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.
brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7920
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby brar_w » 02 Apr 2019 07:50

nachiket wrote:^^This seems to be the much talked about EPE variant. It is no doubt that the LCA Mk2 MWF would be a hot rod with this engine but the question is does India need to finance the development of this engine? In that case the money would be better spent financing development of an indigenous engine for the AMCA while the MWF can carry on with the F414-INS6


I think the article is BS and just something completely made up. Why would only IDRW have this exclusive scoop if indeed such an offer was made? What about the rest of the Indian and US media? The Enhanced engine has evolved and I bet GE is marketing it off and on but there has never really been a thrust to get one single non US customer to fund it and doing that will likely be cost prohibitive and quite redundant because the engine enhancements would at some point be funded by the US Navy since not only do they have a very large Super Hornet inventory but they just added about 100 aircraft to its topline a couple of years ago. I do expect the USN to invest in these enhancements after they are done with the block III F/A-18 validations.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 02 Apr 2019 08:13

Brar, IDRW is doing cut-and-paste + some half baked imagination :D

sajaym
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 69
Joined: 04 Feb 2019 09:11

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby sajaym » 08 Apr 2019 11:04

chola wrote:^^^ Here we go: the J-11 testbed used to wring out the WS-10.

When I first saw this, I literally smacked my forehead. Why didn't we do the same with the Kaveri? The dimensions of that are within those for the MiG-29.

On the right is the WS-10. Easy to spot with the short petals. On the left is the established Al-31 in case the test engine fails:
Image


Instead of expecting the IAF to spare operational airframes, could we have used the MIG-25 for such testing? After retiring them from the IAF, they could've been transferred to HAL. From among the MIG-25s, we could've mothballed all except 2 trainers and kept them running by cannibalizing the others for spares.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3878
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 08 Apr 2019 15:48

sajaym wrote:
chola wrote:^^^ Here we go: the J-11 testbed used to wring out the WS-10.

When I first saw this, I literally smacked my forehead. Why didn't we do the same with the Kaveri? The dimensions of that are within those for the MiG-29.

On the right is the WS-10. Easy to spot with the short petals. On the left is the established Al-31 in case the test engine fails:
Image


Instead of expecting the IAF to spare operational airframes, could we have used the MIG-25 for such testing? After retiring them from the IAF, they could've been transferred to HAL. From among the MIG-25s, we could've mothballed all except 2 trainers and kept them running by cannibalizing the others for spares.


Not going to work. The MiG-25 is a massive straightline interceptor with R-15 turbojets nearly twice the size of the Kaveri. Size difference in engines, aircraft and design are too great.

For a medium class turbofan like the Kaveri you need a lighter twin turbofan aircraft like the MiG-29 (ideal) or the Hornet/Typhoon/Rafale (impractical.)

If we had the will to do this and pushed the Kaveri like the chinis did the WS-10, it would have had to be the Fulcrum.

We picked an inconveniently sized engine in the "Light" Combat Aircraft. If we went with a single engine aircraft based on a Al-31 sized poweplant, we would have had plenty of possible airframes to choose from -- not only the hundreds of Flankers produced by HAL but also the SU-30K/MKs we flew before the MKI so the IAF would had never needed to even give up a MKI for a testbed.
Last edited by chola on 08 Apr 2019 15:53, edited 1 time in total.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 08 Apr 2019 15:51

chola wrote:We picked an inconveniently sized engine in the "Light" Combat Aircraft. If we went with a single engine aircraft based on a Al-31 sized poweplant, we would have had plenty of possible airframes to choose from -- not only the hundreds of Flankers produced by HAL but also the SU-30K/MKs we flew before the MKI so the IAF would hafd never needed to even give up a MKI for a testbed.

:D LCA designers had no idea that IAF would be flying Su-30's or HAL would be producing them when the engine was chosen. Also, they were working under size and cost restrictions, which is why the LCA is the size it is and not the size of a Mig-27 or an F-16, to fit an AL-31 sized engine.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3878
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 08 Apr 2019 16:05

^^^ The LCA designers might not know but did the GOI? We were evaluating the Flanker at least in the early 1990s but possibly before then. First flight of the SU-30MK came in 1997 before that of the LCA.

At any rate, it was still unfortunately inconvenient. An Al-31 based single engine design would have given us commonality and more of an impetus on the local engine, especially since we were making parts for the Al-31 too.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7227
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 08 Apr 2019 16:22

chola wrote:^^^ The LCA designers might not know but did the GOI? We were evaluating the Flanker at least in the early 1990s but possibly before then. First flight of the SU-30MK came in 1997 before that of the LCA.

