MoD Considers Integrating Indian Air Force into Navy's TEDBF Program to Achieve 200+ Order Size and Potential AMCA Synergy

In a strategic move aimed at optimizing defence resources and bolstering indigenous manufacturing, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is considering integrating the Indian Air Force (IAF) into the Indian Navy's Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF) program.

This decision seeks to address the substantial funding and production requirements of the TEDBF project, which are comparable to those of the IAF's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) program.

The TEDBF program, intended to replace the aging MiG-29K fleet operating from Indian Navy aircraft carriers, requires significant investment. While the Navy has identified a need for approximately 145 units, the MoD has initially approved the procurement of only 80.

To ensure the financial viability of the project and attract private sector participation, it is estimated that an order size of around 200 jets is necessary.

A larger order size would bring several benefits:

• Reduced per-unit costs: Increasing the order volume would lower the cost of each aircraft, making the program more financially attractive.
• Private sector involvement: A larger, more financially viable program would encourage private companies to invest in manufacturing and development, boosting India's domestic defence industry.
• Economies of scale: Increased production volume allows for economies of scale, further reducing costs and improving efficiency.

Integrating the IAF into the TEDBF program offers the potential for significant synergy with the AMCA program. Both aircraft are expected to share several critical components, leading to cost savings and technological harmonization:

• Common LRUs: Both the TEDBF and AMCA will utilize similar Line Replaceable Units (LRUs), simplifying maintenance and reducing logistical complexities.
• Shared avionics: The avionics suites for both jets are expected to have significant overlap, allowing for shared development costs and faster integration of new technologies.
• Common engine: Initially, both platforms will be powered by GE F-414 engines, with a planned transition to new high-powered 110kN engines developed by the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) for the AMCA program. This streamlines logistics and paves the way for future upgrades.

By integrating the IAF into the TEDBF program, the MoD aims to achieve a larger order size, making the program more financially viable and attractive for private sector participation.

This strategic move not only supports indigenous manufacturing but also fosters greater synergy between the TEDBF and AMCA programs, optimizing resources and accelerating the development of critical defence technologies.

 

BrahMos Aerospace in Talks with Indian Army for Ground-Based BrahMos-NG Missile System to Meet High-Altitude Needs Malaysian Vessel with Five Chinese Nationals Receives Critical Fuel Supply from Indian Navy 225 Nautical Miles West of Indira Point

[Shrujanam Syama]

We already have Tejas Mk1a and Tejas Mk2 as 4th-gen programs. Why go for another TEDBF (4th gen)? Just merge it with the AMCA program and make a naval AMCA, so it will benefit both the IAF and Navy.

TEDBF will be 4.5 gen. Even Tejas MK2 will be 4.5 gen. This means the electronics suite and avionics will be 5th gen, but the physical design will be 4th gen (non-stealth) as the 5th-gen exterior has poor aerodynamics.

 

[Rokuth]

This is a possibility only if both the aircrafts are mostly similar. That will be known only after the final critical design specification for TEDF is ready. As of now, I remember to have read that CDS for TEDF will be ready by 25-26 only. And, AMCA has crossed beyond its CDS milestone last year itself.🙂

Additionally, if they are dissimilar, why are they so when both Rafel and F18 can have their naval versions?🤔

Actually, the F-18 has always been a purely Naval aircraft. Landbased versions still have all the equipment for carrier operations.
FYI, there had never been a successful convertion of a landbased aircraft into a Naval version. However, there have been successful convertions of Naval aircraft into landbased aircraft. The F-18, and the F-4 Phantom II are 2 such examples.

 

[Anant]

That's why we need EMALS

Yes, but our own EMALS is still under development and scale model testing. Moreover, Vikramaditya and Vikrant will remain STOBAR regardless.

 

[Anant]

Actually, the F-18 has always been a purely Naval aircraft. Landbased versions still have all the equipment for carrier operations.
FYI, there had never been a successful convertion of a landbased aircraft into a Naval version. However, there have been successful convertions of Naval aircraft into landbased aircraft. The F-18, and the F-4 Phantom II are 2 such examples.

There hasn't been a fully successful conversion in last 70 years or so. However, the only exception-ish to that is the Rafale, even though the Rafale M has some slight compromises as compared to the land version.

 

[Anant]

Even 5th gen platforms like F35 and J35 have naval and air force variants.

The F-35 has three distinct variants. The F-35A is suited for ground operations, with the F-35C (a slightly different variant) being for carriers. As for the J-35, it is almost certainly there will be multiple variants.

 

[beencensured]

MoD should push IAF for TEDBF derivative instead of MRFA. We can induct these fighters around 2032. Which will be like a couple of years behind the MFRA procurement of signed in 2025.

Also, instead of spending 20 billion dollars on MRFA, spending it for Indegenious research and technology will yield better results, will be cheaper to develop twin engine fighters and also save enough money to built a 65k ton aircraft carrier.

