TEDBF or ORCA Updates

[Covfefe]

bhai bhai i said it multiple times navy is trying to get best of both worlds by having semi reccessed bays for a2a operations so why this obsession for iwb,having recessed bays is better than iwb as they reduce range

Arey usko chahiye hi hai Internal Weapons Bay to kya karneka. Bina IWB ke bhangaar hai TEDBF 4th gen fighter. Kal se itti baar hi bola hai IWB chahiye IWB chahiye ki abhi to TEDBF mein kuch bacha nahi other than IWB(or the lack of it)

 

[SARTHAK]

Arey usko chahiye hi hai Internal Weapons Bay to kya karneka. Bina IWB ke bhangaar hai TEDBF 4th gen fighter. Kal se itti baar hi bola hai IWB chahiye IWB chahiye ki abhi to TEDBF mein kuch bacha nahi other than IWB(or the lack of it)

abhi banwata hoon ruko

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Deyy, operational requirements for Air Force and Navy are completely different.You cannot compare both. Just because IAF got AMCA, doesn't mean Navy should also go for AMCA. Also IAF won't ground all 4.5 gen aircrafts like Rafale, Tejas-Mk2 after AMCA is inducted. They still need 4.5 gen aircrafts even in 2070.

Repeating myself, i didn't oppose pressent TEDBF design production? I did criticize the delays in R&D.
If someone tell u not to use stand-off weapon like Brahmos but try to sink ship like old days with unguided weapons in close range, how will u respond?
I never said to ground 4.5 gen jet, that's impossible & illogical. I clearly said "Some older gen jets + ships + subs will always b there to supplement ASh ops". Phase-in of new jets & phase-out of old jets always have overlap period.

You design an aircraft based on your operational requirements, not because IAF will have AMCA.

Cost economy forces to have common airframe & production line, saves time also, increases spare parts availability. Rafale, F-18, F-35 are 3 examples.
Repeating myself, operational doctrine & tactics change with time/tech. When U say a 4.5gen gen jet should use Brahmos, that itself is proof that it should not use previous gen weapon with lesser range, right? Stand-off weapons are present gen weapons.
Similarly next gen platform will use next gen weapon & tactics. It is like diff. b/w regular police & SWAT.

1.So, what is your main requirement for TEDBF?
And: Sink your enemy ship .

2. How would you achieve that ?
Ans: By using a long range Anti-ship missile.

can b sunk by multiple platforms like ships, subs, any 4.5gen jet.

3. Can you carry it internally? If yes ,then u can have IWB.
Ans: No, it cannot be carried internally.

So, you dont need a IWB, because,you won't carry your main weapon internally. Also IWB reduces internal fuel.

IWB concept is independent of standoff super/hyper-sonic long range missile because -
A 5th gen future version of TEDBF can work in non-stealth & stealth missions.
But a 4.5 gen TEDBF "stubborn not to evolve further" cannot execute stealth mission.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

bhai bhai i said it multiple times navy is trying to get best of both worlds by having semi reccessed bays for a2a operations so why this obsession for iwb,having recessed bays is better than iwb as they reduce range

Bro, why do u call it obsession? Is talking about future a crime? If someone wants to just talk about how future tanks, submarines & 6th gen jet might look.... is it a crime to discuss on that as well?
What is the objective of this website? Is this meant only for DoD guys or for common public?
Repeating myself 4th ot 5th time, my 1st comment in this forum said to finalize 1 of 2 CG models for TEDBF.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Arey usko chahiye hi hai Internal Weapons Bay to kya karneka. Bina IWB ke bhangaar hai TEDBF 4th gen fighter. Kal se itti baar hi bola hai IWB chahiye IWB chahiye ki abhi to TEDBF mein kuch bacha nahi other than IWB(or the lack of it)

Talking about future on fan site is crime? So we should not talk about future tank, submarine, carrier, anything?
Did u miss what i said:
I mentioned already that as stronger engines will be available with higher T/W ratio, we can proceed.
Today we can have current TEDBF MK1 TD prototype without IWB
then MK2 TD protoype with only main IWB, no SWB
then MK3 TD prototype with MWB & SWB
5th gen jet can do both non-stealth & stealh missions,
But 4.5 gen gen can't execute stealth missions.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

bhai bhai i said it multiple times navy is trying to get best of both worlds by having semi reccessed bays for a2a operations so why this obsession for iwb,having recessed bays is better than iwb as they reduce range

Bro, why do u call it obsession? Is talking about future a crime? If someone wants to just talk about how future tanks, submarines & 6th gen jet might look.... is it a crime to discuss on that as well?
What is the objective of this website? Is this meant only for DoD guys or for common public?
Repeating myself 4th ot 5th time, my 1st comment in this forum said to finalize 1 of 2 CG models for TEDBF.