The size of the aircraft and the engine parameters were already selected before that.

At any rate, it was still unfortunately inconvenient. An Al-31 based single engine design would have given us commonality and more of an impetus on the local engine, especially since we were making parts for the Al-31 too.

Looking at the AL-31 serviceability issues and engine failures in the Su-30 fleet, it would have surely given us plenty of LCA accidents too and probably shut the program for good.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3878
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 08 Apr 2019 16:32

^^^ Ah but using a twin engine testbed and possibly installing the domestic engine in a production variant of the desi Flanker first while letting our other-reality LCA fly with Al-31s initially would have reduced risk considerably.

Your points are well taken though, Nachiket ji. It is just a mind exercise at this point.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby dinesh_kimar » 08 Apr 2019 19:45

Just like Eurofighter used both RB 199 and EJ 200 for first test flight, so too the Mig 29 with Kaveri and RD 33.

The RD 33 is about 40.5 inch diameter, 155 inch length, 1050 kg.
Kaveri is about 35.5 inch diameter, 160 inch length, 1250 kg.

Very similar dimensions, the CG changes can be suitably adjusted.

With small modifications to internal mounting points and freeing up space internally (5-6 inches), it can be made to work.

It's been done in the past, for flight testing.

Dassault always flight tests new airplane with existing engine, and new engine with existing airframe, as risk mitigation.

Route forward for Kaveri is either large multi engine flying test bed like IL 76 or a simpler Mig 29.

Su 30 won't cut it, diameter much bigger.

A guy who has popular tea stall was overheard saying that Kaveri hot parts are going to become composite for weight and performance advantage. ( not HP turbine though).

Maybe afterburner petals and flaps from existing metal alloy to composite carbon based.

Better performance at high temp, less creep, no thermal barrier coating required and much advantage in weight density.

Tea seller however said overall outlook bleak, science lab project only. All tea customers agreed that engine fitment to FTB is a must.

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

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby maitya » 10 Apr 2019 18:58

dinesh_kimar wrote:<snip>
A guy who has popular tea stall was overheard saying that Kaveri hot parts are going to become composite for weight and performance advantage. ( not HP turbine though).
<snip>

I think he's alluding to Titanium Aluminide (TiAl) for the HPC stages (currently they are all "traditional" equiaxed Nickel alloys- approx 50% weight saving) - as TiAl blades can withstand ambient temperatures upto 850deg C, more than enough what the last (or last two) HPC stages would ever encounter.

Of course, the giants like GE et all, have successfully used TiAl for LPT stages etc (IIRC for commercial engine LPT stages).

But to master the cast technology of TiAl blades, is leap-frogging to absolute cutting edge in the field - will require mastery of additive manufacturing for metal parts like Electron Beam Melting (EBM) - basically a type of 3D mfg technique of melting metal powder layer by layer with an electron beam in a high vacuum.

Some of my relevant posts on this topic are: EBM and Ti-Al and EBM vs Laser Sintering.

But HAL already uses DMLS for manufacturing HPT of HTFE-25 while MIDHANI has had 300KW (and also 150KW) EBM furnaces from 2015 onward.

So who knows where we may have reached by now.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby dinesh_kimar » 10 Apr 2019 21:59

^ Saar, in this case it was Carbon silicate based composite (CSi/CSi) for A/B flaps.

It is more heat resistant to 1400 deg approx, and lighter than previously used metal flap.

TBC previously used not required anymore, for this component. (Thermal barrier coating).

(Density was 2.5 g/cc vs. Nickel alloy at 9.7 g/cc).

Also, apparently a class of composites where certain deformation properties improve with temperature (creep resistance?).

So if they qualify the material at room temperature, the job is done, as properties at high temperatures only improve.

I dunno much abt the subject.

The main learning for me was nickle was heavier than steel.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7385
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Prasad » 12 Apr 2019 23:09

maitya wrote:I think he's alluding to ....

edit: never mind.
is there any way I could get in touch with you?

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 25 May 2019 18:43

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1131783236957327360 ---> And please, don't talk about 'joint development' with the United States. The experience of DTTI shows America is interested only in one-way 'trade' i.e. arms exports to India. While Ash Carter was Defence Secretary there was still a mild probability of some decent joint development, not anymore.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1131785966350323712 ---> Especially, not for aero-engines. The India-US Joint Working Group on Jet Engine Technology is an abysmal failure, with Washington flatly refusing to share any technology related to the core.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1131400493207474178 ---> Irrespective of who comes out top at the end of today. the following are a must for India:

1. National mission mode projects for the development of 98 KN & 130 KN Class low-bypass turbofans (jet engines) for powering medium & heavy fighters.

