Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 25 Aug 2009 04:34

ramana:

I wonder if SCB is indispensable. SCB was a solution developed some 30 - 40 years ago (in lab) and taken to production as a practical solution because crystallization was the only way to organize something with low residual stress in those days.

Carbon-carbon composite heat shields and such other things were not in existence in those days. With all the advances in "nano" and ceramic materials, I wonder if there aren't much better solutions these days, than growing crystals. Or maybe with computer-controlled processes, it is possible to cast a whole turbine stage as one piece like they do with the Stereolithography stuff.

There may be other ways around the problems, that may then be "uniquely Indian". But the only way to get these is to have intense research going on all over the nation, with some people whose minds are very focused to recognize breakthroughs.

vina · Post by **vina** » 25 Aug 2009 04:43

What part of it can be salvaged

Most of it in fact ,if you think of it.

1) Take a tinku , chikna small high performance core and mate it with the LP system suitably re jigged and you get the ECO-Kaveri.

2) The core itself , once you get good materials, put a new LP system with higher mass flow , and you get GANGA and not Kaveri!. And of course the core can be used to do all other things like marine engines, pumps, turbo props, turbo fans etc.. However, wont be in the top tier/ world class best unless you get the thermodynamic efficiency up.

Point is to do both 1) and 2), you need the "unobtanium". Luckily, it is "unobtanium" only in India. Earlier it was unobtainum everywhere. Now thanks to the Nuke deal and everything, all you need to do is open the wallet and go shop for components and materials.

Only thing you need to forget is making it 100% in India from raw materials for a long long time, until the time DMRL can pull their pants up and stop squatting to do DOO. Meanwhile throw sweeteners to all manner of PIGS and PIUS who will become PIGS abroad in 6 months and also give danda (after all saam, baan, bedha, danda no?) and you will have all the necessary support and analysis tools base in place in 2 years or so for further more modern iterations.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 25 Aug 2009 07:46

It's a lot better than that. Note that stage pressure ratio for Kaveri is onbly about 1.3. Long way to improve, and this does not require SCB. Just good aerodynamics, or maybe just good fabrication of the existing design (based on other things I've seen, I suspect strongly that the actual fabrication quality control is where they lose 50% of their design performance). If they can get even this improved, they can probably save a lot of weight on the engine. Or they can beef up the turbine blades with the saved weight, or add cooling and increase T.i.T.

Also, the T.i.T is still a long way from getting to the levels where SCB is needed.

IOW, a number of small improvements, whose cumulative effect is a drastic improvement. Just plain hard work and good management and coordination.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 25 Aug 2009 08:41

I had suggested carbon carbon, but vina garu shot down that proposal
Then I suggested cermaic sinterring to strengthen the C-C and shield it with ceramic coating to keep temps and stresses below deformation at high temp.

Its all powder meattalurgy.

Heck couple years ago I said Gnat engine is good enough for a cruise (sub sonic missile) we dont even make Lycoming opposed 4 cylinder.. (O-360 carbureted horizontally opposed engine series) or even ROTAX type engines

Hansa is fitted with ROTAX.

I even suggested modiyfy hamara baja jengine for UAV, upon which JC Cage garu posted PPT how DRDO was working on it two years ago nothing is heard as of 2009

we cant make copies of Rotax that power predator, just joing 4 baja engines man at least one will work

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 25 Aug 2009 12:44

Is the GTRE even trying or thinking of designing new Cores (especially after IAF struck down Snecma thingie) or they are waiting for something to fall from heaven!

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 25 Aug 2009 13:02

If something falls from heaven that is made by DRDO, then it is a confirmed disaster, because even for heavens sake the engines are not good, besides IAF cant efford to lose trained good pilots.

Anant · Post by **Anant** » 25 Aug 2009 13:13

Interesting patent.

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5756225/fulltext.html

I am sure the experts can chime in. The patent was issued in 1998 so not that ancient. At any rate, even to the lay folks, gives an idea of single crystal blades.

Thanks.

Anant

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 25 Aug 2009 13:35

Anant that has been posted by yours truly a fortnight ago in LCA discussions. I also posted whoe lot useless information which DRDO will buy from foreign collobrators.

udy · Post by **udy** » 25 Aug 2009 13:40

^^^ The right patents to study would be the following three :-

Process for the preparation of nickel base superalloys - Niranjan Das
Nickel-based superalloy Niranjan Das
Nickel-based superalloy Niranjan Das

Why there has been no progress from lab to manufacture is for DMRL to answer.

vina · Post by **vina** » 25 Aug 2009 13:44

As for piston injin vs. jet engine, true, I suppose the piston injin does better because all the heat is added at constant volume (i.e., extremely fast while the piston is still essentially at the top of the cylinder), so entropy rise due to heat addition is minimal (I nearly flunked Thermodynamics in the Eye Eye Tea and got through merely because I memorized some buzz phrases) and then all the work of expansion is extracted directly as mechanical work, instead of just a percentage as in a turbine. However, pistons weigh a lot. I suppose the Kaveri-57 PR-machine will use Pulsed Detonations instead of pistons and thus claim to approach the efficiency of a piston engine?

