership has remained stalled for well over three years, with no sign of the intended corporate special purpose vehicle (SPV). A former Indian Chief of the Air Staff, who...
www.livefistdefence.com www.livefistdefence.com
 
Grey Havoc said:
From January of this year, before the much delayed CCS approval:
www.livefistdefence.com

AMCA 'PPP' Proposal Stalled For 3.5 Yrs & Counting - Livefist

An unprecedented decision taken in 2020 to develop India's fifth generation fighter aircraft under a novel public-private partnership has remained stalled for well over three years, with no sign of the intended corporate special purpose vehicle (SPV). A former Indian Chief of the Air Staff, who...
www.livefistdefence.com www.livefistdefence.com
Click to expand...
Thanks a lot for posting this. I was really wondering what's going on with the PPP model and as the article notes, there was total silence while the development itself was progressing. HAL really gave a lot of emphasis in it alongside externalizing tier 2 and 3 vendors for the aircraft manufacturing, which I think goes hand-in-hand with the PPP.

If I sport a guess, I think thr Indian MoD might be putting too much liability on the private side. This has been a problem 1uite a few times woth Indian defence acquisition, eg. Rafale.
 
Grey Havoc said:
From January of this year, before the much delayed CCS approval:
www.livefistdefence.com

AMCA 'PPP' Proposal Stalled For 3.5 Yrs & Counting - Livefist

An unprecedented decision taken in 2020 to develop India's fifth generation fighter aircraft under a novel public-private partnership has remained stalled for well over three years, with no sign of the intended corporate special purpose vehicle (SPV). A former Indian Chief of the Air Staff, who...
www.livefistdefence.com www.livefistdefence.com
Click to expand...
What do you guys think about the avionic architecture of the AMCA? I've often heard it claimed that it's still basically a typical 80s era architecture but I'm not well versed on the AMCA programme to make a comment.
 
snne said:
What do you guys think about the avionic architecture of the AMCA? I've often heard it claimed that it's still basically a typical 80s era architecture but I'm not well versed on the AMCA programme to make a comment.
Click to expand...


I think the Indians themselves do not actually know what's about this project.
And in fact since they are still trying hard to get the Tejas Mk.1A being delivered this summer, are working even more on Tejas Mk.2, and explore around the DEDBF in parallel, I have no hopes at all.

I'm pretty sure we will see the PLAAF's 6th generation fighter or at least a demonstrator flying long before the AMCA.
 
Let's see if they can actually produce a flying prototypes, tbh 2028 is very optimistic in my view. They should be at least start producing parts this or last year for the flyig prototypes. Then build ironbirds to test and integrate various flight systems on the ground before actually mount them into flying prototypes.

Also there would be more than 1 airframe, there at least 2 or 3 where 1 would be flying, 1 structural test and the other if exist become "reference static airframe" a fully functional but not intended to fly, same as Russian T-50KNI.
 
snne said:
What do you guys think about the avionic architecture of the AMCA? I've often heard it claimed that it's still basically a typical 80s era architecture but I'm not well versed on the AMCA programme to make a comment.
Click to expand...
I'll have to look up for the specificis, but I'm very much doubtful that it would be an "80s era architecture". That would be your common federated architecture with 1553B class data bus connecting various mission systems, each having their own processors/computers to process data, connected to a few separate mission computers. F-16 for example had a separate cockpit interface processor, fire control computer and store management system until the MMC.

I don't think India wouldn't be able to develop a central multifunction mission computer in 2020s. It's basically 30 years old technology at this point.
 
the wing is mounted a bit higher than I thought it would
 
Would the higher wing indicate possible side bays for short range AAMs? Just a theory that I have got at the present time.
 
HAL-AMCA.jpg


Compared to this model in 2021, looks like there are some significant changes. the Inlet is different and it looks like it went from mid wing to high wing.
A lot of these models look similar, but if you look side by side, each year (or every other year), there are a number of changes.
I really wonder if the design is not yet finalized
 
helmutkohl said:
Compared to this model in 2021, looks like there are some significant changes. the Inlet is different and it looks like it went from mid wing to high wing.
A lot of these models look similar, but if you look side by side, each year (or every other year), there are a number of changes.
I really wonder if the design is not yet finalized
Click to expand...
does india have a full scale wind tunnel？
 
snne said:
1:1 Mock-up revealed at AeroIndia 2025

View attachment 758705View attachment 758706View attachment 758707

https://twitter.com/x/status/1887829934707712175
View: https://x.com/ReviewVayu/status/1887829934707712175?t=0XWOaYU66i_P4pKRXWSBiQ&s=19
Click to expand...
This supposedly is a mockup of an older configuration. Shape of the horizontal stabilizers and the gap between them and the wing are features that are different from the frozen design showcased previously.

What likely happened was either the people building the mockup had no idea what was going on, or the model was likely ordered/and or made a couple years back before changes were finalized, or a little mix of both.
 
Nx4eu said:
This supposedly is a mockup of an older configuration. Shape of the horizontal stabilizers and the gap between them and the wing are features that are different from the frozen design showcased previously.

What likely happened was either the people building the mockup had no idea what was going on, or the model was likely ordered/and or made a couple years back before changes were finalized, or a little mix of both.
Click to expand...

Yes. On the newer variant there is supposed to be a bump behind the cockpit.
 
It's not about a model.
The point is that this strange thing shows an "aircraft" from the 80s of the last century, while next to it in China there are flying real planes for the 80s of this century.
 
Don't be too hard. Shiny is not always a sign of efficiency.
Interestingly, the TEDBF inlets might lift the veil on what would be the Dassault Rafale F-5 face-lift.
 
Last edited:
Images and poor quality models. Remember Zhuhai: operational J-20, operational J-10C and almost operational J-35.
The difference is more and more abysmal.
 
When the Indians got their LCA prototype into the air with an American engine just three years after the Chinese J-10A prototype took off with a Russian engine, one could think: "You're at the starting line—I’m rooting for both of you. Asia, go!"

For the entire following quarter-century, Indian forums, media and politics were filled with radical nationalism, anti-communism, and sinophobia.
On one hand, there was a dismissive attitude toward the FGFA program, with remarks like "This is not a real fifth-generation fighter, sir! AMCA will be!" and on the other hand, an almost servile admiration for Western technology in the endless MRCA saga.

The result is sad, even tragic. Bangalore is merely an illustration—the true reality lies in the state and prospects of the Indian Air Force.
 
Pity the photographer could not post a better image of the radar Geo so that we could get a better look at it. I suppose that someone will post a much better photo in due course.
 
Thanks Waterballoon. What are the weird aerials at the bottom of the radar? They look out of place on a modern radar, it looks as if they might only be a temporary feature.
 
Back
Top Bottom