TEDBF or ORCA Updates

[Vamsi]

Supercruise on Rafale M would reduce the need to reheat the engine now and then.

Rafale will not supercruise every time.... definitely not for Maritime strike

 

[Echo1Charlie]

Rafale will not supercruise every time.... definitely not for Maritime strike

Still more economical to fly as you don't go maritime strike on every sortie. (I got your point though)

 

[Vamsi]

Still more economical to fly as you don't go maritime strike on every sortie. (I got your point though)

F414 is more fuel economic than M-88, what are you talking eh?

 

[Echo1Charlie]

IAF is not the one to accept or reject Navy's proposal if they ever made one. IAF "just another" arm of Indian armed force which doesn't have any extra powers over other two services. I bet AMCA will be much safer with HAL - Navy partnership than IAF.

Navy's indigenization effort transformed the Indian warship shipbuilding industry, now building corvettes to nuclear subs and carriers.

IAF's indigenization effort made Tejas limping for 30+ years, not to mention that they already doomed the sale profile.

 

[Echo1Charlie]

F414 is more fuel economic than M-88, what are you talking eh?

Consider the supercruise capabilities of Rafale with M88 and TEDBF with F414 which have to reheat the engines every now and then. Which one would consume more fuel/hour?

 

[NutCracker]

This is not the old design, but the latest

I can only see 10 weapon stations, where are other 2

It looks like weapon station under the belly removed
View attachment 194086

Its not Rafale copy. Its better than that. RafaleM has maybe 21T MTOW from ramp.

Testing for three key challenges - Rafale M image shows full load during the Indian Aircraft Carrier Vikrant (frontierindia.com)

The image shows the Rafale aircraft is carrying two fuel tanks of 2 thousand litres each, two Mica medium-range missiles, two Mica self-defence missiles and one AM-39 Exocet anti-ship missile under the fuselage.

Rafale M, the marine version of Rafale, can take off with about 5.5 tons and has a Maximum Tak off Weight (MTOW) of 20-21 tons while having a flight range of almost 1 thousand km

ORCA will take off with 30T tonne minimum vs 24.5T of Rafale. TEDBF has ~100kN engine.

 

[NutCracker]

Consider the supercruise capabilities of Rafale with M88 and TEDBF with F414 which have to reheat the engines every now and then. Which one would consume more fuel/hour?

F414 - 0.840 lb/HR/lb st (w/o afterburner 50kN)
M88 - 0.782 lb/(lbf⋅h 57.8 kN

F414 will consume 1/13th more fuel but provides 1/7th more thrust.

You can clearly see TEDBF can pull higher MTOW and super cruise.

 

[radion]

length has changed from 16.3 to 17m
height from 5.1 to 5.65m
wingspan from 11.2 to 11.6m
but mtow remains the same 26ton.
I guess the range or payload will take a hit for this?
the previous chimed nose looked so sexy,it was like a better rafale copy with a dsi, now its just a rafale with a dsi

 

[Echo1Charlie]

You can clearly see TEDBF can pull higher MTOW.

but still have 1.5t less payload carrying capacity than Rafale M.

 

[Vamsi]

but still have 1.5t less payload carrying capacity than Rafale M.

Your Rafale's payload would still be less than that of TEDBF when it takes off from our carriers

 

[Javelin_Sam]

Your Rafale's payload would still be less than that of TEDBF when it takes off from our carriers

Chill bro. That dude has no idea regarding the difference between ski jump and catapult. And Teddy's 2 f414s combined produces 17 KN more dry thrust and 46 KN more wet thrust than Rafale's 2*M88

 

[flanker99]

but still have 1.5t less payload carrying capacity than Rafale M.

No a/c flies to combat with full load let alone a naval jet that has to take off from a sky jump ramp...it doesn't matter much unless ur a bomber refuellers,cargo etc

 

[Corvus Splendens]

You guys are only concerned about two hardpoints that are apparently missing in this picture? This fking thing is an underperforming (at least by this spec sheet) Rafale copy! Why should we go forward with it? Scrap it, pursue the Navy to get Naval AMCA, and channel its funding. In that way, both Air Force and Naval air arm would have a potent fighter to challenge J20 and carrier-borne J31 from the early 2030s.

 

[NutCracker]

but still have 1.5t less payload carrying capacity than Rafale M.

Okay tell me what is Rafale-M MTOW as per your estimation ??

 

[Echo1Charlie]

Okay tell me what is Rafale-M MTOW as per your estimation ??

24t

 

[Echo1Charlie]

View attachment 194401

Then explain what's the advantage of bringing a 4th generation jet to a 5th generation war? Or would you pursue China to not use J20 and J31 to ensure fair play?

 

[NutCracker]

24t

That's when it gets full length land based runway.

 

[Echo1Charlie]

Chill bro. That dude has no idea regarding the difference between ski jump and catapult. And Teddy's 2 f414s combined produces 17 KN more dry thrust and 46 KN more wet thrust than Rafale's 2*M88

Where's 'teddy'?
When will it first fly?
When will it be available for induction?
How is it going to perform against J31?

Still, a much better option is not to develop a Rafale copy but invest that money and manpower into AMCA which is going to be relevant in 2035.

 

[flanker99]

Where's 'teddy'?
When will it first fly?
When will it be available for induction?
How is it going to perform against J31?

Still, a much better option is not to develop a Rafale copy but invest that money and manpower into AMCA which is going to be relevant in 2035.

Are vai converting a land based a/c to naval a/c is not a good idea as the result is subpar...rafale was developed keeping the naval requirements in mind but mig29 wasnt hence the latter is a subpar naval a/c....its easy to say "convert amca for naval operations" but if u have been following Defense related news long enough (which u clearly haven't) then u would know such proposals has already been rejected due to the complexities involved and huge amounts of time required
Go watch the old ddr pd interviews and interviews with maolenkar sir if u want to know more

 

[Echo1Charlie]

That's when it gets full length land based runway.

Yes! On the other hand mtow with which a Rafale can take off from a Ski jump ramp is not available on open sources (I'm sure even Dassault is unsure about numbers here). Well, all we can do is just guess but I'm not good at guessing that kind of info of an aircraft that is yet to take off from design board.