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.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8142
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 26 Apr 2020 20:06

I am the PI of a DARPA project. DARPA's mandate and DRDO's mandate are not the same.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 26 Apr 2020 20:54

chetak wrote:
Indranil wrote:Thank you for breaking it down for me. I should have looked at the BPR before asking the question. Basically, I am looking at options for a single-engined LIFT with 35 kN and 50 kN of dry and wet thrust.


won't the people posting so knowledgeably also know why the funding for GTRE has slowed so drastically.

why are such constraints and hurdles dominating what is essentially being described here as a project that can be solved simply by vastly increased funding coupled with the development of infrastructure.

what are the scientific community thought leaders not stepping up to own the problem and through that responsible route force the desired solution.

or, are there some other problems that are not benefiting from the sunshine of realistic scrutiny


Because the GOI is waiting for a report from NITI Aayog led by Dr VKS on the next gen jet engine program. Its due this year.

Meanwhile a 1000 crore program to design a Kaveri derivative for the UCAV has been funded and progressed.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 26 Apr 2020 20:56

I have no idea what you wish to depict by such a comparison. DRDO's mandate, its challenges are completely different from that of DARPA. The latter is more and more into program management, whereas DRDO has to develop a lot inhouse and even does limited series production of key items. DRDO also runs multiple academic funded programs at Indian universities.

chetak wrote:yes, this is not an apple to apple comparison especially with the support and role of the MIC but still......... it is undoubtedly an eye opener.

and surprise, surprise, even the budgets are roughly comparable.


Defence Research and Development Organisation
Agency overview
Employees 30,000 (5000 scientists)
Annual budget ₹14,818.74 crore (US$2.1 billion)(2017-18)
Minister responsible Rajnath Singh, Minister of Defence
Agency executive Dr G. Satheesh Reddy, Chairman, DRDO




DARPA
Agency overview
Employees 220
Annual budget $3.427 billion (2019)
Agency executives Dr. Peter Highnam, Acting Director Dr. David Honey, Acting Deputy Director
Parent agency U.S. Department of Defense




https://drdo.gov.in/sites/default/files/drdo-news-documents/DRDO_News_28_Nov_2019.pdf


Steady rise in budget allocation for DRDO

New Delhi:
There has been a steady rise in the budgetary allocation of the Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) since last three years, the Centre said on Wednesday, emphasising that it has been supportive of providing additional funds for the agency on need basis.

In a written response to a question in Lok Sabha, Minister of State for Defence Shripad Naik said Rs 13,501 was allocated to the DRDO in 2016-17. It increased to 15,399.25 and 17,121.99 in 2017-18 and 2018-19.

Naik said Rs 19,021.02 has been allocated for 2019-20.



BTW, I have some SDRE classmates with tenures at some US universities and parts of their research work are supported by DOD grants.

I have yet to hear of the GoI funding such people but there are chinese funds, usually available for the asking

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19453
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Karan M » 26 Apr 2020 22:53

Chetak - i am deleting your above post, as it literally has nothing of import bar the same old same old, and the usual complaints against Indian institutions that can be discussed in multiple other threads and is not suitable for the Kaveri thread. If you have something useful for the Kaveri in particular, please post the same.

Furthermore, claiming that DRDO is not delivering consistently etc is also not a view most certainly not held by many folks from the services I have had the opportunity to interact with in recent days. They all - to my surprise - bemoan the lack of consistent policy making in the services culture itself which has sabotaged far too many projects and is also leading to an exodus of talented technical personnel from the services. They reiterate, the lack of a product development subculture in the services is hobbling them and blaming DRDO has long past gone by the sell-by date.

Even in the current Covid episode, it has been the DRDO which has delivered, at incredibly short notice, everything from masks, to PPE, to ventilators. You can do the research on your own. But this is neither the thread to bring in specious comparisons to DARPA whose function does not even include a fraction of the challenges the DRDO or CSIR et al face in developing an entire ecosystem, and in fact incubating that ecosystem and then transferring the technology to multiple industries.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22277
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 26 Apr 2020 22:54

Karan M wrote:Chetak - i am deleting your above post, as it literally has nothing of import bar the same old same old that can be discussed in multiple other threads and is not suitable for the GTRE thread.


you are the boss, Karan M ji.

Nilanjan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 24
Joined: 04 Apr 2020 13:47

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Nilanjan » 27 Apr 2020 19:51

Guys, i have a news.....in 2017 mod. Sanctioned a project called ' high efficiency high temp. turbine '.i can't confirm exact purpose of this project but it seems it is for a higher thrust engine.maybe it will be basic of the new engine..in a recent interview drdo chief dr. Reddy said drdo moved ahead from kaveri and consentreteting on new design..so, it seems although the full project still in discussion level,the r&d on core tech. started and maybe future of complete engine project will depend on success of the sanctioned project.

