Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35335
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby SaiK » 15 Apr 2017 04:13

If we keep shuttling on who will be the partner, and by the side just sit on the existing Kaveri as just a TD, then we are doomed! None will provide joint works if you have nothing to participate on. GTRE better get reorganized (saying this for the last 5 odd years by now), and get this done without any foreign hands. Whatever it takes, it should be done at home with no external influence.

tushar_m
BRFite
Posts: 680
Joined: 22 Sep 2010 21:07

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby tushar_m » 15 Apr 2017 07:58

NRao wrote:Ah. Thx for the URL.

But that means a couple of things. One that GE is unwilling to part with certain technologies, so India is hedging. Or it could mean there are multiple camps in India who are pushing three different foreign partners. hopefully all this in sync with each other.


Yep, that's what i wanted to say .

If you have only one contract that may or may not materialize , there will always be a problem. We can't depend on one engine manufacturer which is governed by a president that takes U turn every few hours (Mr. T).

UK might not be reliable partner either but with 3/4 camps that can deliver engine for our needs & the orders being in few thousands(over the lifetime) every one is in pressure to deliver what they promised.
One more thing is that EJ200 was the choice of IAF/ADA but we go for GE because of political pressure & love for our new friends @US.
IAF wants EJ200 engines for Tejas, but..

My having multiple engine options we have eliminated any possibility of monopoly that may exist in the future.

Also with news of $250 billion upgrade plan my PM Modi we might be the only country to spend so much on military hardware.

8,000 missiles from Israel part of Modi's $250-bn plan to take on China, Pakistan

pandyan
BRFite
Posts: 331
Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby pandyan » 15 Apr 2017 09:31

tushar_m wrote:One more thing is that EJ200 was the choice of IAF/ADA but we go for GE because of political pressure & love for our new friends @US. [url=http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report-iaf-wants-ej200-engines-for-tejas-but-1320196]IAF wants EJ200 engines for Tejas, but..[/url


:roll: that would have been one sure fire way to kill tejas. after hearing dr. saraswat's speech on single engine usage qualification for GE414 and speculation here that it might be the cause for navy backpedaling on mk2, who knows what kind of issues would we have faced with EJ (don't like name either) 200 :lol:

srai
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3423
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby srai » 15 Apr 2017 09:56

SaiK wrote:If we keep shuttling on who will be the partner, and by the side just sit on the existing Kaveri as just a TD, then we are doomed! None will provide joint works if you have nothing to participate on. GTRE better get reorganized (saying this for the last 5 odd years by now), and get this done without any foreign hands. Whatever it takes, it should be done at home with no external influence.

GTRE is not sitting idly ;) They continue to work towards qualifying the Kaveri. As far as experienced foreign partner goes, they are mostly deemed necessary for overcoming the "last mile" hurdle quickly and with confidence.

Besides, most of the new R&D of indigenous aero engines (public/private) involve GTRE and their former engineers/scientists.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 822
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gyan » 15 Apr 2017 11:00

I think the only possible honest foreign collaborator would be MTU who has the technology base but no directly competing product. Everyone else will stab us in the back.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 15 Apr 2017 20:42

Gyan wrote:I think the only possible honest foreign collaborator would be MTU who has the technology base but no directly competing product. Everyone else will stab us in the back.


MTU is partner in EuroJet consortium. So tey do have EJ200 in direct conflict, in a way. But more importantly. MTU doesn't have key Hot Turbine tech and combustors. HP/LP Compressors, LPT, yes, they can help there. And they would love to perhaps have a JV to dig into HPT tech, but we will have to bankroll the RnD and they wont be able to help us as guide but more like will be co-travellers.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 822
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gyan » 17 Apr 2017 21:37

Very good info JayS. But better to have competent co traveller rather than a Shylock on your back. Snecma, RR, PW, GE will actively sabotage us. EJ 200 is basically RR. Kaveri present problems is with LPC, LPT components. Be as it may we had a good co traveller in MBB with ALH, France with liquid engines, Ukraine with Semi Cryogenic, UK with Gnat, Russia with Aircraft Carrier, Su-30MKI, Brahmos or Israel With Barak-8. The real issue is whether DRDO wants to do its job or just wants to put its label on a ready made Engine. RR also has knowledge from F-136 but will they share? Never. We are still indigenising 50 year old Adour engine.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 17 Apr 2017 22:11