Hmm. Let us see. Another "conclusion" I remember is this, in addition to the efficiency is this. There used to be a nice . There used to be a nice graph on different kinds of engine and which one would you choose based on power output.

At low to medium, diesel/ IC engine, then gas turbine at high power ratings and at extreme power ratings, steam turbines!.

And now your statement

pistons weigh a lot

ring a bell. That choice matrix was based on power density.

The point you would choose gas turbine over diesel is the point at which the cylinder displacement starts increasing at a faster rate than power output !. So basically packaging and compactness and weight considerations start taking precedence over efficiency.

See what will happen if you are one dimensionally focused on efficiency. I would point you to this monster which buts out 110,000 bhp at just 102 rpm!. Think of it, by the time a cylinder cycles once, a normal human being would probably breathed some half a dozen times. Imagine putting this thing in even something as big as an aircraft carrier, which probably will require the power output of two of . There will be barely any useful space left for anything else!.

The Ell See Ay will sound really cool if the frequency is adjusted to that of a Harley-Davidson, hain?

Ah.. But Harley Davidson went and took out a copyright on the sound (I am not joking here). So you will have to pay royalty if you want the Ell See Ay to be that cool!

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 25 Aug 2009 13:55

yes they did copy right the sound. Ah that sounds good.
But here

However, I can’t say I think Harley’s latest agreement to license their unique sound to Honda Motor Company is wise for Harley or good for the global motorbike community.

Harley now licenses the sound (of cylinders)

Anant · Post by **Anant** » 25 Aug 2009 14:03

Sorry John Snow (Spinster). Besides that, as you probably referenced, there is plenty of open source material on this subject. Surely, for the motivated, on some level, it should serve as a primer. We Indians have no shortage of brains and my guess is that infrastructure needed to accomplish things is now in place or nearly in place, so perhaps Narayanan is right and its a motivational issue. Regards.

Anant

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 25 Aug 2009 14:09

anant garu,
that is waht N guru, Vina garu, Arun_S garu, raman garu et al yours truly have been saying and in a very humble way,
we need leaders , we have everything somebody needs to put all the talent and equipment that we have to tie up losoe ends.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 25 Aug 2009 18:21

vinaji:

Two reasons where piston engines start losing: One is that most of the volume is taken up by steel of specific gravity 800,000,000,000 hajaar. Second is that someone is paying to slow down and speed up the inertia of the heavy pistons.

So the big slow approach COULD be efficient for very large engines (and actually it is for solar Stirling engines).
The other approach is to replace the "piston" with something that has little mass - shock waves. This is the Pulsed Detonation Engine. (PDE for those of us who flunked Partial Differential Equations). 20 explosions a second, or 60 explosions a second if you have several PDEs stacked next to each other. Harley-Davidson.

If GTRE claims that the KAveri injin also does this, please suggest HaraKiri to their PR dept.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 26 Aug 2009 08:40

Apologies if this has been posted before.
----------------------------------------
Aero India International Seminar 2009 :: Webcast is available for viewing

In context of this thread, folks may be interested in the talk given by Dr. G. Malakondaiah, Director, DMRL, DRDO
http://www.24framesdigital.com/aeroindi ... daiah.html

vina · Post by **vina** » 26 Aug 2009 10:05

This is the Pulsed Detonation Engine. (PDE for those of us who flunked Partial Differential Equations). 20 explosions a second, or 60 explosions a second if you have several PDEs stacked next to each other. Harley-Davidson.

If GTRE claims that the KAveri injin also does this, please suggest HaraKiri to their PR dept.

Bah!. That PDE has already been perfected for millenia. It is actually bio fuel powered and 100% ecologically sustainable.

In the US you guys might be new to it. After all , it is only recently that you probably can get into a mexican restaurant anywhere in the US and have a big meal primarily consisting of refried beans and fava beans.

Here we have always had the black desi chana. Too much of it and too little visits to certain places for which you carry a lota, builds up a lot of pressure.

Net rusult, a rapid fire pulse detonation, where because the wind breaks sound barrier, you hear a distinctintly audible crack. Much better sound than Harley I assure you. However, please issue gas masks to all folks in vicinity or the genteel folks will complain of noxious emissions.

k prasad · Post by **k prasad** » 28 Aug 2009 11:19

pankajs wrote:Apologies if this has been posted before.
----------------------------------------
Aero India International Seminar 2009 :: Webcast is available for viewing

In context of this thread, folks may be interested in the talk given by Dr. G. Malakondaiah, Director, DMRL, DRDO
http://www.24framesdigital.com/aeroindi ... daiah.html

Great find Pankaj... was looking for this a long time..

Is anyone able to access and view the vids?? If so, Shiv-saar, can you download them if possible - some real treasures here.

