TEDBF or ORCA Updates

itsme

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
735
Likes
1,375
Country flag
View attachment 49148

Air launched HSTDV on ORCA is my dream 😍. Imagine 3 HSTDV & 3 Brahmos NG in ORCA

ORCA as a Heavy weight fighter to replace MKI is my another dream, and yes dream is a dream but IAF still didn't responded.
ORCA is a medium class fighter not heavy class.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
6,174
Likes
25,849
Country flag
ORCA is a medium class fighter not heavy class.
By specs.
Rafale already beats the effective payload of Su-30. AMCA with same engines and smaller wings is expected at 30ton MTOW payload (against 38ton of Su-30). A delta-canard of same size & engines will haul few more.

So if the much lighter ORCA design can carry more fuel than that, then the 110kN-class more fuel efficient engines may match Su-30's range as well. Too early to say.
 
Last edited:

aditya10r

Mera Bharat mahan
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
5,720
Likes
11,620
Country flag
Nobody knows what will happen 20 years later... Look at Tejas replaceing Mig-21 & Mig-27 both.

We may soon buy new Mig-29s while IAF just declared that Jaguars will not be retired unto 2035, well after Mark2. So, ORCA & AMCA may both replace a number of old Mig-29, Mirage-2000, Jaguars & Su-30.
Sometime back even i used to think that 5th gen will be the norm of the future.But i think i was wrong.5Th gen aircrafts act as force multiplier in case of a full blown war or even low level kinetic strikes(like Operation Eldorado canyon or last years balakot strike).They can conduct SEAD/DEAD missions and other A2A roles really well,and BVR will be their niche.

But they have some really big shortcomings.To minimise the RCS they often have to compromise the on aerodynamics and have to carry weapons concealed in the IWB.They are really maintenance intensive,their RAM paints needs to be redone everytime after every sortie.And because these jets have to carry weapons inside their IWB they have to compromise on payload and that can be a real bummer in A2G roles.These are major design limitations.
Just look at Loadout configuration of Dassault rafale and the F-35.




Rafale can carry bombs on triple ejector racks on 2 pylons with 6 bombs in total with still 3 fuel tanks+4 BVR AAM+2 WVRCCM.


And even despite F-35 being available americans are still purchasing more Hornets more Eagles and trying to keep the F-16 in service.Rafale will easily live post 2060.

With Right EW and VLO design and other sensors 4th gen jets will live for really long.
MKI will be replaced from 2040 onwards by AMCA Mk2/Mk3.
 

aditya10r

Mera Bharat mahan
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
5,720
Likes
11,620
Country flag
By specs.
Rafale already beats the effective payload of Su-30. AMCA with same engines and smaller wings is expected at 30ton MTOW payload (against 38ton of Su-30). A delta-canard of same size & engines will haul few more.

So if the much lighter ORCA design can carry more fuel than that, then the 110kN-class more fuel efficient engines may match Su-30's range as well. Too early to say.
I would love a slightly bigger TEDBF/ORCA with Conformal fuel tanks and 120kn+ engine.That will push its MTOW weight over 25-26 tonnes,maybe really close to 30 tonnes but that will be the true-blue replacement for the Su-30mki.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
By specs.
Rafale already beats the effective payload of Su-30. AMCA with same engines and smaller wings is expected at 30ton MTOW payload (against 38ton of Su-30). A delta-canard of same size & engines will haul few more.

So if the much lighter ORCA design can carry more fuel than that, then the 110kN-class more fuel efficient engines may match Su-30's range as well. Too early to say.
That's not really correct. Rafale payload of 9ton has to cater to external fuel tanks too while su30 carried almost double the internal fuel then rafale and can fly much farther on internal fuel than rafale with some external tanks.

It also means su30 with huge payload still generates less drag then rafale as su30 doesn't need external tanks.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
MKI will be replaced from 2040 onwards by AMCA Mk2/Mk3.
The oldest mki went for 1500hr service in 2016.
That's 14 years from 2002 induction .
And it's service life is 6000+ hours.