1 more thing on the recessed bay part - it is a "work-around", not solution. For that also the airframe needs to be inflated slightly for half the volume of missiles, if the fuselage is already cramped & packed tight. U can't just scoop out space like scooping icecream.
What are the ranges of F-22, Su-57 with IWB? Why they implemented it? They need & have stronger engines for that. Tomorrow when we have such engines, domestic/JV/imported then we will also proceed with evolved designs.
USN now got F-35C, Russian Navy might get something as well, perhaps Naval Checkmate with new carrier catapult launch system, who knows. EU might have Naval Tempest & FCAS, time will tell.
Evolution is inevitable.

 

[Covfefe]

Talking about future on fan site is crime? So we should not talk about future tank, submarine, carrier, anything?
Did u miss what i said:
I mentioned already that as stronger engines will be available with higher T/W ratio, we can proceed.
Today we can have current TEDBF MK1 TD prototype without IWB
then MK2 TD protoype with only main IWB, no SWB
then MK3 TD prototype with MWB & SWB
5th gen jet can do both non-stealth & stealh missions,
But 4.5 gen gen can't execute stealth missions.

Nobody missed what you said, nobody could have given the number of times you have said it. It's okay, IWB will be a good feature to have but it isn't there as of now. Some disagree with you, some agree- move on. There's no point keeping the thread hostage to your disagreements with wailing arguments like -"taxpayers concern" "there is no DoD .GOV.IN tag on this site""Are you from DRDO HAL degree dikha".
How many projects you envision can they churn out within a decade? 4 jets as complete projects? Or hosting the Naval jet hostage to AMCA technology development?(IWB is not just a weight penalty, it's a major headache in terms of munition miniaturisation, release test, flutter test and so on- so the project timeline gets kicked by a decade)
And how much of design and development resource you think ADA and HAL has(please refer to Angad Singh's and Raghu Nambiar's interview on Livefist), to work on 4 projects simultaneously? Manpower aside, is any of these project even funded(TEDBF will get fund from the Navy but guess what prototyping funds are not released for Mk2 or AMCA yet) that we're harping for one more? And to this question before you come with taxpayers' eternal right to question and the raison detre for forum's existence, let's have it clear that you can question/ask/dream whatever you wish, but it doesn't happen that way and this thread is specifically for TEDBF. You proposed a cool idea with great facts and figures but staying stuck on the same issue on the third day of the discussion helps no one.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Some people say the glass is half empty, some say it is half full.

There's no point keeping the thread hostage to your disagreements with wailing arguments like -"taxpayers concern" "there is no DoD .GOV.IN tag on this site""Are you from DRDO HAL degree dikha".

if others didn't demean me like 'degree from IIT-Youtube', etc then i also wouldn't have given such reactions, simple. Such frictions don't heppen b/w me & others of my age-group & comprehension level.

How many projects you envision can they churn out within a decade? 4 jets as complete projects? Or hosting the Naval jet hostage to AMCA technology development?
And how much of design and development resource you think ADA and HAL has(please refer to Angad Singh's and Raghu Nambiar's interview on Livefist), to work on 4 projects simultaneously? Manpower aside, is any of these project even funded(TEDBF will get fund from the Navy but guess what prototyping funds are not released for Mk2 or AMCA yet) that we're harping for one more?

I already addressed that concern to have common airframe design with minor modifications like Rafale, F-18, F-35, Su-33, MiG-29 have done for both Navy & AF.
Having 4 different designs of TEDBF + ORCA + MWF + AMCA, i never supported this idea.

(IWB is not just a weight penalty, it's a major headache in terms of munition miniaturisation, release test, flutter test and so on- so the project timeline gets kicked by a decade)

It is natural part & process, not an excuse.
In college we had this semester subject called S/w Engineering which explaind project/product lifecycle from research, development, marketing, sales, implementation, administration, tech support, decommissioning & refresh.
Designing the lastest consumer electronic goods also have huge "headache" compared to the ones in 1990s.
So munitions miniaturization R&D is already happening which i shared already.
Release tests happen for all types & gen of weapons, no big deal.
Flutter test happens even with civil airliners.
For non-tech grads, all these will appear as headache.