All vid list at http://www.24framesdigital.com/aeroindia2009/

vina · Post by **vina** » 31 Aug 2009 14:37

In the front page of Business Standard ( I subscribe the news paper, I think that is India's only quality biz paper, ET is well-- Economic Toilet) there was an article about an Engg Design Services firm winning a 500 person multi year contract to help Rolls Royce develop the next generation engines for the next Gen Airbus A350 .

The article also said that they are spending something like $2000 per seat or close to $10m for a 500 person team in terms of investments for it. Question is, what do Engg Services providers like QueSt do ?. My understanding is that they do the basic cad /cam , mechanical, structural and heat kind of design for all sorts of stuff. But does an engine program need 500 Doos/ Abduls to sit in front of high end engg work stations doing that start of stuff from scratch ? If that is what it takes, what does GTRE have ? How many Doos sitting in front of engg workstations doing that kind of design ?.

But really, what exactly do the Quest and GE J E Welch kind of guys do in Gas Turbines. If companies like RR and GE and PW outsource work to them (they do for a fact) they must be doing something useful. If RR , PW and GE can outsource work which requries 10000000000000 abduls/doos to guys in India, why cant GTRE , if that will cut design and verification time ?

Downland and check out this Aero and Fluid SYstem brochure . Pretty impressive list of claims on what they can do ..

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 31 Aug 2009 16:05

DELETED

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 31 Aug 2009 17:16

what do Engg Services providers like QueSt do

Develop calculation codes - SeeEfDee, com-pu-tational combustion etc - and in some rare cases, set up experiments to verify pieces of those, like DRDoos digging holes in Pokhran and testing pieces of systems.

IIRC, e-FLUENT was developed by QueST. So they get the $1,700,000,000 contracts to develop calculations, hard-code the fudge factors by verification for the precise conditions that the paying customer wants, and then they take the resulting code, make an executable with a cool GUI and sell it at $1,700,000 a pop to places in desh who want to claim that they use e-FLUENT, OVERFLOW, UNDERFLOW, FLOATINGPOINTERROR, etc. And those entities then happily run these for "new" configurations, and get into the GIGO mode, setting them back for the next 10 years.

Why you are not agreeing with my rejults? These are color CONTUWAR plotj done on COLAR LAJER PRINTAR yoojing "TECBPLOT" phrom eFLUENT onlee! Are you better than phoren SeeEffDee?

This is how "ITAR" works, and why one can can buy eFLUENT etc. despite ITAR. Sets back the competition by a decade at least. Crushes indi-genius initiative because what little Doo can compete with the 200,000,000,000 line Massively Parallel pieces of garbage Certified By Phoren?

Early in my career, I had to use a "certified" code like these, bought straight from NASA library where it had been deposited as part of a guvrmand contract. Only 30,000 lines, or maybe 60,000, I don't remember, but it claimed to have solved some massively complicated problem involving interactions between all sorts of components with relative motion, vortices, wings, blades, etc. etc.

Being the nasty-minded obnoxious type that I am, as certified by many here, I asked the (x)OO who was trying to get the thing to work, to see if it could calculate potential flow around a cylinder.

The result of that convinced the young (x)OO to check for other things, like infinite loops, and then for FORTRAN errors, and then for blatant coding errors (like putting in x**2 instead of x). IOW, check through the 30,000,000,000 lines of code with paper and pencil and calculator in hand. (Well... I suggested several nasty and mean-spirited diagnostic tests, in series).

In about 2 years we broke through, and found out why it REALLY could never have worked, and then we realized why they had a pretty picture of the whole vehicle sketched into the result plots of pressure coefficient. It was to make the scale go from -10 to +10, with all the results (and the 3 experimental points) all restricted to the range between -0.5 and +0.5. With large symbols, the "agreement" looked perfect. Using a magnifying glass, one could see that the experimental points varied between -0.5 and +0.5, but the Predicted Results were all like -0.003, +0.003 etc.

That code (the Certified NASA Report Commercialized version, I mean, not the one we opened up) has sold hajaar copies to Top Establishments all over the Duniya, which is great from the pov of those who must compete against these Establishments with only 5% of one's time and one young (x)OO on one's side. Of course we won that competition hands down - the Establishment still can't reach where we reached in 1989.

The Official Code also claimed that it you iterated on some hard-2-predict quantity starting with the same intelligent guess that everyone does, it would CONVERGE within 3 iterations to the right value, experimentally agreed. True. But the nasty-minded asked the (x)OO to go to 10 iterations, which caused the same code to keep changing the (hard-coded) delta-theta until theta has changed from 45 degrees to 180 degrees - and it would keep going.