So it will take 42 more years to complete service life.
Now and service life can always be extended. Airframe can always be zeroed.

So I won't worry about su30 replacement anytime soon.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
I would love a slightly bigger TEDBF/ORCA with Conformal fuel tanks and 120kn+ engine.That will push its MTOW weight over 25-26 tonnes,maybe really close to 30 tonnes but that will be the true-blue replacement for the Su-30mki.
There is no such engine. And there is no necessity to match su30 payload.

All these 8-9 ton figures are broucher figures . No mission flies like that. And multiple plane are used for strike rather then single.

Also weaponry is getting smaller and lighter with technical progress.

Besides as I posted above. Su30 bought from 2010 will easily serve till 2060. 2020 su30 will serve till 2070 .

Don't expect a single su30 to retire before 50-60 years in service. These beasts are formidable and can keep taking upgrades.

Su30 with aesa and sfdr will be far more lethal then any rafale in service.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
Sometime back even i used to think that 5th gen will be the norm of the future.But i think i was wrong.5Th gen aircrafts act as force multiplier in case of a full blown war or even low level kinetic strikes(like Operation Eldorado canyon or last years balakot strike).They can conduct SEAD/DEAD missions and other A2A roles really well,and BVR will be their niche.

But they have some really big shortcomings.To minimise the RCS they often have to compromise the on aerodynamics and have to carry weapons concealed in the IWB.They are really maintenance intensive,their RAM paints needs to be redone everytime after every sortie.And because these jets have to carry weapons inside their IWB they have to compromise on payload and that can be a real bummer in A2G roles.These are major design limitations.
Just look at Loadout configuration of Dassault rafale and the F-35.




Rafale can carry bombs on triple ejector racks on 2 pylons with 6 bombs in total with still 3 fuel tanks+4 BVR AAM+2 WVRCCM.


And even despite F-35 being available americans are still purchasing more Hornets more Eagles and trying to keep the F-16 in service.Rafale will easily live post 2060.

With Right EW and VLO design and other sensors 4th gen jets will live for really long.
Yup 5th gen will act like snipers and network leaders .
All 4.5 gen will act in network with them.
And there will be drones in the mix too.

I have imagined su30 , orca type jets will be used for standoff strikes rather then entering enemy airspace .

They will carry hypersonic supersonic cruise missiles with 1000km+ distances and will launch them at coardinates given by forward stealth jets which will be mapping enemy ground position and taking out radars and enemy jets.
 

Bleh

Laughing member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
6,174
Likes
25,849
Country flag
I would love a slightly bigger TEDBF/ORCA with Conformal fuel tanks and 120kn+ engine.That will push its MTOW weight over 25-26 tonnes,maybe really close to 30 tonnes but that will be the true-blue replacement for the Su-30mki.
Anything over 115kN will eat up its range considerably.
MTOW will already be about 33-35 ton being conservative, if compared to same sized AMCA's 30ton with same. engines. As I explained before, absence of internal weapon bay will also allow more internal fuel than AMCA.
That's not really correct. Rafale payload of 9ton has to cater to external fuel tanks too while su30 carried almost double the internal fuel then rafale and can fly much farther on internal fuel than rafale with some external tanks.

It also means su30 with huge payload still generates less drag then rafale as su30 doesn't need external tanks.
Oh yes. But I just used as an example of wing design difference. ORCA is rated to have 220-230kN max thrust compared to 150kN of Rafale. Plus ^above quote's points.

So I made some rough estimates:
Rafale emt. - 9.5-10t, MTOW - 25t
Su-30 emt. - 17.5t, MTOW - 38.5t
AMCA emt. - 12.5t. MTOW - 30t
ORCA emt. - 15t, MTOW 33-35t

Anyways, after 123 + 100-150 Tejas Mark 1 & 2 replace all the Mig-21 then Mig-27. Post-2035 AMCA & ORCA will start replacing Jaguars, then Mirage-2000, then older Mig-29.
Who knows what'll happen after 2050.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
That's not really correct. Rafale payload of 9ton has to cater to external fuel tanks too while su30 carried almost double the internal fuel then rafale and can fly much farther on internal fuel than rafale with some external tanks.

