Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Kailash » 26 Nov 2010 12:58

Wasn't the MCA supposed to a have a higher dry thrust "variant" of the Kaveri?

Right now the existing thrust is not meeting LCA requirements. Kaveri had a spec on paper which they could not achieve due to various reasons. If we baseline the thrust required for AMCA as approximately equal to a GE414's thrust, isnt it prudent to design a "variant" from ground up?

IMHO, just as we are banking on technologies from the Pak-Fa to enrich our AMCA, its time we bank on whatever technology the french are providing to create a family of engines. The RM talking about increasing indigenous content, should'nt we be developing (atleast planning) for a whole bunch of engines to refurbish our Jags, Mirages and Sukhois, ALH/LCH etc?

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11204
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gagan » 27 Nov 2010 06:53

The LCA may have outgrown the Kaveri, but is it possible to design a fighter or a military aircraft / platform around the current Kaveri if it finally becomes successful?

Can we have like a A-10 warthog tankbuster with a Kaveri type engine? Can the Kaveri engine power a civilian airliner? or a regional jet?
I know there are applications in the marine arena already, but is a smaller LCA or even a trainer built around a Kaveri a viable fighting aircraft?

Santosh
BRFite
Posts: 702
Joined: 13 Apr 2005 01:55

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Santosh » 27 Nov 2010 07:43

The backbone of our strike formation, Jaguars are powered by the SDRE 27.0KN/37.5KN (with reheat) Adour engines. Why are some engines more SDRE than others? If Kaveri has indeed achieved 65KN/81KN with reheat then IMHO all that is stopping Kaveri from being productionalized is the reliability. Once that is proven it should be possible to build a decent aircraft around Kaveri. Now whether we are sensible enough to do that or whether we decide to wait until Kaveri outclasses every single engine that's out there is kweschun.

Added later: Kailash, IIRC we were also banking on Su30 TOT to enrich/enhance the Kaveri program. That hasn't gone anywhere it seems. I am not really hopeful on the Snecma JV or MMRCA JV or PAKFA JV or <insert your favourite vendor/aircraft> JV.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3795
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby kit » 27 Nov 2010 09:16

Gagan wrote:The LCA may have outgrown the Kaveri, but is it possible to design a fighter or a military aircraft / platform around the current Kaveri if it finally becomes successful?

Can we have like a A-10 warthog tankbuster with a Kaveri type engine? Can the Kaveri engine power a civilian airliner? or a regional jet?
I know there are applications in the marine arena already, but is a smaller LCA or even a trainer built around a Kaveri a viable fighting aircraft?


The Warthog will be able to function effectively only in an environment where the air defenses of the adversary are sanitized. A relatively slow moving 'sitting duck' one might say.Against a manpad rich environment i dont think it would last long.PK and China has quite effective air defenses built around their armored formations. Helos are more effective for counter insurgency and terrorist attacks as long as they dont have SAMs !

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 27 Nov 2010 10:31

As shiv pointed, GoI must wait for the 50-100 Kaveri flying tests at Gromov institute, before giving a green signal to Snecma. You all know what real firangs and their agents want, and what the actual requirement folks and brjingos should go after.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby vic » 27 Nov 2010 12:00

Gagan wrote:The LCA may have outgrown the Kaveri, but is it possible to design a fighter or a military aircraft / platform around the current Kaveri if it finally becomes successful?

Can we have like a A-10 warthog tankbuster with a Kaveri type engine? Can the Kaveri engine power a civilian airliner? or a regional jet?
I know there are applications in the marine arena already, but is a smaller LCA or even a trainer built around a Kaveri a viable fighting aircraft?


kit wrote:The Warthog will be able to function effectively only in an environment where the air defenses of the adversary are sanitized. A relatively slow moving 'sitting duck' one might say.Against a manpad rich environment i dont think it would last long.PK and China has quite effective air defenses built around their armored formations. Helos are more effective for counter insurgency and terrorist attacks as long as they dont have SAMs !


Very true ! But jingoes won't like it. They have their heart set on A-10s and Su-25s. Also how effective these planes will be in mountains is anybody's guess. The role of CAS will be taken over by Rustom variants

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11204
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gagan » 27 Nov 2010 21:12

Really, if the Kaveri comes through, it should be put to use.