We had one advantage. Early on we insisted on getting the full code listing, but that wouldn't matter anyway to Modern Desi Rejearch Eshtablijment like GTRE because they wouldn't dream of going through the code line by line and doing parallel calculations with a pencil and kagaz and calculator.

vina · Post by **vina** » 31 Aug 2009 20:56

narayanan wrote:IIRC, e-FLUENT was developed by QueST. So they get the $1,700,000,000 contracts to develop calculations, hard-code the fudge factors by verification for the precise conditions that the paying customer wants, and then they take the resulting code, make an executable with a cool GUI and sell it at $1,700,000 a pop to places in desh who want to claim that they use e-FLUENT, OVERFLOW, UNDERFLOW, FLOATINGPOINTERROR, etc. And those entities then happily run these for "new" configurations, and get into the GIGO mode, setting them back for the next 10 years.
Why you are not agreeing with my rejults? These are color CONTUWAR plotj done on COLAR LAJER PRINTAR yoojing "TECBPLOT" phrom eFLUENT onlee! Are you better than phoren SeeEffDee?

Hmm.. That is the downside of having money I suppose. Back in those days when everyone was much poorer, no funds for spending on any EFFLUENT. All that was available were DOOs and PIGS in hundreds. So the only thing that could be done was to put the DOOs to work and get it done from scratch. There was no Make Versus Buy choice. It was Make only.

We had one advantage. Early on we insisted on getting the full code listing, but that wouldn't matter anyway to Modern Desi Rejearch Eshtablijment like GTRE because they wouldn't dream of going through the code line by line and doing parallel calculations with a pencil and kagaz and calculator.

However, saar. The Engg Design Shops must be useful. For eg, there is an upcoming bid said to be $200m (it is in the papers) from Bombardier for their upcoming C series planes. All the big EDS guys including HCL, Infy, and other guys are bidding. It is employing DOOS in thousands using CAD CAM and commercial software do do design structural etc). How is that stuff not uder ITAR? . Is it because structures are no big deal and including aero elastic sticc and flutter analysis kind of things ?. No hidden secrets there anymore ?. So is it only in YinJin and other high end CFD stuff that are under ITAR?

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 31 Aug 2009 22:27

I have nooooo idea how all these things get there around ITAR, and so I have my doubts about what they actually get. I am told that if I were to take MATLAB Student Edition there I would probably get arrested. Or even the Virtual Reality stuff like LightWave that can be used to create green Space Aliens with furry hides.

BTW, no, it is not in injins onlee that there is highly ITAR and worse stuff, I can assure u..

But vina! PDE's time has come, and as you see it's a simple add-on - call it Kaveri-9.1

Engine Program Aims to Meet Military's Need for Speed

By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Aug. 26, 2009 – The F-22 Raptor and F-18 Hornet fighter jets are fast, screaming through the air at twice the speed of sound, but the SR-71 Blackbird was faster, flying Mach 3 until mechanical problems and exorbitant operating costs forced it out of service in the late 1990s.

Now, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is striving to build an engine that will propel a hypersonic jet at Mach 4 and faster, while also bringing new efficiencies to ships and ground vehicles.

DARPA's Vulcan program kicked off this spring and aims to create the supersonic capability needed to engage targets or perform reconnaissance missions when time is of the essence, Thomas Bussing, program manager, told American Forces Press Service.

"Most of our aircraft are subsonic airplanes, so it takes them a long time to get where they need to be," Bussing said. "If you could travel beyond Mach 4, you could get there in potentially one-fourth the time it would take to get there with a conventional aircraft."

Increased airspeed will translate into more timely battlefield awareness for ground troops and an improved strike capability that takes out enemy forces before they can attack, Bussing said.

Until now, the science required to provide this level of capability eluded engineers and scientists alike.

The Vulcan is being developed as the first propulsion system to combine a full-scale, off-the-shelf turbine like those used in F-22 and F-18 fighter jets with a revolutionary new constant volume combustion engine. The dual-mode engine will basically consist of a constricted tube that compresses air as it combusts fuel.

"The CVC is really a paradigm shift in the way you burn fuel and air," Bussing explained. "Instead of burning fuel like you do in an automobile engine in a slow-burning process, the idea is to use a shock wave so you essentially get instantaneous combustion. If you can do that, it is a more efficient cycle, and you can extract more useful work."

These enhancements are expected to be able to accelerate the aircraft from zero to Mach 4-plus in a matter of minutes, Bussing said. The turbine will generate the initial low-speed propulsion, with the CVC engine kicking in at supersonic speeds.

But the technology being developed promises other benefits, too, he said. It will make ships' propulsion and power engines, as well as ground-based power generators, more efficient. Other applications include using shockwave technology to cut through the ash that builds up on coal power plant heat exchangers, boosting efficiency by 2 to 5 percent.

Those same shockwaves have other military applications, such as nonlethal weapons and psychological operations tools. Channeled through a series of tubes, for example, the waves will emit ear-shattering blasts. Fired at exactly the right sequence, they can create an amplitude and pulse that makes an intended target's stomach turn nauseous. "It's a noise generator that is very powerful," Bussing said. "If used correctly, you can generate a very effective nonlethal response."