Gyan wrote:Very good info JayS. But better to have competent co traveller rather than a Shylock on your back. Snecma, RR, PW, GE will actively sabotage us. EJ 200 is basically RR. Kaveri present problems is with LPC, LPT components. Be as it may we had a good co traveller in MBB with ALH, France with liquid engines, Ukraine with Semi Cryogenic, UK with Gnat, Russia with Aircraft Carrier, Su-30MKI, Brahmos or Israel With Barak-8. The real issue is whether DRDO wants to do its job or just wants to put its label on a ready made Engine. RR also has knowledge from F-136 but will they share? Never. We are still indigenising 50 year old Adour engine.


Our problem is materials and manufacturing technology, and sheer lack of testing facilities. MTU can help us to some extent there, yes. But at what cost..? Why the **** we need goras to walk us through all the time..? Why can't we put faith in our own men and give then enough resources to work with..? We would spend $1B on the French while working with Kaveri. But why we haven't already spent that much money on our own efforts..?? $1B isn't a big amount after all. Give our scientists the exact same tools and resources that goras have and our folks are just as capable of creating the same magic. But no, we want goras to show us the light. We won't try it out ourselves properly first.

I don't think RR knows the secret ingredient of F136. You know what I mean.? They have just made the lift fan system. And MBB screwed up big time on ALH. HAL had hard time clearing out the mess they created.

DRDO hasn't got even 1% of resources what foreign governments have poured in to develop jet technology. Its really unfair to them if someone expected them to come up with world class technology in that much. Even if they can have an engine with only their tag on it but can make us relatively self-sufficient, consider it an achievement.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15709
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 17 Apr 2017 22:49

Why the **** we need goras to walk us through all the time..? Why can't we put faith in our own men and give then enough resources to work with..?


Sure there are many reasons, but here are a few that I have arrived at.

Foreign consultancy it is *thought* will infuse quick solutions AND provide slightly longer term direction. That should have worked a few decades ago. Now it is nowhere close. New solutions are fast and furious. So, even a solution provided by say Safran will last only long enough to keep a client happy for a few years at the most.

On funding local efforts, three things.

First when they were funded the research teams seemed (IMHO) overconfident, tending to promise a LOT in very little time, for a very small price.

Second, culture. No or very low risk. Materials is an area where failure is unusually high, perhaps as much as 80-90%. As a society, Indians are not built for that kind of drubbing.

Third, it is not that India has not produced. They have. BUT, either under very dire circumstances (Kargil syndrome) or in inconsequential spurts.


BTW, I do not think the Bharat Forge, etc efforts will tantamount to very much. It could be better than others in India, but is that the goal? Given a choice I would shoot for the stars. Something highly positive has to come out of the GE collaboration.

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10471
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gagan » 17 Apr 2017 23:28

Bharat forge has ex GTRE folks working for them.
They are giving the GTRE guys everything, including professionally managed program, minus the sarkari delays, and expecting time bound results. Bharat Forge's support workshops are the best in the world, and they can create parts inhouse that GTRE can't. Baba Kalyani was talking about 3D printing several small and very complex parts

Bharat Forge probably knows the EXACT specs of the jet engines that the DRDO, armed forces seek for their various programs, and is angling to be the supplier for this market.
These small engines can be relatively easily built and chances of success are much higher for a UAV or a cruise missile or even a helo engine than for a cutting edge fighter jet engine.

He can build on the initial successes and body shop in the west to get future high end programs to succeed.

But frankly to see an Indian private company building jet engines - I am going !!!

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3480
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 18 Apr 2017 00:06

We've heard of this "Indians averse to risk" before. Its become cliched though . And despite success in other programs we keep rehashing the same thing. Time to move on from these old garbage.

Bharat Forge's aims are modest. Their small engines and upto 1200 hp engines have high chance of succeeding. They are targetting quite cleverly the nascent UAV market. If they do and see adoption, it will establish an industry locally which is forward looking and also financially viable.
One hopes that the low to medium power ones are taken over by local industry and the high end research is left to GTRE and govt.

