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.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 26 Sep 2016 03:07

http://m.economictimes.com/news/defence ... 487326.cms

The French have also agreed in principle to collaborate on the Kaveri engine which lacks the real power thrust needed to fly the Tejas.

An upgraded Kaveri engine with 90 kN thrust compared to the existing 72 kN can be developed with French cooperation which can eventually be used for Tejas which currently uses an American engine.


90-110 kN can eventually get into Migs, LCA and AMCA in addition to Rafale upgrades

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16408
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 26 Sep 2016 07:08

Not sure what Snecma has in mind when they say they will provide the $1 billion funding, for an estimated 30-35% of the work to complete the Kaveri. But, I highly doubt that such an effort would add to the knowledge base within India to make India an engine power. India will have (hopefully) a robust Kaveri - to even perhaps power the LCA MKII.

My gut feel is that the deal with GE will provide better knowledge. But, need to wait it out.



What India has is a good set of people who know how to design an engine. IMHO, what India does not have is a research base for Material Science. And, unless India builds that core, India will get stuck at each step. Once MetSci is mastered, then still the associated step of manufacturing remains. But I think that is more easily mastered. ????

While on that topic, what is preventing them from acquiring platforms - say MiG-29s - as test beds? I assume there are efforts to build wind tunnels.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2146
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Vivek K » 26 Sep 2016 20:33

Decades of manufacturing engines under TOT haven't taught us a whole lot it seems. What would be different here?

What people are pretending to not understand is - why would Snecma train its competitor? A billion or two is nothing for such tech.

India needs original research in Metallurgy and guts for risk taking. The Mig test bed is extremely important. But it seems that IAF/ GOI are happy throwing money away to foreign vendors rather than invest in local industry.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4370
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 29 Sep 2016 00:32

X-posting from Raffy thread
shiv wrote:No - actually HAL has nothing to do with Kaveri, Kaveri is GTRE. Kaveri's issues were not SCB as far as I can tell but there was a fundamental "error in calculation" of the core engine itself which would need redesign from core stage. So the Kaveri is where it is - it is surely usable but probably not for Tejas

The other problem about PSUs and "young engineers" is they will not stay under a rotten inefficient hierarchy of old gobermint codgers - so attrition is a huge issue. But somehow HAL has retained youngsters for HTT 40 at least

SCBs are being made by Koraput HAL as well as by MDN - I have some images of the latter Technically HAL (or any company) can use the tech developed at MDN if they need blades - but it wont be MDN's business to make engine blades. Only the metallurgical takniki

For Kaveri onlee I think
Image


HAL Koraput manufactured Kaveri - most of it. SCB for Kaveri are being imported from Snecma for now, because HAL couldn't make it for Kaveri. They only knew how to make it for Al-31 until few yrs ago. Perhaps now they have a better understanding of the process after playing around with it, but still not to the level where they can make it for Kaveri, per someone who has worked in Koraput.

I am aware of Midhani SCBs. But way we are funding engine program, it would take minimum 5-6yrs for us to industrialise the SCB take still.

Don't think there's anything wrong in Kabini core, else they would have never achieved dry thrust design value. The short fall is in wet thrust. IMO they should not have gone for flat rating. It was too much to chew in first bite.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16408
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 29 Sep 2016 01:59

Vivek K wrote:Decades of manufacturing engines under TOT haven't taught us a whole lot it seems. What would be different here?


Is that even possible? It is my understanding that a ToT would perhaps, at best, be able to duplicate, but not extract knowledge to design ones own.

??????

What people are pretending to not understand is - why would Snecma train its competitor? A billion or two is nothing for such tech.


Snecma is proposing to complete what GTRE set out to do. So, perhaps, show the way just in that sliver. I very much doubt that knowledge transfer could be applied beyond the Kaveri.

India needs original research in Metallurgy and guts for risk taking. The Mig test bed is extremely important. But it seems that IAF/ GOI are happy throwing money away to foreign vendors rather than invest in local industry.


