Twin-Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF)
- Thread starter Gautam
- Start date
I won't be surprised if French help will be sought for TEDBF. Or they could always make it a competition. MRFA winner is expected to assist in AMCA.
As India & France get ready to sign 7-bn Euro deal for Rafale Marine, 87 TEDBFs emerge in shadow
Navy initially gave proposal for 145 twin-engine fighters, basing requirement on 3-carrier force, but planners believe the force should go for 2 aircraft carriers as of now.New Delhi: The deal for 26 Rafale Marine aircraft is likely to cost about 7 billion Euros and this will include weapons, associated ancillary equipment, simulator, spares, documentation, crew training and performance-based logistics support besides certain changes, ThePrint has learnt.
Sources in the defence and security establishment also told ThePrint that the deal is likely to be signed ahead or on the sidelines of a possible visit by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Paris in February next.
They added more clarity was currently awaited as French Prime Minister Michel Barnier lost a no-confidence motion early Thursday.
Under French law, all government-to-government deals are signed by ministers in charge of respective portfolios.
“There could be a slight delay because of this no-confidence motion. But a deal would either be signed ahead or possible on the sidelines of the Prime Minister’s visit to France in February,” a source said, adding final dates were yet to be worked out.
The sources said, France would be obligated under contract to deliver the first Rafale Marine aircraft in 37 months from the date of signing the deal.
They explained the contract would also have a clause whereby within 18 months, manufacturer Dassault Aviation will showcase a Rafale Marine with the modifications the Indian Navy wanted.
The sources did not go into these specific changes, but said they were to ensure that the aircraft performed optimally from an Indian aircraft carrier.
TEDBF programme under review with NSCS
The sources also told ThePrint that the indigenous naval fighter programme, the Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF), had been cleared from all relevant ministries and was now being studied by the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS).They told ThePrint that the Navy had initially moved a proposal for 145 TEDBFs, basing their requirement for a three-carrier force.
However, it is learnt that defence policy planners are of the opinion that the Indian Navy should project requirements on the basis of two-aircraft carriers as of now.
Accordingly, fresh numbers projected are about 87 TEDBFs.
The sources also said the Navy was working closely with the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) and they hoped to make the first flight of the TEDBF by 2028.
They said while formalities were being completed, the Navy, ADA and the relevant agencies were working on the three prototypes of the Tejas Navy. This, they said, was being funded by the earmarked budget for the Tejas.
The sources said the Navy had identified 14 essential upgrades it needed on the TEDBF, including automatic landing and take-off features that the Tejas Navy is short of.
Four of the 14 technologies identified have been tested on the Tejas Navy and have been accepted, they added.
“No time is being wasted. While discussions on numbers and design continue, the Indian Navy and the ADA are already working and proving technologies needed which will enable a faster development cycle for the TEDBF,” a source said.
In 2016, then Navy chief Admiral Sunil Lanba (retd). had rejected the Tejas Navy, saying the programme has not met the timeline and there were further delays.
“LCA Navy doesn’t meet the navy requirements and thus, we need to look at an alternative aircraft to have combat capability on our aircraft carrier. We will continue to support the ADA in developing an indigenous carrier-based fighter. But in the meantime, we need to have combat capability on Vikramaditya and Vikrant,” he had said.
The Navy’s contention was it needed a twin-engine fighter and not a single engine, and that Tejas Navy was always meant as a technology demonstrator. It had also identified several flaws, including weak under fuselage and landing gear, a low thrust-to-weight ratio to take off with a full payload, including fuel and weapons.
The sources underlined the Rafale Marine was a stop-gap arrangement and that the Indian Naval aviation future would be made up of TEDBFs.
I'd hoped the CNS would touch upon plans for purchasing LCA-N Mk1 for carrier training. Need to preserve MiG-29K airframe life given their dismal flight safety record. Can't have them crashing as often as they are. TEDBF is expected to arrive only in 2035-36 which is still a long way off.
