TEDBF Astra Missile Pylons Shifted to Wing Roots, Enhancing Performance and Operational Effectiveness

Recent visuals from October 2023 reveal a significant design modification to India's Twin Engine Deck-Based Fighter (TEDBF) prototype. The Astra missile pylons, previously situated under the fuselage, have been relocated to the wing root position.

This strategic adjustment, while raising questions, offers several potential advantages for the aircraft's performance, operational effectiveness, and overall design.

Structural Integrity and Load Distribution​

One of the primary motivations behind the pylon relocation is likely related to structural integrity and load distribution.

The wing root, a robust part of the aircraft structure, can withstand greater stress and load. By shifting the missile pylons to this position, the stress on the fuselage is reduced, enhancing the TEDBF's durability and lifespan.

Additionally, this change maintains an optimal center of gravity, contributing to improved flight stability and control.

Aerodynamic Efficiency​

Aerodynamic efficiency is paramount for fighter aircraft, as it directly affects speed, fuel efficiency, and maneuverability. Under-fuselage pylons can increase drag, particularly when carrying multiple missiles.

By moving the Astra pylons to the wing roots, the TEDBF achieves a cleaner aerodynamic profile, reducing drag and potentially improving speed and fuel efficiency.

This change also maintains the aircraft's agility, a critical factor in both air-to-air combat and evasion maneuvers.

Weapon System Integration and Operational Effectiveness​

The pylon relocation may also be aimed at enhancing weapon system integration and operational effectiveness.

Wing root positions can provide better missile launch dynamics, ensuring reliable separation and ignition. Furthermore, this configuration facilitates easier maintenance and quicker re-arming, as the wing roots are more accessible than under-fuselage pylons.

The change also allows for a more versatile loadout, enabling the TEDBF to carry a wider array of weapons and sensors.

Payload Management and Carrier Operations​

The TEDBF is designed for aircraft carrier operations, where payload management is crucial due to limited space and the need for quick turnaround times.

By placing the Astra missiles on the wing roots, additional payloads like fuel tanks or other munitions can be carried under the fuselage, maximizing the aircraft's operational capabilities.

While the TEDBF is still under development, these recent design modifications underscore India's commitment to developing a cutting-edge, multi-role fighter aircraft capable of meeting the evolving demands of modern naval warfare.

 

[sanket]

Very Good, But IN havent shown any Interest in AMCA Naval version . TEDBF is been developed for Navy then what payload does it carry. another thing is its 4.5 G compared to AMCA which is stealth which may carry less payload.

 

[The Presence]

Fuselage is the strongest part of a fighter jet. It has the highest load-bearing capability.
Maybe they're keeping it clean for an IWB 👀

 

[Pink Panther]

AMCA will be a derivation of this design conceptually, this might be the reason why they kept the belly free of everything, so that internal weapons bay can be added, they might also derive a transport jet or bomber out of this design making this bigger in the future, so it’s a good thought.

 

[Indian1]

Just pictures of tedbf. Does not exist in real life. Why speculating and debating about an imaginary object?

 

[Anant]

Very Good, But IN havent shown any Interest in AMCA Naval version . TEDBF is been developed for Navy then what payload does it carry. another thing is its 4.5 G compared to AMCA which is stealth which may carry less payload.

Because AMCA cannot be navalised as a STOBAR fighter, and because maintaining fifth generation fighters at sea is a headache of epic proportions.

See, fifth generation fighters have radar-reducinh stealth coatings. When at sea, these coatings would have to be very frequently re-applied, since they wouldn't stick on for too long due to the moisture and seaspray.

Moreover, AMCA is already a very heavy fighter. Navalising it would add another 3-5 tons of weight, which would mean the aircraft would have to either compromise on fuel or payload, or maybe even both. AMCA-N could theoretically operate from a CATOBAR system, but with the inherent limitations of STOBAR, it would be of very limited utility.

 

[desigandu]

Because AMCA cannot be navalised as a STOBAR fighter, and because maintaining fifth generation fighters at sea is a headache of epic proportions.

See, fifth generation fighters have radar-reducinh stealth coatings. When at sea, these coatings would have to be very frequently re-applied, since they wouldn't stick on for too long due to the moisture and seaspray.

