TEDBF Program: Indian Navy's Modernization Drive Advances Despite Delays

The Indian Navy's pursuit of a modern, indigenous carrier-borne fighter jet is advancing with the development of the Twin Engine Deck Based Fighter (TEDBF).

Spearheaded by the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the TEDBF aims to replace the aging MiG-29K fleet currently serving on the aircraft carriers INS Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant.

Critical Design Review and Timeline Adjustments​

The ADA is making strides towards completing the Critical Design Review (CDR) for all TEDBF systems by early 2025.

The CDR marks a pivotal phase, ensuring that all systems meet the Indian Navy's stringent performance requirements and are ready for seamless integration.

Following an initial evaluation of two design proposals, the Indian Navy has selected a preferred design that ADA will refine for the CDR process.

Once the CDR is successfully completed, the TEDBF program will receive final approval from the Indian Navy and proceed to the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) for funding clearance.

After CCS authorization, the timeline anticipates the TEDBF's first rollout within four years, with the jet entering service by 2034. Although the original goal aimed for a first flight by 2026, it appears likely to be revised to late 2029 or the early 2030s.

Procurement Plans and Engine Development​

The Indian Navy plans to procure the TEDBF in two batches of 45 units each.

While initial prototypes will likely employ GE-F414 engines, the production version, especially the second batch, could feature a more powerful 110kN engine currently under development for the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA) Mk-II program.

To support the ambitious TEDBF project, the ADA is seeking approximately ₹13,000 crores in funding. This substantial investment highlights the importance of this program to bolster the Indian Navy's maritime security capabilities.

Significance of the TEDBF​

The TEDBF program represents a critical step in enhancing the Indian Navy's operational readiness and self-reliance. It will address the urgent need to replace the aging MiG-29K jets.

A successful outcome will provide the Indian Navy with a modern and capable carrier-based fighter jet developed within the country.

This achievement will not only increase India's naval prowess but will also be a testament to its growing technological maturity in the defence sector.

 

[PARTHAJIT JANA]

Even for stop gap, does 26 sound enough?

When India acquired INS Vikramaditya, it ordered a fleet of 45 Mig-29 K to go with it, accounting for availability in case of attrition and maintenance.

How will they make do with just 26 Rafales for INS Vikrant.

Probably not, but migs will work till 2040.till then navy will do its work with less no.

 

[Ashutosh]

Kya bol rehe bhai without researching?? Amca 25 tonne, tedbf 26 tonne ...
They already buying 4.5 gen rafale then why new design 4.5 gen fighter jet again?

Bro ye data kaha se Mila aapko, AMCA is heavier

 

[Hari Sud]

MIG-29k is not old but the Indian Navy does not like it.

 

[charminar_waale_ismail_bhai]

Bro ye data kaha se Mila aapko, AMCA is heavier

Yeh Anna-data ka data hai.

Phasal ugne sei pahle MSP nikaal lete hain yeh log.

I mean, even protypes dont exit of either AMCA nor TED-BF. But weight mei TEDBF is heaver than AMCA, iss baat ka confidence inn ko HAL sei bhi jyada hai

 

[Ramsses CDXX]

• 45 aircrafts❗....... What a loss making proposition. The program cost will alone be like initial Eurofighters. Export prospects will sink to 🌊 for 🐊 to feed on.
• All 3-Indian Navy ACs are and will be of Vikrant-size tonnage. Hence not more than 30 aircrafts (20 fixed-wing + 10 rotary). So 20 × 3= 60±6. So what's the rationale of creating a new jet for paltry 40?
• Terminate the program (like Tapas-BH), end the variegated 🇷🇺-🇫🇷 spare supply-chain & relieve taxpayers' suffering.
• Buy Rafale instead. Doosra koi vikalp ya raasta hai hi nahi. Wahi raam-baan hai 🏹 🫤😑

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

MRFA? That Birbal's khichdii?
Who knows when that deal will ripen.

Ah I see what you did there with 'ripen'

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

I think the timeline for TEDBF got messed up because of prioritising AMCA. Tejas mk2 and tedbf, both have seen delays but amca is still on track. I guess its ok, since rafale marine order is finalised. So we wont need tedbf until 3rd carrier gets operational.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

TED-BF should have been the natural progression for ADA/HAL from Tejas Mk-1A and before AMCA MK-1.
Something tells me, AMCA Mk-1 isn't going to be a massive upgrade over a non-naval version of TED-BF (ORCA maybe).
The honor for a true blue 5th Gen aircraft would be AMCA Mk-2.
With that, I don't know where Tejas Mk-2 would fit in.
Honestly speaking, I think the time for single-engined Tejas-Mk2 had come and gone.