Rsatchi
BRFite
Posts: 687
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 22:03

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rsatchi » 28 Apr 2020 19:41

Nilanjan wrote:Guys, i have a news.....in 2017 mod. Sanctioned a project called ' high efficiency high temp. turbine '.i can't confirm exact purpose of this project but it seems it is for a higher thrust engine.maybe it will be basic of the new engine..in a recent interview drdo chief dr. Reddy said drdo moved ahead from kaveri and consentreteting on new design..so, it seems although the full project still in discussion level,the r&d on core tech. started and maybe future of complete engine project will depend on success of the sanctioned project.

Hope this fructifies into something tangible in some realistic timelines!!
Another Noob Pooch: Any of the derivatives/byproducts of kaveri/kabini into serial production of engines of some sort finding niche in military/civilian use??

abhik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 17:42

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby abhik » 28 Apr 2020 20:26

OT but regarding DARPA vs DRDO, AFAIK the US is spending a total of 100+ billion on R&D and testing. Proportionally we should be spending about 10b no? Something to chew on.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 12 May 2020 00:54

maitya and anyone else \:

Can a follow on turbo-prop be developed from the HAL HTFE Turbofan?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_HTFE-25

HAL has very good gearbox development capability in the turboshaft engines like

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_HTFE-25
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safran_Ardiden


If so what will be the power output from such a conversion?

If its sufficient power can be used to replace those on An-32 planes and even Hercules?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 12 May 2020 01:07

I am thinking something like this Rolls Royce Engine:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_AE_2100

The Rolls-Royce AE 2100 is a turboprop developed by Allison Engine Company, now part of Rolls-Royce North America. A derivative of the Allison AE 1107C-Liberty (Rolls-Royce T406) turboshaft engine, the AE 2100 shares the same high-pressure core as that engine, as does the Rolls-Royce AE 3007 turbofan. The engine is a two-shaft design, and was the first[when?] to use dual FADECs (full authority digital engine control) to control both engine and propeller.[citation needed] There are four variants of the engine: the civil AE 2100A, and the military variants which include the AE 2100D2/D2A, AE 2100D3, AE 2100J and AE 2100P.

The engine uses new six-bladed Dowty propellers for use on the 50-seat Saab 2000 and the Lockheed Martin C-130J Super Hercules military transport. Each engine develops 4,591 shaft horsepower.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54275
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 12 May 2020 01:13

IAF has 105 An-32 each with 2 engines.

India
Indian Air Force: Bought 125 aircraft, 105 are still in service. Entire fleet is undergoing modernization; 35 upgraded An-32s have been delivered by Ukrspetsexport.[13] The upgrades include modern avionics equipment, new oxygen systems and improved crew seats. The remaining aircraft are being upgraded in India.


So assume 210 engines plus 40 spare is 250 engines
Add four engines each for Hercules fleet.

A derated version can power the SARAS when it comes along.

dinesh_kimar
BRFite
Posts: 436
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby dinesh_kimar » 13 May 2020 00:39

^ Ramana Saar, will answer as layman, dunno if it's on the dot.

Turbofans have an outer cowl around which most of air is bypassed, and less air is highly compressed by 3-4 compressors, ignited and powers the turbine, and exits the rear nozzle, providing thrust.

'Props have no bypass, no cowl, the power shafting is directed front thru many compressor stages (10-12), and runs a slow speed propeller making thrust from the front. It is slower engine.

I assume it is difficult to convert a turbofan into a prop, it's like fast car engine vs slow truck engine.

The HAL engine is about 1400 hp / 1200 kw. Maybe some aspects/ know- how can be used to build a turboprop for Dornier/Saras size aircraft.

The AN-32, C-130 ,etc. needs 5000 hp+.

The conversion of Turboprop to turboshaft engine ( for propeller plane and helicopter respectively) could be possible, as Pratt & Whitney PT-6 and GE CT-7 shows.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 22277
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 13 May 2020 03:11

dinesh_kimar wrote:^ Ramana Saar, will answer as layman, dunno if it's on the dot.

Turbofans have an outer cowl around which most of air is bypassed, and less air is highly compressed by 3-4 compressors, ignited and powers the turbine, and exits the rear nozzle, providing thrust.

'Props have no bypass, no cowl, the power shafting is directed front thru many compressor stages (10-12), and runs a slow speed propeller making thrust from the front. It is slower engine.

I assume it is difficult to convert a turbofan into a prop, it's like fast car engine vs slow truck engine.

The HAL engine is about 1400 hp / 1200 kw. Maybe some aspects/ know- how can be used to build a turboprop for Dornier/Saras size aircraft.

The AN-32, C-130 ,etc. needs 5000 hp+.

The conversion of Turboprop to turboshaft engine ( for propeller plane and helicopter respectively) could be possible, as Pratt & Whitney PT-6 and GE CT-7 shows.