Moreover, AMCA is already a very heavy fighter. Navalising it would add another 3-5 tons of weight, which would mean the aircraft would have to either compromise on fuel or payload, or maybe even both. AMCA-N could theoretically operate from a CATOBAR system, but with the inherent limitations of STOBAR, it would be of very limited utility.

Maybe when we have EMALS/AAG from a potential nuclear propulsion 65000 ton CATOBAR carrier by 2050, we would need stealth jets…in the meantime could we get a squadron of F-35Bs to fly from our 2 smallish carriers….

 

[Boomeranger]

AMCA will be a derivation of this design conceptually, this might be the reason why they kept the belly free of everything, so that internal weapons bay can be added, they might also derive a transport jet or bomber out of this design making this bigger in the future, so it’s a good thought.

AMCA FOC ONLY after 2055 year for MK1. Then 10 years for MK2 and so, TEDBF only after 2070 year FOC...

 

[Pink Panther]

AMCA FOC ONLY after 2055 year for MK1. Then 10 years for MK2 and so, TEDBF only after 2070 year FOC...

pretty much same time to wait for our first Rafale if ordered tomorrow, 382 order Backlog @ 6/year, at that time some countries will fly 7th gen jets.

 

[Pink Panther]

Just pictures of tedbf. Does not exist in real life. Why speculating and debating about an imaginary object?

When we are speculating about Navy buying Rafale-M and IAF buying 114 $335Mln Rafale for $40Bln, there is nothing wrong in imagining this too, Dreams are free of cost, any one can dream.

 

[Pink Panther]

Maybe when we have EMALS/AAG from a potential nuclear propulsion 65000 ton CATOBAR carrier by 2050, we would need stealth jets…in the meantime could we get a squadron of F-35Bs to fly from our 2 smallish carriers….

if offered yes, if S-400’s are donated, yes, yes if some US 4th gen jet is bought first for MRFA.

 

[Pink Panther]

Because AMCA cannot be navalised as a STOBAR fighter, and because maintaining fifth generation fighters at sea is a headache of epic proportions.

See, fifth generation fighters have radar-reducinh stealth coatings. When at sea, these coatings would have to be very frequently re-applied, since they wouldn't stick on for too long due to the moisture and seaspray.

Moreover, AMCA is already a very heavy fighter. Navalising it would add another 3-5 tons of weight, which would mean the aircraft would have to either compromise on fuel or payload, or maybe even both. AMCA-N could theoretically operate from a CATOBAR system, but with the inherent limitations of STOBAR, it would be of very limited utility.

and so as Tejas and Rafake sll have RAM coating all 4.5 jets have RAM coatings, SU-35, Gripen and Typhoon, F/A-18.

 

[desigandu]

if offered yes, if S-400’s are donated, yes, yes if some US 4th gen jet is bought first for MRFA.

Just wait and watch, both IN and IAF will be flying some versions of F-35s by 2030 - the great game between the US and China will shape geopolitical events that will push Bharat closer to the US and vice versa…US equipment is the best but comes with strings attached that we need to manage…Modi 3.0 will make India strong and more assertive, while China will go for Taiwan - I love coldwar2….Russia will lean more towards China, and that too will make India nervous…Jai Hind…Jai Bharat…S400 etc. is a side show - push comes to shove the Americans know how to fight a cold war and win, but they need strong partners which are in short supply…

 

[పవన్కుమార్]

Because AMCA cannot be navalised as a STOBAR fighter, and because maintaining fifth generation fighters at sea is a headache of epic proportions.

See, fifth generation fighters have radar-reducinh stealth coatings. When at sea, these coatings would have to be very frequently re-applied, since they wouldn't stick on for too long due to the moisture and seaspray.

Moreover, AMCA is already a very heavy fighter. Navalising it would add another 3-5 tons of weight, which would mean the aircraft would have to either compromise on fuel or payload, or maybe even both. AMCA-N could theoretically operate from a CATOBAR system, but with the inherent limitations of STOBAR, it would be of very limited utility.

Who said to apply stealth coating for each and every amca fighter? Its an option . For 32 amca naval fighters use for only 8 fighters with stealth coating and remaing let them evade radar detection using only geometric shape of amca and use passive counter radar wave cancellation techniques to most of its extent. Like f18 growler and naval rafale . Who said to use stealth coating as mundatory for every amca. ? Having few naval amca to counter and stand bharath among 5th gen indigenous naval fighters club at 3 rd place in world is ideal place among competitors ready and poised to use their 5th gen fighters in Indian ocean waters.