There needs to be a more powerful derivative to fly on a LCA/AMCA
And there needs to be a Marine version
And there needs to be a version suited / downsized for Cruise missile use.
And there needs to be a version for the Helos, and the MBTs
And finally there needs to be a plane designed around the Kaveri - Doesn't matter if it is a spy plane, an EW plane, a trainer etc, but there needs to be an aircraft designed around the Kaveri.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9747
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Yagnasri » 27 Nov 2010 22:27

For cruse missle we dont need that well built eng as we need it for a single flight.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11204
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gagan » 28 Nov 2010 00:17

How about a Kaveri powered HALE UAV?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5241
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 28 Nov 2010 00:52

kit wrote:
The Warthog will be able to function effectively only in an environment where the air defenses of the adversary are sanitized. A relatively slow moving 'sitting duck' one might say.Against a manpad rich environment i dont think it would last long.PK and China has quite effective air defenses built around their armored formations. Helos are more effective for counter insurgency and terrorist attacks as long as they dont have SAMs !
This is true for any CAS operation. Air superiority has to be achieved first. The advantage of a gunship, over helos are 1. Loiter time, 2. Payload they can carry. 3. Aerial refueling 4. Range

ashokpachori
BRFite
Posts: 291
Joined: 28 Nov 2010 01:02

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ashokpachori » 28 Nov 2010 01:16

Gagan wrote:How about a Kaveri powered HALE UAV?



Predator empty weight 512 Kg

Global Hawk (HALE) empty weight 3800 Kg

Kaveri engine weight 1100 Kg

Dont you think its like killing a bird with cannon ?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8064
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 28 Nov 2010 01:25

I am not sure of the Kaveri in the as is form. But if we can develop a non-afterburning variant with a thrust of 45 KN to 55 KN, it can do the trick.

I am pretty sure that we will come up with a RQ-4A kind of plane within a decade. The Chinese already have a smaller version with the Xianglong. But the engine requirement is more like that of the Adour engines.

Aura equivalents like the Taranis, nEUROn, Corax, Skat etc also use Adour kind of engines. Skat uses a non-afterburning RD-93 variant (producing 50kn) though.

And then of course we have the phantom ray which uses the F404 but I doubt we will be getting there anytime soon.

ashokpachori
BRFite
Posts: 291
Joined: 28 Nov 2010 01:02

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ashokpachori » 28 Nov 2010 02:14

Prompt Global Strike (PGS): We’ll have the surgical hypersonic missile strike to your door, anywhere in the world, in one hour or less…or your pizza’s free a la Dominos...

But thats superpower with unbriddled USD printing power!

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23385
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Austin » 03 Dec 2010 15:11

Not sure where to post it but its connected with aero-engine development

From "International Conference "Aero Engines of the 21 st century" in Moscow gives some insight on 5th and 6th gen engine requirement and technologies link

According to the head of CIAM, given the high competition, continuous improvement of aircraft engines, also taking into account the overall development of science and technology, there are very bold decisions for the coming years, new demands are put forward to a promising engines. In particular, the requirements on noise in 2015 will be reduced by 32% with respect to the requirements of Annex 16, Chapter 4 of ICAO in 2020 - by 42% in 2025 - up 71%. Regarding fuel consumption - engines must consumes less fuel: up to 33% in 2015, up to 50% in 2020 and up to 70% in 2025


When creating engines 4-th generation of the total funding for the project on advanced areas of technological advance (NPOV) accounted for about 14-15%% - this was the methodology in the 70's and 80's. When you create the fifth-generation engine for about 60% of the total funding went to advanced research. "Our forecast for the sixth-generation engines - more than 70%


According to him, when considering solutions to reduce fuel consumption discusses various options for improving the parameters of the cycle - higher efficiency units, the growth of the degree of bypass to 20, the use of open-rotor, bringing the total degree of pressure increase to over 50, as well as increasing the aerodynamic and weight to improve himself flying apparatus - the aerodynamic quality instead of 17 will increase to 24."For those professionals who deal with the prospect, search and research, these data should be as a reference", - stressed Skibin.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 16 Dec 2010 10:22


thammu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 72
Joined: 29 Mar 2007 08:16

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby thammu » 14 Jan 2011 16:30

Any news on Kaveri?

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1801
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby wig » 26 Jan 2011 18:47

Kaveri engine to power 5th generation fighter aircraft
Under development for over two decades, the indigenous fighter jet engine 'Kaveri' will be used for powering the home-grown fifth generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Being developed by DRDO's Gas Turbine research Establishment (GTRE), the Kaveri was initially being developed for the LCA Tejas programme but now it will be used on the AMCA, which is expected to be ready by 2016-17, senior officials told PTI here.