Perplexing. Suspect other projects are important. With no real engine in sight, why invest on a test platform.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2146
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Vivek K » 29 Sep 2016 05:35

Rao sahab! Perplexed am I by your post. Last we heard, GTRE is still working and not disbanded.

Are you informing us that the Kaveri is now defunct? If not then what is the issue with a flying testbed? Or are you suggesting that it shouldn't be flown?
Last edited by Vivek K on 29 Sep 2016 05:39, edited 1 time in total.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2146
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Vivek K » 29 Sep 2016 05:39

NRao wrote:
While on that topic, what is preventing them from acquiring platforms - say MiG-29s - as test beds? I assume there are efforts to build wind tunnels.

Perplexing!! Short term memory loss?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby shiv » 29 Sep 2016 06:41

JayS wrote:X-posting from Raffy thread
Don't think there's anything wrong in Kabini core, else they would have never achieved dry thrust design value. The short fall is in wet thrust. IMO they should not have gone for flat rating. It was too much to chew in first bite.

There is nothing wrong with the core - but the problem is increased demand for thrust from the Kaveri for LCA - and what I heard was that this is not going to be possible without redesigning the core. Anyhow this information is itself 7-8 years old now.

I am hoping to see a couple of new engines appear - including that HAL effort. It is ironic that GTRE first made the HJE 2500 (for the HF 24) and now the Kaveri and our nation has not bothered to design a single aircraft around an engine we have. What a waste. Whenever I try to imagine why we did this my mind simply takes me in the direction of concluding that as a people we have zero esteem in our own work and will always look at some foreign entity as far better. This attitude exists in govt and the armed forces as well as the public sphere. If the Chinese are ahead it is because they are willing to give their own people a chance and accept failures (even if they do not make failures public). We consider ourselves failed even before we start

saumitra_j
BRFite
Posts: 334
Joined: 24 Dec 2005 17:13
Location: Pune, India

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby saumitra_j » 29 Sep 2016 07:36

+ 1 Million Shiv saar, we simply don't value our own work. As far as Kaveri is concerned, we need to understand a few things about how they graduate from static testing to high altitude testing in a 4 engined aircraft to a two engine aircraft and then finally to a single engined aircraft. As of AI 2015, Kaveri had not done the required number of hours of static/ test on 4 engined aircraft before it could be considered for two engined aircraft for various reasons (UPA's stupidity and criminal negligence being the biggest of them). When it comes to testing on a two engined aircraft, it is not so simple as IAF needs to have a spare airframe which in itself can be a big hurdle, even if all other things are done. I hope there is serious funding being made available by NDA but there has been no public news so far on the developments of the Kaveri.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby shiv » 29 Sep 2016 08:05

It is not clear to me that India is taking engines seriously. To paraphrase Sherlock Holmes " When you eliminate all probable causes what remains is the answer, no matter how improbable it may seem"

Right here on BRF we have seen for over a decade and even now, well informed and educated people talking about "transfer of engine tech" and "Getting help from Sweden/SNECMA" for engines. Perhaps there is a genuine widespread belief that these things can be bought or that the knowhow will somehow magically appear out of nowhere. This is a deep misunderstanding (and fundamental ignorance) of science and high tech engineering based on that science. It is knowledge and human skill. You can get knowledge but human skill can only come with doing it. Engines require funding and effort and readiness to face failure but continue funding and effort. Also removal of the mythology that Indians create for themselves about how easy it must be but our people are simply corrupt/stupid.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5235
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 29 Sep 2016 08:51

shiv wrote: Whenever I try to imagine why we did this my mind simply takes me in the direction of concluding that as a people we have zero esteem in our own work and will always look at some foreign entity as far better. This attitude exists in govt and the armed forces as well as the public sphere. If the Chinese are ahead it is because they are willing to give their own people a chance and accept failures (even if they do not make failures public). We consider ourselves failed even before we start
Well, only partly true. If a Hira Walchand could beg, borrow and steal under colonial rule to initiate "indigenous" building of ships and aircrafts leading to the birth of the Vizag and HAL, one can hope that a few Hira's are still around and can maneuver the statist structures and break the logjam? I know you are a skeptic, when it comes to private industry being able to do any magic, maybe not but I am convinced they are part of the answer.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8118
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Pratyush » 29 Sep 2016 08:55

The Pvt industry can only work if it has orders. No orders equals no industry.