After, Tejas, ADA/HAL should have shifted gear to twin-engined aircrafts based on GE F-414 engines.

Tejas Mk2 is going to be workhorse of air force, since it is cheaper. Just as F-16 is workhorse for USAF. Super sukhois will serve like F-15. Amca is going to be like F22, few numbers but very high performance. I dont think there are plans for IAF to go for tedbf variant yet. Maybe they would go for it to replace aeging sukhois.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

Navy plans to have 4 Aircraft carriers so that 3 of them can be operational at any given moment.

TEDBF would easily cross 150+ mark and might reach 200 given IAC 3 would be a large carrier( Geral Ford Class)

IAC 2 would be Vikrant class

Firstly, IAC wont be gerald ford class. It wont be nuclear powered and it would be in queen elizabeth class or the charles de gaulle class, 65000ton.

And your numbers for tedbf are too high. 1 carrier has around 30 fighters. And we also have order of 26-28 rafale marine

 

[Avada kedavra]

Its really shocking that an institution can indefinitely keep delaying again and again and get away with it.
Such a pathetic state of affairs.
U try this in any private corporate environment u will get the boot.

 

[Avada kedavra]

Tejas Mk2 is going to be workhorse of air force, since it is cheaper. Just as F-16 is workhorse for USAF. Super sukhois will serve like F-15. Amca is going to be like F22, few numbers but very high performance. I dont think there are plans for IAF to go for tedbf variant yet. Maybe they would go for it to replace aeging sukhois.

Amca is overhyped.
Right now news is coming that the plan of it being a private public partnership itself is failing.
No private player is interested.

 

[Apocalypse gupta]

Amca is overhyped.
Right now news is coming that the plan of it being a private public partnership itself is failing.
No private player is interested.

The reason for private players being hesitant is genuine. Great risk because of expensive project, lack of expertise etc.

The hype is appropriate since india is developing its own F22.

 

[Ashutosh]

Firstly, IAC wont be gerald ford class. It wont be nuclear powered and it would be in queen elizabeth class or the charles de gaulle class, 65000ton.

And your numbers for tedbf are too high. 1 carrier has around 30 fighters. And we also have order of 26-28 rafale marine

18 will be carried internally, deck pe bhi fighters utha sakte hai

Vikramaditya internally carries 34 fighters and on deck can carry more.

Moreover, the question here is about availablity

Aircraft for Navy need more maintenance and spend quite a good amount of time in maintenance especially after a deployment.

So basically for Vikramaditya only you will need 50+ aircraft so that atleast 30 fighters are available in any moment

Same goes for Vikrant it would need around 40+ aircraft so that atleast 20 of them are available at a moment

30X2= 60( Vikrant and IAC2)
55- Vikramaditya
IAC 3 - 80+ .

Easily crossing the 150 mark and nearing 200

All these numbers are of mobile sea based carriers

Permanent carriers like INS Jatayu and naval bases of Lakshadweep and Andaman Nicobar shall have their own share of fighters

It might get close to 250

 

[Mridul baruah]

Koi nehi... Kuch naya batao. Tarikh pe tarikh ka to aadat sa ho gaya hai.

 

[Pramkumar]

ADA/IN/HAL and MOD and GOI should work on the TEDBF based on the Kaveri Engine instead of GE-414. this will help them to move faster in the cycle.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

And the charade of indigenous aircraft development continues unabated. ....

 

[Anant]

Anant, do not know why that would be so?
F/A-18 and Rafale are two examples of commonality fighters between airforces and navies.

First of all why develop 4th generation naval fighter over a decade and plus when India needs a fifth generation naval fighter soon.

Perhaps, IN should make it a 5th generation fighter and then IAF modify it for its requirements.

Developing a 4th generation naval fighter really going backwards. My opinion.

I agree that a 4.5th generation naval fighter isn't ideal. However, if memory serves me, the concern for AMCA-N was due to weight. As it is, AMCA is estimated to weigh 12 tons when empty, with a maximum take-off weight of 25 tons. Now, if you look at the process of navalising a fighter, you normally add about 1.5-2.5 tons to the empty weight (going by the F-35 and Rafale M).

Going for AMCA-N would necessitate significant weight increases for the carrier-specific gear and increased fuel requirements. With all that, and considering the fact that all of our carriers atleast for the next 20 years will be STOBAR carriers, the payload would suffer greatly. Alternatively, you would have a fighter which can carry a lot of stuff but has a short range.

In theory, if AMCA-N could be developed in a way that didn't have these challenges, then nothing like it. However, AMCA-N as it would stand today would not be a very effective fighter to have long-term. That said, when we do go for another naval fighter in the 2060s and 2070s, I would sincerely hope that the aircraft at that point would be as modern as possible.

 

[Anant]

ADA/IN/HAL and MOD and GOI should work on the TEDBF based on the Kaveri Engine instead of GE-414. this will help them to move faster in the cycle.

Not happening. The Kaveri would be grossly underpowered for the TEDBF, even in a twin-engine configuration. The F414 does about 57 kN on dry thrust and 97.5 kN on wet thrust, while the Kaveri can do 50 kN on dry thrust and 80 kN on wet thrust. That power shortfall would hurt us, especially when you consider the fact that we don't have catapults- payload and/or fuel would suffer as a result.

Moreover, the Kaveri hasn't been integrated with an afterburner yet, and GTRE doesn't have any timelines on when they may be able to do that.

 

[Anant]

18 will be carried internally, deck pe bhi fighters utha sakte hai

Vikramaditya internally carries 34 fighters and on deck can carry more.

Moreover, the question here is about availablity

Aircraft for Navy need more maintenance and spend quite a good amount of time in maintenance especially after a deployment.

So basically for Vikramaditya only you will need 50+ aircraft so that atleast 30 fighters are available in any moment

Same goes for Vikrant it would need around 40+ aircraft so that atleast 20 of them are available at a moment

30X2= 60( Vikrant and IAC2)
55- Vikramaditya
IAC 3 - 80+ .

Easily crossing the 150 mark and nearing 200

All these numbers are of mobile sea based carriers

Permanent carriers like INS Jatayu and naval bases of Lakshadweep and Andaman Nicobar shall have their own share of fighters

It might get close to 250

Not quite. Easy...

Vikramaditya normally carries 26 fighters and 10 helicopters, though that can be increased to 30-32 fighters if need be (a total of 40 airframes is expected). Vikrant has a similar capacity. Between these two carriers, you would need 60-ish fighters for full deployment plus another 6-8 attrition replacements.

IAC-II will have a similar capacity, though you can probably leave off a few aircraft due to plans to operate UCAVs. Let's assume you would need 30 aircraft here including attrition replacements.

Now, IAC-III would be a 65,000 ton conventional CATOBAR carrier as originally planned some years back. With IAC-II coming in, IAC-III could be pushed back a few years to replace Vikramaditya, and at best, would be a 75,000 ton nuclear CATOBAR carrier. At best, you could carry some 32-36 fighters plus 10-12 helicopters plus UCAVs. Add 4 attrition replacements here.

Hence, between IAC-I, IAC-II, and IAC-III, you would need around 86-90 aircraft here. Now, add another 30 or so aircraft for shore-based use, since we would also have 26 Rafale Ms. That comes to a total minimum production run of 120 aircraft, which could be increased further in case there were export orders (highly unlikely), or if shore-based use was to be stepped up. Even so, the chances of the overall production run exceeding 150 are miniscule.

 

[Ashutosh]

• 45 aircrafts❗....... What a loss making proposition. The program cost will alone be like initial Eurofighters. Export prospects will sink to 🌊 for 🐊 to feed on.
• All 3-Indian Navy ACs are and will be of Vikrant-size tonnage. Hence not more than 30 aircrafts (20 fixed-wing + 10 rotary). So 20 × 3= 60±6. So what's the rationale of creating a new jet for paltry 40?
• Terminate the program (like Tapas-BH), end the variegated 🇷🇺-🇫🇷 spare supply-chain & relieve taxpayers' suffering.
• Buy Rafale instead. Doosra koi vikalp ya raasta hai hi nahi. Wahi raam-baan hai 🏹 🫤😑

Bro numbers 150 aaram se cross kar rhe hai and nearing 250 good enough for the development of the fighter.

IAC 1( INS Vikrant) - 43 000ton displacement
18 internal + some on deck( fighters)
IAC 2( Vikrant class) - 43000 ton displacement,,,,
IAC 3( Queen Elizabeth class) - 65000 ton displacement
40+
INS Vikramaditya 45000-46000 ton displacement - 34+ on deck

36+40+ 34= 110+

Now if we take availability in count we have to add 50 more fighters

These are the numbers for Mobile carriers only.

Immobile carriers ( INS Jatayu)
Can have their own share of fighters.