2. GaN & HgCdTe fabs.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4225
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: BRF Project: India's Kaveri Engine Saga

Postby Manish_Sharma » 28 Jun 2019 15:17

Saurav Jha
@SJha1618
Slowly but surely all the pieces for creating a flight worthy low-bypass turbofan (jet engine) are coming together. Obviously, the usual 'Indian style' hurdles remain (now, don't ask me to elaborate), but for the first time in years something might just come of it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/SJha1618/sta ... 5592025089

gaurav.p
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 04 May 2018 23:02

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby gaurav.p » 28 Jun 2019 20:24

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1144474463297126400 --> Indian Rare Earths Limited has developed a formulation for Yttrium Stabilized Zirconia & Lanthanum Zirconate, which has been used to create bi-layer thermal barrier coatings (LZ over YSZ) for jet engine parts. Test material has already been sent to HAL. Results are encouraging.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1144478225592025089 --> Slowly but surely all the pieces for creating a flight worthy low-bypass turbofan (jet engine) are coming together. Obviously, the usual 'Indian style' hurdles remain (now, don't ask me to elaborate), but for the first time in years something might just come of it.

modi jee we don't need to repeat a marut for the tejas/amca. modi jee are you listening, plz listen to sjha saheb...

Noob q = are these TBC have a similar application like these? https://aquantumofmind.wordpress.com/20 ... ndia-2015/

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20549
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 29 Jun 2019 01:35

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1131783236957327360 ---> And please, don't talk about 'joint development' with the United States. The experience of DTTI shows America is interested only in one-way 'trade' i.e. arms exports to India. While Ash Carter was Defence Secretary there was still a mild probability of some decent joint development, not anymore.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1131785966350323712 ---> Especially, not for aero-engines. The India-US Joint Working Group on Jet Engine Technology is an abysmal failure, with Washington flatly refusing to share any technology related to the core.

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1131400493207474178 ---> Irrespective of who comes out top at the end of today. the following are a must for India:

1. National mission mode projects for the development of 98 KN & 130 KN Class low-bypass turbofans (jet engines) for powering medium & heavy fighters.

2. GaN & HgCdTe fabs.

So, effectively and as long expected, the much touted India - US relationship has no core :)

Its merely a bania type transactional business deal with those guys leveraging the hell out of the so called relationship, no

and if push came to shove, they would, as usual, sanction the hell out of us or simply embargo any and all spares and support deliveries.

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2809
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 30 Jun 2019 20:35

Its foolish for us to expect ToT. No one parts with their crown jewels.

The only time we got real ToT was Type 209/1500 submarines and FH-77B 155 mm howitzers because both Germany and Sweden were peripheral players in the arms business and really needed the Indian deals.

Kaveri is achievable domestically provided we make it a multi-agency multi disciplinary-program similar to ATAGS program with DRDO as a lead integrator and work packages given to private and public sector entities. Private entities like L&T or Tata SED can hire lateral talent (specifically NRIs who are working in aerospace companies worldwide or teaching in universities) without getting into office politics of GTRE labs who're scared of laterals outranking them.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby dinesh_kimar » 01 Jul 2019 08:43

Regarding Post by Rohit Vats ji in IAF thread abt Maruti re-heat engine:

The GTRE delivered a 29 KN version with reheat for the project. The thrust was sufficient to transform Maruti to it's full potential.

The main drawbacks expressed by GTRE director AVM Chaudhary were :

1. Area ruling problem mentioned in RV's post and blog.

2. He did not trust Kurt Tank , said Marut's aerodynamics were suspect, esp. the tail plane located absolutely on bottom of fuselage. (He had done his Master's in Aerodynamics and Propulsion from UK, had deep misgivings abt testing a wooden glider model of supersonic aircraft some 75 times, no one else used this route , and for what benefit ?)

The AVM founded GTRE, and delivered many products such as India's first working jet in 1961, turbocharger for Arjun, the GTX-37 with 66 KN and the reheated Marut engines.

The Kaveri started after he retired, and new director took over. He felt it was not the right step for India to take for self sufficiency and indigenisation.
He had 3 proposals for engine development after looking into resources avbl: (all scrapped the day he retired !)