The AMCA is a twin-engine indigenous fighter aircraft programme for which initial sanctions have already been accorded by the Defence Ministry, they added.

The indigenous fighter aircraft engine programme was first started in 1986 and has suffered delays and cost over-runs. It was also marred by the technology denial regimes in the 90s

http://www.ptinews.com/news/1300981_Kav ... -aircraft-

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 26 Jan 2011 19:00

From the hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/techno ... 127075.ece
After not being able to get the desired thrust for powering fighter aircraft, the DRDO entered into a Joint Venture with the French engine manufacturers Snecma to further enhance its capabilities.

“In recent times, the engine has been able to produce thrust of 70-75 Kilo Newton but what the IAF and other stake-holders desire is power between 90—95 KN.

“I think with the JV with Snecma in place now, we would be able to achieve these parameters in near future,” they said.

On using the Kaveri for the LCA, they said the engine would be fitted on the first 40 LCAs to be supplied to the IAF when they come for upgrades to the DRDO in the latter half of the decade.

Due to the absence of an indigenous engine, GE engines from the United States were procured to power the LCAs and recently, another tender was awarded to the American company for supplying 99 engines for the advanced version of the Tejas.

On the present status of the programme, officials said the maiden flight test of the Kaveri was completed successfully during the Flying Test Bed (FTB) trials at the Gromov Flight Research Institute in Moscow November last year.

During the coming months, 50-60 test flights will be carried out to mature the engine in terms of reliability, safety and airworthiness.

These trials would pave the way for further flight trials of Kaveri engine with a fighter aircraft, they added.


again the same question I may ask What do IAF see a short coming of 5-10kN for Kaveri say delivers 90kN to 95kN replacing a 100kN firang maal?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 26 Jan 2011 21:15

Assumptions here is all those GE engines would be dumped or reused elsewhere or sold?. The FDAEC controls with GE is easily compatible/swappable for the Kaveri and there is no major hicks there. My point was Mk2 where IAF asks 100kN.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54179
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 27 Jan 2011 03:35

They probably know Kaveri cant get that number. This ensures it kept out.


abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2610
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby abhik » 27 Jan 2011 09:30

I still don't get it, why have they settled for the Rafale's engine this early when there is a good possibility of getting EJ200 tech if we decide to choose the Eurofighter for MRCA.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 27 Jan 2011 10:18

well the M88-3 tech is no less better, albeit lesser thrust. raw thrust is likely not the issue with AMCA being strike oriented and twin engined, which should give it a T:W >1 like most modern twin engines.
Snecma ecosystem is already involved with existing kaveri...the below refers to the kaveri flying today, not the future hot section...article is from 2002.
http://www.le-webmag.com/article.php3?i ... 00&lang=en


Three group companies, Snecma Moteurs, Techspace Aero and Hispano-Suiza, are teaming up with the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) to provide disks, blades and control systems for the Kaveri, which will eventually power the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).


just like GE for Tejas mk2, perhaps its best we worked with whoever we were working with as they understand the issues better.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7453
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Prasad » 27 Jan 2011 10:28

The Rafale using the M-88 with a wet thrust of 75 KN gets a T:W of 1.1 per wiki. I'm sure even if Kaveri hits 75-80 KN, we get a similar T:W for the AMCA. Why would we need >75 KN in that case? If Kaveri gets better, then good for the jet but even otherwise it should still be good right?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 27 Jan 2011 10:33

maybe they want a2a meat on the AMCA too...and perhaps try it on a experimental batch of Tejas, push it to the limit and build up a knowledge base. future strike ac probably are going to need better agility and speed to escape the new gen fighters and missiles coming online....stuff like Jaguars and super etendards probably will not survive too easy.

vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby vic » 27 Jan 2011 10:35

Some experts here on BRF pointed out that M-88 has a very tinku core and upgrading it will always be a difficult. It is possible that M-88 may be able to push out say 90kn but then upgrading the core & LP for 100kn with rectangular movable exhausts etc may prove way tougher. It may be better to go in for a clean slate “Indian” redesign. If the confidence level is low then we must fund all the three options:-

1. Upgrading present Kaveri as far as possible to realize the best out of the core

2. M-88 purchase in the garb of JV

3. And going in for clean slate re-designed or new engine with say help of MTU who have the expertise but no fully build competing engine

Without option 1 & 3, going only with option 2 will push us into another 50 years of technological slavery to Snecma

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16946
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Rahul M » 27 Jan 2011 10:39

"In recent times, the engine has been able to produce thrust of 70-75 Kilo Newton {against design target of 81kN} but what the IAF and other stake-holders desire is power between 90�95 KN. I think with the JV with Snecma in place now, we would be able to achieve these parameters in near future," they said.

finally the confusion is laid to rest. this is pretty good achievement considering the problems !! gives me hope that a 100kN category engine should be doable within the decade.

