What's new

Twin Engined Deck Based Fighter [TEDBF] Development | Updates & Discussions.

akshay gehlot

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2013
143
-1
121
Country
India
Location
United States
Why would india test a single engine fighter for deck landings when no country on earth has ever deployed single jet engined fighter from an aircraft carrier?
??
Because they want to gain information before finalizing TEDBF's design and components ... And understand the rigors that Naval aviation places on their composites ,materials etc

The MWF,TEDBF etc will all be built on the lessons learnt in designing ,building and flying the Tejas . Not to mention have a lot of the similarity between avionics, subsystems etc , Now whereas they had 1000's of hours of experience catering to IAF specific demands there was little to no experience ADA and HAL had for meeting navy's requirements

The N-LCA with its testing on carrier and at INS Hansa gives them invaluable info on how the avionics , landing gears, cockpit design , delta wings etc etc work in a short take off or ski-jump scenario and what can be incorporated in the new design and what needs to be modified

Carrier Aviation is a punishing pursuit and requires perfection from both man and machine .. In such a situation its imperative that the designers have as much info as they can before building a new jet
 

Saudang

FULL MEMBER
Sep 21, 2020
283
-5
228
Country
India
Location
Australia
Do228 of HAL is becoming Amphibious, man this year’s aero India will be very fun!!! Sadly because of COVID-19 the spectators are not allowed this time😕.
I was a regular when it used to be in Yelahanka base. COVID really put a dampener this time, otherwise seems like this year, Indian companies are on beast mode
 

MirageBlue

FULL MEMBER
Mar 24, 2020
399
1
817
Country
United States
Location
India
The latest images of the new TEDBF twin engine deck based fighter for the replacement of IN's MiG-29Ks.

This is 1 of the 2 concepts being studied so far, with both concepts using semi-stealth shaping for the front fuselage. DSI intakes are confirmed for the TEDBF, derived from the work already done on the AMCA. But this is still a preliminary configuration, since it hasn't yet crossed the PDR stage. Currently planned to be powered by 2 X F-414-INS6 turbofans.

MTOW = 26,000 kgs, which is 1,500 more than that of a MiG-29K. More fuel will mean longer range and higher endurance. The design has been made keeping that high internal fuel requirement in mind, it seems.

Looks amazing in my opinion.




 

The Raven

FULL MEMBER
Mar 31, 2020
414
3
899
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
Something seems to be seriously wrong with the planning at the IAF/IN, with a lot of wastage and doubling up on initiatives. The TEDBF seems to be essentially an attempt at reinventing the Dassault Rafale in terms of overall specs. Surely if the IN wanted a replacement for the Mig-29Ks, wouldn't the Rafale N be a more appropriate candidate to leverage synergies with the IAF? Or to look at it another way, why not simply develop the TEDBF for both the IAF and IN instead of acquiring the Rafale in small numbers? If you wanted to take a longer term view, why not develop a naval version of the AMCA instead, rather than what looks to be a half-way design based on the LCA MkII and the AMCA? And then there's the naval LCA! And if this goes ahead, where does that leave further acquisitions of Rafales? It all seems like a mess without any clear strategy or thought for operational synergies between the IAF and IN, not to mention the costs.
 

Ghost Hobbit

FULL MEMBER
Aug 27, 2020
882
-30
558
Country
India
Location
India
To test various systems and sub-systems on aircraft carrier after testing them at INS Hansa (ground based facility)... after navy red flagged the naval version of LCA because of:

1. Single Engine
2. Payload and Range issue

This was done to speed up the design and development of twin engine fighter jet for Indian Navy...
Engineering of landing gear
Auto-take off and landing capabilities
Jet should take off and land on full thrust so to check if the structural pressures are handleable
 

akshay gehlot

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2013
143
-1
121
Country
India
Location
United States
Something seems to be seriously wrong with the planning at the IAF/IN, with a lot of wastage and doubling up on initiatives. The TEDBF seems to be essentially an attempt at reinventing the Dassault Rafale in terms of overall specs. Surely if the IN wanted a replacement for the Mig-29Ks, wouldn't the Rafale N be a more appropriate candidate to leverage synergies with the IAF? Or to look at it another way, why not simply develop the TEDBF for both the IAF and IN instead of acquiring the Rafale in small numbers? If you wanted to take a longer term view, why not develop a naval version of the AMCA instead, rather than what looks to be a half-way design based on the LCA MkII and the AMCA? And then there's the naval LCA! And if this goes ahead, where does that leave further acquisitions of Rafales? It all seems like a mess without any clear strategy or thought for operational synergies between the IAF and IN, not to mention the costs.
1. Rafale-M or SH or any other currently flying carrier fighter bar Mig29 will face issues with the lift and deck size that India has on Viky,Vikrant ..

2. There is a huge amount of co-operation between various projects ,just because they don't share the same name or same branding doesn't mean there isn't going to be large amounts of similarity between avionics ,subsystems, infrastructure ,spares etc of MWF and TEDBF . I wouldn't be surprised if at the end of the day TEDBF and MWF share as much similarities with each other as F-35 A and F-35 C do ..who a lot of people may not realize have some significant differences , As i said in a previous comment carrier aviation has its own very specific requirements and needs so building the same jet for both with just very minor changes is just not going to cut it , The biggest being Navy requires Twin engine fighters while AF is fine with single engine jets which keep op and main. costs low

3. AMCA is a 5th gen jet and will take much more time (~12 years till first flight as opposed to 2 for MWF and 5 for TEDBF ) , You can't jump a step and go straight to 5th gen + tech without the necessary experience gained in building these , And 4.5+ gen jets like SH,Rafale are expected to continue to serve in carrier aviation for a long time so its not like we're building something obsolete

4. Naval LCA was meant to be technology demonstrator and nothing else , It was to show IN than HAL could achieve a carrier landing and takeoff and is being used a platform to run tests and gain experience before TEDBF is finalized

5. Rafale is a silver bullet type of acquistion and you'll be probably see 2 more squadrons being ordered but that's it . The future air wing plan is pretty straightforward

Light fighters (Mig 21's currently being replaced by Tejas )

Medium fighters (Mig29,Mirage,Jaguar all were upgraded a few years ago and will be replaced by MWF when ready by late 2020's , Rafales to take over from Mirage's roles )

Air superiority fighters ( Su30 planned to be upgraded , and AMCA to be introduced by mid 2030's )


So the plan for this decade is to go from 7-8 aging variants of foreign fighters to just 4-5 variants most of which would be made here .
 

The Raven

FULL MEMBER
Mar 31, 2020
414
3
899
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
1. Rafale-M or SH or any other currently flying carrier fighter bar Mig29 will face issues with the lift and deck size that India has on Viky,Vikrant ..
So in other words, the Vikrant wasn't designed with other potential fighters in mind? Only Mig-29K or anything similar? What's the plan for IAC-2/3? If that is the case, then Dassault and Boeing are wasting their time pitching their respective platforms to the IN?

2. There is a huge amount of co-operation between various projects ,just because they don't share the same name or same branding doesn't mean there isn't going to be large amounts of similarity between avionics ,subsystems, infrastructure ,spares etc of MWF and TEDBF . I wouldn't be surprised if at the end of the day TEDBF and MWF share as much similarities with each other as F-35 A and F-35 C do ..who a lot of people may not realize have some significant differences , As i said in a previous comment carrier aviation has its own very specific requirements and needs so building the same jet for both with just very minor changes is just not going to cut it , The biggest being Navy requires Twin engine fighters while AF is fine with single engine jets which keep op and main. costs low
I wasn't referring to sub-systems or avionics. If you look at the acquisition rationale of the IAF and IN, you can find synergies and potential to reduce logistic and supply chain complexity, and therefore costs. For example, the MRCA/Rafale/IN/LCA MKII requirement could have been consolidated into a single platform, the TEDBF, which is essentially a twin engine LCA MKII with a semi-stealth front section. If Meteor was a priority, along with AESA and other avionics, these could have been acquired from France and integrated on TEDBF.

3. AMCA is a 5th gen jet and will take much more time (~12 years till first flight as opposed to 2 for MWF and 5 for TEDBF ) , You can't jump a step and go straight to 5th gen + tech without the necessary experience gained in building these , And 4.5+ gen jets like SH,Rafale are expected to continue to serve in carrier aviation for a long time so its not like we're building something obsolete
Fine, but given the fiasco with LCA, do you really think those timelines for MWF/TEDBF are realistic? If the IAF/IN were at all confident with HAL/ADA, they wouldn't have acquired the Rafale or STILL be considering F-21, F-18, F-15, Rafale-M and every other fighter under the sun.

4. Naval LCA was meant to be technology demonstrator and nothing else , It was to show IN than HAL could achieve a carrier landing and takeoff and is being used a platform to run tests and gain experience before TEDBF is finalized
That's not the multitude of messages coming out from HAL and the IN who seem to be on completely different pages.