1. HF 24 with a 2000 deg. K reheat version of 703 , with 46% thrust increase . Role:IAF tactical air superiority aircraft.

2.GTX- Adour with GTX LP part and Adour HP parts ( agreed to by Rolls Royce) and a new afterburner.Role:IAF DPSA aircraft.

3. A GTX Snecma engine to re engine Mig 21. ( A licensed ATAR 9K50 with GTX components, agreed by Russia).Role: IAF air superiority aircraft.

Also, the good AVM built up the first technicians from GTRE by importing carpenters, utensil makers, box makers , ironmongery and blacksmiths and fitters from Kanpur. A practical man, as advocated by our BRF stalwarts - Pentaiah , Chola and others.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 367
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby dinesh_kimar » 01 Jul 2019 08:55

One of the ISRO CE engines has the third highest thrust in the world, after EU and USA.

(Better than the Russian , Chinese and Japanese engines).

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11195
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Gagan » 04 Jul 2019 17:41

The GSLV MK3 Cryo engine is the largest upper stage Cryo in the world !

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

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Singha » 04 Jul 2019 18:35

i once met a retired technician from GTRE who lives nearby and has a side hobby of being a puja pandit. apparently he had spent years working in canadian aerospace industry before coming to india. he did the opening puja for my apartment.

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

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Singha » 04 Jul 2019 18:38

even within the EU biraderi, for the typhoon eurojet engine, RR does not really share the hot section tech with MTU who makes the cold section.

hot section fluid dynamics, physics, material science is one of the highest crown jewels of IP. @ world class level only saturn, GE, P&W, snecma and RR have it for fighter engines. the list is even less for commercial aviation - GE-Snecma(CFM), P&W (incl GTF fame!) and RR is it.

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

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby maitya » 04 Jul 2019 20:49

Singha wrote:even within the EU biraderi, for the typhoon eurojet engine, RR does not really share the hot section tech with MTU who makes the cold section.

hot section fluid dynamics, physics, material science is one of the highest crown jewels of IP. @ world class level only saturn, GE, P&W, snecma and RR have it for fighter engines. the list is even less for commercial aviation - GE-Snecma(CFM), P&W (incl GTF fame!) and RR is it.

May I just add, that once one achieves of DS-cast blade tech level, from there on "advancements" are purely incremental/baby steps ... for example, a very old post of mine (from circa 2014) which touches on the incremental nature of these advancements (pls note TeT increments with SCB Gen etc).

Nobody, and I repeat nobody will part these obscene-effort-and-cost-based-IPR ... and some people, in BRF, will still come and claim Russki-bhaichara etc has resulted in ToT of manufacturing AL-31P injin etc :((

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1170
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 04 Jul 2019 20:56

Moderator note - We are losing focus. Let it be clear designing a rocket engine is not the same as designing a jet engine. For eg how many reuses and refiring of a rocket engine versus jet engine is done ? Also mass flow rates, fuel etc are different. So please stay on focus. This is the Kaveri engine thread.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2638
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 04 Jul 2019 22:51

tsarkar wrote:Its foolish for us to expect ToT. No one parts with their crown jewels.

The only time we got real ToT was Type 209/1500 submarines and FH-77B 155 mm howitzers because both Germany and Sweden were peripheral players in the arms business and really needed the Indian deals.

Kaveri is achievable domestically provided we make it a multi-agency multi disciplinary-program similar to ATAGS program with DRDO as a lead integrator and work packages given to private and public sector entities. Private entities like L&T or Tata SED can hire lateral talent (specifically NRIs who are working in aerospace companies worldwide or teaching in universities) without getting into office politics of GTRE labs who're scared of laterals outranking them.


If we want jet turbine engine, it should come under PMO. Simple as that. Cut the MoD file pushing, drip irrigation style funding is not going to take us anywhere.

Stuff like nuke, SSBN, jet engine, hypersonic, space are strategic capabilities. If not driven by PMO, the SSBN would not seen the light of the day.

Jet engine requires huge budget, the kind only PMO can clear. HAL had to beg for money to set up a new LCA line. Imagine it producing F404 level jet engine.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16406
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby NRao » 05 Jul 2019 06:48

Have not followed this thread for some time now, so apologies for butting in.

1) I agree with tsarker. No one is going to give - in any form - their crown jewel.

As I said years ago, India needs to invest about a billion a year until the problems, of the kaveri, are resolved (the tail end is what cost the most ..... billions of $). India does have plenty of Excel spreadsheets of data, but that is not the problem (those spreadsheets provide what is known). The issue is what is unknown. That can only be resolved by bullheaded research. No other way. Fail multiple time.

