TEDBF or ORCA Updates

[SwordOfDarkness]

Also, people are ignoring the fact that navy is also hinting at n amca- probably for a2a roles. Tedbf is best left a 4++Gen with sensor fusion etc to save time, money, and for better availability rates.

 

[Kuldeepm952]

Deyy, how many times I have to tell you ? Requirements for F-22,Su-57,F-35 & TEDBF are different. Why are you comparing all of them with TEDBF.

Primary requirement for TEDBF is Anti-Ship strike. Inorder to achieve this ,it need to carry Anti-Ship missile. A long range Anti-ship missile cannot be carried internally. Hence , IWB has no use for TEDBF. For pure air to air missions it has recessed bays. Except IWB , all other 5th gen features will be incorporated in TEDBF.

Recessed bays?? Any sources?? Hearing of it for the first time.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Deyy, how many times I have to tell you ? Requirements for F-22,Su-57,F-35 & TEDBF are different. Why are you comparing all of them with TEDBF.

Primary requirement for TEDBF is Anti-Ship strike. Inorder to achieve this ,it need to carry Anti-Ship missile. A long range Anti-ship missile cannot be carried internally. Hence , IWB has no use for TEDBF. For pure air to air missions it has recessed bays. Except IWB , all other 5th gen features will be incorporated in TEDBF.

Buddy, comparing them with TEDBF is the whole idea in the era of stealth as we r making stealth for AF but not Navy.
Some older gen jets + ships + subs will always b there to supplement ASh ops, so that shouldn't hinder newer platform. I'm just talking about future version of TEDBF.
Older gen doctrine for older gen jets. Newer gen doctrine for newer gen jets.
That's my point that why r we not building a stealth jet for Navy when we are making one for AF?

What does STANDOFF mean? it means safe launch capability where enemy can't launch at you, simple. So a 4.5gen jet can also do ASh ops, u don't need 5th gen jet for that, although it can also do it with external load, no stealth required at standoff range. But the 5th gen can sneak & attack with smart weapons & achieve the same goal of disabling enemy which a 4th gen jet cannot.

Why r u making it compulsary for newer gen jet only to use older gen doctrine when objective can be met by other platforms?

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Also, people are ignoring the fact that navy is also hinting at n amca- probably for a2a roles. Tedbf is best left a 4++Gen with sensor fusion etc to save time, money, and for better availability rates.

My 1st comment in this forum said to finalize TEDBF but some people misunderstood me.
The IWB config is for future.
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

I also showed calculation
If empty weight can be reduced to 11 tons or 24,250 lbs without IWB & weight due to IWB is considered 20%, that's 11Tx1.2=13.2 tons = 29,100 lbs
Weight of IWB = 2.2 tons
Let's consider Max. T/o weight = 25+2.2=27.2 tons = 60,000 lbs
Thrust/weight ratio becomes 0.44 dry, 0.73 with AB.
F-35C: Thrust/weight ratio with IWB = 0.46 dry, 0.71 with AB.

 

[SARTHAK]

My 1st comment in this forum said to finalize TEDBF but some people misunderstood me.
The IWB config is for future.
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

I also showed calculation
If empty weight can be reduced to 11 tons or 24,250 lbs without IWB & weight due to IWB is considered 20%, that's 11Tx1.2=13.2 tons = 29,100 lbs
Weight of IWB = 2.2 tons
Let's consider Max. T/o weight = 25+2.2=27.2 tons = 60,000 lbs
Thrust/weight ratio becomes 0.44 dry, 0.73 with AB.
F-35C: Thrust/weight ratio with IWB = 0.46 dry, 0.71 with AB.

thing is REQUIREMENTS AND DOCTRINE AND BUDGET is MORE important than your speculative calculations believe it or not, engineering solutions are derived on experience basis rather than brochure reading

 

[SARTHAK]

Recessed bays?? Any sources?? Hearing of it for the first time.

