AMCA Will Undergo Another Critical Design Evaluation After Stress Test Findings, Prioritizing 100% Load Capacity and Enhanced Safety

The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) has announced that India's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) will undergo a further critical design review (CDR) following the results of recent stress and load testing.

This development was revealed by an ADA project official during Aero India 2025, held from February 10-14, where a full-scale model of the fifth-generation fighter jet was a key attraction.

Initial stress and load tests, conducted using the finite element method (FEM), a sophisticated numerical analysis technique, had been performed at 90% of the projected load, in line with established ADA procedure. FEM allows engineers to simulate and analyze the structural behaviour of complex systems like aircraft under varying conditions.

However, following a comprehensive review of the initial test data, the ADA management has opted to raise the design benchmark. The decision was made to ensure the AMCA's airframe and overall structure can withstand 100% of the anticipated loads, demonstrating a strong commitment to maximizing the aircraft's safety, performance, and reliability. This reinforces the ADA's dedication to developing a robust and dependable aircraft, vital for India's future air defence.

The findings from the initial tests have necessitated design modifications, prompting the need for this additional CDR. The review process is expected to be completed by April 2025, according to the ADA official.

This extra step, while crucial for ensuring the aircraft's structural integrity, has impacted the AMCA's production schedule.

Originally, the commencement of metal-cutting, a significant milestone in aircraft manufacturing, was planned for 2024, following project approval and funding allocation of INR 150 trillion (approximately USD 1.7 billion) by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) in March 2024.

These activities have now been rescheduled for later in 2025 to allow for the implementation of the design changes and verification of compliance with the updated specifications.

This revised timeline reflects the project's focus on thorough testing and validation, prioritizing long-term performance and safety over adhering to an initial schedule.

 

[PrasannaBJN]

As a citizen of India, we feel secure. But the consistent delays, especially for air power like inducting Tejas Mk1 and Tejas Mk2, and taking years and years to sign deals with other countries for other fighters like the Rafale (which become obsolete by the time we induct them) does not make sense. The public sector companies like ADA and HAL, by obstructing private companies from participating, are hindering our defence preparedness. HAL and ADA should own the delays and failures in delivering the fighters on time. The government should strictly give a deadline for these public sectors, and if they are not able to deliver, they should impose hefty fines and should involve private companies immediately. Countries like Turkey, South Korea, and even Pakistan take decisions so quickly. Private companies in South Korea and Turkey are so fast as they are preferred. This is not acceptable. HAL and ADA take their own sweet time and want to retain the monopoly and keep delaying, delaying, delaying.

 

[Dredd]

Hope they improve the internal weapon bay with the new iteration. Currently, it can hold a max of 1500kg of weapons and 4 hard points. There should be 2 side internal weapon bays for ASRAAM missiles.

 

[Benith Israel]

Already rescheduled! It's better if we swallow our pride and order 114 F-35A. Just junk Tejas Mk2 and work on making 120 AMCA Mk1.

 

[Rinku Pandey]

We will hear many such delays in the next 15 years.

 

[The_rED_dEVIL]

Hope they improve the internal weapon bay with the new iteration. Currently, it can hold a max of 1500kg of weapons and 4 hard points. There should be 2 side internal weapon bays for ASRAAM missiles.

I don't think 25-tonne class fighters can have space for that. F-35A/C with 29-tonne MTOW doesn't have one. (Only Su-57, F-22, and J-20 have those). Rather, if the existing weapons bay could be modified so that bay doors have a hardpoint for 2 WVR missiles like F-35s have.

In fact, F-35 also have 4 hardpoints in internal weapons bay with higher capacity due to higher MTOW than AMCA design (though they are trying for an additional hardpoint in each bay using "sidekick" tech; it's still under development).

 

[Dredd]

I don't think 25-tonne class fighters can have space for that. F-35A/C with 29-tonne MTOW doesn't have one. (Only Su-57, F-22, and J-20 have those). Rather, if the existing weapons bay could be modified so that bay doors have a hardpoint for 2 WVR missiles like F-35s have.

In fact, F-35 also have 4 hardpoints in internal weapons bay with higher capacity due to higher MTOW than AMCA design (though they are trying for an additional hardpoint in each bay using "sidekick" tech; it's still under development).

If that could be done then great, But 1500KG payload is also less which is 2700KG in case of F35.

 

[Sandeep]

First of all the design standard and methodology of ADA need to change as they can’t work on estimates but they need to work to the exact measurements, weight and standards etc.

Although this should never of happened in the first place this isn’t a major problem that can’t be rectified in a few months. While that work is ongoing and being fixed they would still have placed the orders for the metal, technology and equipment that’s still required as well.

From now on ADA should work with the private sector companies and staff right from the start of a jet program who have the knowledge, experience and education in designing, developing and manufacturing any aeronautical programs.

 

[Preet]

I don't think 25-tonne class fighters can have space for that. F-35A/C with 29-tonne MTOW doesn't have one. (Only Su-57, F-22, and J-20 have those). Rather, if the existing weapons bay could be modified so that bay doors have a hardpoint for 2 WVR missiles like F-35s have.

In fact, F-35 also have 4 hardpoints in internal weapons bay with higher capacity due to higher MTOW than AMCA design (though they are trying for an additional hardpoint in each bay using "sidekick" tech; it's still under development).

Well bro, J35 also has 6 internal hardpoints... there is room for it in under 30T fighters too.Now, coming to payload capacity and MTOW... these are all preliminary specifications. When it finally flies, it's gonna be classified as a 27-28T fighter with a little higher payload capacity for both internal and external hardpoints.There is no reason for AMCA to have a lower payload than F35. Engine thrust is the same; AMCA would be even better with a 110kN engine.

 

[Yogindra]

As a citizen of India, we feel secure. But the consistent delays, especially for air power like inducting Tejas Mk1 and Tejas Mk2, and taking years and years to sign deals with other countries for other fighters like the Rafale (which become obsolete by the time we induct them) does not make sense. The public sector companies like ADA and HAL, by obstructing private companies from participating, are hindering our defence preparedness. HAL and ADA should own the delays and failures in delivering the fighters on time. The government should strictly give a deadline for these public sectors, and if they are not able to deliver, they should impose hefty fines and should involve private companies immediately. Countries like Turkey, South Korea, and even Pakistan take decisions so quickly. Private companies in South Korea and Turkey are so fast as they are preferred. This is not acceptable. HAL and ADA take their own sweet time and want to retain the monopoly and keep delaying, delaying, delaying.

ADA and HAL is not obstructing Private companies for aircraft production. Private companies are not matured enough to produce aircraft. Aircraft production lead time is more than two years from metal cutting. During initial batch of 20 aircraft production, the performance of private companies in respect of structure assembly is not at all satisfactory.

 

[schmoo123!!!]

Why can't they get it right first time with all the R&D equipment and sophisticated computers that they have?

 

[Dredd]

Well bro, J35 also has 6 internal hardpoints... there is room for it in under 30T fighters too.Now, coming to payload capacity and MTOW... these are all preliminary specifications. When it finally flies, it's gonna be classified as a 27-28T fighter with a little higher payload capacity for both internal and external hardpoints.There is no reason for AMCA to have a lower payload than F35. Engine thrust is the same; AMCA would be even better with a 110kN engine.

That's the exact reason I always think that there is massive room for improvement in AMCA design; we have gone with too simple a design, with compromises on internal payload and fuel capacity.

 

[Preet]

That's the exact reason I always think that there is massive room for improvement in AMCA design; we have gone with too simple a design, with compromises on internal payload and fuel capacity.

Bro, I think design is pretty decent. Stealth is the main thing here. Rest, about the payload, see, in J35, the side internal hardpoints were added in the last iteration of prototype. Initially, it also had 4 internal points only. The design will surely evolve.

And I'm sure, India does a far better job than China in terms of metal composites strength. Example: JF17, being a bigger platform, has a lower payload than a smaller Tejas Mk1A. So, I'm sure, AMCA would be 27-28T MTOW when it evolves, with 2T internal payload! And eventually, it will add side points too.