I know I have said this many times. There is a lot of money to be made, jobs , knowhow, a local eco system, education & research that is involved and is at stake here. We cannot let this bleed our economy.
Parrikar mentioned 6000 engines would be needed in the next decade ,,,that too just for our helicopter fleet. That is so! much! money!

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 18 Apr 2017 11:51

NRao wrote:
Why the **** we need goras to walk us through all the time..? Why can't we put faith in our own men and give then enough resources to work with..?


Sure there are many reasons, but here are a few that I have arrived at.

Foreign consultancy it is *thought* will infuse quick solutions AND provide slightly longer term direction. That should have worked a few decades ago. Now it is nowhere close. New solutions are fast and furious. So, even a solution provided by say Safran will last only long enough to keep a client happy for a few years at the most.

On funding local efforts, three things.

First when they were funded the research teams seemed (IMHO) overconfident, tending to promise a LOT in very little time, for a very small price.

Second, culture. No or very low risk. Materials is an area where failure is unusually high, perhaps as much as 80-90%. As a society, Indians are not built for that kind of drubbing.


Third, it is not that India has not produced. They have. BUT, either under very dire circumstances (Kargil syndrome) or in inconsequential spurts.


BTW, I do not think the Bharat Forge, etc efforts will tantamount to very much. It could be better than others in India, but is that the goal? Given a choice I would shoot for the stars. Something highly positive has to come out of the GE collaboration.


Do you see the contradiction in those two points..??

Third point - Dire situations are pretty easy to create. Just self-impose ban on all the imports. Easy peasy.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 19 Apr 2017 17:07

Sjha's article on Kaveri is up on DDR.

http://www.delhidefencereview.com/2017/ ... et-engine/

One more to follow.

The key problems encountered by the Kaveri design, according to sources who have formerly been associated with the program, are:

1.Unacceptable levels of fan-blade flutter risk – It seems that the Kaveri intake may need some redesign to reduce the chances of stall inducing self-excited vibrations (flutter) being experienced by the engine’s duct fan blades.

2. Reheat oscillations – Kaveri prototypes currently experience significant combustion oscillation in their augmentors/afterburners. This also has an impact on specific fuel consumption during reheat.

3. First stage Low-pressure Compressor blade vibration – The Kaveri’s first stage low-pressure compressor is also experiencing worrisome levels of rotor blade vibrations at the moment.

The issues delineated above have been deemed rectifiable by those in the know. But it seems outside consultancy support will be needed for the same. That, is a story for another day.


My conclusion that the Kabini core is working very well was correct then. This itself is a huge achievement.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1193
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Zynda » 19 Apr 2017 17:21

JayS, per your knowledge, in what flight regime would (1) be experienced by Tejas? Self-excited vibrations...interesting. Can centrifugal force be a source of self-excited vibrations? Since even intake redesign is mentioned, is there some aero-elasticity process which is creating flutter? Could blade rubbing be the one of the side effects why intake redesign is needed?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47330
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 19 Apr 2017 21:13

JayS, Yes Kabini core is OK.

Other three are very interesting.
First they want air intake redesign. Should be doable.
Second is during reheat or after burner. I don't know about this.
Third is contradictory statement. Problem can be fixed and need foreign consultancy!
Are 1 & 3 coupled?

Basically the compressor needs to be redesigned : intake and blades.
Now what about 2 is it same thing in the afterburner section. Are the burners pumping the fuel consistently?

Heck it looks like redesign of the Kaveri outer shell is needed.

ashishvikas
BRFite
Posts: 161
Joined: 17 Oct 2016 14:18

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ashishvikas » 20 Apr 2017 09:21

Foreign expertise key to fire up India's jets
by Saurav Jha

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/607 ... re-up.html

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 20 Apr 2017 10:05

ramana wrote:JayS, Yes Kabini core is OK.

Other three are very interesting.
First they want air intake redesign. Should be doable.
Second is during reheat or after burner. I don't know about this.
Third is contradictory statement. Problem can be fixed and need foreign consultancy!
Are 1 & 3 coupled?

