TEDBF or ORCA Updates

MonaLazy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
1,150
Likes
7,162
Has GOI cleared the funds
frontierindia.com/ada-to-ready-aircraft-carrier-based-fighter-tedbf-for-the-indian-navy-by-2026/

The development of flying prototypes should cost around $1.75 billion, according to first estimates.

In September 2022, ADA began the preliminary design phase of TEDBF, which is expected to be completed within two years. The design process consists of three parts. The initial step involves sizing, refining, and enhancing the aerodynamic design of the TEDBF. Using CFD Analysis, the aerodynamic configuration will then be adjusted. Subsequently, a wind tunnel testing model for high-speed and low-speed tests would be developed for TEDBF aircraft. In the last part of the preliminary phase, the wind tunnel will be used to evaluate the canard, air intake, and DSI.

Within two to three years, the TEDBF project is expected to transition from the design phase to the implementation phase. In an optimistic scenario, the aircraft will be finished by 2026.

Expect funds release once the project moves from design to implementation phase.
 

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
13,704
Likes
60,539
Country flag
View attachment 171834

Twin Engine Deck Based Fighters Update:
-Apr 2020 #IndianNavy & Aeronautical Development Agency proposal and $1.75 Bn #Indian govt approval
-Sep 2022: Preliminary design phase begins
-2024: Design phase to implementation phase
-2026: 1st prototype flight
-2032: Mass production

If we are really serious about this than their is no point in Buying 57 F 18 or Rafale M.
If we place the order now F 18 will start rolling out by 2025 and rafale make take longer than that.
Better to put all the eggs in this basket and indiginise our carrier platform once and for all.

Shift all the performing MIG 29 on Vikrant and leaves the low serviceability ones to Vikramaditya as it spends more time in Harbour rather than sea these days. In that way we wouldn't compromise with our capability.
 

MonaLazy

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
1,150
Likes
7,162
If we are really serious about this than their is no point in Buying 57 F 18 or Rafale M.
If we place the order now F 18 will start rolling out by 2025 and rafale make take longer than that.
Better to put all the eggs in this basket and indiginise our carrier platform once and for all.

Shift all the performing MIG 29 on Vikrant and leaves the low serviceability ones to Vikramaditya as it spends more time in Harbour rather than sea these days. In that way we wouldn't compromise with our capability.
  1. We are dead serious about this which is why the MRCBF #s were toned down from 57 to just 26
  2. If we put all our eggs in the TEDBF basket, FF 2026, service entry by 2032 is an optimistic timeline- still that's 10 years Vikrant will have to sail without a reliable fighter!
  3. The current incumbent on Indian ACC Mig-29K has problems, & is a definite no go, otherwise, a repeat order of some more mig-29ks would have been ideal-
The Indian Navy currently uses the MiG-29K onboard its carriers, which has certain operational issues. The engine has been reported to have fuel problems, excessive oil consumption, and too many failures.
4. Whoever the winner of MRCBF- a few planes can be leased immediately (1 year?) to be relevant to that 10-year timeline while the new from factory take their time coming​
5. Looking forward by the time Vishal comes online- MRCBF & TEDBF will fly the flag on all 3 ACCs.​
 

Blademaster

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
4,357
Likes
13,518
View attachment 171834

Twin Engine Deck Based Fighters Update:
-Apr 2020 #IndianNavy & Aeronautical Development Agency proposal and $1.75 Bn #Indian govt approval
-Sep 2022: Preliminary design phase begins
-2024: Design phase to implementation phase
-2026: 1st prototype flight
-2032: Mass production

This is one beautiful looking plane!!! Can't wait to see it fly in the skies and become the mainstay of IAF and IN. If done correctly, it can totally replace the Rafales and Su-30MKIs.
 

HariPrasad-1

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
8,994
Likes
19,569
Country flag
  1. We are dead serious about this which is why the MRCBF #s were toned down from 57 to just 26
  2. If we put all our eggs in the TEDBF basket, FF 2026, service entry by 2032 is an optimistic timeline- still that's 10 years Vikrant will have to sail without a reliable fighter!
  3. The current incumbent on Indian ACC Mig-29K has problems, & is a definite no go, otherwise, a repeat order of some more mig-29ks would have been ideal-


4. Whoever the winner of MRCBF- a few planes can be leased immediately (1 year?) to be relevant to that 10-year timeline while the new from factory take their time coming​
5. Looking forward by the time Vishal comes online- MRCBF & TEDBF will fly the flag on all 3 ACCs.​

If we can make that 75kn/125 kn engine, even MWF can be made carrier compatible if navy agrees on single engine fighter.
 