OT

2) The DTTI Joint Working Group on Jet Engine Technology did NOT fail.
a) The "US" agreed (US SD left it to GE) (under Ash Carter) to part away with techs that India wanted under the "joint development".

It was in Sept 2017 that GE (although in the Trump era, it had nothing to do with the new President), in what was the last meeting under this Joint Group, that declined to part with the IP. GE agreed to everything else.

No URL for this news. But please follow the latest devs.

3) DTTI is not dead. Best it is in hibernation. Besides, India - actually MP - got the US to agree on a few other items of Interest to India (I had posted elsewhere that there is an Indian observer at DARPA, something MP wanted the DTTI idea to morph to). There are a couple of other items of interest that have favored India - for some other thread.

Sorry to go OT.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 05 Jul 2019 08:04

NRao wrote:2) The DTTI Joint Working Group on Jet Engine Technology did NOT fail.
a) The "US" agreed (US SD left it to GE) (under Ash Carter) to part away with techs that India wanted under the "joint development".

It was in Sept 2017 that GE (although in the Trump era, it had nothing to do with the new President), in what was the last meeting under this Joint Group, that declined to part with the IP. GE agreed to everything else.

No URL for this news. But please follow the latest devs.

Sorry to go OT.

Do you believe it is a good idea to pass off the above as facts? You yourself have indicated that you have no URL for Point 2 and Point 2a. Much has flowed since Sept 2017, because exactly a year later (in Sept 2018), one of the DTTI's centrepiece programs - the JETJWG - was shut down. In diplomatic parlance, they use the term strategic pause. Here is the link for that....

2+2 should finally yield 4
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/bl ... y-yield-4/

At its last meeting in July, DTTI’s jet engine working group was shut down for lack of progress. They chose to call it a “strategic pause”. Apparently, the divergence between what India wanted and what the US and General Electric were willing to offer was too wide. It’s obvious that GE will not part with its crown jewel having spent billions in R&D. As someone said, “it’s the one thing the company has”. GE executives saw it as a compromise of their intellectual property to even suggest improvements in an indigenous Indian engine (Kaveri). Differences also emerged because the US wanted a measure of where India was in terms of indigenous engine technology. India was not keen on open access and benchmarking.

There are many who follow the latest developments. Now if you have something more recent than Sept 2018, please share it with the forum. Since you brought up the point that the US agreed to part away with the engine tech that India wanted, can you kindly share what that tech is? What is the "everything else" exactly that GE agreed to share with India?

What India needs - and which no one will give - is the hot section of the engine.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 05 Jul 2019 08:25

A recent article (June 2019 vintage) from Air Vice Marshal Manmohan Bahadur (Retd) on the much-vaunted DTTI.

Propel defence talks with US beyond rhetoric
https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comme ... 87484.html
14 June 2019

The present US interest and ‘affection’ for India is to have an ally to counter the increase in Chinese power in South and South East Asia. This is pivoted on the Indo-US Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI). The trick is to make it work to India’s advantage.

Indo-US defence relations have to move beyond the rhetoric of the "oldest democracy and largest democracy being natural allies". The fact is that they are not so due to the many dissimilarities in their political and social structures. Only national interests drive international relations. What better example than the 'strategic' Sino-US friendship that started in the 1970s to cut the USSR down to size and the resultant unprecedented economic largesse to Beijing that put it on a power trajectory that the US is now trying to oppose? Oh, the irony of it all! Or, the US-Pak relationship, with successive US presidents turning a Nelson's eye on Pakistan's export of terror and nuclear proliferation just to meet their national interest of defeating the USSR in Afghanistan. More importantly, the latest US decision to remove Turkey, the only Muslim-majority country in NATO, from the F-35 fighter programme due to its S-400 purchase from Russia shows that US decisions will continue to be driven by its national interests.

If one sees the reality, disregarding the 'natural-allies' rhetoric, the present US interest and 'affection' for India is on similar path — to have an ally to counter the increase in Chinese power in South and South East Asia. This is pivoted on the Indo-US Defence Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI). The trick is to make it work to India's advantage and the litmus test for this 'friendship' would be US action, or inaction, against India due to Delhi's decision to acquire the S-400 (like Turkey). A status check of DTTI is in order, taking the IAF's projects as examples. DTTI, when signed in 2012, was "..to pursue four pathfinder DTTI projects for possible co-development and/or co-production, as well as cooperation on aircraft carriers and jet engine technology." Seven joint working groups were also launched and the yearly meetings, alternatively in the two countries, seem to be taking place.