Basically the compressor needs to be redesigned : intake and blades.
Now what about 2 is it same thing in the afterburner section. Are the burners pumping the fuel consistently?

Heck it looks like redesign of the Kaveri outer shell is needed.


Thas screech. Basically inefficient combustion. Bad Afterburner design. That's what stopping it from achieving wet thrust. Whats surprizing is they sat over it for so long. They could have taken consultancy help only for AB by now and make it work.

One problem is they are totally dependant on Commercial CFD codes, from what I see. That must be restricting their ability to optimize it or even figure out the issues. No OEM worth its salt depends on Commercial codes for serious technology development. They have their own better methods. Commercial codes are used for V&V and are always considered 2nd grade in terms of accuracy and reliability. In academia, I have seen many do not even bother to know about commercial codes because they are basically useless for state of the art research work.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 20 Apr 2017 10:34

Zynda wrote:JayS, per your knowledge, in what flight regime would (1) be experienced by Tejas? Self-excited vibrations...interesting. Can centrifugal force be a source of self-excited vibrations? Since even intake redesign is mentioned, is there some aero-elasticity process which is creating flutter? Could blade rubbing be the one of the side effects why intake redesign is needed?


My knowledge in this are is limited. As you said correctly, Self-excited vibration == Flutter which is an Aero-elastic phenomenon. Its basically created due to insufficient stiffness of the blade. It could be solved by increasing stiffness of the blade (which would increase the weight) or by modifying the aerofoil, which would need better Aero codes (3D Aerodynamics), which seems to be Achilles Heel for GTRE, they don't have it.

My best guess is the flutter is occurring during high AoA high power operation (as far as Fighter flight envelop is concerned). As far as Fan performance map is concerned I think its near the surge line. From Kaveri intake, I suppose he means by the struts in front of the Fan. It could be so that they are giving rise to separation/unsteady flow which are then stalling the blades and making them flutter.

You won't be bothered about blade rubbing. With flutter the Fan blades will fail in HCF much before they can create enough rubbing. As such there is abrasive liner applied on the casing side for this to reduce tip leakage. So the blades actually eat into this liner over time.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47330
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 20 Apr 2017 22:16

JayS.

Thats screech. Basically inefficient combustion. Bad Afterburner design. That's what stopping it from achieving wet thrust. Whats surprizing is they sat over it for so long. They could have taken consultancy help only for AB by now and make it work.


One of our members here was told about combustion problems in early 2000 decade. So they knew but hoped it will get resolved.

The problem is issues are known and identified but due to "Bridge on the River Kwai" syndrome that is due to sunk cost they are brushed aside by leadership.

I wish IAF had its officers embedded in the Kaveri program so they could give feedback to the Chief.

Kaveri project chief seems to be hung up on making it solo effort of GTRE and not get what's' needed to push the product out.
By overpromising they have jeopardized GTRE already low reputation.

Hope the Manik is also not in same category.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 21 Apr 2017 00:34

ramana wrote:JayS.

Thats screech. Basically inefficient combustion. Bad Afterburner design. That's what stopping it from achieving wet thrust. Whats surprizing is they sat over it for so long. They could have taken consultancy help only for AB by now and make it work.


One of our members here was told about combustion problems in early 2000 decade. So they knew but hoped it will get resolved.

The problem is issues are known and identified but due to "Bridge on the River Kwai" syndrome that is due to sunk cost they are brushed aside by leadership.

I wish IAF had its officers embedded in the Kaveri program so they could give feedback to the Chief.

Kaveri project chief seems to be hung up on making it solo effort of GTRE and not get what's' needed to push the product out.
By overpromising they have jeopardized GTRE already low reputation.

Hope the Manik is also not in same category.


Volvo Aero was asked to review Kaveri AB. I think it was one time thing. They should have done proper collaboration with Volvo then to fully debug it.
Might be the Politics or Organisational egos which prevented Kaveri PMs from seeing the light. In fact I find thats the only plausible reason.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5578
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Indranil » 21 Apr 2017 03:35

VEry good write up from Saurav Jha, as always.

