Twin-Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF)

[Hydra]

And turks might end up having a pretty robust fifth gen due to using the more powerful ge engine.

This is what i used to tell from begening,KAAN will be a better aircraft tha AMCA duebto the engine choice.

 

[randomradio]

Yeas, our programsvare revolving around GEf404 or its variants or its indigenous solution. The thing i am asking is, why didn't we pursue an aircraft from begening with a GE F110-100/129? We would have end up with an indigenous MMRCA fighter now instead of a desi mig21.

When LCA started, neither F100 nor AL-31F were available.

 

[Hydra]

When LCA started, neither F100 nor AL-31F were available.

PW f100 was used to power F15 back then, and i am sure F15 is an older aircraft than LCA.

 

[randomradio]

PW f100 was used to power F15 back then, and i am sure F15 is an older aircraft than LCA.

That doesn't matter to the Americans.

 

[Lolwa]

This is what i used to tell from begening,KAAN will be a better aircraft tha AMCA duebto the engine choice.

The turks have two advantage over us. First is they were part of the f35 program so they have first hand experience on working on a proper fifth gen aircraft so they know the concepts. We have no real idea unlike the turks.
Second is there manufacturing superiority. First is in engine and the other is in electro-optical tech. Out of all fifth gens the tai-tfx seems to have the stealthiest design for an irst and it also has an eots. They also have eo based munitions and cruise missiles like som j. While we use active radar.
We have a recon cam and irst on amca.
The tedbf ng needs to be atleast have eodas, eots, 110kN+ engine, iwb's. That's it. They can seperate the tedbf make it a 4.5+ naval program with ge-414 and transition those technologies on a fresh sheet naval design

 

[randomradio]

The turks have two advantage over us. First is they were part of the f35 program so they have first hand experience on working on a proper fifth gen aircraft so they know the concepts. We have no real idea unlike the turks.
Second is there manufacturing superiority. First is in engine and the other is in electro-optical tech. Out of all fifth gens the tai-tfx seems to have the stealthiest design for an irst and it also has an eots. They also have eo based munitions and cruise missiles like som j. While we use active radar.
We have a recon cam and irst on amca.
The tedbf ng needs to be atleast have eodas, eots, 110kN+ engine, iwb's. That's it. They can seperate the tedbf make it a 4.5+ naval program with ge-414 and transition those technologies on a fresh sheet naval design

All the Turks did was buy the jets. India worked on FGFA in detail.

 

[Bon Plan]

I really don't know why we are obsessed with 110 kn engines? Why not more powerful engines like F110-129 by GE or inhouse equivalent is not considered for next fighter jets. Yeas, aircraft will be bit bigger,but in order to cope up the limited space inside iwb, we need a bigger aircraft.

F110 is a quite "old" engine. It remains a very potent one, but heavier and bigger than a modern alternative, even with less power (because lighter).

 

[Bhartiya Naagrik Sainik]

For IN we don't need stealth fighters; the main objective of IN will be an anti-ship mission. So LCA MK2 with a twin-engine will be good enough; else, get it from the international market. Since we are planning for lots of things and are unable to deliver. We need to be more practical about what we can do and set our priorities.

F35 B and F35 C are the only currently operating 5th generation marine fighter jets.
We are not a blue water navy and have no plans to send our aircraft carrier to the South China Sea.

There is no J35 inducted in the PLA NAVY.
AMCA is not yet ready, and we are struggling to get LCA MK1A production; it will be foolish to plan for TEDBF with stealth characteristics from ADA. If it's just a wish list, then no issues.

You're not simulating the future well. let me know about your profile a bit so that i can customize my reply for you, like if you are school/college kid &/or non-tech stream, otherwie if i start putting tech terms, acronyms, graphs, diagrams, etc, it'll bounce off your head.
> But for now you should understand that naval jet even if flying low can be detected by high flying air assets, over the horizon radars, etc.
> Many nations are developing & improving anti-stealth radars, so 4.5gen ets dont stand any chance in future unless long range threats have been destroyed.
> Destroyers, Frigates, etc can also have long range LR-SAMs.
> With future networked warfare, a submarine can also fire cold-launched SAM with active terminal seeker into a general area of confirmed targets.
> We're not in era of dedicated jets like Land Attack, Maritime Attack, Interceptor, Fighter, etc.
> We don't need to waste our time & resources sailing at snail's speed to South China Sea. Our peninsular IOR is already vast to defend. Shore targets in Pakistan would also be our primary concern + possible targets around Red Sea endangering our ships + possible hostility from Bangladesh or even Myanmar, who knows the future?
> J-35 has progressed a lot since FC-31 days. Now their production capacity has increased. The next protoype could be fully equipped, production ready model, before 2030.
> Their J-36 & naval version of J-50 will also progress fast. We're deep in era of affordable supercomputing, automation, robotics & now AI, ML, etc.
> We're most populous country now with 10s of 1000s of students passing out of colleges every year, who needs to be absorbed into industry. Hence ADA, DRDO, HAL & private firms need to expand their facilites & employees.
> We need to be future oriented, not sentimental, nostalgic, dragging obsolete things like LCA/inflated-MWF airframe which was inspired by Mirage-2000, designed in 1970s/80s. A jet needs to be good from both inside & outside. Only fitting latest internal components not enough.
> Being practical doesn't mean keep on compromising & lagging decade ater decade. Wherever we are unable to deliver, i think we should setup a court of enquiry into bureaucratic babu system.

F110 is a quite "old" engine. It remains a very potent one, but heavier and bigger than a modern alternative, even with less power (because lighter).

A few pieces of a suitable engine w/o ToT can power prototypes, that's all. The airframe R&D should not get hit.
When F-15/16 have been pushed to us then citizens would obviously wanna know if we asked just for the engine & what was USA's response.
And if we consider Russia so friendly then AL-31 could have been used. Now when they have built AL-51 then we should get few AL-41.
Also, looking at differences b/w TD & production jet, like YF-22 Vs F-22, X-35 (no IWB) vs F-35, we should make our TD prototypes with modular engine bay to adjust multiple types of engines with managable dimension differences.
F-16 different blocks used -
> F110-GE-100 (182" long, 36" inlet dia.)
> F110-GE-132 (182" long, 46.5" inlet dia.)
> F110-GE-132A (185" long, IDK inlet dia.)
> F100-PW-229 (191" long, 35" inlet dia.)

F-15E has used F-100-PW-229, F110-GE-129 & 132.



Russian engines longer.
AL-31 (198" long, 36" inlet dia.)
AL-41 (198" long, 37" inlet dia.)

We see that most engines have identical inlet diameter 35/36/37", except F110-GE-132 with 46.5". Lengths are easier to manage.