And to this question before you come with taxpayers' eternal right to question and the raison detre for forum's existence, let's have it clear that you can question/ask/dream whatever you wish, but it doesn't happen that way and this thread is specifically for TEDBF.

Actually, it is public questioning, journalism, talk shows, etc which keeps a check on delays & corruption otherwise corruption doesn't follow any demographic characteristics. After independence, 70 years is huge time tolearn After Marut jet, our programs were stalled & we were made puppeted importers otherwise today we would be already having TEDBF & AMCA & launching 6th gen research like EU.

You proposed a cool idea with great facts and figures but staying stuck on the same issue on the third day of the discussion helps no one.

I'm merely responding & discussing like others in every thread.
3 days of replies is nothing in front of the total life of this thread, website & the life of DoD project.
Some threads are on older platforms & products which have crossed 300+ pages mark.
TEDBF is just beginning now, discussion will keep happening for decades.
So U can't put a red signal if 2 people at least wanna discuss, they may take days/weeks/months, let them, u can opt not to participate among them, just b a witness or completely ignore.
I'm also planning to learn 3D tools so that i can explain my points better. There r already some 3D art websites where people express themselves.

 

[Javelin_Sam]

Ater decades of importing we are habituated to lag & let the world take lead. hence obviously 1-2 decades of more lag we have to tolerate. If AF-AMCA prototype can fly in few years then N-AMCA prototype can follow after few years too. So in 10 years if we can get AF-AMCA & in 15 years N-AMCA just like the N-LCA was developed then it will be good.
We are not in era of analog design where people use to design with sheet, drafter, pencil.
View attachment 128468


U r from DoD? And even if u r from DoD, u expect all members to b aero guys? Is this DoD website with .GOV.IN domain? What is the objective of this website? Does HAL/NAL/DRDO/ADA monitor fan sites? If all members disclose their qualification & profession then it will be clear who is in how much water.

N-AMCA prototypes need the more powerful 75KN engine. The engine after development must undergo 1000s of hours in a testbed before powering N-AMCA. Add the time to develop and validate this GEF414 sized engine that can churn out 75KN thrust in the timeline. (Such an engine will be the apex of engine technology second only to PWs powering F22 and F35.) Nobody knows how the RAM coatings developed will hold up in the salty marine environment. All these require atleast 10-15 years of flight testing and several iterations after the 1st prototype's first flight.
If the engine can be realised by 2035, then N-AMCA can reach initial production around 2045. Or even if we assume an extremely optimistic 2040-2042, that is nearly 20 years from now. IN cannot fly Mig29K till then. TEDBF/RafaleM/F-18SH is their practical choice. It seems they are going for TEDBF for near future and IAF's Mig29 UPG like upgrade for MiG-29k plus UTTAM AESA in the short term

 

[Covfefe]

My ultimate point in every reply is that R&D shouldn't stop, delays should be avoided, that's all

What gave you the idea that R&D has stopped? And in the quest of "R&D" and a "perfect product" development, an actual product rollout should not stop. We did this stupidity with Mk1 already trying to make it AESA equipped , Indian engine fitted and BVR capable. Navy needs the fighters now

For non-tech grads, all these will appear as headache

Lol you're too arrogant to assume that
1) the other fella is a "non-tech grad"
2) it's actually a headache for non-tech grads.
Can't help it

In college we had this semester subject called S/w Engineering which explaind project/product lifecycle from research, development, marketing, sales, implementation, administration, tech support, decommissioning & refresh.
Designing the lastest consumer electronic goods also have huge "headache" compared to the ones in 1990s.

Yeah, in my college they taught Kamasutra and how not to cause colossal screw up in the scope of a running project midway.
And designing an underwear is also fairly complex but that's not we are discussing here

So munitions miniaturization R&D is already happening which i shared already.
Release tests happen for all types & gen of weapons, no big deal.

Where have you come across the miniaturisation projects of DRDO? Please share. We hardly have the full envelope of weapons- let alone it being IWB compatible

Flutter test happens even with civil airliners.

Yeah, but don't see them churning out a new plane every few years. And they don't have weapon pylons mounted on them designed to carry ordnance and a release mechanism within the huge envelope that a fighter jet has.