Foreign expertise key to fire up India's jets

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3480
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 21 Apr 2017 11:28

Indranil wrote:VEry good write up from Saurav Jha, as always.

Foreign expertise key to fire up India's jets


No investments in high-bypass engine or in high power turboprops R&D ....not even plans.
Rs.10000 crore focused on high thrust mil only and 10 year forecast on RoI.
A few thousand crores now focusing on civilian & transport sector can yield quicker results as the constraints are much lower but will see faster RoI.
By today's exchange rates - the Chinese are are investing Rs.90,000 crores in a much more comprehensive plan.

:evil:

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 21 Apr 2017 17:35

Neela wrote:
Indranil wrote:VEry good write up from Saurav Jha, as always.

Foreign expertise key to fire up India's jets


No investments in high-bypass engine or in high power turboprops R&D ....not even plans.
Rs.10000 crore focused on high thrust mil only and 10 year forecast on RoI.
A few thousand crores now focusing on civilian & transport sector can yield quicker results as the constraints are much lower but will see faster RoI.
By today's exchange rates - the Chinese are are investing Rs.90,000 crores in a much more comprehensive plan.

:evil:


Unless we have our own aircraft, no point in trying for Civil engine. Civil sector is far more cut throat and solely depends on economic value. Once we have perfectly working and flightworthy mil engine, it will be much easier to do it. While doing mil jet engine we basically would be creating the infrastructure (or we are suppose to) to enable us for future work. I think we should straightaway jump to GTF and Open Rotor architecture. And it would be a good idea to launch two TD projects for both these using either Kabini core or HTSE-25 core. This would give us chance to develop other things which will not be covered by mil jet project.

So we should -
- get Kaveri 80kN class flightworthy by using French help.
- Launch simultaneous project to uprate it to 90kN class (I believe its low hanging fruit, just replacing materials could* do the trick)
- Launch 110kN project with the aim of getting it to 10+:1 thrust class by 2035.
- Finish HTFE/HTSE/Manik et al projects as soon as possible.
- Launch Open Rotor/GTF project based on available desi core - starting at Academia level moving to Engineering eventually.
- Launch pure academic RnD projects on variable cycle engines - only a few Cr each yr for a decade or so should give us a good base.

Last two projects could act as umbrella projects to fund basic level of RnD for future across the spectrum.
Money and manpower both will be an issue though. But unless we go extremely aggressive we will never catch up.

To much wishful thinking..?? :oops:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15709
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 21 Apr 2017 18:43

Neela wrote:
Indranil wrote:VEry good write up from Saurav Jha, as always.

Foreign expertise key to fire up India's jets


No investments in high-bypass engine or in high power turboprops R&D ....not even plans.
Rs.10000 crore focused on high thrust mil only and 10 year forecast on RoI.
A few thousand crores now focusing on civilian & transport sector can yield quicker results as the constraints are much lower but will see faster RoI.
By today's exchange rates - the Chinese are are investing Rs.90,000 crores in a much more comprehensive plan.

:evil:


It all depends on how one does the accounting.

GE's Bangalore unit, of some 700 people (not sure how many are engineers in that number), are the leading edge group for civilian engines. They have designed a good number of the latest and greatest engines for the civilian sector. The same group has been tasked to work with ADA to update the F414 INS6 to meet the requirements for the AMCA, via the DTTI path.

BUT, I do not know how involved they are in research. I suspect the core research and the data resides in the US and this group has access to that knowledge base + mentors from the US if the need were to arise.

So, is there knowledge to produce a civilian engine in India? Can India produce a world class engine for the civilian market?

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 21 Apr 2017 19:20

NRao wrote:
Neela wrote:
No investments in high-bypass engine or in high power turboprops R&D ....not even plans.
Rs.10000 crore focused on high thrust mil only and 10 year forecast on RoI.
A few thousand crores now focusing on civilian & transport sector can yield quicker results as the constraints are much lower but will see faster RoI.
By today's exchange rates - the Chinese are are investing Rs.90,000 crores in a much more comprehensive plan.

:evil:


It all depends on how one does the accounting.