 

[Sandeep]

This design has been carefully developed so that it can carry more weapons and hard points in certain gaps and areas. India should try and reduce the air drag as much as possible and give it some stealth features to limit its exposure from radars by using more composites and radar absorbing material. They should have also used a diamond shaped nose rather than a standard round version which will be easier to pickup on radar.

 

[Athmanirbharata - II]

Just wait and watch, both IN and IAF will be flying some versions of F-35s by 2030 - the great game between the US and China will shape geopolitical events that will push Bharat closer to the US and vice versa…US equipment is the best but comes with strings attached that we need to manage…Modi 3.0 will make India strong and more assertive, while China will go for Taiwan - I love coldwar2….Russia will lean more towards China, and that too will make India nervous…Jai Hind…Jai Bharat…S400 etc. is a side show - push comes to shove the Americans know how to fight a cold war and win, but they need strong partners which are in short supply…

It is not impossible, Pentagon has asked Lockheed to make a secret F35 variant for an undisclosed export customer and funding was allocated end of last year, that secret customer could be India also, there could be a deal for a combination of F15+F35 or F21+F35, this might be the reason for the rumor of Navy going for only 26 Rafale-M and that too directly from France, if we are making Rafale for MRFA in India, wouldn't’ those 26 also would have been made in India, I had this doubt earlier, but we never know until it happens for sure.

 

[Anant]

and so as Tejas and Rafake sll have RAM coating all 4.5 jets have RAM coatings, SU-35, Gripen and Typhoon, F/A-18.

That they do, but even as the American Navy is finding out, the materials used in high-RAM coatings tends to not stick on, for lack of a better term. This is also part of the reason why they are keeping most of their F-35Cs on carriers presently in friendly waters.

 

[Anant]

Maybe when we have EMALS/AAG from a potential nuclear propulsion 65000 ton CATOBAR carrier by 2050, we would need stealth jets…in the meantime could we get a squadron of F-35Bs to fly from our 2 smallish carriers….

Sir, by 2050, who knows? Material technology could have reached a point where these coatings can be maintained far better.

As for F-35Bs, I respectfully disagree for three reasons. Firstly, the US hasn't offered India F-35s, and unless something massive changes, that seems to be how things will be. Secondly, yet another aircraft type means even more maintenance headaches. Finally, the F-35B isn't exactly an optimal option for a 45,000 ton carrier. The stealth would help, but payload might be an issue.

 

[Pink Panther]

That they do, but even as the American Navy is finding out, the materials used in high-RAM coatings tends to not stick on, for lack of a better term. This is also part of the reason why they are keeping most of their F-35Cs on carriers presently in friendly waters.

We need to do reapplication of RAM coating periodically, it is a well known fact, any jet whether it is Airforce or Naval will lose the coating overtime due to the friction on the body when it flies.

 

[J S Roy Choudhury]

That they do, but even as the American Navy is finding out, the materials used in high-RAM coatings tends to not stick on, for lack of a better term. This is also part of the reason why they are keeping most of their F-35Cs on carriers presently in friendly waters.

RAM coatings are not only expensive, they are highly maintenance dependant. Their contribution in reducing RCS is probably overrated.

At present, stealth effect, i.e., minimising RCS presented to a hostile sensor, is obtained by :

• Minimising thermal infra-red emission from the engine and its exhaust.
• Reducing radar reflection by cleverly shaping the airframe.
• Reducing EM radiations by maintaining radio silence and/or skipping frequencies
• Minimising radar reflections from airframe by the use of radar-absorbent materials (RAM) or radar-transparent materials such as plastics.

Out of the above components, the share of the first two components are highest and technically much more feasible in the long run. Since each component comes with the associated cost of manufacturing and maintenance, the cost to benefit ratio offered by such RAM coatings is a matter of serious debate.

In any case, we cannot imagine a situation where an aircraft will require the specialised RAM treatment in the midst of sorties just to maintain its stealth properties! Agreed, that with the evolution of newer materials, the RAM coatings may become more robust. But till then, we have to discount them.

To be honest, a stealth aircraft (by whatever method it is obtained), has stealth only till the first contact is made with the enemy. After that, stealth has a limited role, and aerodynamic performance alone saves the day. I may be wrong, but practicality demands so.