IAF Not Interested in Land-Based Variant of TEDBF, Focusing on AMCA and Tejas MkII

The Indian Navy's vision for a new carrier-borne fighter jet, the Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF), seems to be encountering rough seas from the Indian Air Force (IAF). The IAF has reportedly shown little interest in the Navy's proposal for a land-based variant of the TEDBF, named the Omni-Role Combat Aircraft (ORCA).

Why the IAF Isn't on Board with ORCA​

According to a senior IAF official, developing the ORCA would be redundant. The IAF is already heavily invested in the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), a domestically manufactured 5th-generation fighter jet in the same weight class (around 25 tons) as the ORCA. The AMCA boasts features like stealth technology and advanced avionics, putting it at the forefront of modern fighter jet design.

The IAF has a clear roadmap for its fighter jet fleet. This includes inducting the lighter Tejas MkII fighters (around 17.5 tons) – 200 units are planned – followed by the more advanced AMCA with an estimated procurement of 200 units post-2033. Additionally, they're looking to acquire 97 Tejas Mk1A fighters, bringing their total Tejas fleet to a substantial 220.

When questioned about the possibility of ORCA replacing the Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft (MRFA) program (likely to result in the selection of the Rafale jets), IAF officials highlighted their existing investment in infrastructure and pilot training for the 36 Rafales already in service. They see the ORCA as offering no significant technological leap over the Tejas MkII or AMCA, making it an unnecessary expense.

Navy Sails On with TEDBF​

Despite the IAF's disinterest, the TEDBF program remains a priority for the Navy. The 26-ton TEDBF is specifically designed for operation from India's aircraft carriers, and it's intended to replace their ageing MiG-29K fleet.

Looking Ahead: Collaboration or Separate Paths?​

The IAF's focus on the AMCA and Tejas MkII programs signifies a strategic shift towards self-reliance in 5th-generation fighter jet technology. The Navy's TEDBF program, however, remains crucial for maintaining their carrier-based airpower. Whether the future holds collaboration between the IAF and Navy on a joint carrier-borne fighter jet project remains to be seen.

 

[Pink Panther]

if AMCA gets delayed or if MRFA is cancelled we need a backup plan in TEDBF/ORCA.

 

[PARTHAJIT JANA]

They will be if their demand for mrfa is shut down completely.

 

[Parthasarathi DasGupta]

Navy's game plan is always based on pragmatism. They know clearly that , AMCA will be still born. That's why they are going after TEDBF.
However, I personally feel that they should have gone for F18. As the production line is now almost closed. So, If order was given then Boeing would be able to supply much earlier. We need aircrafts now ! Not, after 10 years.

 

[kumar]

When IAC3 with higher tonnage is approved, then tedbf itself will have more orders. With existing 5th gen tech, it is maintenance nightmare for navy to maintain 5th gen aircraft.

 

[பாலா குப்புசாமி]

Yes, of course, we are purchasing 200 MK2, 220 MK1A, and 200 AMCA. However, we need one more twin-engine 4.5-gen fighter instead of MRFA. There's no sign of selecting MRFA in the near future, and even if chosen, it will take another 10 years. Why not consider ORCA instead of MRFA? It would be better to buy 36 more Rafales. Our strength lies in having different variants of fighters. Of course, maintenance is a nightmare, but it's good to confuse our rivals

 

[Kira]

This program was always going to be issue as the total fighters required by the IN is way too small to justify a independent stand alone project,as I had argued way back.
Tejas is only relevant today inspite of so many delays,because of the sheer number of old Soviet jets that IAF needs to replace in a rather short amount of time.
LCA as a project would not have been justifiable if the requirement was only for 40 or so odd jets.
Lastly for those arguing for need for ORCA as a separate program due to the number of fighters needed by IN increasing steadily post induction of IAC-2 and beyond need to take into the timeline of late 2030s where induction of only 5th Gen birds would make any sense.

 

[PARTHAJIT JANA]

Navy's game plan is always based on pragmatism. They know clearly that , AMCA will be still born. That's why they are going after TEDBF.
However, I personally feel that they should have gone for F18. As the production line is now almost closed. So, If order was given then Boeing would be able to supply much earlier. We need aircrafts now ! Not, after 10 years.