5. Rafale is a silver bullet type of acquistion and you'll be probably see 2 more squadrons being ordered but that's it . The future air wing plan is pretty straightforward
Silver bullet?! I thought that was meant to be the Su-30MKI/Super-30?

Light fighters (Mig 21's currently being replaced by Tejas )

Medium fighters (Mig29,Mirage,Jaguar all were upgraded a few years ago and will be replaced by MWF when ready by late 2020's , Rafales to take over from Mirage's roles )

Air superiority fighters ( Su30 planned to be upgraded , and AMCA to be introduced by mid 2030's )

So the plan for this decade is to go from 7-8 aging variants of foreign fighters to just 4-5 variants most of which would be made here .
I don't think the upgraded M2K and the Mig-29 are going anywhere soon. As you say, these have only recently been upgraded at high cost, and to retire them in less than a decade is unlikely, not least because of the optimistic timeline of the MWF. I'm fairly sure the M2K and Mig-29 will still be flying well past 2030.
 

akshay gehlot

FULL MEMBER
Nov 21, 2013
143
-1
121
Country
India
Location
United States
So in other words, the Vikrant wasn't designed with other potential fighters in mind? Only Mig-29K or anything similar? What's the plan for IAC-2/3? If that is the case, then Dassault and Boeing are wasting their time pitching their respective platforms to the IN?

IAC 2 or 3 aren't coming for at least 10-12 years .... During that time Vikrant and Vikramaditya will be 2 carriers and they obviously were made with Mig 29s in mind

There's not much alternative either because when they were designing Vikrant (or refuribing Viky ) the Americans,British and French planned carriers were all 65k ton + and had catapults or emals , The only ski jump carriers were with India ,Russia and China ll of them who use Su/Mig derivatives

I wasn't referring to sub-systems or avionics. If you look at the acquisition rationale of the IAF and IN, you can find synergies and potential to reduce logistic and supply chain complexity, and therefore costs. For example, the MRCA/Rafale/IN/LCA MKII requirement could have been consolidated into a single platform, the TEDBF, which is essentially a twin engine LCA MKII with a semi-stealth front section. If Meteor was a priority, along with AESA and other avionics, these could have been acquired from France and integrated on TEDBF.
You're comparing a new carrier program with the first indigenious fighter and a 15 yr old acquisition program , Their timelines and demands are all different

Rafale came from the older MMRCA program , A time when neither Vikrant nor Vikramditya was commissioned and was mainly meant to replace the 60 odd Mirage 2000's in IAF .

LCA was a light fighter program meant to replace Mig 21s and the expectation for a long time was that LCA Mk2 would be a slightly upgraded version with no airframe changes but its only in the last couple of years that both IAF and HAL inspired by improvements they saw in MK1A agreed to pivot for a more advanced medium weight fighter instead of a incremental upgrade like Mk1->Mk1A


MRCA is non-starter , Its not going anywhere and everyone involved with IAF knows that , They're just pressuring them to ensure 2-3 more squadrons of Rafales are ordered by the MOD , The import lobby is strong and there will always be certain members arguing for American jets but its simply not gonna happen no matter how many shiny brochures Lockheed or Boeing sent out or how many "articles " are published ,

Fine, but given the fiasco with LCA, do you really think those timelines for MWF/TEDBF are realistic? If the IAF/IN were at all confident with HAL/ADA, they wouldn't have acquired the Rafale or STILL be considering F-21, F-18, F-15, Rafale-M and every other fighter under the sun.
MWF timeline is very realistic , The design is final ,wind tunnel and other testing is going on and the first flight is expected by end of this year-start of next .TEDBF obviously will take longer and will depend on how much support IN gives it , Its still in early stages and the first flight isn't expected for 5 years



Silver bullet?! I thought that was meant to be the Su-30MKI/Super-30?
Absolutely not ... Su-30 is the heavy air superiority backbone of IAF , You don't order 272 silver bullets , Its doctrine is similar to how USAF uses the F-15 .

Rafale on the other hand came because the IAF liked Mirage2000 so much and wanted more of it , IAF exclusively preferred Mirage2000 on ops like surgical strikes ,Kargil etc and whenever they want laser guided precision bombs , Its gonna succeed Mirage on ops like these and especially more so in the eastern theatre

I don't think the upgraded M2K and the Mig-29 are going anywhere soon. As you say, these have only recently been upgraded at high cost, and to retire them in less than a decade is unlikely, not least because of the optimistic timeline of the MWF. I'm fairly sure the M2K and Mig-29 will still be flying well past 2030.
I don't know what timeline your going by but even by IAF/HAL timelines MWF won't replace them before 2029-2030 ..Don't get confused between timelines for first flight and the timeline for ordering and commissioning of actual squadrons