A point you very conveniently left out was resource prioritisation. R&D should not stop fine, but where is the manpower? Where is the money? They are putting money where the mouth is otherwise there are a lot of interesting avenues in the world to follow- an adaptive jet engine, batmobile, an iron man suit.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

N-AMCA prototypes need the more powerful 75KN engine. The engine after development must undergo 1000s of hours in a testbed before powering N-AMCA. Add the time to develop and validate this GEF414 sized engine that can churn out 75KN thrust in the timeline. (Such an engine will be the apex of engine technology second only to PWs powering F22 and F35.) Nobody knows how the RAM coatings developed will hold up in the salty marine environment. All these require atleast 10-15 years of flight testing and several iterations after the 1st prototype's first flight.
If the engine can be realised by 2035, then N-AMCA can reach initial production around 2045. Or even if we assume an extremely optimistic 2040-2042, that is nearly 20 years from now. IN cannot fly Mig29K till then. TEDBF/RafaleM/F-18SH is their practical choice. It seems they are going for TEDBF for near future and IAF's Mig29 UPG like upgrade for MiG-29k plus UTTAM AESA in the short term

Too many problems, isn't it? Perhaps that's why EU dumped 5th gen & jumped directly to 6th gen, in colaboration obviously.
Ok agreed, u highlighted the challenges well. Now let's shift our mind mode into looking at possible work-arounds & solutions.
But remember, we r common people discussing theory for time pass. DoD doesn't monitor forums or seeks advice from public. There is a global history of industrial blunders, scams, bad decisions in every sector. Even scientists & business tycoons have made mistakes. So whether a discussed theory of solution will be implemented or not is a different thing. That shouldn't stop us from discussing nicely.

Nothing is APEX of any technology, evolution & R&D is ongoing natural process. We boast of our global CEOs hence we have to prove things domestically too. ISRO has done so well, so DoD can also do it.

Briefly speaking, there is something called "accelerated development" where same work force is divided into shifts for increasing project work/day. Many other adjustments are required.

So a prototype TD with lesser power engine can be developed like for X-35, which can test rest of the systems as part of DEM-VAL & then when the 75KN engine will be available, by then the actual airframe will also be ready for IOC testing. If we can't develop the engine in 10-15 years then we can look for imported or JV option now.

DRDO developed RAM called "Adrishya" Who knows they might have started testing it secretly for sea environment also?
F-22 took 25 years from 1980-2005, F-35 took 22 years from 1993 to 2015 doesn't mean AMCA & N-AMCA variant will also take same time. We are not in era of pencil, sheet, drafter board. We don't have to develop VTOL jet. We don't have international customer pressure. We already have huge advantages.

I think MiG-29K is already a good feared jet & can be MLUed.
Rafale M, yes certainly, but i don't know about their ski-jump tests.
F-18, my opinion doesn't support a complete jet from USA bcoz it can try to impose CAATSA on us in future depending upon our colaborations across all wings.
Meanwhile i already shared TEDBF MK1/2/3 plan to be combined with engine development in JV/import/domestic.

BTW i just came to know by google search that 5 months back a model similar to TEDBF but with IWB was shown by MiG at MAKS 2021

So just like in Sukhoi Checkmate, they will use AL-41F or Izdeliye-30 engine.
A frozen popsicle country with lesser population has always managed to show horns & teeth to the West.
And currently Russian Rubles is equal to INR

So our DoD needs to push harder.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

What gave you the idea that R&D has stopped? And in the quest of "R&D" and a "perfect product" development, an actual product rollout should not stop. We did this stupidity with Mk1 already trying to make it AESA equipped , Indian engine fitted and BVR capable. Navy needs the fighters now

LCA MK1? I dont even focus on light jets. Not intrested, sorry. Good for export to small nations, Malaysia seems intrested if Israeli components removed.

Lol you're too arrogant to assume that
1) the other fella is a "non-tech grad"
2) it's actually a headache for non-tech grads.
Can't help it

Which other fella? It is not fault or arrogance of tech grads better comprehension. I focus on technology in my best comprehension & knowledge base as per my qualification & profession. There is huge diff. b/w talking about parts of machine & architecture of it.
I actually wanted to join DRDO/HAL, etc but like i said long back i'm an average guy. My college senior made it to HAL & worked on LCA for some time back in mid-2000s.

Yeah, in my college they taught Kamasutra

LOL! Highly inappropriate analogy. It is not fault of a member here if he/she is Engg. grad. & professional, but an advantage. Be it any topic, if u can't comprehend something, just ask nicely.

And designing an underwear is also fairly complex but that's not we are discussing here

ROFL! Again highly inappropriate analogy. Just ask nicely what u don't know or can't comprehend.

Where have you come across the miniaturisation projects of DRDO? Please share. We hardly have the full envelope of weapons- let alone it being IWB compatible

Glad u asked finally.
I didn't mention DRDO. I shared pics of CUDA missile shown for F-35.
But we have SAAW munition which is identical in size with SDB used in F-22.