GE's Bangalore unit, of some 700 people (not sure how many are engineers in that number), are the leading edge group for civilian engines. They have designed a good number of the latest and greatest engines for the civilian sector. The same group has been tasked to work with ADA to update the F414 INS6 to meet the requirements for the AMCA, via the DTTI path.

BUT, I do not know how involved they are in research. I suspect the core research and the data resides in the US and this group has access to that knowledge base + mentors from the US if the need were to arise.

So, is there knowledge to produce a civilian engine in India? Can India produce a world class engine for the civilian market?


Short answer -1. No. 2.why not, if we try hard enough.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15709
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 21 Apr 2017 19:48

(I have been tied up, so have not responded to the "risks" post, a page or so ago. Sorry about that.)

Short answer -1. No. 2.why not, if we try hard enough.


What is interesting is that the US wanted to JV with India and India proposed the uprating of the INS6. Being a "JV" it required investments in some ratio from both sides. The "Indians" in this effort, apparently, are the Indians in GE Bangalore. How any other agency is tied in is yet to be revealed.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3480
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 21 Apr 2017 20:26

JayS Sir,


I agree it is a huge leap for us to compete in the civilian sector. Even Sukhoi Superjets engine core come from Snecma or Rolls Royce.

But we have to start somewhere for the civilian side.
The EADS C-295 is being sold to India uses turboprops of 2000 kW each.
The abandoned MTA was planning to use turbofan engines.
We have no development in these categories. Citing strategic reasons, funds can be allocated for engine dev. for mil-transport sector. This will help establish the platform for the future military and civilian side. The military can sink up all the initial versions but will provide valuable data across the development , use & maintainence chain. Even if they are 30% less fuel-efficient, it still will help in learning other parts of the full engine cycle and create know-how.
At some point, we will learn how to make them effiecient but a start has to be made. Else decades will be lost making us reliant on foreign suppliers.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 822
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Gyan » 21 Apr 2017 21:30

I think we need to launch multiple programmes with different finish lines. But first develop full comprehensive eco system of universities, labs, wind tunnels and flying test beds. We should seek to get AJT engines, mid end Turboprop and Turboshaft engines into production first.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15709
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby NRao » 22 Apr 2017 01:18

I hope I am wrong, but the one person who could or should have turned this around was Parrikar. The current RM nor Modi have the stuff needed to deal with in addition to other responsibilities. That they are unable to find a person in good time is also as n indicator of staleness+stagnation of things in ND.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47330
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 24 Apr 2017 21:16

I think this thread is also turning into another wallowing thread.
The minute some one posts hopeful facts immediately after the submit button is hit, comes the wallow.

Stick to facts only people. We have too many opinion threads.

Thanks,
ramana

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3480
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Neela » 25 Apr 2017 01:46

new media source. Cant verify authenticity.
No detials on engine class or category.

INDIA, UK WORKING ON LATEST JET ENGINE

NEW DELHI (TIP): India and the UK are jointly making one of the most powerful engines for fighter jets of the future and the first such engine will be unveiled within a year.

The gas turbine engine, the very latest in technology, is being developed in collaboration between UK’s Rolls Royce and India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) and Gas Turbine and Research Establishment (GTRE), said Stephen Phipson, Head of Defence and Security Organisation, Department of International Trade, UK

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 47330
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby ramana » 25 Apr 2017 03:30

Neela, If you come across details like type of engine, thrust dry and wet and technology used please post.

I wonder if RR is hedging their bets by co-development of this new jet engine.
Many of GTRE folks are graduates of Cranfield school.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 08:49

RR does have a proposal for Mil engine. If anyone who visited RR stall this AI remember, they had kept a huge fan there for this proposed engine. Sadly the stall was manned by a bunch of kids who didnt know anything about it.

RR is basically out of the play as far as Mil engines are concerned and not in the best of the financial shape. When I read that news last time it was posted this particular mil engine came to my mind as possible candidate. Its possible they are looking at India as cashcow to bankroll this development.