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20517
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Philip » 27 Jan 2011 11:12

What if Kaveri again proves inadequate? I suggest that right at the start the boffins have an alternative in mind in case Kaveri development proves difficult.In fact,some reports say exactly what we've been saying for aeons on BR,that the nation lacks worthwhile infrastructure for development of aero-engines,whose technology has become so advanced.Is it not shameful that Kaveri has to be tested in Russia (even though the modified IL-76 testbed is ours) every time? Why has the MOD not set up a complete infrastructure for aero-engine development in India,preferably at Bangalore? If this is not done simultaneously with Kaveri's development,I am afraid that when the AMCA arrives,that too a 5th-gen stealth deisgn,it might be with another proven foreign engine,just like the LCA.In almost every case worldwide,advanced aircraft are being developed first with proven engines and then later on with more advanced ones which will be used on production lines.This is being done with the FGFA and the Chinese F-20 too.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7453
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Prasad » 27 Jan 2011 11:14

Rahul,
The problem once again is new engine on a new plane. Yes, we don't have a GE that turns out turbines like theres no tomorow but we still need to manage risk since the amca will be our second plane. In such a case, would it be prudent to take the current kaveri as benchmark and design the amca around it, or design with the future engine in mind and build pv's and td's using the current one or use the 414 until we get the gold-plated kaveri?

rohiths
BRFite
Posts: 399
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 21:51

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby rohiths » 27 Jan 2011 11:40

If we are targeting a weight of 20 tons for AMCA then the engine must have 100-110kN of thrust. Anything else will become inadequate.
Since SDREs are designing a stealth plane for the first time 100kN must be the benchmark. Otherwise it is better to stick with F414 onlee for AMCA. (Possibly F414 with thrust vectoring)

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 27 Jan 2011 11:54

we must also account for the likelihood of AMCA ending up 15-20% overweight which is quite likely given our 1st attempt at internal bays / boxy fuselage / J-20 killa looks... so having a good comfort margin will save us blushes and a forced re-engining. whatever be the frailties of the newgen boxy designs, a powerful engine will help catch it by scruff of neck and push it around corners...

the design must be clever enough to accomodate both Kaveri-snecma and F414 with ikea allen wrench changes..I hope to god the major external things like gearboxes are on the same side in both !

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16946
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Rahul M » 27 Jan 2011 12:12

Prasad wrote:Rahul,
The problem once again is new engine on a new plane. Yes, we don't have a GE that turns out turbines like theres no tomorow but we still need to manage risk since the amca will be our second plane. In such a case, would it be prudent to take the current kaveri as benchmark and design the amca around it, or design with the future engine in mind and build pv's and td's using the current one or use the 414 until we get the gold-plated kaveri?

prasad ji, the proven engine thing is frankly bunkum.

let's see the recent fighters that have NOT used proven engines :
F-22, F-35, PAKFA, J-20, EF, Rafale and the list goes on to the su-27 and F-15.

unlike the unreliable turbojet engines of 50's and 60's, modern turbofan engines are reliable enough that new designs can power aircraft after thorough ground tests.

secondly, preparing for failure is a never ending game. what do we do if the engine fails ? well, what do we do if some other critical part of the aircraft fails, say the landing gear ? what if the design itself is faulty ? it's impossible and somewhat stifling to try and take care of every eventuality. given what we have achieved with the kaveri I've every reason to believe we would succeed with the kaveri-2. if not, we can always use the GE F414 which would power the LCA Mk2. :wink:

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3512
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby suryag » 27 Jan 2011 12:24

Folks from this news article logged on Nov23
Kaveri Engine Undergoes More Flight Trials In Russia
DRDO plans to conduct nearly 60 test flights in the next couple of months to gauge engine reliability, safety and airworthiness.


Are these 60 flights over and is it because of encouraging results are we planning to mate kaveri and AMCA?

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3635
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 27 Jan 2011 13:30

Rahul M wrote:
"In recent times, the engine has been able to produce thrust of 70-75 Kilo Newton {against design target of 81kN} but what the IAF and other stake-holders desire is power between 90�95 KN. I think with the JV with Snecma in place now, we would be able to achieve these parameters in near future," they said.

finally the confusion is laid to rest. this is pretty good achievement considering the problems !! gives me hope that a 100kN category engine should be doable within the decade.