I think they did take right decisions. Us shouldnt be trusted in offensive weapons ,as you can see there are too many differences to bridge, and they will screw us in times of need. Its better we go with an already established fighter jet for training, weapons commonality rather than a new fighter jet.

 

[Akshat]

They will be if their demand for mrfa is shut down completely.

Which is never gonna happen.

 

[Akshat]

Navy's game plan is always based on pragmatism. They know clearly that , AMCA will be still born. That's why they are going after TEDBF.
However, I personally feel that they should have gone for F18. As the production line is now almost closed. So, If order was given then Boeing would be able to supply much earlier. We need aircrafts now ! Not, after 10 years.

Rafale is able to deliver first jets within 36 months. And they are far superior and cheaper as well. A few months of delay is not enough to justify billions extra for inferior quality jets.

 

[Akshat]

Yes, of course, we are purchasing 200 MK2, 220 MK1A, and 200 AMCA. However, we need one more twin-engine 4.5-gen fighter instead of MRFA. There's no sign of selecting MRFA in the near future, and even if chosen, it will take another 10 years. Why not consider ORCA instead of MRFA? It would be better to buy 36 more Rafales. Our strength lies in having different variants of fighters. Of course, maintenance is a nightmare, but it's good to confuse our rivals

Because there is no sign of ORCA for another 20 years.

 

[sanket]

if AMCA gets delayed or if MRFA is cancelled we need a backup plan in TEDBF/ORCA.

Instead expecting IAF to participate in ORCA , IN should rethink about TEDBF & Should think about developing Naval version of AMCA. It will save Time & Money.

 

[charminar_waale_ismail_bhai]

Funny thing is, both IAF and IN are betting on the wrong horse in the race to produce them their AMCA or TEDBF.

Our beloved HAL.

BTW, what is the latest from Mr. Anantakrishnan?

 

[Pramkumar]

IAF should look ORCA as 5th Gen replacement for SU30MKI from 2035-36

 

[Ayyadurai Namasivayam]

Instead expecting IAF to participate in ORCA , IN should rethink about TEDBF & Should think about developing Naval version of AMCA. It will save Time & Money.

Yes. Naval AMCA will be a good option. But what indian Naval leadership thinking is stealth coating and other stealth features will be affected due sea erosion and rough sea conditions.

 

[LookingBack]

if AMCA gets delayed or if MRFA is cancelled we need a backup plan in TEDBF/ORCA.

Wow! Fantastic idea. If TEDBF/ORCA is cancelled we need 2nd bkup plan ABCD/EFGH and if that is cancelled we need a 3rd bkup plan.
Well try to derail Bharat's steady growth advising unnecessary, multiple & parallel plans so that every plan gets collapsed and Bharat is forced to import.

 

[Ashutosh]

Rafale is able to deliver first jets within 36 months. And they are far superior and cheaper as well. A few months of delay is not enough to justify billions extra for inferior quality jets.

Production line done AF for a decade ....... doesn't even matter if they can deliver 36 jets/ year.

 

[NSR]

Rightfully so because IAF needs a bigger and 5th Generation AMCA with all the bells and whistles.
Whereas TEDBF is a smaller version and will not fit in IAF requirements.

Too many fighter development programs at the same time - Tejas Mk IA, Tejas Mk2, TEDBF, and AMCA.
Very difficult for a country like India and failures will be high.

On the top of that IN will be paying dearly through their noses for 26 Rafale-Ms - not less than $8+ billions for them and $2+ billions for their armaments.
Perhaps, IN should use this $10+ billions to develop its own TEDBF and armaments and save money for India and other services procurements needs.

We can't blame IAF.

 

[The_rED_dEVIL]

When IAC3 with higher tonnage is approved, then tedbf itself will have more orders. With existing 5th gen tech, it is maintenance nightmare for navy to maintain 5th gen aircraft.

Exactly. TEDBF should be given approval (IAF's decision on ORCA shouldn't decide the fate of it). It is important. Navy will have 3-4 carriers and MiG 29K will be retired. 2 Vikrant class carriers themselves will need 45×2=90 TEDBF. And another Vishal class carrier means at least 60-70 more orders. Adding up to 150+ orders.

IAF programmes like Tejas mk 2 and AMCA had initial order expectation of 120. So, why is Navy's programme order insufficient for progress?

 

[abhinav srivastava]

If IAF joins TEDBF then it will have to forego Rafale. IAF is Rafaels fan boy.