Bheeshma
BRFite
Posts: 592
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 22:01

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Bheeshma » 25 Apr 2017 09:05

I wouldn't trust anything of strategic importance with britshit. They already screwed the IAF over marut engine and should not be trusted again.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2144
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby Marten » 25 Apr 2017 09:54

JayS wrote:RR does have a proposal for Mil engine. If anyone who visited RR stall this AI remember, they had kept a huge fan there for this proposed engine. Sadly the stall was manned by a bunch of kids who didnt know anything about it.

RR is basically out of the play as far as Mil engines are concerned and not in the best of the financial shape. When I read that news last time it was posted this particular mil engine came to my mind as possible candidate. Its possible they are looking at India as cashcow to bankroll this development.

OT: I stood around them asking questions until one of the marketing suits told me the folks who could answer were not around. :roll:
We should consider buying RR instead of any collaboration business. Eventually some HK based co will bid and take it anyways.

JayS, could they contribute in terms of materials or data?

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 11:54

Marten wrote:
JayS wrote:RR does have a proposal for Mil engine. If anyone who visited RR stall this AI remember, they had kept a huge fan there for this proposed engine. Sadly the stall was manned by a bunch of kids who didnt know anything about it.

RR is basically out of the play as far as Mil engines are concerned and not in the best of the financial shape. When I read that news last time it was posted this particular mil engine came to my mind as possible candidate. Its possible they are looking at India as cashcow to bankroll this development.

OT: I stood around them asking questions until one of the marketing suits told me the folks who could answer were not around. :roll:
We should consider buying RR instead of any collaboration business. Eventually some HK based co will bid and take it anyways.

JayS, could they contribute in terms of materials or data?


I am totally with you buddy when you say we should buy RR. The exact thought has touched my mind a year or so ago. At least I will not be surprized to see it going under the hammer in near future. GOI should keep an eye and help some Indian pvt player acquire it, by pulling some strings at political level if need be. I am sure British govt will do all in its power to save RR or keep it in British hands or in European/American hands at least. But if that ain't happening they surely will be more happy to sell it to an Indian entity than a Chinese one any day.

In terms of contribution- bottomline is, RR is a full fledged engine OEM, one among the top three.!! If they offer true JV we should perhaps grab the opportunity with both hands. If we play our cards well, we can get much better deals from players like RR or Saffron who seems to have little funds available for future developments and no foreseeable big ticket programs coming up from home governments, than someone like GE or PW who don't have much for them in it to share key capabilities. What RR will share would also depend on what we are willing to offer.

Its not a time to go with a begging bowl. Its time to be more assertive. We missed on capitalizing on the misery of soviets. We should not fail on capitalizing on the misery of Europeans. :wink:

I am thinking, could RR be our ticket to entry into Civil engine market..?? Should we think of having a JV with them to make futuristic engines like GFT or Open rotor..??

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1473
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chola » 25 Apr 2017 13:28

The GOI should help in buying RR. Range Rover and Jaguar formed the vast majority of Tata's profits for years. I see us buying up the rest of Britshit industrial icons when Brexit begins biting.

It will be the ultimate f.u. to Victoria.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15623
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2017 16:04

JayS wrote:
Marten wrote:OT: I stood around them asking questions until one of the marketing suits told me the folks who could answer were not around. :roll:
We should consider buying RR instead of any collaboration business. Eventually some HK based co will bid and take it anyways.

JayS, could they contribute in terms of materials or data?


I am totally with you buddy when you say we should buy RR. The exact thought has touched my mind a year or so ago. At least I will not be surprized to see it going under the hammer in near future. GOI should keep an eye and help some Indian pvt player acquire it, by pulling some strings at political level if need be. I am sure British govt will do all in its power to save RR or keep it in British hands or in European/American hands at least. But if that ain't happening they surely will be more happy to sell it to an Indian entity than a Chinese one any day.

In terms of contribution- bottomline is, RR is a full fledged engine OEM, one among the top three.!! If they offer true JV we should perhaps grab the opportunity with both hands. If we play our cards well, we can get much better deals from players like RR or Saffron who seems to have little funds available for future developments and no foreseeable big ticket programs coming up from home governments, than someone like GE or PW who don't have much for them in it to share key capabilities. What RR will share would also depend on what we are willing to offer.