NutCracker

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2022
Messages
1,062
Likes
4,998
Country flag
If we are really serious about this than their is no point in Buying 57 F 18 or Rafale M.
If we place the order now F 18 will start rolling out by 2025 and rafale make take longer than that.
Better to put all the eggs in this basket and indiginise our carrier platform once and for all.

Shift all the performing MIG 29 on Vikrant and leaves the low serviceability ones to Vikramaditya as it spends more time in Harbour rather than sea these days. In that way we wouldn't compromise with our capability.
nah. production rate is 24 for f-18 , US MI complex can start delivering within 2 years of signing and deliver 15-18 in 1.5 years to make minimum 18 requirement to make AC fully combat ready.

its not good to waste precious life years of perfectly capable AC be it Vikramaditya or VIkrant.

also we are buying only 26.
 

Blademaster

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
4,357
Likes
13,518
That is true with all aircraft carrier except vertical take off plane like F35. Any Point Here?
Because the Navy tried to see if the NLCA could work on a ski jump which didn't and a more powerful engine would not do the trick.
 

Okabe Rintarou

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
2,336
Likes
11,942
Country flag
View attachment 172080

This is surprising. Tejas Mk1 didn't have a JFS system? I thought the F404 allowed such an operation
Tejas Mk1 does have a JFS system. Even an APU (on FOC version). And it has been qualified for windmill relight, so its safe that way. Maybe the JFS is not qualified for inflight relights? Don't know.
 

DumbPilot

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2022
Messages
462
Likes
1,273
Country flag
Tejas Mk1 does have a JFS system. Even an APU (on FOC version). And it has been qualified for windmill relight, so its safe that way. Maybe the JFS is not qualified for inflight relights? Don't know.
That doesn't make sense.. JFS operation needs to be at the right pressure and with the correct intake airspeed. Only the engine producer will do those qualifications.
1664770357811.png


This is a F-16 JFS schematic. Such schematics are prepared for each engine, so the Tejas Mk1 should have a verified JFS airstart.
 

Okabe Rintarou

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2018
Messages
2,336
Likes
11,942
Country flag
That doesn't make sense.. JFS operation needs to be at the right pressure and with the correct intake airspeed. Only the engine producer will do those qualifications.
View attachment 174131

This is a F-16 JFS schematic. Such schematics are prepared for each engine, so the Tejas Mk1 should have a verified JFS airstart.
It does make sense, even more so after your comment. That JFS envelope in this diagram can only be tested and marked down by the engine OEM. As a result JFS assist to relights is only possible once this envelope is known. But Tejas Mk1 JFS was designed and developed by HAL. As a result, they only tested it for take offs not for relights. As can be seen in this article: https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...reakthrough/articleshow/46044701.cms?from=mdr

Further details on this JFS assisted cold-soak startup in high altitude airfields (sauce: https://www.drdo.gov.in/sites/default/files/newsletter-document/Mar_15.pdf )
Tejas Cold Weather Start via internal-JFS.png


So from this its clear that HAL made their own JFS, certified it for ground starts, but since there is no high altitude test facility in India and because we are not the engine OEM either, the entire envelope of the JFS was not noted and marked like in the F-16 engine airstart diagram you showed. As a result, Tejas Mk1 relies on windmill relight for now and can't do starter assisted relight. So when they say "JFS with in-flight relight capability" is a feature they are looking to give in Mk2, it makes perfect sense.
 

DumbPilot

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2022
Messages
462
Likes
1,273
Country flag
It does make sense, even more so after your comment. That JFS envelope in this diagram can only be tested and marked down by the engine OEM. As a result JFS assist to relights is only possible once this envelope is known. But Tejas Mk1 JFS was designed and developed by HAL. As a result, they only tested it for take offs not for relights. As can be seen in this article: https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...reakthrough/articleshow/46044701.cms?from=mdr

Further details on this JFS assisted cold-soak startup in high altitude airfields (sauce: https://www.drdo.gov.in/sites/default/files/newsletter-document/Mar_15.pdf )
View attachment 174152

So from this its clear that HAL made their own JFS, certified it for ground starts, but since there is no high altitude test facility in India and because we are not the engine OEM either, the entire envelope of the JFS was not noted and marked like in the F-16 engine airstart diagram you showed. As a result, Tejas Mk1 relies on windmill relight for now and can't do starter assisted relight. So when they say "JFS with in-flight relight capability" is a feature they are looking to give in Mk2, it makes perfect sense.
That's a bit of a shame for the Mk1. Thanks for the article
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top