TEDBF or ORCA Updates

[ersakthivel]

I can look at Jf-17 & say it has shit area-ruling Yes, I may not have details or numbers but the "coke-bottle" shaping is far more evident.

Plus a slender tailend taper is always better streamlined aerodynamically. That much too we can infer based on common knowledge.

you hv a right to your opinion,

I dont dispute that,

IMHO area ruling can be fathomed only with a detailed graph plotting the volume(area in 2D sense) of fuselage and wings combined at any fuselage length point on one axis and fuselage length in another,

three dimensional fuselage and wing shaping planform's volume variance can not be estimated by looking at 2D photographs of miniature models.

Even Tejas was designed with area ruling as a prerequisite in computed simulation models , niggles at front fuselage of tejas on this score , was due to the fact that it has to carry a larger radar(bigger than rafale ) while fitting within the smaller hanger of Mig21s at front line airbases,(which limits fuselage length) and its spec which asked fr operations with meaningful load from LEH and high ITR led to low wing loading design ,

leading to compromise at some points of area ruling curve


SO no fighter designer worth his salt will ignore this in preliminary design phase, as imputed by many Tejas critics(who just say that area ruling was ignored in Tejas design)

Since Tejas mk2 and AMCA are designs which didnt hv the limitations of Tejas mk1 goal, I hv little reason to suspect that they both hv poorer area ruling spec than any other fighter in service

 

[ersakthivel]

Not volume.
Cross-sectional area...hence the name "area rule"

volume on any 2D cutting plane is same as the area is my inference

 

[Emperor Kalki]

you hv a right to your opinion,

I dont dispute that,

IMHO area ruling can be fathomed only with a detailed graph plotting the volume of fuselage and wings combined at nay fuselage length on one axis and fuselage length in another,

three dimensional fuselage and wing shaping planform's volume variance can not be estimated by looking at 2D photographs of miniature models.

Even Tejas was designed with area ruling as a prerequisite in computed simulation models , niggles at front fuselage of tejas on this score , was due to the fact that it has to carry a larger radar(bigger than rafale ) while fitting within the smaller hanger of Mig21s at front line airbases,(which limits fuselage length) and its spec which asked fr operations with meaningful load from LEH and high ITR led to low wing loading design ,

leading to compromise at some points of area ruling curve


SO no fighter designer worth his salt will ignore this in preliminary design phase, as imputed by many Tejas critics(who just say that area ruling was ignored in Tejas design)

Since Tejas mk2 and AMCA are designs which didnt hv the limitations of Tejas mk1 goal, I hv little reason to suspect that they both hv poorer area ruling spec than any other fighter in service

volume on any 2D cutting plane is same as the area is my inference

 

[ersakthivel]

Didn't expect the whole new design of TEDBF concept to be ready this quickly!..

View attachment 74834

Looking at the shaping of its fuselage, it should have better area-ruling coefficient than both MWF & AMCA... It's not gonna have internal weapons bay it seems, so much more internal fuel than AMCA.

many models were studied fr stealth AMCA , so selecting one from them is a speedier process , I suppose

studies fr canards wd hv been done on Tejas mk2 itself, SO adding that also is not a new idea,

TEDBF hugely benefits from the decades long hardwork of ADA on Tejas mk1 and mk2 programs

 

[Trololo]

I do not like the 8G/1.6M figures in the performance numbers. I believe it compromises some of the kinematics. In near future naval A2A engagement can be with PLAN J-16 types, which bring with them the natural kinematic performance of the Flanker line. And I am assuming that they will come with 117S type of high power engines as well. Its imperative that the TEDBF/ORCA have very high kinematic performance, especially a high TWR. I mentioned on LCA Mk1A forum that high excess power solves most of the drag issues deltas face in turning fights. If the TEDBF has high kinematic performance, imagine what the ORCA can do being a lot lighter.

