TEDBF or ORCA Updates

[Alamarathan]

Dcas ??

My bad on typo,

I meant DAS as in eots

 

[NutCracker]

Unfortunately IOC & FOC are given by user, not developer or manufacturer. Are you suggesting new AF under HAL, like HAF ? IOC only helpful for lsp and testing, with basic capability, not to cancel mrfa/mmrca/etc.
Its very unfortunate that, IOC first flight is not going to ensure any thing, but initial stage of a weapon testing by a developer & need multiple years to complete & to handover it to AF, with small lsp order.

No, what I meant is when TEDBF receives IOC by Navy..

there will be less boxes unchecked for IAF to whine against this project.

 

[johnj]

My bad on typo,

I meant DAS as in eots

Currently I think, no das & eots for amca mk1, only amca mk2[2035] comes with irst maws- das. mk1 comes with dc-maws stealth version and lca mk2 & tedbf comes with similar/same non stealth dc-maws.

 

[johnj]

No, what I meant is when TEDBF receives IOC by Navy..

there will be less boxes unchecked for IAF to whine against this project.

Again, not helpful. IAF requirement and IN requirement were different. For ex. sh is very good for navy, but sh only meet min. req of IAF. Means, still need more time to develop af version, and at the end iaf choose amca mk2.

 

[NutCracker]

Again, not helpful. IAF requirement and IN requirement were different. For ex. sh is very good for navy, but sh only meet min. req of IAF. Means, still need more time to develop af version, and at the end iaf choose amca mk2.

I know. I am just replying to another user who wants HAL to pitch TEDBF land variant directly to the GOI.

Still I might say it can happen. We cant have 400 AMCA. in 2040s we will have to find 4.5Gen replacement of SU30MKI.

 

[johnj]

I know. I am just replying to another user who wants HAL to pitch TEDBF land variant directly to the GOI.

Still I might say it can happen. We cant have 400 AMCA. in 2040s we will have to find 4.5Gen replacement of SU30MKI.

I'm clueless here, my bad.
Any ways, my opinion, not important,
First of all both teddy af or amca can't replace su30mki. Before considering teddy, what is the adv of teddy against mwf & amca ? IAF need 6th gen to replace 4.5gen mki. The most imp point is, both PAF & PLAAF deploy 5th gen against IAF, and need 400 stealth jet to counter both. Stealth jet & loyal wingman is the future, and 4.5 jet for support/low cost, & mwf mk2[lca mk3] comes with 110~125kn engine, and IN can deploy their jets in north if needed. Its better to spend money to buy more tedbf instead of spending on af version

 

[Vamsi]

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

 

[flanker99]

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

At this rate when the cdr is done we will end with a rafale m

 

[MonaLazy]

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

Please locate the specification section on the same board and look for store stations.

 

[Vamsi]

Please locate the specification section on the same board and look for store stations.

where ?

 

[Aditya Ballal]

where ?

Just because they haven’t mounted anything in these stations in this picture doesn’t mean it’s not there.

 

[pipebomb]

Any updated timeline of tedbf from aero india 2023, PDR, CDR, first flight etc.

 

[flanker99]

Any updated timeline of tedbf from aero india 2023, PDR, CDR, first flight etc.

Pdr this year

 

[Echo1Charlie]

This is not the old design, but the latest

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

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

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.

 

[Vamsi]

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.

Where was it under performing?
Don't compare it with Rafale-B/C , compare it with Rafale-M & then talk

 

[Vamsi]

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.

Navy first asked for joint AMCA, IAF is the one who rejected that proposal, go ask IAF why it rejected?

 

[Echo1Charlie]

Where was it under performing?
Don't compare it with Rafale-B/C , compare it with Rafale-M & then talk

Payload carrying capacity
TEDBF - 7.5t
Rafale M - 9t
Hardpoints - 12 on TEDBF vs 13 on Rafale M, do you want to spend billions on TEDBF (which even HAL can't firmly say it will be in service by 2030 or 2035) when half of that money could buy enough Rafale-Ms to address the need while rest of the money, man hour could be used on more important future projects?

 

[Vamsi]

Payload carrying capacity
TEDBF - 7.5t
Rafale M - 9t
Hardpoints - 12 on TEDBF vs 13 on Rafale M, do you want to spend billions on TEDBF (which even HAL can't firmly say it will be in service by 2030 or 2035) when half of that money could buy enough Rafale-Ms to address the need while rest of the money, man hour could be used on more important future projects?

Internal fuel
TEDBF - 5.5 tons
Rafale-M - 4.3 tons

 

[Echo1Charlie]

Navy first asked for joint AMCA, IAF is the one who rejected that proposal, go ask IAF why it rejected?

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.

 

[Echo1Charlie]

Internal fuel
TEDBF - 5.5 tons
Rafale-M - 4.3 tons

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