TEDBF or ORCA Updates

[Kuntal]

But won't the above suggestion be simpler?.. Lesser missing & reshaping.

Also the number of vertical stabilizers depend on the vortex formation. Actually the present one has the canards further apart, outside the intakes (like J-20) & may need twin vertical stabilisers... But if canards be on fuselage then it's more likely to require a single tail. View attachment 55394

Yes it's. But from modeling point of view, it could be little bit tricky to lower the intake. Let's see what I can do.

 

[Bleh]

Yes it's. But from modeling point of view, it could be little bit tricky to lower the intake. Let's see what I can do.

More importantly you gotta change the tail/s... This one looks exactly same as Rafale's giving ot agonist same silhouette.

Although I do think these are a bit of a uneconomic use of your efforts... They have openly said that even MWF is can I have a semi-stealth with AMCA coating & materials. Which almost guarantees the ORCA to have frontal steath with stealthy radome, serrated edges & leading-edge aligned like this https://defenceforumindia.com/threads/tedbf-or-orca-updates.81942/post-1675468

TEDBF at this point is almost guaranteed this, with AMCA like tail.

 

[Bleh]

TEDBF at this point is almost guaranteed this, with AMCA like tail.

Revised TEDBF possibility.

 

[Synergy]

just asking, is there any chance for tedbf/orca to be a heavy catagory aircraft as after MKI we won't have any.

(haven't gone through all the posts of this thread yet. so please ignore if it's a repeat).

 

[Bleh]

just asking, is there any chance for tedbf/orca to be a heavy catagory aircraft as after MKI we won't have any.

(haven't gone through all the posts of this thread yet. so please ignore if it's a repeat).

No indication now... actually it was discussed before how Rafale can haul a massive about of payload due to is delta-canard design. Once 110kN engines are operational then AMCA & ORCA can both carry almost 3.5t & 5t more net payload respectively.

But not proper heavy class aircraft until 130kN engine is ready, about 2040. IAF will probably some oldest Su-30 with AMCA,to make the fleet less top-heavy.

 

[Suhaan]

IAF rejects ORCA

 

[vayuu1]

IAF rejects ORCA

I think ultimately the amca as it is called will be aorca

 

[Brood Father]

IAF rejects ORCA

Good decision ...we should not focus on too many projects ..rather focus on one and make it happen

 

[Bleh]

IAF rejects ORCA

Yeah... They were never that interested in ORCA anyway.

Navy can't have N-AMCA because its not feasible to operate stealthy jets from sky-jump carriers (limited op.radius + massive AShM), or else they'd have gone for pure 5th gen too.
@Kuntal wanna work on this next?

 

[Kuntal]

Yeah... They were never that interested in ORCA anyway.

Navy can't have N-AMCA because its not feasible to operate stealthy jets from sky-jump carriers (limited op.radius + massive AShM), or else they'd have gone for pure 5th gen too.
@Kuntal wanna work on this next?

Do we have a side view and a front view of this design ?

 

[scatterStorm]

Good decision ...we should not focus on too many projects ..rather focus on one and make it happen

Solid copy.

 

[Kuntal]

Yeah... They were never that interested in ORCA anyway.

Navy can't have N-AMCA because its not feasible to operate stealthy jets from sky-jump carriers (limited op.radius + massive AShM), or else they'd have gone for pure 5th gen too.
@Kuntal wanna work on this next?

It's getting impossible for me to keep up with you guys in DFI, as I'm not a regular here. We'll have a discussion on twitter inbox or somewhere else about this design.

 

[Chandragupt Maurya]

Airforce is interested in MWF and AMCA and has rejected the ORCA good decision though

 

[Bleh]

It's getting impossible for me to keep up with you guys in DFI, as I'm not a regular here. We'll have a discussion on twitter inbox or somewhere else about this design.

Sure we'll talk there.

Do we have a side view and a front view of this design ?

Yes, hold on. I'll send you detailed top-side-front views to tomorrow morning... You'd get the nose, tail, canopy windshield & rear-fuselage shape from MWF.

 

[Synergy]

IAF rejects ORCA

any official confirmation?

if AF backs out then will the tedbf project be feasible?

probably AF is banking on mmrca.

so there should be either 171 Rafales or SH (114+57). so an investment of about $30/35B at this point of time, will it be possible?

 

[Suhaan]

any official confirmation?

if AF backs out then will the tedbf project be feasible?

probably AF is banking on mmrca.

so there should be either 171 Rafales or SH (114+57). so an investment of about $30/35B at this point of time, will it be possible?

I guess it(link) will be out in coming days

 

[Anandhu Krishna]

I don't think Navy alone can fund the project.

 

[Bleh]

I don't think Navy alone can fund the project.

They have requested requirement of 150 jets. That's a pretty huge number by itself.

 

[Flying Dagger]

Tedbf or twin engine Tejas , is still very realistic project and shouldn't be scrapped at all.

Air force may come back once they see the product doing fine. IN must go for it as eventually they will need 100+ fighter jet with 3 carrier and air strips on andaman islands .

 

[Flying Dagger]

It is feasible. IN has already decided to reduce requirements to 36 from 57 due to fund issue. That means somewhere they do understand they need an indigenous solution to keep cost down and get their objectives.

If you compare the cost of Import with the projected program cost for tedbf it will definitely fall under it.

IAF can join later the only reason to worry is whether we have resources to put it through prototype phase at the earliest.

any official confirmation?

if AF backs out then will the tedbf project be feasible?

probably AF is banking on mmrca.

so there should be either 171 Rafales or SH (114+57). so an investment of about $30/35B at this point of time, will it be possible?