TEDBF or ORCA Updates

I love tedbf even more than I love MWF because it's then true evolution of lca program . It's the culmination of all that hardwork done for all these years. And it's and absolutely beauty and absolute beast . I know it's weird....But I love this goddam plane, more than my crush. Now please...

defenceforumindia.com

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

thing is REQUIREMENTS AND DOCTRINE AND BUDGET is MORE important than your speculative calculations believe it or not, engineering solutions are derived on experience basis rather than brochure reading

So can't we talk & discuss freely about future on fan site? R u from DoD? I'm common average guy, hence i speculate. And I'm experienced IT engineer too, which enables me to technically comprehend lots of stuff. If DRDO/NAL/HAL/ADA need computer enginners from civillian sector then i can contribute but i think they have age restrictions. And this is fan site, not ".GOV.IN", hence i speculate.
Now u may introduce urself.

 

[MonaLazy]

Navy must have found something that negates the benefits of a stealth jet on carriers

You are absolutely right! Why we don't go full stealth with TEDBF:

1. Serpentine intakes distort the airflow arriving at fan blades of the engine, if not enough air pressure can be built at engine inlet, power out of engine is reduced. For STOBAR ops we need all the power the engines can produce since there is no catapult assistance- the plane has to take off on engine power. Take off power decides what weapon fuel combo you can take off with, with adequate safety margin.

2. Stealth shaping makes the plane less maneuverable

3.1. IWB means you can carry only missiles upto a certain length

3.2 IWB means you can carry only limited numbers of missiles

3.3 IWB means less fuel, less range and you have the vast expanse of the sea to cover

3.4 AShMs sink ships and are very long and heavy, don't fit in IWB and is the apex weapon of a fighter plane at sea

4. So called beast mode where you carry the weapons in external stations give up on stealth advantage totally. Do remember in this configuration the plane handles like a boat and being 5th gen you were not very nimble to begin with

5. Sea water corrodes and destroys everything- composites and RAM coatings aren't exactly cheap. 5th gen planes need touching up on surface after every flight. You don't need a high maintenance aircraft on an ACC- can't keep making sorties for spare parts when you are 15000kms away from home base nor can you carry all spares on the ship.

6. Stealth CPFH (Cost Per Flying Hour) are an order of magnitude higher than 4th gen

7. 5th gen is top secret cutting edge. Recently UK spent God knows how much to recover a sunk £120+M F35 from the sea floor and prevent it falling in Russian hands. They involved the US also! First few weeks to locate the wreck, then guarding it, finally salvaging it- all while maintaining a sizeable force presence far off.

The UK has recovered the F-35 stealth fighter that crashed off an aircraft carrier into the sea

British newspaper reports say it took a couple of weeks to find the plane and then another few weeks to get it out of the water.

www.businessinsider.com

No information on the cost of salvage operation other than

Which means it cost a bomb. Don't think IN salvaged our Mig-29K that went down with Cdr Nishant Singh.

British F-35 that plunged into Mediterranean recovered - Times of India

Europe News: BRUSSELS: Salvage teams have recovered a British stealth fighter that fell into the Mediterranean as it was taking off from the UK's flagship aircraft.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

 

[SARTHAK]

So can't we talk & discuss freely about future on fan site? R u from DoD? I'm common average guy, hence i speculate. And I'm experienced IT engineer too, which enables me to technically comprehend lots of stuff. If DRDO/NAL/HAL/ADA need computer enginners from civillian sector then i can contribute but i think they have age restrictions. And this is fan site, not ".GOV.IN", hence i speculate.
Now u may introduce urself.

speculating is all ok but you were taking it too far what is meant to say is this see how drdo did things gradually and you want iwb on tedbf so cool down and let ada do it iteration wise

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

speculating is all ok but you were taking it too far what is meant to say is this see how drdo did things gradually and you want iwb on tedbf so cool down and let ada do it iteration wise

Bro, does a discussion forum has rule that one can't talk about future, near or far? I also spoke about future iteration only. I want IWB on TEDBF when we develop or arrange a good engine, domestic/imported/JV. How many times will i repeat?
But we have to speed up things compared to past, that's all.
BTW, i'm least bothered abt light jets bcoz if medium jet like TEDBF has so many issues & hurdles then light jet means less size, volume, fuel, range, economy, it is a nightmare, good for small nations.