_hoping_
the max thrust will be even more than the stated value. The article clearly states the current tests are to prove air-worthiness and reliability and the line mentioning the thrust starts with "In recent times".

Was it K Prasad who mentioned that the GTRE director said we have reached 95% of the planned thrust value? I think there is more to come.
_end_

rohiths
BRFite
Posts: 399
Joined: 26 Jun 2009 21:51

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby rohiths » 27 Jan 2011 13:58

Marten wrote:
rohiths wrote:If we are targeting a weight of 20 tons for AMCA then the engine must have 100-110kN of thrust. Anything else will become inadequate.
Since SDREs are designing a stealth plane for the first time 100kN must be the benchmark. Otherwise it is better to stick with F414 onlee for AMCA. (Possibly F414 with thrust vectoring)

Could you help me understand why it must be 100kN and no less? Is there a scale for 20 tons requiring 100-110kN and 30 requiring 150kN and more? Thanks in advance.


I think we need at least a Thrust to Weight ratio of 1.
If we assume that weight of AMCA with payload and fuel is 20 tons, then we need 200kN of thrust. So the thrust per engine is 100kN. If we have a better TW ratio, it will be great but it is unlikely that SDREs will be able to push the the TW ratio without sacrificing other design parameters like stealth and payload.

PS: 10kN in weight terms is 1 ton. (1kg wt =9.8N)

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3635
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 27 Jan 2011 14:00

Philip wrote:What if Kaveri again proves inadequate? I suggest that right at the start the boffins have an alternative in mind in case Kaveri development proves difficult.In fact,some reports say exactly what we've been saying for aeons on BR,that the nation lacks worthwhile infrastructure for development of aero-engines,whose technology has become so advanced.Is it not shameful that Kaveri has to be tested in Russia (even though the modified IL-76 testbed is ours) every time? Why has the MOD not set up a complete infrastructure for aero-engine development in India,preferably at Bangalore? If this is not done simultaneously with Kaveri's development,I am afraid that when the AMCA arrives,that too a 5th-gen stealth deisgn,it might be with another proven foreign engine,just like the LCA.In almost every case worldwide,advanced aircraft are being developed first with proven engines and then later on with more advanced ones which will be used on production lines.This is being done with the FGFA and the Chinese F-20 too.


The spin-offs from a single project like the Kaveri are indeed massive. Once you have one up and running and reliable , you are not very far from
- Turbo-props
- Turbo-shafts
- propfans ( being touted as the future of 100 seater aircraft. See here. Never heard of it until last week )
From what I have read on this forum and what K prasad wrote, the Kaveri Marine is being nurtured well by the Indian Navy.



I dont know if this is the mentality of the babus. See what happened with the LCA project. Once the whole platform was proven, we then saw the budget for the 2(?) wind tunnels coming.
The infrastructure and budget for aero engines must have been in place 5 years back.

But, at the same time, it must also be understood that we need to learn how to test the engines safely and reliably. We have had one unfortunate incident with the Avro hack. Maybe it is better to see how others do it and then plan our infrastrcture accordingly. I think there is a lot for us to learn on that front...the instrumentation, mounting, test profiles etc.

Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Drishyaman » 27 Jan 2011 19:28

Neela wrote: Was it K Prasad who mentioned that the GTRE director said we have reached 95% of the planned thrust value? I think there is more to come.
_end_


Alhamdulilla.... we will be there shortly.
Its a matter of another 15-20 KN in another 3-4 yrs and IAF will be forced to accept Kaveri for Tejas MK-3.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36405
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 28 Jan 2011 00:31

duh! no one can force IAF to accept things. It has to come by way of GSQR or requirements. This is the reason, DPP laws are now slowly getting rewritten so that private-public are aware ahead with given lead time what IAF expects. Now, if DRDO challenges IAF about specifications, then it is entirely a different matter. But, you can't make them accept a product that never was there a request for it in the first place.

project chartering fundamentals- drdo/gov and aam junta needs more education on certain basic aspects of requirements management.

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 28 Jan 2011 02:48

@ Ambuj: I did rather say that it would be"Insha Allah" :P

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7420
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby nachiket » 28 Jan 2011 05:08

^^BENIS language getting carried over into other threads. Happens all the time on BRF.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sooraj and 28 guests