captscooby81
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2016
- Messages
- 7,120
- Likes
- 27,109
So is this going to pave way for more Rafale's ? If IAF is dragging its feet on MK1A which aircraft they have in mind to replace more than 200 Mig21 & 27 and Jaguars ?
TEDBF or ORCA Updates
- Thread starter Shakti Malik
- Start date
Gautam Sarkar
Regular Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2019
- Messages
- 471
- Likes
- 2,346
Eh..... ?!? I have fans now. What is happening ?
The component testing of the SCE-200 in Ukraine was supposed to be completed by the end of 2019. The full engine test stand at ISRO propulsion complex, Mahendragiri is supposed to be completed by the mid next year. If the test stand is completed in time, expect a hot test in 2020. Dr. S. Somnath was reported recently that the engine was ready for trials.
Assassin 2.0
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2019
- Messages
- 6,087
- Likes
- 30,705
I think naval twin engine jet will be non stealthy version of AMCA .
Assassin 2.0
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2019
- Messages
- 6,087
- Likes
- 30,705
BIG UPDATE.
ADA earlier this year at Aero India 2019 had showcased a Navy-LCA Mk2 with Max takeoff weight (MTOW) of around 16.5 tonnes powered by a single-engine supplied by US engine-maker General Electric (GE) F414IN engine generating 98 kN thrust class but it was rejected by the Indian Navy due to Thrust to weight ratio and Navy also wanted safety of the second engine for smooth carrier deck operations. According to details revealed by Dr. Girish Deodhare, Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF) will be powered by Two F414IN engines generating 98 kN thrust class each and now will be bigger and heavier than the Navy-LCA Mk2 concept which was showcased at Aero India 2019 earlier this year. TEDBF will have Max takeoff weight (MTOW) of around 24 tonnes which puts it in the same class as that of other carrier-based fighter jets like Rafale-M ( 24.5 tonnes) and Mig-29K ( 24.5 tonnes) which is already operated by the Indian Navy. TEDBF will also be in the same weight category has that of the 5th generation stealth AMCA program which is under development for the air force which also falls under 25 tonnes. According to information provided to idrw.org, the current fleet of 43 Mig-29K will be relieved of its carrier-based duties once TEDBF is inducted from 2031 onwards and instead Mig-29K fleet will be used from shore-based Naval facilities for patrolling and combat missions instead of being retired as reported by other media outlets. Dr. Girish Deodhare has confirmed that the first roll-out will happen by 2025 and the first flight of TEDBF will happen by 2026. Technologies developed for the Naval-LCA Mk1 program will be used for the TEDBF program, while other technologies will come from MWF-AF and AMCA programs which are also in development. Two years back, the Indian Navy had issued RFI to supply 57 fighter jets to Navy and four players Rafale-M (Dassault, France), F-18 Super Hornet (Boeing, US), MIG-29K (Russia), Sea Gripen (Saab, Sweden) had responded to the RFI issued by the Indian Navy. It is more or less can be assumed that due to the development of the TEDBF program, the Indian Navy is likely to stick with the local 4.5 generation program while it invests in the 5th Generation Naval-AMCA program soon for operations from the second carrier.