JohnTitor
BRFite
Posts: 1345
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JohnTitor » 29 Sep 2016 15:01

One solution to this is government funding for specific projects in the private sector with the winner of the competition getting a massive order. This is what is done in the west

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6704
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby habal » 29 Sep 2016 15:48

>> It is ironic that GTRE first made the HJE 2500 (for the HF 24) and now the Kaveri and our nation has not bothered to design a single aircraft around an engine we have

I think the UAV is the solution that has been envisioned as a test platform for the kaveri. When a drone flies with Kaveri, there is no stigma of failure and no pressure for performing. This seems to be the reasoning.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4370
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 29 Sep 2016 15:55

shiv wrote:
JayS wrote:X-posting from Raffy thread
Don't think there's anything wrong in Kabini core, else they would have never achieved dry thrust design value. The short fall is in wet thrust. IMO they should not have gone for flat rating. It was too much to chew in first bite.

There is nothing wrong with the core - but the problem is increased demand for thrust from the Kaveri for LCA - and what I heard was that this is not going to be possible without redesigning the core. Anyhow this information is itself 7-8 years old now.


Actually its not a necessity that core needs to be redesigned for increasing thrust. One can increase fan size - that is increase BPR. But then that will increase engine dia which will not fit in LCA probably. That boat has sailed long ago now anyway.

Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8118
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Pratyush » 29 Sep 2016 16:31

Lca is an Indian design. The Ada can easily figure out how much needs to change in order to make the revised Kaveri fit the plane. If the issue is Blade diameter.

Just understand that the UK modified the Phantom with RR engine.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6704
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby habal » 29 Sep 2016 17:12

UAV engine is without afterburner ? So we shall never improve upon wet thrust in UAV design. Is this correct ?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4370
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 29 Sep 2016 19:13

Pratyush wrote:Lca is an Indian design. The Ada can easily figure out how much needs to change in order to make the revised Kaveri fit the plane. If the issue is Blade diameter.

Just understand that the UK modified the Phantom with RR engine.

I don't think, Kaveri will ever fly in LCA MK1A (apart from development/expt flight). Sad but reality. Let's face it. And MK2 has 98kN requirement which Kaveri can't match without core redesign.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby shiv » 29 Sep 2016 19:19

ShauryaT wrote:
shiv wrote: Whenever I try to imagine why we did this my mind simply takes me in the direction of concluding that as a people we have zero esteem in our own work and will always look at some foreign entity as far better. This attitude exists in govt and the armed forces as well as the public sphere. If the Chinese are ahead it is because they are willing to give their own people a chance and accept failures (even if they do not make failures public). We consider ourselves failed even before we start
Well, only partly true. If a Hira Walchand could beg, borrow and steal under colonial rule to initiate "indigenous" building of ships and aircrafts leading to the birth of the Vizag and HAL, one can hope that a few Hira's are still around and can maneuver the statist structures and break the logjam? I know you are a skeptic, when it comes to private industry being able to do any magic, maybe not but I am convinced they are part of the answer.

Walchand did his work at a time when there was great demand from US armed forces for war materiel. There definitely is demand in India but the mindset is (in my view) looking at foreign solutions which may be totally unobtainable. Will say more about this in the small arms thread but not today. Today is a day for me to thank the Indian army.

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 469
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby maitya » 04 Oct 2016 12:11

^^^^ The complexity of the manufacturing SC blades, their various Gens (and how a modern DS blade has better thermo-mechanical properties compared to 1st and even 2nd Gen SCs) and also inter-relationship of the TeT (obtained from better metallurgical tech of SCs etc) and the OPR (from better HPC tech) etc are detailed in various posts in the following:
1. The Kaveri Saga - India's attempt to build a modern Turbofan.