The Indian Navy's proposed TEDBF can be seen here at Aero India in model form giving an idea of its looks and weapon loadout. pic.twitter.com/tW3abzxMKT
— Vayu Aerospace Review (@ReviewVayu) February 9, 2025
From the rear angle, you can barely tell the difference. At minimum, they could have used twin canted tail fins.
It's a waste of time and money. ADA should bring some more fancy wooden models like Star Wars jets since they are not going to finish anything other than LCA. just trying to get some projects to keep their jobs, simply wasting taxpayer's money for an analysis that is never going to be delivered. If IN needs any fighter jets, just procure them from the market when it's needed. GOI should create a DOGE-like institution to move people from MOD, ADA, and HAL and absorb these non-performing people into some other organization.
Last edited:
This is straight up bullshit. You plan on ordering 89 jets of 4.5th gen that too in 2040s. Better to discard it all together.
Why complicate life? Twin fins would mean the need for additional sensors and more maintenance.
Nah, it's good. This was always the expected date. What you have just relaized is you had unrealistic expectations, which happens to all who enter this field. Both TEDBF and AMCA are 15-year programs, so the dates mentioned are only for the early IOC models. Even J-20 and Su-57 are on the cusp of deliveries of their definitive models after first flight 15 years ago.
The potential for good news is, as you'd hoped, the timeline for TEDBF meets the timeline necessary for AMCA's engine. So let's hope there's an engine upgrade on the anvil.
No,just a static model of an aircraft which yet to get the clearance of development.Rafale with DSI
These babu saw the opertunity when IN shows interest on new aircraft 57 or so,and sabotage that figure. If india falls to an autocracy, first thing he/she should do is send ADA,HAL guys & people like Indrani Roy to cellular jail.
There is an indication by IN about 5gen TEDBF, means complete stealth. 
See the 1st ticked point.
IDK the complete video or transcript but the current TEDBF design could be scrapped or heavily modified.
So this is different from the earlier linear roadmap which IMO is contributing problem rather than parallel, independent projects.
Technology constraints, challenges, hurdles, complexities, etc are NORMAL part of Engineering.
Just like our commercial tech of laptops/desktops, cellphones, etc have improved drastically & helps us so well technically & non-technically, similarly, Industrial Technology improves not just H/w components making, testing, but also business processes & decision making through secured conferencing, networks, databases, inventory management S/w, product lifecycle & project mgmt. S/w etc. Since our IT boom in 1990s we've been making all these things.
In most populous country with technical colleges in almost every city, 10s of 1000s of tech students passing out every year, If ADA, DRDO, HAL lacks resources then obviously they should expand + private sector.
Our Socialist mixed economy is supposed to be more economical than Capitalist free market one.
We have our RAMs & RAS now, we need geometric structure.
It's good that IN understand now that Naval jets won't get threat concession by enemy SAMs, AAMs, jets.
The era of 5gen is said to begin with B-2 & F-117 revealed in 1988, then YF-22/23 revealed in 1990. They were developed in 1980s & initiated in 1970s. So we are 30-40 years behind that way.
But we are 15 years down the line with AMCA & many common components with MWF, TEDBF. There are 3 options now -
- tweak AMCA like F-35 A & C models.
- tweak current TEDBF design. The MWF can act as TD like X-35 & final Naval TEDBF can be stealthy like F-35C, although inflated to 2-engine jet.
- cleansheet AHCA with stronger engines for a good airframe TWR to take-off & carry sufficient minimum custom weapons.
Our engine JV shoud cater to this, meanwhile we should arrange interim engine for prototype.
Also, a panic has been created about humidity, salinity, higher CAPEX & OPEX of naval jets, etc as if it is a solid barrier in way of tech advancement. It sounds like 4.5gen is the end of line & pinnacle of Naval jet tech & no future version of RAM & RAS can protect the jets in affordable cost.