ADA earlier this year at Aero India 2019 had showcased a Navy-LCA Mk2 with Max takeoff weight (MTOW) of around 16.5 tonnes powered by a single-engine supplied by US engine-maker General Electric (GE) F414IN engine generating 98 kN thrust class but it was rejected by the Indian Navy due to Thrust to weight ratio and Navy also wanted safety of the second engine for smooth carrier deck operations. According to details revealed by Dr. Girish Deodhare, Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF) will be powered by Two F414IN engines generating 98 kN thrust class each and now will be bigger and heavier than the Navy-LCA Mk2 concept which was showcased at Aero India 2019 earlier this year. TEDBF will have Max takeoff weight (MTOW) of around 24 tonnes which puts it in the same class as that of other carrier-based fighter jets like Rafale-M ( 24.5 tonnes) and Mig-29K ( 24.5 tonnes) which is already operated by the Indian Navy. TEDBF will also be in the same weight category has that of the 5th generation stealth AMCA program which is under development for the air force which also falls under 25 tonnes. According to information provided to idrw.org, the current fleet of 43 Mig-29K will be relieved of its carrier-based duties once TEDBF is inducted from 2031 onwards and instead Mig-29K fleet will be used from shore-based Naval facilities for patrolling and combat missions instead of being retired as reported by other media outlets. Dr. Girish Deodhare has confirmed that the first roll-out will happen by 2025 and the first flight of TEDBF will happen by 2026. Technologies developed for the Naval-LCA Mk1 program will be used for the TEDBF program, while other technologies will come from MWF-AF and AMCA programs which are also in development. Two years back, the Indian Navy had issued RFI to supply 57 fighter jets to Navy and four players Rafale-M (Dassault, France), F-18 Super Hornet (Boeing, US), MIG-29K (Russia), Sea Gripen (Saab, Sweden) had responded to the RFI issued by the Indian Navy. It is more or less can be assumed that due to the development of the TEDBF program, the Indian Navy is likely to stick with the local 4.5 generation program while it invests in the 5th Generation Naval-AMCA program soon for operations from the second carrier.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2018
- Messages
- 4,110
- Likes
- 24,158
Imo,IN will drop namca too... Expect a separate tedbsf(s being stealth) project.
I guess,They're not interested in iaf "controlled" projects.
Assassin 2.0
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2019
- Messages
- 6,087
- Likes
- 30,705
Amca is going to be a heavy jet for naval standards and with just 96KN thrust engines it will not be able to create good thrust to weight ratio. Hence to overcome this problem a stronger engine most probably a 110-115KN engine will be required which will be kaveri and seeing it's development it will take its own time. Hence Navy felt that best way to move forward is development of it's own carrier based jet.Imo,IN will drop namca too... Expect a separate tedbsf(s being stealth) project.
I guess,They're not interested in iaf "controlled" projects.
And one fact even US Navy ordered some new The Navy awarded Boeing a $4 billion multi-year contract modification to build 78 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighters, according to a Wednesday Pentagon contract announcement FA-18 which will be delivered by 2025 or soo.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2018
- Messages
- 4,110
- Likes
- 24,158
"To meet Deck Based Fighter requirements, a RFI for MRCBF (Multi Role Carrier Borne Fighter) has been hosted on the MoD website.
The case is being progressed in accordance with DPP-16.
Further,a case for MiG-29K midlife upgrade is being progressed".
Hmmm...
The case is being progressed in accordance with DPP-16.
Further,a case for MiG-29K midlife upgrade is being progressed".
Hmmm...
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,622
- Likes
- 590
http://idrw.org/more-images-of-tedbf-orca/
Some images of the proposed solution.....
Some images of the proposed solution.....
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,622
- Likes
- 590
nongaddarliberal
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2016
- Messages
- 3,997
- Likes
- 22,761
ORCA is absolutely necessary if we want to expand our carrier fleet. We can't keep buying F 18's or rafales which will cost more than the carriers themselves if bought in large numbers. It will also be a major upgrade over the present Mig 29Ks. By the time INS Vishal comes in, we will be an 8-10 trillion dollar economy. I'm pretty sure we'll plan on building more carriers then.
Hari Sud
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2012
- Messages
- 3,794
- Likes
- 8,525
How much of the technology we already have and how much of it is to be developed locally in what time frame? Can some technology could be purchased abroad outright with cash and no volume or export strings attached and speed up the development.
is the ‘Private Sector’ part of the solution of this issue.
is the ‘Private Sector’ part of the solution of this issue.
HariPrasad-1
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2016
- Messages
- 9,607
- Likes
- 21,075
It will be a 10.5 to 11 ton fighter with a huge thrust. If GE 414 EPE is used, It will bloody kill anything. Two 98 kn engine is a plane of empty weight of 10 to 11 ton is something mind boggling. In air combat configuration, it will have a T/W ratio of 1.4 plus which will Kick anything you can imagine. Its Air force version can easily substitute MKIs. The only consideration to be kept in mind is that whether these 4+++ planes will remain relevant at that time.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 6,206
- Likes
- 25,975
Giant Super Tejas revealed: Hushkit analysis
The Tejas effort to create an indigenous fighter for India took a dramatic turn with last week’s reveal of a plan for a twin-engined variant with twice the thrust and almost doubled weight. The new aircraft is a close-coupled canard delta in the same class as the Rafale. Jim Smith gives his analysis.