2. The SC Advantage

3. The upthrusting dilemma

4. Various options of up-thrusting Kaveri

Pls refresh and then we can discuss further.


Admins, can you pls delete my post just above this one (it's a duplicate post).

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4370
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 20 Oct 2016 01:30

SaiK wrote:sJha tweet should be music to the ears if true. :D

ps: some contend it to be old news though. may be he is trying social engineer a solution


I saw SJha's tweet. Indeed we have discussed this 2600Cr funding here on BRF previously in this very thread.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3351&start=2960#p2024478

Quick google search shows earliest post from IRDW from Feb-2016

Things are moving too slow on this front. Its almost 3 yrs and Mig29 is nowhere to be seen.

thammu
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 71
Joined: 29 Mar 2007 08:16

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby thammu » 20 Nov 2016 19:58

DRDO ties up with Snecma to revive gas turbine engine for Tejas
http://www.business-standard.com/article/specials/drdo-ties-up-with-snecma-to-revive-gas-turbine-engine-for-tejas-116112000534_1.html

India’s defence research agency has signed a deal with French engine maker Snecma to revive and certify the Kaveri engine, before powering a flight of Tejas light combat aircraft prototype by 2018.

Snecma, as part of the offsets deal for the 36 Rafale jets India bought for its air force, would handhold the Gas turbine and research establishment (GTRE), which has designed Kaveri, to fix gaps in its performance, address safety concerns, certify and fly it on a Tejas light combat aircraft. The Rs 600 odd crore expense for Snecma, which powers the Rafale jets, would be adjusted against the 50 per cent offsets that it is mandated to spend in India.

The Kaveri project has been on the backburner for nearly a decade after GTRE, an agency of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), struggled to reduce its weight and improve its performance needed to power the fighter. So far, the government has spent Rs 2,100 crore on the engine that has tested on ground for over 3,000 hours and around 30 hours on a IL-76 transport plane in Russia. It has a marine variant that the Navy is testing and it is in talks with Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd and the Indian Railways to power rail engines.

“Once the engine houses make it a flightworthy engine, we have numerous programmes coming up and there is more than one place for it to be fitted. The question is whether we will be able to fit it into only the LCA or will we be able to get it into the (GE) 414 with the higher power is a point that we are raising,” said C P Ramanarayanan, DRDO Director General for Aeronautics cluster said.

The Indian Air Force has ordered for over 120 single engine Tejas fighters powered by a General Electric 404 engine, the powerplant the aircraft first flew in January 2001. So far the Tejas has flown nearly 3,300 sorties, which includes sorties by IAF chief Arup Raha and the air chief of Turkmenistan.

An upgraded Mark-2 aircraft of Tejas is being designed for a more heavier GE-414 engine by 2025, and the DRDO hopes that the upgraded Kaveri would qualify for the plane by then.

If not, the Kaveri would power other programmes such as Ghatak, the unmanned combat aircraft vehicle of UCAV, for which studies have begun by the research agency.

“So we have Ghatak in our hand, we have so many other programmes coming up. Anyway we have to have indigenous engine development also. All that we are trying to do is trying to allocate one of the prototype for this and make use of some of the offset for this hand holding if possible,” said Ramnarayanan.

India is among the few countries in the world such as Russia, Britain, US and France to have capabilities to build a gas turbine engine.

The chief of Aeronautical Development Agency Commodore C D Balaji said that the agency expects around 40 aircraft of the 123 planes ordered by the IAF would be delivered by 2020 and the remaining 83 by 2025. He said the Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd is doubling its production of Tejas to 16 from eight.

sarang
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 16 Jun 2007 11:23
Location: India

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby sarang » 21 Nov 2016 07:44

If 98-110 kN happens, it will be the biggest day for indian aviation. :twisted:

or they are going for plain vanilla 90 kN.

either ways, very good news. 8) :D :D

Rammpal
BRFite
Posts: 290
Joined: 23 Sep 2016 12:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Rammpal » 21 Nov 2016 11:53

JayS wrote:
Actually its not a necessity that core needs to be redesigned for increasing thrust. One can increase fan size - that is increase BPR. But then that will increase engine dia which will not fit in LCA probably. That boat has sailed long ago now anyway.