About three aircraft carriers could be built for 25 billion dollars. At least two aircraft carriers with a full deck of planes could also be built.

 

[S. Gupta]

No need for TEDBF as new advanced techology has been given to make sure single engine plane is made adequately safe for naval operations.

 

[Raja Raja Cholan]

This is a possibility only if both the aircrafts are mostly similar. That will be known only after the final critical design specification for TEDF is ready. As of now, I remember to have read that CDS for TEDF will be ready by 25-26 only. And, AMCA has crossed beyond its CDS milestone last year itself.🙂

Additionally, if they are dissimilar, why are they so when both Rafel and F18 can have their naval versions?🤔

This is why the timeline set for first flight test never happened. When planned progression is taking place interjection like this disrupts it's planned schedules. If design stage for AMCA is in the final stages or even mid stage engineers need to redo the design to accommodate the merger of IAF AMCA with IN TEDBF. All these merger intergration is going to disrupt the design and adjust planned timeline.

 

[Rajesh]

Good decision. If MRFA happens, make sure they have both naval and air versions and fulfill the requirements from MRFA. Meanwhile, Mk2 can also be used to increase the numbers for the IAF. TEDBF and AMCA programs should be merged to form a 5th-gen fighter and should be used for both the IN (carrier variant) and the IAF. Or scrap MRFA and fulfill the IAF's needs with ORCA and order used Rafales (24 to 36) as an interim solution, and AMCA as independent programs.

 

[Deepak Hegde]

Do whatever you want. Without a flying prototype the fighter is decades away from being a reality. Indian PSU's efficiancy matches the speed of a snail.

The only difference is even a snail reaches somewhere in 30 years. PSU development of aircraft is nowhere even after 30 years !!

 

[desigandu]

Instead of TEDBF, we should accelerate AMCA and also develop a AMCA-N for the Navy…

Yes stealth is more expensive to maintain but costs shared by IN and IAF and higher numbers of AMCA will be better in the long run…

Currently AMCA for IAF are about 200-250 jets, which when combined with naval needs can put AMCA across the 500 mark, which will provide economies of scale, common systems, MRO, engines etc.!

Savings from TEDBF can be reinvested in starting a 6th gen research efforts especially around a variable cycle engine for which if work starts in 2030, hopefully one will be ready starting 2040!

Development is a multi generational continuous effort and needs to be planned, funded and executed over decades!

I am hopeful and optimistic, though very concerned at IAF fighter numbers and the near future till 2030!

 

[desigandu]

A proposal in my opinion…

MRFA converted to 36 Rafales + 36 F-35As, both delivered by 2030, in fly away…but given our threat environment, we don’t have many viable options…

TEDBF converted to AMCA-N even with stealth at sea and maintenance costs on carriers, will be offset by commonality of AMCA…Also that after 2040, non stealth planes will have limited role in contested environments and drone/unmanned systems will be part of the ecosystem….

All of these are dependent on a high thrust engine starting 2035, and a kaveri2 for reengining by 2035…

1. Tejas Mk1A - 2025, all 200 jets by 2030-2032…
2. Tejas Mk2 - 2030, all 200 jets by 2038-2040…
3. TEDBF - scrapped for AMCA-N
4. AMCA Mk1- 2035, all 50 jets by 2038-2040…
5. AMCA Mk2 and AMCA-N, all 450 jets by 2040-2050…

Yes, this is more hope today, but realistic if we are willing to invest, while mitigating some short term risks till 2030…

 

[desigandu]

The Navy has already rejected a navalised AMCA on very valid grounds. The stealth coatings on a hypothetical AMCA N wouldn't last nearly as long enough as needed at sea, and the aircraft would be too heavy for STOBAR operations.

Agree, but given the synergies in a common AMCA for IAF and IN, and the challenges and funding required for a TEDBF, MOD with the services must do a realistic analysis and decide next steps…

Funding, timelines, current capability and threat environments in combination must inform developments as compared to purely needs…

Things are rapidly changing with Chinese developments, Porkis flying stealth jets and our own delays - thus the solution must evolve…

In my opinion managing a separate TEDBF program as compared to a common AMCA 5th gen jet warrants serious discussion and analysis, but a quick decision…

 

[desigandu]

Not to mention weight. AMCA is pretty heavy as it is. Navalising it would add even more weight, causing significant compromises on endurance or payload when operating from our STOBAR carriers.

That is the reason a AMCA-N must only use 2 high thrust engines, which if started in 2025, will only appear around 2035, making AMCA-N the same timelines as AMCA Mk2…

If this happens we should buy additional Rafale Ms and also extend the life of Mig29s, while approving the new carriers accordingly…IAC2 can start now but IAC3 onwards only around 2030…