 

[SARTHAK]

Bro, does a discussion forum has rule that one can't talk about future, near or far? I also spoke about future iteration only. I want IWB on TEDBF when we develop or arrange a good engine, domestic/imported/JV. How many times will i repeat?
But we have to speed up things compared to past, that's all.

i feel this is the best speed we can get(in indian context where it is very common to skip deadlines),once bjp losses the election in 2024 ,forget iwb even tedbf is in danger

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

i feel this is the best speed we can get(in indian context where it is very common to skip deadlines),once bjp losses the election in 2024 ,forget iwb even tedbf is in danger

That's a case of political corruption like it happened before & kept us a puppeted importer. Who will b PM/FM we can't say But here at least we can have a technical PoV discussion, aage Bhagwaan maalik.
But if budgeting is favorable then i think HAL & others can expand & accelerate. If smaller countries can do so can we.

 

[srevster]

India needs to double down on domestic manufacturing capabilities but it also needs to diversify its supply chain and allow competitive component suppliers that can accelerate aircraft design improvements.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Anti-Stealth propaganda spotted. Navy is doomed to suffer forever, Stealth is joke & hoax, let's scrap AMCA

 

[MonaLazy]

Why we don't go full stealth with TEDBF:

E/F Myths

This particular section is worth its bytes in gold-

Fact – "The E/F is an extremely survivable airplane." Stealth is one approach to survivability — a very expensive approach, whose stand-alone effectiveness is limited to a few mission scenarios. A flexible airplane requires a flexible approach to survivability, one that will deliver significant survivability improvements across the full span of envisioned missions.

By balancing the survivability of the E/F (with a combination of reduction in its vulnerable area; signature reduction; employment of defensive systems; and integration of stand-off munitions such as JDAM, JSOW, and SLAM-ER), the airplane capitalizes on all the survivability technologies of the past decade.

For example, a glance at the airplane’s physical geometry and exterior features reveals the influence of dedicated radar cross section (RCS) signature control. Where it made good cost-vs.-capability sense, the signature was tailored. For those aspects where additional signature control would have been cost prohibitive, the Navy directed survivability resources elsewhere to get the best return for each survivability dollar.

Next, the real measure of survivability is not the likelihood of a single asset’s coming back from any one mission. The real measure of survivability is the number of pilots and airplanes left on the flight deck after a campaign. Similarly, lethality is the number of targets destroyed per aircraft lost. More fuel and more weapon stations will enable the E/F to make fewer sorties into the target area and employ more tactically desirable routes. Fewer sorties and better routing will result in less threat exposure and enhanced survivability.

How do more stations contribute to improved survivability? If a strike planner today wanted to put two laser-guided bombs and two High Speed Anti-Radiation Missiles (HARMs) into the battle space, it would require a flight of two C/D aircraft, each most likely configured with two external fuel tanks. The strike planner who could employ the F/A-18E/F would be able to get that same load into the target area with one airplane (configured with a single 480-gallon fuel tank). As a bonus, the E/F would be able to carry two AMRAAM on the additional out board stations. It adds up: more weapons, fewer sorties, increased survivability, and greater lethality.

Stealth is not the be all & end all. It is just one approach to survivability. These are the thoughts of a USN TP. Crucially:

Where it made good cost-vs.-capability sense, the signature was tailored. For those aspects where additional signature control would have been cost prohibitive, the Navy directed survivability resources elsewhere to get the best return for each survivability dollar.

You spend your money wisely always balancing cost vs capability. Don't always have to go full commando on stealth- can pick and choose those features that give max bang for buck and those optimisations are seen in ALL designs from ADA from Mk1 to TEDBF and everything in between.

 

[MonaLazy]

You are absolutely right! Why we don't go full stealth with TEDBF:

1. Serpentine intakes distort the airflow arriving at fan blades of the engine, if not enough air pressure can be built at engine inlet, power out of engine is reduced. For STOBAR ops we need all the power the engines can produce since there is no catapult assistance- the plane has to take off on engine power. Take off power decides what weapon fuel combo you can take off with, with adequate safety margin.