:eek:
Where's the extra power gonna come from, for the bigger fan ?

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

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Singha » 21 Nov 2016 11:58

if the kaveri can be proven (even in dry thrust mode) on a high endurance UCAV and Tejas testbed will definitely move things forward and encourage people. will permit derivatives tuned to applications.

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 469
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby maitya » 21 Nov 2016 12:07

Rammpal wrote:
JayS wrote:
Actually its not a necessity that core needs to be redesigned for increasing thrust. One can increase fan size - that is increase BPR. But then that will increase engine dia which will not fit in LCA probably. That boat has sailed long ago now anyway.


:eek:
Where's the extra power gonna come from, for the bigger fan ?


There are many ways of upthrusting ... just scroll up a few posts and you will find links of some of those options. If further detailed understanding is required, the Kaveri sticky thread is there for reference etc.

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 469
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby maitya » 21 Nov 2016 12:17

^^^^ However I doubt such upthursting etc (from 51KN dry to 65KN dry levels) can be achieved in 2 years etc ... the testing cycle itself will span atleast 2-3years.

I think, realistically, what they are trying to do with Snecma (as a consultative partner) is completing the mandatory ground-runs (IIRC there were about 1000hr more left, an year or so back) required before it can be certified for integration into, first a double-engined platform (MiG-29 or a Su-30MKI testbed), followed by ultimately to a single-engine platform (say a LCA TD or a PV).
Not sure if anymore subsonic actual flying hrs (say in a IL-76) are required or not, though.

But overall good news, as it will brings in invaluable certification related experience and know-how etc.

Betw those enamored with the shiny-toys etc, all in the name of "defending the country etc" ... 500Cr just for 2yr consultancy support!! While the decades worth of investment into the program is approx 2000Cr, right?
There is, after all, a reason for us being ruled by the East India Company for ~2 centuries - where can you find more gullible people than us!!!!

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 342
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ragupta » 21 Nov 2016 12:57

Betw those enamored with the shiny-toys etc, all in the name of "defending the country etc" ... 500Cr just for 2yr consultancy support!! While the decades worth of investment into the program is approx 2000Cr, right?
There is, after all, a reason for us being ruled by the East India Company for ~2 centuries - where can you find more gullible people than us!!!!


statement only true, if lack of fund is only reason for unsuccessful Kaveri and 500cr spend would have brought it to completion.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4370
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 21 Nov 2016 23:09

Rammpal wrote:
JayS wrote:
Actually its not a necessity that core needs to be redesigned for increasing thrust. One can increase fan size - that is increase BPR. But then that will increase engine dia which will not fit in LCA probably. That boat has sailed long ago now anyway.


:eek:
Where's the extra power gonna come from, for the bigger fan ?


The path for increase in performance over the designed value is set right at the preliminary design stage. This is specified as design requirement typically. For example, About 5% more thrust can be generated by small tinkering in design due to better design tools over the time/increasing TIT/improving efficiency of the components. About 10% increase should be possible with some serious redesign of compressors in addition to the changes for 5%. Upto 20% thrust increase can be achieved by redesigning LP system for higher mass flow rate in addition to all above changes. Hope you get the idea. The flowpath is designed right from the onset keeping in mind this growth plan. So its OK to assume about 20% organic up-thrust potential in the design. Beyond that it becomes difficult and a fresh sheet design is better idea.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4370
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 21 Nov 2016 23:15

maitya wrote:^^^^ However I doubt such upthursting etc (from 51KN dry to 65KN dry levels) can be achieved in 2 years etc ... the testing cycle itself will span atleast 2-3years.