It also means su30 with huge payload still generates less drag then rafale as su30 doesn't need external tanks.
Further on this .
Total payload for Rafale is 4.5 ton internal fuel +9 ton payload== 13.5 tons.

For su30mki internal fuel==9 ton+ payload=8ton+ == 17 ton.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
Anything over 115kN will eat up its range considerably.
MTOW will already be about 33-35 ton being conservative, if compared to same sized AMCA's 30ton with same. engines. As I explained before, absence of internal weapon bay will also allow more internal fuel than AMCA.
Oh yes. But I just used as an example of wing design difference. ORCA is rated to have 220-230kN max thrust compared to 150kN of Rafale. Plus ^above quote's points.

So I made some rough estimates:
Rafale emt. - 9.5-10t, MTOW - 25t
Su-30 emt. - 17.5t, MTOW - 38.5t
AMCA emt. - 12.5t. MTOW - 30t
ORCA emt. - 15t, MTOW 33-35t

Anyways, after 123 + 100-150 Tejas Mark 1 & 2 replace all the Mig-21 then Mig-27. Post-2035 AMCA & ORCA will start replacing Jaguars, then Mirage-2000, then older Mig-29.
Who knows what'll happen after 2050.
I full expect AMCA to keep evolving just like lca.
Orca will remain medium weight like eurofighter.
We won't model is after f18 but after rafale and eurofighter as these are more advanced designs with less footprint.

But 6th gen concepts are pointing toward big jets which can carry more internal fuel than even f22 and can fly even farther as airbases near enemy won't survive future warfare.

So amca will evolve into mk3 and mk4 with scaled up design to be proper 6th gen fighter.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
Nobody knows what will happen 20 years later... Look at Tejas replaceing Mig-21 & Mig-27 both.

We may soon buy new Mig-29s while IAF just declared that Jaguars will not be retired unto 2035, well after Mark2. So, ORCA & AMCA may both replace a number of old Mig-29, Mirage-2000, Jaguars & Su-30.
It was always clear Jaguar will serve more as the last batch was build in 2000s. It's also upgraded with aesa now and has self defense in debry .

Actually bombers like jaguar can remain relevant with more awacs and s400 . As powerful radars of awacs and s400 type systems can map enemy airspace and air defense and point out gaps for jaguar to exploit .

Even inside enemy space jaguar can be protected by s400 cover for hundreds of kilometers even without other fighter escorts.
 

aditya10r

Mera Bharat mahan
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
5,720
Likes
11,620
Country flag
The oldest mki went for 1500hr service in 2016.
I know for a fact that MKI does over 200 hours per year.So The oldest MKI has atleast 3500+ hours of service.

Plus AF has some operational problems with MKI,really gas guzzling and pretty high maintenance.But apart from that its pure butter.

Last i heard they have some 6000/8000 hours of service life left and the calculation method is also different for them.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
I know for a fact that MKI does over 200 hours per year.So The oldest MKI has atleast 3500+ hours of service.

Plus AF has some operational problems with MKI,really gas guzzling and pretty high maintenance.But apart from that its pure butter.

Last i heard they have some 6000/8000 hours of service life left and the calculation method is also different for them.
This from jays on BRF. Who also rights for Delhi defense review with indranil.


The Su30MKI do not need any replacement anytime soon. All they need is a good upgrade package to manage technical obsolescence. Not even the oldest ones. Not unless their claimed Airframe life of 6000h by Sukhoi is bogus. The oldest has just started getting 1st overhaul at 1500hrs from 2016. And its almost certain that their life can be extended if need be.