The Vulcan will have application in production processes, too, he said. The waves it generates can accelerate particles to the extremely high speeds needed to create carbide, oxide or nitrite coatings.

"There is a whole series of products and techniques this concept enables," Bussing said. "This technology has a broad range of potential applications."

But for initial development, DARPA is focusing on applying the new technology in a multiple-Mach jet engine capable of supporting intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and strike missions.

Getting to this point took 15 years of rigorous testing, and Bussing estimated it will take another four to five years to complete the four-phased development program.

The first phase wraps up late next month with a review of the four competing contractors' conceptual designs. The next phase will test each component, then demonstrate how they operate together through experimental tests, some conducted in wind tunnels. Phase 3 will be a full-scale demonstration, which Bussing called the most important step in the program that proves out the technology.

The fourth phase will culminate with a test combining a full-scale version of the new CVC engine and turbine, to demonstrate how they operate from zero to Mach 2, then on to Mach 4. Bussing said the hope is to reach that point within five years.

DARPA, the Defense Department's super-high-tech, super-advanced research agency, is the only defense organization that could have taken on such an ambitious project involving such new, unproven technologies, Bussing said.

"This is a very high-risk technology, but one that promises very high payoff," he said. "So this is the right place for an organization like DARPA to be working in."

But achieving the Vulcan's promise will represent a major milestone, even by DARPA standards, Bussing said.

"There are many DARPA hard problems to make this work: for example, the way in which air is processed in these engines, the way the detonation event is created, the way the various components pieces are all coupled together," he said. "So it is technically very challenging. There is a lot of fundamental physics and technology that has to be worked out," he said. "But we have a high degree of confidence we can make this technology work."

I tell u, time 4 GTRE PR dept to include PDE in next briefing. Arre yaar, CONSTANT volume is eajy, we are doing VARIABAL volume even!

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 03 Sep 2009 01:11

vina! Chinese are scrambling to catch up with Kaveri. C b lo: Great din for Photoshop!!!

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, SEPTEMBER 1, 2009

China Puts Up a Fighter: Beijing's fifth-generation military challenge to the U.S.

By RICHARD D. FISHER JR.

ZHUKOVSKY, Russia—With few exceptions, Beijing rarely says much of substance about its ongoing military build-up or its strategic thinking. But the overriding message from the recent Moscow Airshow and other airshows, plus occasional interviews with Chinese and Russian engineers, is that Beijing is not conceding next-generation air superiority to anyone, least of all the United States.

Exhibit A is Beijing's long-running effort to build a fifth-generation fighter plane ... In what may be the only public reference to the program by a Chinese official, the Commander of the People's Liberation Army Navy (General Ko Py) mentioned their requirement for a fighter capable of "supersonic cruise" during 60th anniversary celebrations in April. Today this can only be achieved by the U.S. F-22A Raptor, the world's only operational fifth-generation fighter, (and India's Kaveri engine without a fighter plane attached to it???).

... many technical obstacles. Development of advanced engines capable of 15-ton thrust levels is a particularly serious bottleneck. But China's fifth-generation efforts date back to the early 1990s and will start with two heavy fighters from China's two main fighter companies. .... Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, famous for developing the fourth-generation J-10 fighter, was considering.. development of a medium-weight fifth-generation plane comparable to the F-35. ..could mean.. vertical take-off and aircraft carrier versions. In 2006, the competing (Strange concept for yindoo guvrmand agencies) Shenyang Aircraft Corporation revealed a concept for a single-engine forward-swept-wing fighter that would be highly maneuverable and potentially stealthy (in fact so stealthy that it is invisible to the naked eye, not just to radar!). ..PLA envisions two levels ..: a heavy fighter for maintaining air superiority (Em All CeeYay) , and a medium-weight plane that's cheaper and more versatile (Right Chinese Ailclaft).

Even before China's fifth-generation fighter flies, advances in electronics and engines will enable new "four-plus" generation fighters, like the J-10B that recently began flight testing (not 2 mention Jay - Sattar Bandaar, why r they not mentioning that? 70 berjent more advanced than jay -dus onlee). These fighters and eventual fifth-generation fighters will pose a more effective challenge to current and future U.S. air forces, and will make obsolete the fourth-generation fighter fleets of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. The U.S. Navy currently has no program for a fifth-generation fighter as good as the F-22, but instead intends to rely on the slower F-35C, which is optimized for attack missions.

The PLA aims to ..reduce .. reliance on Russian and other foreign technologies. A Ukrainian source here disclosed that his company is in discussions with Chengdu-associated institutes on .. second fifth-generation engine program for China. ..Sukhoi .. stated pointedly that they are not helping China with its fifth-generation program. They're cooperating with India instead on New Delhi's own fifth-generation fighter development. Russia's main reason appears to be business; China has not signed a treaty protecting intellectual property. China could be motivated by technological nationalism.