2. Stealth shaping makes the plane less maneuverable

3.1. IWB means you can carry only missiles upto a certain length

3.2 IWB means you can carry only limited numbers of missiles

3.3 IWB means less fuel, less range and you have the vast expanse of the sea to cover

3.4 AShMs sink ships and are very long and heavy, don't fit in IWB and is the apex weapon of a fighter plane at sea

4. So called beast mode where you carry the weapons in external stations give up on stealth advantage totally. Do remember in this configuration the plane handles like a boat and being 5th gen you were not very nimble to begin with

5. Sea water corrodes and destroys everything- composites and RAM coatings aren't exactly cheap. 5th gen planes need touching up on surface after every flight. You don't need a high maintenance aircraft on an ACC- can't keep making sorties for spare parts when you are 15000kms away from home base nor can you carry all spares on the ship.

6. Stealth CPFH (Cost Per Flying Hour) are an order of magnitude higher than 4th gen

View attachment 128420

7. 5th gen is top secret cutting edge. Recently UK spent God knows how much to recover a sunk £120+M F35 from the sea floor and prevent it falling in Russian hands. They involved the US also! First few weeks to locate the wreck, then guarding it, finally salvaging it- all while maintaining a sizeable force presence far off.

The UK has recovered the F-35 stealth fighter that crashed off an aircraft carrier into the sea

British newspaper reports say it took a couple of weeks to find the plane and then another few weeks to get it out of the water.

www.businessinsider.com

View attachment 128423

No information on the cost of salvage operation other than
View attachment 128426
Which means it cost a bomb. Don't think IN salvaged our Mig-29K that went down with Cdr Nishant Singh.

British F-35 that plunged into Mediterranean recovered - Times of India

Europe News: BRUSSELS: Salvage teams have recovered a British stealth fighter that fell into the Mediterranean as it was taking off from the UK's flagship aircraft.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

2.2 Stealth shaping reduces payload also since you are not concerned with optimising lift, but making it LO is the primary concern

On a side note, I'm reasonably certain of the TEDBF were to incorporate IWBs, then we will all start crying about reduced range and how TEDBF will be restricted to flying in a smaller circle around the ACC reducing it's effectiveness, with land far away and landing at same ship the only option unlike over land where you can land at any other runway close by if low on fuel or other emergency. Mission planning is also lot more flexible on land- the Balakot bombers took off from Gwalior, refuelled at Agra/Bareilly, bombed Blasphemystan and landed back at an airfield in the Western sector.

Inside story of attack on Balakot — from IAF officer who planned and executed it

A total of 16 aircraft, six each armed with Spice 2000 and Crystal Maze missiles, flew into PoK and struck Balakot terror camp while 4 remained in Indian territory as back-up.

theprint.in

 

[Javelin_Sam]

A future TEDBF with IWB is an oxymoron. A future Naval jet with IWB is N-AMCA. It's elder brother AMCA is on paper with no confirmation on its 75KN dry thrust engine yet. So navy knows N-AMCA won't come in the next 15-20 years. Those clamouring for TEDBF with IWB might have passed their Aerospace Engg course from IDRW Institute of Technology (IIT-Youtube)

 

[Vamsi]

Buddy, comparing them with TEDBF is the whole idea in the era of stealth as we r making stealth for AF but not Navy.
Some older gen jets + ships + subs will always b there to supplement ASh ops, so that shouldn't hinder newer platform. I'm just talking about future version of TEDBF.
Older gen doctrine for older gen jets. Newer gen doctrine for newer gen jets.
That's my point that why r we not building a stealth jet for Navy when we are making one for AF?

What does STANDOFF mean? it means safe launch capability where enemy can't launch at you, simple. So a 4.5gen jet can also do ASh ops, u don't need 5th gen jet for that, although it can also do it with external load, no stealth required at standoff range. But the 5th gen can sneak & attack with smart weapons & achieve the same goal of disabling enemy which a 4th gen jet cannot.

Why r u making it compulsary for newer gen jet only to use older gen doctrine when objective can be met by other platforms?

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.

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

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.

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.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

A future TEDBF with IWB is an oxymoron. A future Naval jet with IWB is N-AMCA. It's elder brother AMCA is on paper with no confirmation on its 75KN dry thrust engine yet. So navy knows N-AMCA won't come in the next 15-20 years.

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.

Those clamouring for TEDBF with IWB might have passed their Aerospace Engg course from IDRW Institute of Technology (IIT-Youtube)

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.

 

[SARTHAK]

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.

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