However that doesn't mean we shouldnt procure more LCA. Even though MWF is the more definitive version, We should definitely procure 4-6 more Mk1A Sq to quickly jack up the Sq no.
 

aditya10r

Mera Bharat mahan
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
5,720
Likes
11,620
Country flag
However that doesn't mean we shouldnt procure more LCA. Even though MWF is the more definitive version, We should definitely procure 4-6 more Mk1A Sq to quickly jack up the Sq no.
Oh yeah this must happen.IAF should stick to 12 squadrons for Tejas Mk2 MWF.
The Su30MKI do not need any replacement anytime soon. All they need is a good upgrade package to manage technical obsolescence. Not even the oldest ones. Not unless their claimed Airframe life of 6000h by Sukhoi is bogus. The oldest has just started getting 1st overhaul at 1500hrs from 2016. And its almost certain that their life can be extended if need be.
I never said anything about replacement,they are here for atleast another 20-25 years before we start replacing them with something else.And Su-30 has little to no Composites so its service life is pretty limited.Other major problem with the MKI is its RCS.It just does not gives a fuck about it.Podded engines and canards,exposed cans too.

So yeah we have plenty of time.
 

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
7,255
Likes
12,207
Country flag
I know for a fact that MKI does over 200 hours per year.So The oldest MKI has atleast 3500+ hours of service.

Plus AF has some operational problems with MKI,really gas guzzling and pretty high maintenance.But apart from that its pure butter.

Last i heard they have some 6000/8000 hours of service life left and the calculation method is also different for them.
Report on when first Su30 was handed over after overhaul. Contains the 1500 hrs detail.

 

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,171
270+ Su 30 can serve us as our main fighter for upto 2050 for sure. Only thing needed is a Upgrade, Su 30 seems to lack only at the EW front, a Radar and electronics upagrade can turn it into a beast. Other than that all Flankers are fuel guzzlers and not so maintenance friendly. I'm all for giving a shot at developing a AL 31 like engine. We are already developing MAWS for su 30 might as well extend it for each and every component of Su 30

The 120 Mig 21 ought to be replaced by Mk1,Mk/1a.
Also look for Export of MWF. If we can sell even 100 MWF to foreign market it will make development of our plane even more profitable.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
Oh yeah this must happen.IAF should stick to 12 squadrons for Tejas Mk2 MWF.

I never said anything about replacement,they are here for atleast another 20-25 years before we start replacing them with something else.And Su-30 has little to no Composites so its service life is pretty limited.Other major problem with the MKI is its RCS.It just does not gives a fuck about it.Podded engines and canards,exposed cans too.

So yeah we have plenty of time.
Composites have not much to do with service life. F15 didn't had any composite and yet they serve 10000hrs + .

F15 too have huge rcs but they will serve quite long.
 

IndianHawk

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
9,058
Likes
37,670
Country flag
270+ Su 30 can serve us as our main fighter for upto 2050 for sure. Only thing needed is a Upgrade, Su 30 seems to lack only at the EW front, a Radar and electronics upagrade can turn it into a beast. Other than that all Flankers are fuel guzzlers and not so maintenance friendly. I'm all for giving a shot at developing a AL 31 like engine. We are already developing MAWS for su 30 might as well extend it for each and every component of Su 30

The 120 Mig 21 ought to be replaced by Mk1,Mk/1a.
Also look for Export of MWF. If we can sell even 100 MWF to foreign market it will make development of our plane even more profitable.
The oldest su30 will serve till 2050. Youngest will serve till 2060-70.

Su30 are being constantly upgraded. Maws IRsT both are coming . It's ew is already a beast. As proven by shaking off aim120 in balakot.

All it needs is an aesa and sfdr missile . And it will outmatch f15 EX.
 

Suryavanshi

Cheeni KLPDhokebaaz
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
16,330
Likes
70,171
Chin has 600+ flankers in their inventors, 250 J10 which are our equivalent of Mk1a and 250+ Mig 21.
Also 100+ dedicated bombers.

I know the general concesus is that China can't move all of its inventory towards this front but listen up I don't trust Chin. U never know what might happen tomorrow, better if we don't leave things to luck. We must prepare for the worst.
At any time we should be ready to fight 2/3 of their total Air force that is 700 jets.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top