The IN and the IAF both use the AI20 series engines for the IL38 and the AN32.

these engines are far too heavy for the saras. Each engine is about a 1000 Kgs, give or take

per wiki

General characteristics: Ivchenko AI-20D series 5
Type: Single-shaft turboprop
Length: 3,096 mm (121.9 in)
Diameter: 450 mm (18 in) (intake casing)[10]
Width: 842 mm (33.1 in)
Height: 11,802 mm (464.6 in)
Dry weight: 1,040 kg (2,290 lb)

comparable engines would be

Allison T56
Bristol Proteus
General Electric T64
Pratt & Whitney Canada PW100
Rolls-Royce Tyne

The PT6 series or equivalent would be the better fit

the DO228 which is in a comparable weight class to the saras has engines that weigh, IIRC, about 380 lbs apiece, give or take.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3349
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby fanne » 13 May 2020 04:03

Engine development has been very non strategic. Take example of HTFE -25, it can perhaps fit in some trainer (that HAL is not building as of yet), but cannot power Jaguars (even if it is upgraded to its max limit). However a HTFE-40 like engine could have powered Jaguars and a derated HTFE-40, could have fulfilled the purpose that HTFE-25 was suppose to fulfill. In our infinite wisdom, we went for HTFE-25 and not HTFE-40.
The amount of tech we developed for Kaveri (and got from AL-31F engines), HTFE-40 would have been achievable. An engine of that nature may not need SC blade (where per news we may be struggling...or not), a directionally solidified blades could do (which we were able to achieve through Kaveri)….similarly other tech would have helped. But we went for HTFE-25..
Similarly we are going for a 110 KN engine, the fall back to F414 would leave it short of thrust. We have mastered (relatively), design and construction of airplane (LCA). A twin engine F 414 plane will have 32% more thrust available than Rafale (Afterburner M-88-2 74KN thrust, F414 - 98KN thrust, both giving roughly 66% of AB thrust as dry thrust). We can build our next gen TEDBF and AMCA around that engine and then go for indigenous attempt to make a F414 engine locally (similar to Kaveri vs F404).
Making a plane optimized for 110 KN engine (two engine, thrust of 220 KN) and then failing in getting the engine right will jeopardize the plane as well. Worst news, there is no 110 KN thrust engine in the market (assuming that if there were, sizes would be comparable, so easy to replace). Though similar to F404-IN-20, there is rumor that F414-XXX is in the making that would give 110 KN thrust (or so we hope).
In the past, decisions on engines have not be optimal, I hope some new people make the decisions on the new path forward.
A HTFE-40 like engine from web has many uses - Trainer, Jags, UCAV, UAV, even small transport planes and within our reach. The HtFE-25 should continue, but just as science project, we should start HTFE-40 (if a new design so be it). The goal should be that in few years, it can be put in Jags. Who knows where the Jags will be in few years, may be we will retire them, maybe we wont. Mig 21 were supposed to be retired in 1990, the Bisons by 2010 and here we are in 2020.

Some back of the envelope comparison for engines -
(This is one of reasons why single engined fighters typically have better peformance than twin engined fighters despite lower thrust-to-weight ratio. Engine frontal area is one of major contributors to drag in all “normal” flight conditions. Taking two engines that use same technology and general design, frontal area – and drag – will increase with square of dimensions’ increase, while weight – and thus thrust – will increase with cube of dimensions’ increase. Engine that is 20% larger in all three dimensions will have 44% greater frontal area and 72,8% more weight and thrust – thus its thrust-to-drag ratio will be 20% greater than that of the smaller engine. If engines are of the same size and characteristics, then twin engined aircraft will be larger and have higher inertia and inferior transient performance. This of course assumes identical design goals and avaliable technology. For example, F-119 is 239% larger in volume than the EJ200, has 59% greater frontal area and 15% better thrust-to-drag ratio.).

https://defenseissues.net/2014/12/06/fi ... mparision/

chetonzz
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 73
Joined: 18 Mar 2019 11:11

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetonzz » 20 May 2020 15:59

posting a video here of that european man's "analysis" of Kaveri saga so far

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfrHWdoXl1M

kalichpur
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 May 2020 16:46

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby kalichpur » 22 May 2020 23:26

Here a YouTube channel called "AgentJayZ" run by a guy who works at JET CITY a jet turbine work shop.
He has over 800 videos on problems and maintenance of jet engines. He sort of mentors engineering students.
I thought persons on this forum may get more in-depth knowledge about jet engines.
Here is a sample video on AL-25 engine. I have learned a lot from this channel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLcQNfk95Ps

Apologies if this channel is already known here. This is my first post on BR

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 22 May 2020 23:27

Rambo, welcome to BR. Please change your username. If you cannot, please advise and I will change it for you.

kalichpur
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 May 2020 16:46

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby kalichpur » 22 May 2020 23:31

Please change it for me as I am not very familiar with the interface. Please change it to "Hispano"

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8805
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 22 May 2020 23:47

Rambo, we need a human sounding one. Not an ethnic one :) Anything is fine.

kalichpur
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 May 2020 16:46

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby kalichpur » 23 May 2020 14:27

Rakesh wrote:Rambo, we need a human sounding one. Not an ethnic one :) Anything is fine.


Please change it to "Kalichpur"


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests