India Navy TEDBF Program

Gessler

Contributor
Moderator
India Moderator
Messages
852
Reactions
38 1,896
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
New CGI by Harshal Pal - in A2A configuration with 8 x NG-CCM (ASRAAM) and 6 x Astra Mk-3 Ramjet BVRAAM

E99r-DBVQAUtRbk.jpg
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,502
Reactions
111 19,268
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
I was about to move it to Tejas thread, but then I realised why you posted it here.....please add relevant connection like the following when you can.



In a significant development the Naval Tejas Mk 1 NP-5 trainer has completed its fabrication and has been moved from its assembly line to another section of the Light Combat Division of Hindustan Aeronautics facility in Bengaluru where it will start low and high speed taxi trials followed by its first flight next month.

The NP-5 will be used as a Technology Demonstrator project for the Twin-Engine Deck-Based Fighter (TEDBF) program.

The NP-5 will be used to carry out of nominal landing trials during which it will mimic bad weather conditions that could affect the rear fuselage and landing gears during carrier landing in adverse weather conditions and the collected data will be crucial for the development of landing gears for the TEDBF program by Hindustan Aeronautics and any design changes that could be required for the aircraft to last its operational lifespan.
 

Fulcrum 007

New member
Messages
2
Reactions
1
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
Hello! I am new here.

I always wondered as to why we are not pursuing a possible N-AMCA for carrier ops. So could the main reason be the lack of additional lift generating surfaces such as LERX/LEVCON/canards in AMCA's current frozen configuration? I have heard that such control surfaces help control the aircraft's pitch rate when performing a jump at a certain AoA from a ski-jump.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,502
Reactions
111 19,268
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Hello! I am new here.

I always wondered as to why we are not pursuing a possible N-AMCA for carrier ops. So could the main reason be the lack of additional lift generating surfaces such as LERX/LEVCON/canards in AMCA's current frozen configuration? I have heard that such control surfaces help control the aircraft's pitch rate when performing a jump at a certain AoA from a ski-jump.

AMCA Naval variant will need a proven air force system first before that can be ruggedized and optimized (in various ways) for naval operations. AMCA is just not mature enough.

In interim there is TEDBF program (also needs maturing) or acquiring of rafale/hornet that fit navy requirements well enough. TEDBF may just end up being a naval AMCA, we have to see.

....and welcome to the forum!
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,502
Reactions
111 19,268
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
I dont get it,why not the AMCA in 2032,wont the TEDBF be 4,5 gen?

It likely will be AMCA variant given this delay. Consolidating this program into AMCA makes more sense anyway.

There is shift in same conference indicating more attention priority to submarine program which is very lacking in numbers compared to requirement, so this consequence on naval aviation (and carrier program) is somewhat expected.
 

Follow us on social media

Top Bottom