“At the turn of the year, Harsh Vardhan Thakur, a test pilot with Hindustan Aerospace, released an image of a twin-engine version of Tejas, identified as ORCA – an acronym for Omni-Role Combat aircraft. Subsequently, comments on the ORCA rendering were made by defenceupdate.in, and by ndtv.com. Having provided a couple of quick comments to @Hush_Kit on the ORCA image, I have been asked to provide an item for the blog.
Firstly, it is apparent that, as is normal with Tejas, the story is not as simple as at appears at first sight. In addition to ORCA, a concept for a twin-engine deck-based fighter (TEDBF) also exists, and if such a project were to proceed, ORCA would essentially be an air force variant, with lower weight, as, among other changes, the deck-landing capable undercarriage could be replaced with lighter landing gear. Neither of these variants relate to the existing air force or navy procurement plans, or directly to the development of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), a future Indian-developed stealthy fighter, although some technology developments for ORCA and TEDBF might provide risk reduction for AMCA.
Configuration Design
The ORCA rendering shows a close-coupled canard using the Tejas wing planform with twin-engines. Dimensions, weights, engine-specifics are unstated, but the render shows a significant external weapons payload, and what appear to be conformal fuel tanks located on the upper shoulder of the fuselage, as in late-model F-16s.
Initial commentary by defenceupdate.in appears to assume the use of two GE F404 engines, rather than the more powerful F414 engines, and draws attention to the significant design changes that would be required to develop this configuration from the existing Tejas.
Subsequent commentary by ndtv.com provides significantly more detail, focussed primarily on the TEDBF variant. This indicates that TEDBF would be a significantly larger aircraft than Tejas, would feature wing fold and would use two GE F414 engines. These engines are stated (Janes All the Worlds Aircraft) to have a maximum take-off thrust of 22,000 lb (97.9 kN), compared to 18,000 lb (80 kN) for the GE F404 variant fitted to Tejas. The GE F414 is the engine for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, while the GE F404 is the powerplant of the F/A-18 ‘Classic’ Hornet.
The most startling aspect of the TEDBF discussion is the stated weight of the aircraft, which is quoted as 23 tonnes, compared to 13.5 tonnes for Tejas Mk1. As an indication, 23 tonnes is close to the max overload weight of the Typhoon, and similar to quoted maximum take-off weights for Rafale. So TEDBF is in no way the cheap and cheerful solution that might originally have been considered as an outcome of Tejas.
In addition, the TEDBF is expected to carry a significantly greater weapons payload than Tejas, stated to be 9 tonnes, and to have an integrated sensor and avionics suite including AESA radar, IRST, datalinks and sensor fusion.
Configuration comments
On the whole, the illustrations available of TEDBF and ORCA appear credible as twin-engine evolutions of Tejas. However, there are some interesting differences between the designs, and some questionable features. Firstly, the ORCA rendering does not seem to allow sufficient fuselage width to accommodate two engines, noting that there will need to be a strong firewall between the two engines. For TEDBF, it would appear logical to use such a structure as the anchor point for the arrestor hook, but no hook is apparent in the illustrations.
The fuselage of TEDBF appears slightly longer than shown in the ORCA illustration, resulting in a slightly further forward position of the canard relative to the wing. Of course, this might result from the concept drawings representing as-yet unrefined designs, or perhaps related designs at different stages of concept definition. In my view, both ORCA and TEDBF would benefit from a fuselage plug to lengthen the aircraft and position the canards slightly further forward, so that they do not overlap the wing leading edge. I would expect this to improve the canard-wing aerodynamics and lift-dependent drag, as well as increasing fuselage fineness ratio, which should improve wave drag slightly, and provide additional volume for fuel or avionics.
The fuselage of TEDBF appears slightly longer than shown in the ORCA illustration, resulting in a slightly further forward position of the canard relative to the wing. In my view, both ORCA, and to a lesser extent TEDBF, would benefit from a fuselage plug to lengthen the aircraft and position the canards slightly further forward. I would expect this to improve the canard-wing aerodynamics and lift-dependent drag, as well as increasing fuselage fineness ratio, which should improve wave drag slightly, as well as providing additional volume for fuel or avionics.
Of course, the big unanswered question is whether the aircraft has GE F404 or F414 engines. I would assume the latter, given the quoted weights, and if so, the larger fan diameter, and airflow requirements for the engine are likely to require larger intake ducts than in the original Tejas.
Development Issues
The ndtv.com commentary on the TEDBF quotes project sources as indicating a cheap and rapid development path exists, building on Tejas experience, and further suggests a development timescale of 6 years from go-ahead.
Let’s consider what would need to be done. Firstly, the propulsion system change will require substantial redesign of the fuselage, together with revision of the structure to accommodate the additional weight and size of the airframe. While some aspects (such as the wing) appear to re-use Tejas components, I suggest this is a superficial resemblance, since the use of a canard, rather than Leading-Edge Vortex Controllers (LEVCONs), will change the aircraft aerodynamics, stability and control and control laws. The significantly higher weight will result in increased loads and require redesign of the structure. Additionally, the landing gear will need to accommodate higher weights, and, presumably will be rearranged for the TEDBF so that the arrestor hook can take advantage of the engine-bay firewall as an attachment point.
To deliver the required operational flexibility and capability, a substantial weapons, sensors and avionics integration programme will be required. Much of this might piggyback on existing or planned integration work for MWF platform, but type-specific weapons integration, carriage and release programmes will also be required.
Should all this development work succeed, the operational TEDBF will emerge as an aircraft with the same size, weight, configuration and, perhaps, capability as the Rafale aircraft currently just being delivered to India. They would supplement the capability of that aircraft, and would have the imprimatur of being Indian designed and built. Could the ORCA variant then replace the SU-30 MKI? Perhaps, but this seems to be the intent for the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) programme.
Where would ORCA sit compared to the AMCA? If that aircraft is to be stealthy, a further increment of technical difficulty is added in configuration design, manufacturing and propulsion and sensor integration. If the ultimate aim is for India to be able to design its own 5th or even 6th generation stealthy fighter, then the necessary confidence in aerodynamics, control system design, propulsion and system integration gained in a ORCA/TEDBF programme would de-risk at least some platform and system elements. But ORCA/TEDBF could at best be a reduced signature aircraft – more significant configuration changes would be needed to achieve a low signature outcome.
Notwithstanding some risk reduction for AMCA from ORCA/TEDBF, the challenges of materials, build standard, internal weapon and, integrated sensors, stealth system maintenance and operations planning of a 5th or 6th generation system would still remain as the step up to AMCA.”
We spoke to Tejas test pilot Harsh Vardhan Thakur who noted – ” These are (one of) many concept drawings. There are many more. Canards will not overlap with the main planes.”
So perhaps caution should be exercised in reading too much into the artwork.
The Tejas effort to create an indigenous fighter for India took a dramatic turn with last week’s reveal of a plan for a twin-engined variant with twice the thrust and almost doubled weight. The new aircraft is a close-coupled canard delta in the same class as the Rafale. Jim Smith gives his analysis.
“At the turn of the year, Harsh Vardhan Thakur, a test pilot with Hindustan Aerospace, released an image of a twin-engine version of Tejas, identified as ORCA – an acronym for Omni-Role Combat aircraft. Subsequently, comments on the ORCA rendering were made by defenceupdate.in, and by ndtv.com. Having provided a couple of quick comments to @Hush_Kit on the ORCA image, I have been asked to provide an item for the blog.
Firstly, it is apparent that, as is normal with Tejas, the story is not as simple as at appears at first sight. In addition to ORCA, a concept for a twin-engine deck-based fighter (TEDBF) also exists, and if such a project were to proceed, ORCA would essentially be an air force variant, with lower weight, as, among other changes, the deck-landing capable undercarriage could be replaced with lighter landing gear. Neither of these variants relate to the existing air force or navy procurement plans, or directly to the development of the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), a future Indian-developed stealthy fighter, although some technology developments for ORCA and TEDBF might provide risk reduction for AMCA.
Configuration Design
The ORCA rendering shows a close-coupled canard using the Tejas wing planform with twin-engines. Dimensions, weights, engine-specifics are unstated, but the render shows a significant external weapons payload, and what appear to be conformal fuel tanks located on the upper shoulder of the fuselage, as in late-model F-16s.
Initial commentary by defenceupdate.in appears to assume the use of two GE F404 engines, rather than the more powerful F414 engines, and draws attention to the significant design changes that would be required to develop this configuration from the existing Tejas.
Subsequent commentary by ndtv.com provides significantly more detail, focussed primarily on the TEDBF variant. This indicates that TEDBF would be a significantly larger aircraft than Tejas, would feature wing fold and would use two GE F414 engines. These engines are stated (Janes All the Worlds Aircraft) to have a maximum take-off thrust of 22,000 lb (97.9 kN), compared to 18,000 lb (80 kN) for the GE F404 variant fitted to Tejas. The GE F414 is the engine for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, while the GE F404 is the powerplant of the F/A-18 ‘Classic’ Hornet.
The most startling aspect of the TEDBF discussion is the stated weight of the aircraft, which is quoted as 23 tonnes, compared to 13.5 tonnes for Tejas Mk1. As an indication, 23 tonnes is close to the max overload weight of the Typhoon, and similar to quoted maximum take-off weights for Rafale. So TEDBF is in no way the cheap and cheerful solution that might originally have been considered as an outcome of Tejas.
In addition, the TEDBF is expected to carry a significantly greater weapons payload than Tejas, stated to be 9 tonnes, and to have an integrated sensor and avionics suite including AESA radar, IRST, datalinks and sensor fusion.
Configuration comments
On the whole, the illustrations available of TEDBF and ORCA appear credible as twin-engine evolutions of Tejas. However, there are some interesting differences between the designs, and some questionable features. Firstly, the ORCA rendering does not seem to allow sufficient fuselage width to accommodate two engines, noting that there will need to be a strong firewall between the two engines. For TEDBF, it would appear logical to use such a structure as the anchor point for the arrestor hook, but no hook is apparent in the illustrations.
The fuselage of TEDBF appears slightly longer than shown in the ORCA illustration, resulting in a slightly further forward position of the canard relative to the wing. Of course, this might result from the concept drawings representing as-yet unrefined designs, or perhaps related designs at different stages of concept definition. In my view, both ORCA and TEDBF would benefit from a fuselage plug to lengthen the aircraft and position the canards slightly further forward, so that they do not overlap the wing leading edge. I would expect this to improve the canard-wing aerodynamics and lift-dependent drag, as well as increasing fuselage fineness ratio, which should improve wave drag slightly, and provide additional volume for fuel or avionics.
The fuselage of TEDBF appears slightly longer than shown in the ORCA illustration, resulting in a slightly further forward position of the canard relative to the wing. In my view, both ORCA, and to a lesser extent TEDBF, would benefit from a fuselage plug to lengthen the aircraft and position the canards slightly further forward. I would expect this to improve the canard-wing aerodynamics and lift-dependent drag, as well as increasing fuselage fineness ratio, which should improve wave drag slightly, as well as providing additional volume for fuel or avionics.
Of course, the big unanswered question is whether the aircraft has GE F404 or F414 engines. I would assume the latter, given the quoted weights, and if so, the larger fan diameter, and airflow requirements for the engine are likely to require larger intake ducts than in the original Tejas.
Development Issues
The ndtv.com commentary on the TEDBF quotes project sources as indicating a cheap and rapid development path exists, building on Tejas experience, and further suggests a development timescale of 6 years from go-ahead.