... Beijing's current reliance on Russian technologies effectively gives Moscow a veto over China's sales of its planes to third parties. ..The new J-10B may already be slated for Pakistan, advancing the arms race on the Indian subcontinent. (bhy all they downglading J-sattar to only J-dus?? )

(NOW comes the reason why this appeared now in the Warr Stleet Joulnar:) There are worrying signs that the U.S. either does not fully appreciate the consequences of Chinese (4 and 5 gen) entering the market, or is willfully ignoring them. In July, (S-o-D) Gates publicly predicted that by 2020 "nearly 1,100 [combat aircraft in the U.S. Air Force] will be the most advanced fifth-generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is projected to have no fifth-generation aircraft by 2020. And by 2025, the gap only widens." ..Obama administration had overruled congressional objections and stopped production of the F-22A at 187 by 2012.

This is a big gamble, and seems like a bad bet ... it could cost America future air superiority in the Pacific. It could deny a key U.S. ally, Japan, a significant non-nuclear means for deterring Chinese aggression. It could also be bad for the U.S. companies like Lockheed-Martin and Boeing commercially. Washington's inability to offer a fifth-generation "champion" fighter could push South Korea and Japan to turn to French technologies to develop their own fifth-generation programs. (they could always turn to Pakistan.. )

.. Beijing's own goals are crystal clear. It would be far smarter for the U.S. to prepare for the likelihood that Beijing will develop and build far more than 187 fifth-generation air-superiority fighters.

Mr. Fisher is a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center and is the author of "China's Military Modernization: Building for Regional and Global Reach" (Preager, 2008)

Kakarat · Post by **Kakarat** » 07 Sep 2009 06:08

Kaveri jet engine finally poised for first flight
After 20 years in the making, the Kaveri jet engine will finally take to the skies.

In 1989, Dr Mohana Rao, then a junior technician at the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), Bangalore, immersed himself in the ambitious Kaveri programme, which was designing a jet engine for the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft. After pushing the Kaveri through two decades of heartbreak and achievement, Dr Rao is now the Director of GTRE. And his baby, the Kaveri engine, is ready to fly.

This week, a fully built Kaveri engine will be transported to a testing facility outside Moscow called the Gromov Flight Research Institute. Here, a giant IL-76 aircraft will have one of its four engines replaced with a Kaveri. Russian and GTRE experts will then evaluate the Kaveri’s performance while the IL-76 flies.

Before the actual flight tests, Russian experts at Moscow’s Central Institute of Aviation Motors will run ground checks on the Kaveri’s performance, in conditions that simulate altitudes up to 15 kilometers (49,200 feet).

Business Standard visited the Kaveri ground test bed at GTRE, Bangalore, where Russian experts are finishing “pre-acceptance checks” on the Kaveri engine that is headed for their facilities in Russia. The giant turbofan engine, suspended from a ceiling bracket, was being revved up gradually. As it roared to a deafening crescendo, engineers monitored the Kaveri’s power output, watching carefully from behind a bullet-proof glass window.

“The Kaveri’s development is complete”, confirmed Dr Mohana Rao, “In ground testing at GTRE it met the performance parameters laid down in 1998. The next step is to confirm that it performs during flight. A 50-person GTRE team will travel with the engine to Moscow and participate in the flight trials over the next 3-4 months.”

India has no facilities for altitude-testing and flight-testing jet engines. GTRE estimates it will take several hundred crore rupees to create such test facilities in India. Meanwhile, each test campaign in Russia costs Rs 50-60 crores.

For the DRDO (GTRE is a DRDO laboratory) even a successful Kaveri flight will be a bittersweet end to one of India’s most savagely criticised development programmes. A measure of success, on the one hand, in an ambitious technological leapfrog to building a modern jet engine, something only a few countries can do. On the other hand, the Kaveri has failed to provide an engine for the Tejas, even after spending Rs 3000 crores.

“The reason was two-fold”, explains Mohana Rao. “The Kaveri turned out 15% heavier than we planned. From the planned 1100 kg, its final weight has gone up to 1265 kg.”

Meanwhile, the Tejas fighter also turned out heavier than planned, demanding a more powerful engine; the Kaveri’s maximum thrust of 65 Kilo Newtons (KN) is simply not enough. The air force has chosen American GE 404-IN engines, which produce 80 KN at full power, to power the first 20 Tejas fighters. And subsequent Tejas will get about 95 KN of thrust from a new-generation engine: the General Electric GE-414 and the Eurojet EJ200 engines are currently being evaluated.

But GTRE is undeterred, having produced a high-tech turbofan jet engine in a country that has never produced even a motorcycle or car engine.

“We need more thrust without increasing the size of the engine”, says Mohana Rao. “That means getting better technologies from a more experienced foreign partner. We have chosen (French aero-engine major) Snecma. The Defence Ministry has approved the tie-up.”