On land/sea, in space, deep under water, if something needs to be done, will be done. So let's not fuel this point which goes against stealth naval jet rather than being constructive & progressive.
The next carrier should have EMALS which should be sanctioned a.s.a.p.
See the 1st ticked point.
IDK the complete video or transcript but the current TEDBF design could be scrapped or heavily modified.
So this is different from the earlier linear roadmap which IMO is contributing problem rather than parallel, independent projects.
Technology constraints, challenges, hurdles, complexities, etc are NORMAL part of Engineering.
Just like our commercial tech of laptops/desktops, cellphones, etc have improved drastically & helps us so well technically & non-technically, similarly, Industrial Technology improves not just H/w components making, testing, but also business processes & decision making through secured conferencing, networks, databases, inventory management S/w, product lifecycle & project mgmt. S/w etc. Since our IT boom in 1990s we've been making all these things.
In most populous country with technical colleges in almost every city, 10s of 1000s of tech students passing out every year, If ADA, DRDO, HAL lacks resources then obviously they should expand + private sector.
Our Socialist mixed economy is supposed to be more economical than Capitalist free market one.
We have our RAMs & RAS now, we need geometric structure.
It's good that IN understand now that Naval jets won't get threat concession by enemy SAMs, AAMs, jets.
The era of 5gen is said to begin with B-2 & F-117 revealed in 1988, then YF-22/23 revealed in 1990. They were developed in 1980s & initiated in 1970s. So we are 30-40 years behind that way.
But we are 15 years down the line with AMCA & many common components with MWF, TEDBF. There are 3 options now -
- tweak AMCA like F-35 A & C models.
- tweak current TEDBF design. The MWF can act as TD like X-35 & final Naval TEDBF can be stealthy like F-35C, although inflated to 2-engine jet.
- cleansheet AHCA with stronger engines for a good airframe TWR to take-off & carry sufficient minimum custom weapons.
Our engine JV shoud cater to this, meanwhile we should arrange interim engine for prototype.
Also, a panic has been created about humidity, salinity, higher CAPEX & OPEX of naval jets, etc as if it is a solid barrier in way of tech advancement. It sounds like 4.5gen is the end of line & pinnacle of Naval jet tech & no future version of RAM & RAS can protect the jets in affordable cost.
On land/sea, in space, deep under water, if something needs to be done, will be done. So let's not fuel this point which goes against stealth naval jet rather than being constructive & progressive.The next carrier should have EMALS which should be sanctioned a.s.a.p.
Tedbf needs to be converted into a full fledged fifth gen programme. Or atleast kf-x style program.
It looks very good in this latest version.
Now that it has become clear that the navy would like to have a stealthy airframe, and the timeline has been extended to 2037 and beyond, ADA should be working on a new design. Let's call it TEDBF-NG.
To make it future-ready and financially viable, they can position it as a cheaper alternative to AMCA and export ready. The Navy does not have stringent requirements like all-aspect stealth or supercruise.
Keep in mind that you can't adapt a land-based fighter design to be carrier-compatible; it has to be the other way around. Design has to be cleansheet not based on AMCA.
To make it future-ready and financially viable, they can position it as a cheaper alternative to AMCA and export ready. The Navy does not have stringent requirements like all-aspect stealth or supercruise.
- Ability to operate from STOBAR, CATOBAR and EMALS
- A shore-based version with a lower empty weight because there is no need for reinforced landing gear and folding wings.
- Engine options: GE F414 or 110kn AMCA engine
- Common avionics with AMCA Mk1 (We can drop fancy things like EOTS and limit it to IRST)
- No need for all-aspect stealth or supercruise
Keep in mind that you can't adapt a land-based fighter design to be carrier-compatible; it has to be the other way around. Design has to be cleansheet not based on AMCA.
Dassault worked with Boeing on X32 developpment. Why not with India ?
I really don't understand why they don't chose a twin vertical fin config.
It looks very good in this latest version.
It is nearly the norm now.