 

[ersakthivel]

area is proper term AS YOU SAY,

I used the term VOLUME which too implied the same meaning

I hv edited the post accepting your suggestion

Thanks

 

[ersakthivel]

I do not like the 8G/1.6M figures in the performance numbers. I believe it compromises some of the kinematics. In near future naval A2A engagement can be with PLAN J-16 types, which bring with them the natural kinematic performance of the Flanker line. And I am assuming that they will come with 117S type of high power engines as well. Its imperative that the TEDBF/ORCA have very high kinematic performance, especially a high TWR. I mentioned on LCA Mk1A forum that high excess power solves most of the drag issues deltas face in turning fights. If the TEDBF has high kinematic performance, imagine what the ORCA can do being a lot lighter.

naval fighters with wing folding mechanisms and heavier landing gears getting restricted to 8Gs is not a new phenomenon

unless we hv a cutting edge engine available , going fr 9G with those limitations above will lead to unacceptable compromises on range and pay load is my opinion

Airforce version will hv none of those limitations and will be as good as other modern fighter in kinematics

 

[ersakthivel]

Another excellent vid from Anantha Krishnan.


View attachment 74840

Some important observations-.

1. The bulges on the sides of the cockpit and extending over the dorsal surface are conformal fuel tanks. The obtuse angle between the intake walls and the wings have been deliberately done to reflect incoming rf waves at directions other than that of the emitter. Will reduce RCS. Coupled with the faceted front fuselage which is edge aligned with the intakes as is evident from the pic, there are certain elements of low observability built into the design from ground up. With adequate ram treatments and serrations on panels and trailing edges of elevons ,flaps and canards, Tedbf will have a lower RCS than even the Rafale .

2. Navy had put forward it's initial requirements in an informal manner for a twin engined deck based fighter in early 2020. And initial configuration studies began then and there.

3. Initial requirements were put forth in an official manner in May of 2020. Since then the Navy PO had been formally attached with the Ada team and had been continuously providing it's inputs to suit the configuration as per their requirement .

4. The ADA team had come up with two configurations . One is a delta canard , the model of which you are seeing now. Another is a trapezoidal wing with tail planes configuration. Work on both are continuing in a parallel manner now. Both configurations among many designs met Navy's initial requirements .

5. Low speed wind tunnel tests on the delta canard Rafale ish design will begin soon which will further help in fine tuning the design .

6. Tedbf will have a MTOW of 26 tons which is one and a half tons higher than than of Rafale M. Will have a significant bring back capability . Mr Kumar had emphasized on this time and again. Ada's design legacy and experience gained through NP1 and NP2 have helped them in designing the TEDBF . In other words, the Naval Mk1 was an important stepping stone to Tedbf without which the design team would have had to face many hiccups and teething troubles while developing tedbf. Now, the entire process has become much easier with the experience gained through the various flight trials at shore based test facility especially the takeoff and landings from INS Vikramaditya.

7. Navy will issue it's Operational requirements and PQR soon.

put a stealth weapon bay like silent Eagle program of USAF F15, it will hv better stealth than some "so called" stealth fighters,

Airforce version derived from it will be the top dog fr IAF, It can compare to any 4.5 gen fighters presently on offer.

especially with the news coming in about Anti stealth ROFAR radar(dont know how credible) IAF needs a kick ass twin engined fighter that has no stealth penalties imposed,

IRST tech too is ever improving putting a question mark over stealth, (if the revolution that happened in MW IR tech is repeated fr long wave Infra red tech)

otherwise we may be forced import more rafales or any other twin engined fighters in future



It brings great value to the combat area when coupled with AMCA (which will be used fr missions that require much better stealth compliance)

 

[ersakthivel]

It's a bad narrative.
Come tomorrow Pakis will repeat the same thing and some western nighas might as well.
TEDBF is the next obvious step to Tejas which is Delta wing itself.
The future is delta and compound tailed delta.
We have been developing Tejas mk 2 with Canards why are we not saying it is a evolution from Tejas mk 2 and Naval LCA?

rightly siad

They added another engine to tejas mk2 planform and got better stealth compliant fuselage from one of the models they developed fr Stealth AMCA is my view also

 

[Bleh]

See, normally stealth doesn't mean shit in case of naval aircrafts... because they will carry huge anti-ship missiles externally.

But TEDBF with semi-stealth will be effective with an escort jammer supressing/disrupting the radars trying to track the strike package.

So it all makes sense now!

If TEDBF can takeoff from skyjump with ASRAAM, Astra Mk1, NGARM (RudraM-1), drop tanks & centreline escort-jammer pod then that itself will be a feat... something the like of Mig-29K or J-15 can't even dream of.

 

[flanker99]

Well, these are all I was waiting for since I heard the word "TEDBF"
Expect a beautiful 3d model soon from my side

can u try to mate the amca wings and tails with the tedbf fuselage pls?...doesnt look like we will get to see the model of the 2nd concept anytime soon

 

[Bleh]

can u try to mate the amca wings and tails with the tedbf fuselage pls?...doesnt look like we will get to see the model of the 2nd concept anytime soon

That won't be realistic. I'll make a plausible trapezoidal wings version of we don't find anything this Aero India.

@DerBronzeLord might be able to get them. He'll attend the AI21.

 

[Leonardo Alves]

The silence from IAF on not stating this need is "Deafening"

Turf wars brewing up.
Bane of any country although 36 more rafale are good.

 

[Bleh]

This is what I found the intake-canard placement of Teddy (that's what I'm calling it from now) similar to... not the official Flygsystem 2020, mind you, but this video's artistic impression.

 

[Tactical Doge]

This is what I found the intake-canard placement of Teddy (that's what I'm calling it from now) similar to... not the official Flygsystem 2020, mind you, but this video's artistic impression.

Teddy
Ted's BF
Ted
Lotta names, it has
Tickled, I am
Ted's BF, I prefer

 

[ersakthivel]

Turf wars brewing up.
Bane of any country although 36 more rafale are good.

If IAF says 36 more rafales are needed , No one questions that,

But TEDBF will hv a run of close to 200 fighters plus if IAF really puts its mind to it,

Its specs are superior to all Twin engined MMRCAs available in market,

Its development is also derisked since it is combining elements proven from Tejas mk2{canards) and stealth shaping(from AMCA studies)

Also IAF showing concrete intent on this will HAL and ADA to ask fr more money from govt and govt enlarging HAL tejas production facilities further to cater to protyping of three fighter Tejas mk2, AMCA TEDBF along with production of 80 odds Tejas mk1As

And any delay is derisked since extra Tejas mk2 orders can cater fr that delay

Still IAF is keeping quiet on it

 

[Lonewolf]

If IAF says 36 more rafales are needed , No one questions that,

But TEDBF will hv a run of close to 200 fighters plus if IAF really puts its mind to it,

Its specs are superior to all Twin engined MMRCAs available in market,

Its development is also derisked since it is combining elements proven from Tejas mk2{canards) and stealth shaping(from AMCA studies)

Also IAF showing concrete intent on this will HAL and ADA to ask fr more money from govt and govt enlarging HAL tejas production facilities further to cater to protyping of three fighter Tejas mk2, AMCA TEDBF along with production of 80 odds Tejas mk1As

And any delay is derisked since extra Tejas mk2 orders can cater fr that delay

Still IAF is keeping quiet on it

Even if they ask for it after production starts they can get it easily , it's very easy to make a air force variant

 

[ersakthivel]

Even if they ask for it after production starts they can get it easily , it's very easy to make a air force variant

Thats true,

but showing intent adds whole new dimension to the TEDBF development, It will get more funding priority if 300 fighter orders are assured from the word Go,
Pvt sector too will start scaling up MFG facilities in their Tier 1 facilities , with earlier financial planning,

A few years delay could be cut,

remember lack of co ordination btn IAF and ADA on weapon fits almost delayed the Tejas project by a decade, leading to full wing re design to cater to IAF's newer R73E requirements

Such pitfalls could be avoided,

remember the two year long wrangle over the price of tejas mk1A deal, which delayed it further

 

[Bleh]

 

[Bleh]

Artwork of Teddy...