The four 'pathfinder' projects were an apology to be classified as 'modern'; they were next-generation Raven Mini UAVs, roll-on and roll-off kits for C-130, mobile electric hybrid power source and a protector kit against chemical/bio/nuclear fallout. The Indian Army rejected the UAV as being low-tech. The C-130 project has not moved forward while the remaining two were closed in August, 2017. The jet engine technology project has not moved at all and, to add to the gloom, the India Rapid Reaction Cell set up by the US to fast-track DTTI projects has been downsized, an indicator perhaps of decreasing focus in the Trump administration. So, where is the bottleneck?

There is, certainly, bureaucratic inertia in India, but the feedback has also been that the US is more interested in using DTTI to identify technically sound Indian private players to feed into their supply chain. Theoretically, it's a good idea, but when one considers that the DRDO is reportedly being side-tracked, with only a perfunctory interest being shown in its labs for any R&D cooperation and no transfer of meaningful technology taking place, there enters an element of intrigue. Where does one go from here, considering that DTTI was advertised as a panacea for India's need for high-end technology to modernise its arms inventory? Modernisation and indigenisation are oxymoronic in nature. The former is a requirement of the Services that is immediate, while the latter takes decades to achieve. So, aspirational dreams that are not based on realities of realpolitik must be jettisoned and we must prioritise what is possible into short-, medium- and long-term engagements.

In the short term, remove the thrust on high-end impractical projects — as an example, the fifth generation jet engine that the GTRE is trying to develop for the past four-plus decades. The problem with the DRDO is that it wants to make either top-of-the-line stuff, or nothing at all, without taking certain mandatory baby steps (we are, even now, importing infantry man's rifle and ammunition). So, work on realistic doables, like for say, engines for the HTT-40 basic trainer aircraft, Intermediate Jet Trainer, UAVs et al, and then graduate to bigger ones based on the expertise gained. In fact, that's how China's industry has progressed and in our case, the US may be willing to part with technology that does not threaten its monopoly. There are two co-development projects that look encouraging: the small air launched Unmanned Aircraft System and the Virtual Augmented Mixed Reality for Aircraft Maintenance (VAMRAM). Technologies that are no longer niche but are important op requirements, like software-defined radios, may be pursued.

In the mid-term, ISTAR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance) platforms, sensor and optics technology, wide band data links and high-end encryption devices could be looked at. With the IAF placing its bets on the DRDO's Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft for the 2030s as its mainstay fighter, we would be in need of technology for equipment like radar absorbent material, low visibility intake design, conformal antenna et al. Finally, if the Indo-US handshake has to really become firm, then long-term projects need to evolve from the mid-term requirements and lead on to high-end ones like jet engine technology etc.

DTTI will not deliver the 'high' tech aspired by India — no country parts with top-of-the-line technology. The second 'T' which stands for trade, is what the US is exploiting to access our small private players. If, and it is a big if, they are receiving high-grade technology, then it is an acceptable proposition. However, if it is just screwdriver information, then they are mere 'trading' entities. The only spin-off could be an increase in manufacturing, with the hope that the private players would build on the experience and design their own products. Some of our small entrepreneurs are tech wizards and one needs to guard against them being bought over by big foreign players wherein their IPRs would be lost. The government must, thus, take a realistic view (devoid of aspirational 'kite-flying') of what technology the US can actually share. A three-stage 'flight plan' of the trajectory that Indo-US defence cooperation should take must be drawn up and fed into a realistic long-term indigenisation plan that takes into account the immediate modernisation needs of the Services.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 05 Jul 2019 09:59

Problem.is Research in GTRE.
It's too much to demand a turbofan out of them.
And of them to sign up.
Before you go ballistic many of them are college mates

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7874
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 05 Jul 2019 20:15

ramana wrote:Problem.is Research in GTRE.
It's too much to demand a turbofan out of them.
And of them to sign up.
Before you go ballistic many of them are college mates

I agree Ramana-ji. However bombastic statements on BRF - about perceived US benevolence - needs to be stopped. Statements - without a link for verification - like above (not you Sir!) will invite a ban. If someone is going to make a statement (to pass off as fact), you better have a link or a data point to back it up. Final Warning.