Business Standard has learned that Rolls Royce, and General Electric declined to partner GTRE, apparently unwilling to part with cutting-edge technology. US major, Pratt & Whitney, was willing only to provide consultancy. With only Russia’s NPO Saturn and Snecma in the game, the MoD has opted for Snecma.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Sep 2009 07:08

So the specs laid for Kaveri during 1998 is 80 kN with after burner and 50 kN in dry thrust and that is what they are testing now ?

I read Snecma is also acting smart on TOT , any reason why we choose Snecma over Saturn ?

vina · Post by **vina** » 07 Sep 2009 10:55

“The reason was two-fold”, explains Mohana Rao. “The Kaveri turned out 15% heavier than we planned. From the planned 1100 kg, its final weight has gone up to 1265 kg.”

Hmm. Wonder what needs to be done to shed flab. Go for all blisk compressor stages, higher pressure ratio per stage as Mullah Enqyoob ordered to cut down number of stages and increase overall pressure ratio , better and lighter materials maybe . 160 Kilos weight reduction is big target..

the Kaveri’s maximum thrust of 65 Kilo Newtons (KN) is simply not enough. The air force has chosen American GE 404-IN engines, which produce 80 KN at full power, to power the first 20 Tejas fighters. And subsequent Tejas will get about 95 KN

Something fishy about these numbers. Dont seem right.

“We need more thrust without increasing the size of the engine”, says Mohana Rao. “That means getting better technologies from a more experienced foreign partner. We have chosen (French aero-engine major) Snecma. The Defence Ministry has approved the tie-up.”

Yup.. A smaller high performance core will be what the Frenchies bring in. Or else, it will be back to eating a lot of Desi Black Chana and building pressure to go directly to "Pulse Detonation Engine"

With only Russia’s NPO Saturn and Snecma in the game, the MoD has opted for Snecma.

Point is Russians dont have such a core. They will take your money, and use you as a guinea pig to develop one and then it will find it's way in to Thundaar and other ChiPanda "expolts".

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 07 Sep 2009 11:23

Something fishy about these numbers. Dont seem right.

Numbers seemed Ok to me , can you elaborate on what you found fishy.

It honestly doesn't matter if Kaveri has not turned out to be the best jet engine there ever was , we have a base now and that's the hardest to get - besides there is no urgent need for Kaveri as LCA has been delinked and MCA is about 11 years away. I'm sure we could work out the requirements from what is needed from MCA in terms of thrust and with the help of Foreign tech. bring up a far more capable engine based on Kaveri.

If we could do it with with the Arihant reactor , why not Kaveri.

arunsrinivasan · Post by **arunsrinivasan** » 07 Sep 2009 11:30

^^ As mullah enqyoob, & others have pointed out, the problem seems to be with the quality of GTRE leadership, probably organisation culture, unless that is fixed, not sure how having 11 years before MCA is ready, will fix the problem.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 07 Sep 2009 11:35

Let me start off with a disclaimer, I am wikipedia level when it comes to jet engines. It is good that we are sending these engines to russia, which means we have most likely an engine that can things up. Given this, can someone comment upon the suitability of the kaveri in the current or different form for use in IJT/AJT.

Bheem · Post by **Bheem** » 07 Sep 2009 11:44

Kakarat wrote:Kaveri jet engine finally poised for first flight

“The reason was two-fold”, explains Mohana Rao. “The Kaveri turned out 15% heavier than we planned. From the planned 1100 kg, its final weight has gone up to 1265 kg.”

Meanwhile, the Tejas fighter also turned out heavier than planned, demanding a more powerful engine; the Kaveri’s maximum thrust of 65 Kilo Newtons (KN) is simply not enough.

The Kaveri is falling really short at 65kn as " full military power" of F404IN20 is 85kn and peace time full power is 78kn.

pralay · Post by **pralay** » 07 Sep 2009 11:52

Nihat wrote:besides there is no urgent need for Kaveri as LCA has been delinked and MCA is about 11 years away.

This is pure "babu" statement. We must keep up the engine program with new specifications and new core/design to match future requirements for both light as well as heavy fighters.
THE NEED IS URGENT, as lack of engine WAS/IS/WILL-BE affecting our war preparedness.
So lets start with new engine designs and multiple prototypes.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 07 Sep 2009 11:55

From Anecom
Dated: June 2009

Compressor test build 2 for Indian Aero Engine

2nd compressortest for Indian Aero Engine
Following the successful first test of the compressor component in autumn 2008 AneCom AeroTest received the follow-up order for the enhanced compressor. The replacement activities of the test rig already started and the follow-up test will be executed end 2009

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 07 Sep 2009 12:02

suryag wrote:Let me start off with a disclaimer, I am wikipedia level when it comes to jet engines. It is good that we are sending these engines to russia, which means we have most likely an engine that can things up. Given this, can someone comment upon the suitability of the kaveri in the current or different form for use in IJT/AJT.

it's too large for IJT/AJT.

but it can surely fit in a LIFT version of LCA.