I think, realistically, what they are trying to do with Snecma (as a consultative partner) is completing the mandatory ground-runs (IIRC there were about 1000hr more left, an year or so back) required before it can be certified for integration into, first a double-engined platform (MiG-29 or a Su-30MKI testbed), followed by ultimately to a single-engine platform (say a LCA TD or a PV).
Not sure if anymore subsonic actual flying hrs (say in a IL-76) are required or not, though.


I do not expect any upthrust in given time frame. Even the existing engine should take fair bit of time to get fully certified for single engine Jet. I bet on at least 4yrs. If it happens before that I'll eat my hat.. :wink:

However if thy start on uprated version rightaway, it should be possible to have a certified 90kN class engine by 2025. But we will need something like 5000Cr investment for that.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3632
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 29 Dec 2016 12:35

New tender from HAL:
Supply of 300 Single crystal blades for Tech demonstrator for new HAL engine

Seems to be an addendum to a tender issues earlier here containing the technical specifications of the SC blades here.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4843
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neshant » 29 Dec 2016 19:26

JayS wrote:Actually its not a necessity that core needs to be redesigned for increasing thrust. One can increase fan size - that is increase BPR. But then that will increase engine dia which will not fit in LCA probably. That boat has sailed long ago now anyway.


How difficult can it be to slightly increase the diameter of the plane?

I know stuff will have to be re-certified but even so, is it not possible.

F-16 has had radical surgery to its frame during its development.

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4609
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Kartik » 02 Feb 2017 05:52

Safran has posted a new job opening for a Director/Program Manager for the Kaveri engine program, indicating that the Safran offset related help, derived from the Rafale contract's offset obligations, is going ahead. This was posted on another forum by a French poster

Safran job posting for a Director/Program Manager on Kaveri program

JOB DESCRIPTION

Primary branch / Main trade
Program & Customer Relations - Program
View Full Profile
Director / Program Manager KAVERI - Military Engines M / F
Contract Type
CDI
Status
Engineer & Executive
Work time
Full time
Mission Description
Within the program management division, in liaison with the designated correspondents of the other entities of Safran Aircraft Engines, and in particular, the technical management, the quality management, the industrial management and the commercial management, the program director Kaveri will have the following tasks:

- Lead the team Kaveri program
- Establish the project schedule and identify, in accordance with the PROMPT methodology, key program milestones, consistent with the challenges and milestones of the contract and the Rafale India contract associated offsets,
- Ensure the control and coordination of all activities on the program, including consistent with the M88 program
- Ensure the profitability of the engine and its future support system, identify performance improvement axes economic,
- Ensure coherence of actions regarding developments / improvements / changes in the product (via meetings team from program)
- Manage the actions of the Company and the Group regarding this program ensuring overall consistency in cost, quality and deadlines
- ensure customer satisfaction in meeting the commitments,
- define, validate and allocate budgets of all functions involved in the program
- ensure always the risk management,
- ensure implementation M20 process (PROMPT) "pilot Programs",
- Ensure, in collaboration with the technical authority, flight safety,
- ensure, as part of the process P20, the control key actions leading to compliance with project milestones.
Complement of the description
With the support of the program team, it will:

- Make live staking program:

o Validate the deliverables prior to submission review milestone
o Ensure the answers and closure recommendations

- Adapt the organization & the pilotage Phases of the program
Position Specifications
Travel in France and abroad
LOCATION

Location
Europe, France, Ile-de-France, ESSONNE (91)
City
EVRY

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13091
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby UlanBatori » 02 Feb 2017 06:17

This is very interesting.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16408
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 02 Feb 2017 06:18

JayS wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Lca is an Indian design. The Ada can easily figure out how much needs to change in order to make the revised Kaveri fit the plane. If the issue is Blade diameter.

Just understand that the UK modified the Phantom with RR engine.

I don't think, Kaveri will ever fly in LCA MK1A (apart from development/expt flight). Sad but reality. Let's face it. And MK2 has 98kN requirement which Kaveri can't match without core redesign.


Is that not the expectation set by the French? That the Kaveri will be mated with the LCA ............... by 2020?

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4370
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 02 Feb 2017 22:40

NRao wrote:
JayS wrote:I don't think, Kaveri will ever fly in LCA MK1A (apart from development/expt flight). Sad but reality. Let's face it. And MK2 has 98kN requirement which Kaveri can't match without core redesign.


Is that not the expectation set by the French? That the Kaveri will be mated with the LCA ............... by 2020?


IIRC they first claimed it will be done by 2018..!! Well, French can can anything. What can we do if they cannot finish it in said time line..??? A variant of matured civil engine family takes minimum 3yrs for certification even when done by GE/PW/RR (min 5-6 yrs total development time from concept to EIS). Certification for mil engine is even more rigorous. And you can add some factor for Kaveri since it will be flight tested for very first time. Do the math. I would not put my money on even 2020..!! If its done by then, I'll eat my hat.

And I am not considering additional time required for mating of M88 core with Kaveri LP modules and debugging of LP modules fully. I think Kaveri AB also was having below par performance. And to modify one LCA to mate it with Kaveri, integrate Kaveri and prepare it to fly.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16408
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 02 Feb 2017 23:30

You know more than me on that.

However, I would think, with the number of consultants that India has talked with, that these guys have a pretty good handle on the risks by now. Especially the French.

I think it would all depend on who is running the show and the amount of leeway they have. But, at times I wonder if the next batch of Rafale would depend on the success of this project.

nirav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2020
Joined: 31 Aug 2004 00:22
Location: Mumbai

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby nirav » 02 Feb 2017 23:46

^that would be an awesome carrot to dangle.
MMRCA was 126+84 options iirc..

Rafale could be the 84 if satisfactory progress is made on the Kaveri.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36393
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 02 Feb 2017 23:54

UlanBatori wrote:This is very interesting.

"we" are eagerly looking forward for your blessings

UlanBatori
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13091
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby UlanBatori » 03 Feb 2017 00:17

I know nothing about it. Overall, one can look at it many ways, as usual:
1) Cynical: phoren boondoggle to do the development for GTRE, but now at Safran
2) Rah-rah optimism: Safran is going to teach GTRE to design world-beating engines. :roll:
3) Tender for 300 single-crystal blades is suspicious: are they buying overpriced test articles to stick into one or two engines, rather then the technology to BUILD single-crystal blades? What if the tender is filled by a phoren supplier? Is there a technology learning path?
4) So OFFSET money is going to remain in Phrance. Can be criticized as a baksheesh trick, if any smell of payments to desi entities surfaces. If the SAFRAN development team is to come to India and teach GTRE to develop the WorkingKaveri, that would be a different thing. Reminds me of a Lockheed C-130 "offset" which resulted in a bunch of Saudis running around in Lockheedstan trying to get the local girls to join their harems. :eek: Put the project PI in a very tough position, between the :evil: houris and the likely-2-get-head-chopped Air Fauj Captain.
5) Will the SAFRAN-developed Kaveri be license-produced like the old British centrifugal-compressor monstrosity at HAL injin phactory? "Why can't you reverse engineer/change the blades, hain?" "Because v r only allowed to build from these blueprints not anything else". If so why is it any better than buying the injins from Massastan? Now the great India-genius Kaveri name, hallowed for 40 years, is also given to the feringhis, hain?

But I don't see what option GOI had, to ramp up Ellseeyay production. What I want to see is clear intent to build 1000 engines and use them till them are worn out.
I would have voted to get the Su-24's engines, if they won't sell us the Su-35's engines, and learn to build them from scratch. By the thousands. At Palaniappan's OMRON Calculators, Bus Repair and Aircraft Engines, Pottanur. Look at Syria performance of the old crates of the RuAF.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ArjunPandit, Bala Vignesh, darshand, Google Feedfetcher and 57 guests