Vivek K
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2144
Joined: 15 Mar 2002 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Vivek K » 05 Jul 2019 20:28

There is no shortcut to engine development. SJHA recently (6/28) hinted on twitter that a flight worthy low-bypass turbofan may be coming together. Does anyone know what was he referring to - Kaveri or HTFE?

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1144478225592025089 : Slowly but surely all the pieces for creating a flight worthy low-bypass turbofan (jet engine) are coming together. Obviously, the usual 'Indian style' hurdles remain (now, don't ask me to elaborate), but for the first time in years something might just come of it.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3032
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ArjunPandit » 05 Jul 2019 21:25

did something meaningful come out from the Rafale offsets? given that we havent heard and half of 2019 is past..which is what it was hitting for ..would it be safe to assume it nothing came out of it? Googleeshwara doesn't give much...

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20549
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 06 Jul 2019 11:22

ArjunPandit wrote:did something meaningful come out from the Rafale offsets? given that we havent heard and half of 2019 is past..which is what it was hitting for ..would it be safe to assume it nothing came out of it? Googleeshwara doesn't give much...



nothing meaningful or useful will ever come out of any offset.


it all goes proceeds on a wink wink nudge nudge basis and each side is paying lip service.

In actual fact, we have the muscle to force them to address our concerns but some creep politico or baboo(n) will always be keen to let the side down because of considerations.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20549
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 06 Jul 2019 11:30

Vivek K wrote:There is no shortcut to engine development. SJHA recently (6/28) hinted on twitter that a flight worthy low-bypass turbofan may be coming together. Does anyone know what was he referring to - Kaveri or HTFE?

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1144478225592025089 : Slowly but surely all the pieces for creating a flight worthy low-bypass turbofan (jet engine) are coming together. Obviously, the usual 'Indian style' hurdles remain (now, don't ask me to elaborate), but for the first time in years something might just come of it.


it would be unwise to assume that any one twitter handle has India's sole interests at heart.

every one of them has some angle to play or some point to pitch or even some interests to peddle.

watchfully trust but only after verification and constant corroboration from multiple unconnected sources

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3878
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 06 Jul 2019 16:07

ramana wrote:Problem.is Research in GTRE.
It's too much to demand a turbofan out of them.
And of them to sign up.
Before you go ballistic many of them are college mates


It has to be done by an industry not a single laboratory entity like the GTRE.

We should have first built and mass-produced our own turbojet first. We skipped this step entirely and then shot for the moon with a turbofan which when the Kaveri program started in the 1980s was something that even the Russians had problems with -- in fact, the RD-33 and AL-31 are problematic to this very day.

The truth is we attempted something that is really only perfected by a handful of Western firms.

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

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby SaiK » 22 Jul 2019 23:25

copying on ramana's request from BRF twitter dhaaga:
---

#JaiShriRam Ramana
JayS, Did you take aircraft sizing studies in College? Specifically I want to know if the M88 cored Kaveri engine can be fitted into a Su-30 with an adapter structure? Mig 29 and K?
Jaguar path is the HAL engine with after burner.
#JaiShriRam Ramana · Yesterday, 4:41 PM

Ramana, if we take core of M88, we will habe to basically redesign LP system from scratch to match with the core, unless Kaveri LP system is already, with some incredible coincidence or due to extensive Snecma consutancy, has correct blade angles and mass flow rate matching for M88 core.
JayS· Yesterday, 10:44 PM

And funfact is GTRE has core working OK, and has had trouble with LP Compressor and AB system mainly. So I dont see the point in replacing core. What we shud hv gotten from French is SCB. Not the ToT but blades supplied to our design. And help in AB system design.
JayS · Yesterday, 10:46 PM

JayS
I never have seen no reference to SCBs in Kaveri so far, apart from SCBs from DMRL. Kaveri has had DS blades. I dont think we can make those blades completely ourselves. We do not have technology so far, for TBC coating and laser hole drilling. For that the blades are sent abroad. I cant think why France wouldnt want to mfg scb stock blades for us and supply.
JayS · 12:12 AM

#JaiShriRam Ramana
JayS, How many M29 are there?
#JaiShriRam Ramana · 12:14 AM

JayS
The process that Russians ToTed is less advanced than even what DMRL has developed. What we were lacking was TBC and laser drilling. Recently we have seen TBC related tender from DMRL, IIRC, indicating some definite progress there.
JayS · 12:15 AM

#JaiShriRam Ramana
France had a close call with DT demanding India buy American for 114. India refused and bought S400. So France owes India one.
#JaiShriRam Ramana · 12:16 AM
IAF has 3 SQ of M29. I dont know exact number but its between 60 and 70.

JayS
IN has 45 odd M29K
JayS · 12:21 AM

#JaiShriRam Ramana
So they won't miss one.
#JaiShriRam Ramana · 12:21 AM

#JaiShriRam Ramana
If we push IAF to hand over a M29, is the engine ready?
#JaiShriRam Ramana · 12:23 AM

JayS
Interestingly HAL's HTSE1200 also have SCB in them. Question is how is HAL making them, or is it Snecma which is supplying them..? Its highly likely that HAL is getting Shakti SCB from Snecma and usi g them in HTSE. I would be surprized to see HAL making those SCB on their own based on Russian ToT. Its definitely a possibility and would be a pleasant surprize if its the case.
JayS· 12:25 AM

JayS
GTRE folks say its ready. Scecma has audited and says its ready for limited flight testing. We have had some discussion in Kaveri thread where I posted some recent publications from GTRE which indicate they have solved the issues with LPC flutter and AB screech. I feel there is good evidence to suggest the engine is ready for flight testing.
JayS· 12:27 AM



JayS
They may find more problems in FT, but without FT we will never know.
JayS· 12:28 AM

JayS
There is a plane for couple of FT campaigns on larger FTB, most likely IL76. I think a tender was out for first one. But my memory is bit hazy on this. The discussion must be there in Kaberi thread. Or Indranil might remember.
JayS· 12:30 AM



#JaiShriRam Ramana
Indranil and your article on MWF and comparison to Grippen being read in high places.
#JaiShriRam Ramana · 12:55 AM

JayS
Good too know. If it makes some. Impression where it matters,nothing like it.
JayS · 1:40 AM

No Jay, I meant the SCBs were almost ready from our labs and it was only a question of jigs. I don't recollect any news after that we made to make the prototype (k9?).

The failure was with the existing blade.. and we were working on the SCB (drdo pub i recollect). BTW, isn't DS the first step to single crystals? The process used by russkies for the AL fps is different? Or we never got this tech from them?

Anyway, I think we were close yp get the 90* bends with SCB (I need tp refer the pub) or something. I vaguely remember zirconium reference..hence the question.
2:43 AM

JayS
DMRL has 2nd Gen SCB. But they can make the stock material. From there to finished blade need two critical. Tech we didnt have, TBC and Laser driling for cooli g holes. Midhani was in process of dev those tech. This is way back in 2017.recently there was a tender for TBC machine setup.
JayS · 5:46 AM

JayS
Russian tech is a bit tedious one, per a DMRL scientist. Western method is better and DMRL has followed the western approach. Also IIRC, Al31 HPT blades have single pass internal cooli g channels. While western scb have multipass. Even DMRL blades are multipass.
JayS · 5:48 AM

Nilesh Ji .. novice question: are we focusing on creating smaller jets for drones? Can Kaveri be downsized for a surveillance drone?
Jambavan
Thanks in advance
Jambavan · 5:57 AM

JayS
We have couple of small jet engines, PTAE7, Manik which are good for drones. Companies like Poerjet, Kalyani are making micro jets. HTFE25 is there. Kaveri is too tfta for drones.
JayS· 6:17 AM

At IITB, we have now new propulsion lab for SCB research.
8:59 AM

JayS
is that a part of CoPT.?
JayS · 11:54 AM

yes. per last oped I read

https://www.hindustantimes.com/mumbai-n ... ZC7OO.html

I wanted to go visit IITB for some time, but could never manage. I was curious to find out what they are doing exactly. I was in touch with this thing long back when it was mere castle in the air.
JayS
in 2014
JayS · 12:12 PM

tsarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2809
Joined: 08 May 2006 13:44
Location: mumbai

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby tsarkar » 23 Jul 2019 01:48

IIT Bombay is doing some super great work but not sure how much of it is in open domain.

As I have posted earlier, specific "work packages/projects" are given to the faculty & kids completion of which looks really nice in their resume when they're recruited by aerospace majors. I know kids recruited by THE companies based on such work.

A real win win situation! The turn of this decade will indicate whether we've crossed the Rubicon.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 23 Jul 2019 03:46

SaiK, Thanks.
edited out names.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20549
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 23 Jul 2019 04:14

I saw some SCB samples being made for kaveri some years ago.

don't know what happened as I lost both track and interest because of security issues.

someone in GTRE would know.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53475
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 23 Jul 2019 06:01

I would like to know the current status of the Kaveri engine.
Are ground tests complete?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: darshand and 48 guests