Willy · Post by **Willy** » 07 Sep 2009 12:20

So the Snecma deal is on. It is imperitive that the kaveri progresses. But the question is what will a well developed kaveri power? Hopefully the IAF would allow it to power some later versions of the LCA or maybe even just the trainers.Will it be to big for the AJT?

vina · Post by **vina** » 07 Sep 2009 13:48

The Kaveri is falling really short at 65kn as " full military power" of F404IN20 is 85kn and peace time full power is 78kn.

I really dont believe that 65KN number. Both of the true CANT be true.. 1) Kaveri met it's design specs and 2) The max thrust is 65KN.

I can believe it when Ajai Shukla reports what the GTRE guys told him that the Kaveri met it's design specs and the thrust is 65KN. Yeah, yeah, I know the flat rating and all the rest of it, but if the flat rated thrust at full A/B is 65KN, it still doesn't cut it.

I am willing to bet that Shuklaji cant know the difference between wet and dry thrust if someone hit him on the face with a wet undie. Unless GTRE explained to him with that there is something called after burner that comes on with a big woooooooooshh and spews flames like a gigantic flamethrower and explains it in equally dumbed down terms I doubt a lay man /reporter without a technical background would have got it. I he knew it, Shukla would have been smart enough to ask for the dry and wet thrust numbers and quoted two thrust levels. Maybe he should e-mail (oops govermund babus dont do email.. sorry fax or phone the GTRE PRO), who will in turn submit it to the "appropriate" person with all due protocol and sent via the office peon who will transfer it from desk of one babu to clerk to babu to another ( each of whom will doodle on the margins and think of profound "No Objection Certificates") and after a week or two will come up with a response (if at all).

Mayuresh · Post by **Mayuresh** » 07 Sep 2009 17:31

vina wrote:
The Kaveri is falling really short at 65kn as " full military power" of F404IN20 is 85kn and peace time full power is 78kn.
I really dont believe that 65KN number. Both of the true CANT be true.. 1) Kaveri met it's design specs and 2) The max thrust is 65KN.

I can believe it when Ajai Shukla reports what the GTRE guys told him that the Kaveri met it's design specs and the thrust is 65KN. Yeah, yeah, I know the flat rating and all the rest of it, but if the flat rated thrust at full A/B is 65KN, it still doesn't cut it.

Yes, I too think there has been some mistake in the report. If 65KN is the afterburning thrust, I am not sure we should even bother sending our engine to Russia. I wonder if the LCA shall even be able to take-off with that kind of a thrust

65KN thrust is surely without an afterburner, which translates to around 95KN afterburning thrust (the afterburing thrust is a guesstimate, based on some heuristics, so do not take me to task for it)
If finally, the Kaveri manages to pass all tests with 65KN military thrust, I think we may be able to put it in the LCA. It shall be heavierthan the 404 (GE-404 weighs 1036 kg, this guy weighs 1265 kg!). Any idea how much the GE414 weighs? BTW, the Eurojet2000 manages 90KN and weighs just 989 kgs!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Sep 2009 18:21

Kaveri further models must continue at all costs until a manufacturing TOT is established and the local shops brought upto the mark in delivering a repeatable and high quality product. if necessary, set aside 10 Tejas to form a kaveri test sqdn and develop the 1000s of man hours of flight test exp. its not for sale, nobody will teach us or tot that. need to pull in techs from Gromov like flying testbeds (Goi needs to release funds for that)

only half dozen countries in the world have made something like kaveri starting from a clean sheet of paper. its easy to incrementally improve things -vs- establishing the first baseline.

people who never try will always heckle from the gallery, let them take to the field first and show us something better.

Victor · Post by **Victor** » 07 Sep 2009 18:27

vina wrote:
I am willing to bet that Shuklaji cant know the difference between wet and dry thrust if someone hit him on the face with a wet undie.

No doubt. From his farticle:

But GTRE is undeterred, having produced a high-tech turbofan jet engine in a country that has never produced even a motorcycle or car engine.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Sep 2009 00:20

Rahul M wrote:
suryag wrote:Let me start off with a disclaimer, I am wikipedia level when it comes to jet engines. It is good that we are sending these engines to russia, which means we have most likely an engine that can things up. Given this, can someone comment upon the suitability of the kaveri in the current or different form for use in IJT/AJT.
it's too large for IJT/AJT.

but it can surely fit in a LIFT version of LCA.

Marine too.

Both of the true CANT be true.. 1) Kaveri met it's design specs and 2) The max thrust is 65KN.

The design spec - of 65KN - was set in 1998. And that has been met.

The Kaveri’s development is complete”, confirmed Dr Mohana Rao, “In ground testing at GTRE it met the performance parameters laid down in 1998.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 08 Sep 2009 00:22

On:

“We need more thrust without increasing the size of the engine”, says Mohana Rao. “That means getting better technologies from a more experienced foreign partner. We have chosen (French aero-engine major) Snecma. The Defence Ministry has approved the tie-up.”

I was under the impression that the IAF vetoed this "tie-up".