Here is CFD model of AMCA launching SAAW

Yeah, but don't see them churning out a new plane every few years. And they don't have weapon pylons mounted on them designed to carry ordnance and a release mechanism within the huge envelope that a fighter jet has.

Obviously, i mentioned flutter test as a normal regular test, not for comapring civil airliner with fighter jet. Then why r u comparing? It is just that both are aircrafts & all jets have certain common sub-systems conceptually (not same parts).

A point you very conveniently left out was resource prioritisation. R&D should not stop fine, but where is the manpower? Where is the money? They are putting money where the mouth is otherwise there are a lot of interesting avenues in the world to follow- an adaptive jet engine, batmobile, an iron man suit.

Only President, PM, FM, DoD heads, etc know allocation & routing of funds. Not going deep but we managed to have Bofors scam, Rafale scam. In Engineering also we had Satyam scam, 2G scam. In medical industry there are kidney & critical medicine stealing staff.
So on this forum let's concentrate on technology & possibility assuming everything favorable & things doable. That's less "headache" for us when we are not DoD guys or politicians.

 

[Covfefe]

Just ask nicely what u don't know or can't comprehend.

It is not fault of a member here if he/she is Engg. grad. & professional, but an advantage. Be it any topic, if u can't comprehend something, just ask nicely.

I actually wanted to join DRDO/HAL, etc but like i said long back i'm an average guy. My college senior made it to HAL & worked on LCA for some time back in mid-2000s.

Let's have some reality cheque here.
The 'other fella' has already interned with HAL during as an engineering kid, cracked HAL GET test and better ones and had forgone the offer for better. So calm down your panties, Engineering grad- you sound stupid when you start comparison of ADA's and HAL's programs with Boeing and LM directly

But we have SAAW munition which is identical in size with SDB used in F-22.

If your argument for armament for a naval attack fighter is a smart bomb with 80kg warhead and 100km range, then your logic is farther than your IWB dreams

all jets have certain common sub-systems conceptually (not same parts)

Then what's the point of even bringing a civil jetliner to comparison?

Only President, PM, FM, DoD heads, etc know allocation & routing of funds. Not going deep but we managed to have Bofors scam, Rafale scam. In Engineering also we had Satyam scam, 2G scam. In medical industry there are kidney & critical medicine stealing staff.
So on this forum let's concentrate on technology & possibility assuming everything favorable & things doable. That's less "headache" for us when we are not DoD guys or politicians.

Lol, so resource availability isn't something to be discussed according to the Engineering grad here? Or we should let the scientists, engineers, military planners discuss the technological part of the project as well? Because we don't know the exact technological capabilities and availability as well by that logic?
If there's is something about these simple things your Engineering grad mind can't comprehend, please (don't) ask nicely.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

@Covfefe Yeah so what's there to highlight as if unable to believe it. How deos HAL/DRDO/NAL/ADA select new recuits? You don't know? R u Indian citizen or just Hindi speaking person from some neighboring country?

 

[SwordOfDarkness]

....... IG you would have to edit your post, quote seems to be put in weirdly and I cant understand anything :/

@Covfefe

 

[Covfefe]

....... IG you would have to edit your post, quote seems to be put in weirdly and I cant understand anything :/

Its just trash talk with the engineering grad here. Please ignore.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Its just trash talk with the engineering grad here. Please ignore.

Glad u accepted honestly that u do trash talking. Would like to know ur profession.

 

[Covfefe]

Glad u accepted honestly that u do trash talking. Would like to know ur profession.

Giving reality cheques to "Engineering grads" who talk trash with no consideration for realities and humility.

 

[Covfefe]

@Covfefe Yeah so what's there to highlight as if unable to believe it. How deos HAL/DRDO/NAL/ADA select new recuits? You don't know? R u Indian citizen or just Hindi speaking person from some neighboring country?

HAL conducts it's separate GET test(atleast they did back then), DRDO its own. Don't know about ADA and NAL. Didn't they teach you how to check recruitment process in your Engineering college where they taught you the very complex product life cycle management

 

[SARTHAK]

HAL conducts it's separate GET test(atleast they did back then), DRDO its own. Don't know about ADA and NAL. Didn't they teach you how to check recruitment process in your Engineering college where they taught you the very complex product life cycle management

Bas karo ab ! end this now both of you ,this a forum for constructive decision @Bhartiya Sainik i think we have had a lot over iwb so no more