MWF is expected to first fly in 21-22 then go through a couple of years of testing then be ordered , and going by the industry standard of 3 years before delivery you're looking at 2027-28 by the time the first squadron gets commissioned and considering the Jaguars are older and will get replaced first it is likely that upgraded Mig29s and Mirages stick around till 2030 after which they'll get replaced by MWF
 

The Raven

FULL MEMBER
Mar 31, 2020
414
3
899
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
You're comparing a new carrier program with the first indigenious fighter and a 15 yr old acquisition program , Their timelines and demands are all different

Rafale came from the older MMRCA program , A time when neither Vikrant nor Vikramditya was commissioned and was mainly meant to replace the 60 odd Mirage 2000's in IAF .

LCA was a light fighter program meant to replace Mig 21s and the expectation for a long time was that LCA Mk2 would be a slightly upgraded version with no airframe changes but its only in the last couple of years that both IAF and HAL inspired by improvements they saw in MK1A agreed to pivot for a more advanced medium weight fighter instead of a incremental upgrade like Mk1->Mk1A
You've basically described the problem but still don't see it. The fact that a token acquisition of Rafales after more than 15 years of the MMRCA without any foresight into how that would affect the IAF and IN, resulting in effectively duplicating the Rafale in the form of the TEDBF, is the problem.

MRCA is non-starter , Its not going anywhere and everyone involved with IAF knows that , They're just pressuring them to ensure 2-3 more squadrons of Rafales are ordered by the MOD , The import lobby is strong and there will always be certain members arguing for American jets but its simply not gonna happen no matter how many shiny brochures Lockheed or Boeing sent out or how many "articles " are published ,

MWF timeline is very realistic , The design is final ,wind tunnel and other testing is going on and the first flight is expected by end of this year-start of next .TEDBF obviously will take longer and will depend on how much support IN gives it , Its still in early stages and the first flight isn't expected for 5 years
If the Rafale was acquired to replace the Mirages, why then was there a need to enlarge the LCA to effectively the M2K weight and overall performance? In fact, if you're so confident about the timeline of the MWF taking flight, why not simply replace the M2K with the MWF rather than importing Rafales? Do you see how you and the indian defence establishment appear to be going round in circles? Coming up with one excuse after another without any clear foresight.

Absolutely not ... Su-30 is the heavy air superiority backbone of IAF , You don't order 272 silver bullets , Its doctrine is similar to how USAF uses the F-15 .

Rafale on the other hand came because the IAF liked Mirage2000 so much and wanted more of it , IAF exclusively preferred Mirage2000 on ops like surgical strikes ,Kargil etc and whenever they want laser guided precision bombs , Its gonna succeed Mirage on ops like these and especially more so in the eastern theatre
Complete garbage and backtracking...you indians have been barking for the past few decades about the mighty Su-30MKI being the 'raptor' of the east and the spearhead of the IAF, and now its relegated? And again with the Rafale replacing the M2K when the MWF is supposed to do that, according to you on your previous post, along with the Mig-29.

I don't know what timeline your going by but even by IAF/HAL timelines MWF won't replace them before 2029-2030 ..Don't get confused between timelines for first flight and the timeline for ordering and commissioning of actual squadrons

MWF is expected to first fly in 21-22 then go through a couple of years of testing then be ordered , and going by the industry standard of 3 years before delivery you're looking at 2027-28 by the time the first squadron gets commissioned and considering the Jaguars are older and will get replaced first it is likely that upgraded Mig29s and Mirages stick around till 2030 after which they'll get replaced by MWF
Good luck with that timeline. The real problem is the IAF has little to no confidence with HAL/ADA, to mitigate the debacle of the LCA being repeated in the form of the MWF and the TWDBF, it has to resort to spending on the Rafale. However, the bigger problem looming for the IAF is 5Gen, now that the Russians have kicked you indians off the PAKFA, the IAF only has the option of the AMCA.
 

KurtisBrian

FULL MEMBER
Aug 24, 2020
1,273
-5
376
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
is Dassault involved in this new jet? these Teja jets keep looking more and more like Dassault jets.
 

A.P. Richelieu

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 20, 2013
5,867
6
3,833
Country
Sweden
Location
Sweden
Why would india test a single engine fighter for deck landings when no country on earth has ever deployed single jet engined fighter from an aircraft carrier?
Ehmm, what about the United States, United Kingdom, France, Argentina, Australia, Brazil (if Skyhawks counts as fighters), etc.
I guess you do not know much about aircraft carriers.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom