TEDBF or ORCA Updates

[Bleh]

As I said,if/or/maybe,don't conclude things...

He's probably right... I remember the 1st MWF wind-tunnel model being clearly a forerunner of the painted scale model at display at same event (which had lots of alterations & modifications).

 

[FalconSlayers]

TEDBF—Block-II?

 

[Bleh]

A little pic from the ADA Brochure..

 

[FalconSlayers]

A little pic from the ADA Brochure..

View attachment 85680

6 BVRAAMs only? Btw is there any triple launcher in IAF aircrafts?

 

[flanker99]

6 BVRAAMs only? Btw is there any triple launcher in IAF aircrafts?

If it can carry that load from a sky jump ramp then its significant

 

[FalconSlayers]

If it can carry that load from a sky jump ramp then its significant

We should have made our Vikrant a CATOBAR carrier instead of Ski jump one.

 

[Bleh]

Btw is there any triple launcher in IAF aircrafts?

No. I don't think anybody uses such nightmare outside advertisement brochures.

 

[Shekhar Singh]

As per Amit R kashyap there are two designs undergoing wind tunnel testing. One with canard and other one with tail stabilizers.

 

[FalconSlayers]

As per Amit R kashyap there are two designs undergoing wind tunnel testing. One with canard and other one with tail stabilizers.

You mean the other one is this?

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

You mean the other one is this?

View attachment 85690

No this one is the old LCA Navy MK2 model showcased in Aero-India 2019.

Since then Navy has moved on to twin engineed TEDBF.

I think the other model being referred to is the trapezoidal wing version with tail (as per DDR interview).
Tthough there is no news of it going to wind-tunnel testing. The TEDBF project is being handled by the same team behind LCA Navy MK1. So they are laying more emphasis on the delta + canard design which borrows from Tejas programme. Though the final call will be that of Navy.

 

[FalconSlayers]

No this one is the old LCA Navy MK2 model showcased in Aero-India 2019.

Since then Navy has moved on to twin engineed TEDBF.

I think the other model being referred to is the trapezoidal wing version with tail (as per DDR interview).
Tthough there is no news of it going to wind-tunnel testing. The TEDBF project is being handled by the same team behind LCA Navy MK1. So they are laying more emphasis on the delta + canard design which borrows from Tejas programme. Though the final call will be that of Navy.

Why not go with AMCA’s initial design?
like this?

 

[shuvo@y2k10]

Why not go with AMCA’s initial design?
like this?
View attachment 85705

Not a bad idea from the design perspective.
Any of the older AMCA models from 3B-01 to 3B-09 can be used. AMCA team in ADA has generated a huge amount of design data regarding AMCA from 2008-09 onwards and tested several models in wind tunnel.
But so has been also done on LCA Navy programme by the team who is currently heading TEDBF programme.

I think the second prototype being talked about in DDR interview by TEDBF programme director in Aero India 2021 was most likely based on AMCA based model since it talked about a trapezoidal + tail design.

However, Navy has done some preliminary assessment about converting Airforce variant of AMCA into NAMCA in 2016-17 and concluded that is will compromise on the aerodynamic performance of a Naval aircraft.
Hence Navy going with a older AMCA based model design for TEDBF is rather slim.

 

[FalconSlayers]

Not a bad idea from the design perspective.
Any of the older AMCA models from 3B-01 to 3B-09 can be used. AMCA team in ADA has generated a huge amount of design data regarding AMCA from 2008-09 onwards and tested several models in wind tunnel.
But so has been also done on LCA Navy programme by the team who is currently heading TEDBF programme.

I think the second prototype being talked about in DDR interview by TEDBF programme director in Aero India 2021 was most likely based on AMCA based model since it talked about a trapezoidal + tail design.

However, Navy has done some preliminary assessment about converting Airforce variant of AMCA into NAMCA in 2016-17 and concluded that is will compromise on the aerodynamic performance of a Naval aircraft.
Hence Navy going with a older AMCA based model design for TEDBF is rather slim.

I said this because it will eliminate the need for additional testing and further R&D.
Previous designs have already went through wind tunnel tests.




And the ones asking why the Wind tunnel model of TEDBF doesn’t have DSI, it is because ADA will first see how it performs and how much bumb is needed to be given to the aircraft.

 

[Maitreya Shyam]

 

[FalconSlayers]

Just why? I mean it is a carrier borne fighter and will go into production by 2031, and will be used to replace all of old MiG-29Ks in service. Its not that we have a lot of carriers, we’ll have 2 carriers and possibly a third one too if its plans succeed, so we’ll need 120 TEDBFs for all three carriers excluding trainer aircrafts which all will be delivered after 2040, so TEDBF MK2 doesn’t make sense.

 

[IndianHawk]

Why not go with AMCA’s initial design?
like this?
View attachment 85705

Because that's not suitable for naval operation.
Navy needs a fresh design build from scratch keeping in mind naval requirements.

Large wing span for more lift at short take off.
Loads of internal fuel . Twin engine for safety range .

No / less stealth coating in abrasive sea environment.

External fuel tanks are must at sea thus reducing stealth anyway. Anti ship missiles also can't be fitted in internal bay hence stealth is pretty much useless for majority of naval operations.

Hence new 4.5 gen design.

 

[FalconSlayers]

Because that's not suitable for naval operation.
Navy needs a fresh design build from scratch keeping in mind naval requirements.

Large wing span for more lift at short take off.
Loads of internal fuel . Twin engine for safety range .

No / less stealth coating in abrasive sea environment.

External fuel tanks are must at sea thus reducing stealth anyway. Anti ship missiles also can't be fitted in internal bay hence stealth is pretty much useless for majority of naval operations.

Hence new 4.5 gen design.

Thats why I said old design without any stealth coating, I am not saying use old AMCA design for stealth naval aircraft but as a 4.5 gen naval aircraft.

 

[IndianHawk]

Just why? I mean it is a carrier borne fighter and will go into production by 2031, and will be used to replace all of old MiG-29Ks in service. Its not that we have a lot of carriers, we’ll have 2 carriers and possibly a third one too if its plans succeed, so we’ll need 120 TEDBFs for all three carriers excluding trainer aircrafts which all will be delivered after 2040, so TEDBF MK2 doesn’t make sense.

Navy has different goals . It's not just carriers but land based fighters too . Navy will eventually try to wrestle total coastal defence away from airforce so it needs larger numbers of Aircrafts.

Beside jet will have to evolve with time keeping pace with enemies field.

 

[IndianHawk]

Thats why I said old design without any stealth coating, I am not saying use old AMCA design for stealth naval aircraft but as a 4.5 gen naval aircraft.

Simply put amca design is not useful for navy. Too small wings , too narrow body etc.

 

[FalconSlayers]

Navy has different goals . It's not just carriers but land based fighters too . Navy will eventually try to wrestle total coastal defence away from airforce so it needs larger numbers of Aircrafts.

Beside jet will have to evolve with time keeping pace with enemies field.

Yes Anadaman and Nicobar needs atleast 1dedicated Regiment of S400 too.