Let’s consider what would need to be done. Firstly, the propulsion system change will require substantial redesign of the fuselage, together with revision of the structure to accommodate the additional weight and size of the airframe. While some aspects (such as the wing) appear to re-use Tejas components, I suggest this is a superficial resemblance, since the use of a canard, rather than Leading-Edge Vortex Controllers (LEVCONs), will change the aircraft aerodynamics, stability and control and control laws. The significantly higher weight will result in increased loads and require redesign of the structure. Additionally, the landing gear will need to accommodate higher weights, and, presumably will be rearranged for the TEDBF so that the arrestor hook can take advantage of the engine-bay firewall as an attachment point.
To deliver the required operational flexibility and capability, a substantial weapons, sensors and avionics integration programme will be required. Much of this might piggyback on existing or planned integration work for MWF platform, but type-specific weapons integration, carriage and release programmes will also be required.
Should all this development work succeed, the operational TEDBF will emerge as an aircraft with the same size, weight, configuration and, perhaps, capability as the Rafale aircraft currently just being delivered to India. They would supplement the capability of that aircraft, and would have the imprimatur of being Indian designed and built. Could the ORCA variant then replace the SU-30 MKI? Perhaps, but this seems to be the intent for the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) programme.
Where would ORCA sit compared to the AMCA? If that aircraft is to be stealthy, a further increment of technical difficulty is added in configuration design, manufacturing and propulsion and sensor integration. If the ultimate aim is for India to be able to design its own 5th or even 6th generation stealthy fighter, then the necessary confidence in aerodynamics, control system design, propulsion and system integration gained in a ORCA/TEDBF programme would de-risk at least some platform and system elements. But ORCA/TEDBF could at best be a reduced signature aircraft – more significant configuration changes would be needed to achieve a low signature outcome.
Notwithstanding some risk reduction for AMCA from ORCA/TEDBF, the challenges of materials, build standard, internal weapon and, integrated sensors, stealth system maintenance and operations planning of a 5th or 6th generation system would still remain as the step up to AMCA.”
We spoke to Tejas test pilot Harsh Vardhan Thakur who noted – ” These are (one of) many concept drawings. There are many more. Canards will not overlap with the main planes.”
So perhaps caution should be exercised in reading too much into the artwork.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 6,206
- Likes
- 25,975
Basically they want to pull a Super Mirage-4000 on Tejas Mark 2.
But existence of AMCA means that it's very likely for ORCA/TEDBF to be only for the navy... Because LCA Navy Mark2 is officially over. The official plan now (more of a concept at this point) is to have the existing MWF design expanded to house two engines... F-414. If sanctioned, first flight by 2025-26.
Claimed MTOW 25t & ordnance payload 9t (against MWF's 17t & 6.5t).
Navy would prefer Naval AMCA, but for design work on that to begin, it would require AMCA to be flown & fully flight-tested first.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 6,206
- Likes
- 25,975
@Kuntal This ORCA model clearly resembles Tejas AF version...
...Will you be interested in making one based on the LCA Navy Mark2 (latest delta design, not one with tail-stabilisors)?
I'll provide some reference image... just get rid of the LEVCONs & add canards, diverterless intakes, extra engin, fuel tanks etc.
Its belly is already widened. 13 hardpoints like above.
If you can ignore the tail-stabilisors, same design from different angle.
I'll provide some reference image... just get rid of the LEVCONs & add canards, diverterless intakes, extra engin, fuel tanks etc.
Its belly is already widened. 13 hardpoints like above.
If you can ignore the tail-stabilisors, same design from different angle.
Last edited:
nongaddarliberal
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2016
- Messages
- 3,997
- Likes
- 22,761
I still don't understand what type of guarantee we have that the Americans will sell us enough f 414's. And what about spares and support for the engines? With what confidence are we going forward with MCA and ORCA?
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2017
- Messages
- 6,206
- Likes
- 25,975
Several jets like Gripen & T-50 run production based on American engines. They'll sell us F-414... especially guaranteed if we select F-18 (just gotta copy-paste its butt then), but otherwise too.
What we should do is get ToT for F-414 EPE & start building it in house, as well as grow 120kN+ engine based on that, instead of wasting time with Snecma whose own engine is much less powered.