Its not a time to go with a begging bowl. Its time to be more assertive. We missed on capitalizing on the misery of soviets. We should not fail on capitalizing on the misery of Europeans. :wink:

I am thinking, could RR be our ticket to entry into Civil engine market..?? Should we think of having a JV with them to make futuristic engines like GFT or Open rotor..??



They may even sell to you but will very severely hobble you by putting very very stringent conditions about intellectual property transfer.

So the buyer will simply wind up bankrolling a bunch of fat, lazy, entitled, perk grabbing brits as well as their effing pensions for life.

They have already done this hobbling in the case of the Tata JLR deal.

and see how we got effed in the corus deal, essentially becoming payroll masters and very little else.

If things were as easy as you say, beggars would be selling jet engines, no??

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2292
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby JayS » 25 Apr 2017 16:48

chetak wrote:They may even sell to you but will very severely hobble you by putting very very stringent conditions about intellectual property transfer.

So the buyer will simply wind up bankrolling a bunch of fat, lazy, entitled, perk grabbing brits as well as their effing pensions for life.

They have already done this hobbling in the case of the Tata JLR deal.

and see how we got effed in the corus deal, essentially becoming payroll masters and very little else.

If things were as easy as you say, beggars would be selling jet engines, no??


Quick comment - Ramana saar already issues warning. So I won't stretch his patience no more. This would be last from me.

IPR will be as much restricted as it will be in any other biz model, be it JV, be it that you own it. But when you own it you control it to better extent than just being a customer. Also not everything is under restriction, low hanging fruits (MRO for example) can be plucked. And you can slowly infuse key tech back to home products. (Tata Motors is doing it). And with RR you are directly No-2 Civil engine OEM. Try to go solo and it will be 30yrs before we even have one engine flying on civil jet.

Getting jet tech is a long term planning. There is no easy way. Hard work will be there in any option. Clearly we as a Nation do not want to seat down and do it ourselves but rather want it to be served on silver platter to us by throwing some money or quid pro quo. Then better be this way than begging it. But for me first preference is still DIY.

Corus fiasco is completely different issue. Steel industry was highly distressed after 2008 downturn. Chinese dumped cheap steel all over the world and the meek powerless Brishit govt refused to put anti-dumping duty to protect UK steel industry. Tatas were at wrong location at wrong time. But all OT here.

BTW that begging is our attitude not our economic condition.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15623
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Postby chetak » 25 Apr 2017 17:35

JayS wrote:
chetak wrote:They may even sell to you but will very severely hobble you by putting very very stringent conditions about intellectual property transfer.

So the buyer will simply wind up bankrolling a bunch of fat, lazy, entitled, perk grabbing brits as well as their effing pensions for life.

They have already done this hobbling in the case of the Tata JLR deal.

and see how we got effed in the corus deal, essentially becoming payroll masters and very little else.

If things were as easy as you say, beggars would be selling jet engines, no??


Quick comment - Ramana saar already issues warning. So I won't stretch his patience no more. This would be last from me.

IPR will be as much restricted as it will be in any other biz model, be it JV, be it that you own it. But when you own it you control it to better extent than just being a customer. Also not everything is under restriction, low hanging fruits (MRO for example) can be plucked. And you can slowly infuse key tech back to home products. (Tata Motors is doing it). And with RR you are directly No-2 Civil engine OEM. Try to go solo and it will be 30yrs before we even have one engine flying on civil jet.

Getting jet tech is a long term planning. There is no easy way. Hard work will be there in any option. Clearly we as a Nation do not want to seat down and do it ourselves but rather want it to be served on silver platter to us by throwing some money or quid pro quo. Then better be this way than begging it. But for me first preference is still DIY.

Corus fiasco is completely different issue. Steel industry was highly distressed after 2008 downturn. Chinese dumped cheap steel all over the world and the meek powerless Brishit govt refused to put anti-dumping duty to protect UK steel industry. Tatas were at wrong location at wrong time. But all OT here.

BTW that begging is our attitude not our economic condition.


Old chap,

if you for a single moment imagine that (for example) single crystal technology will be available to you on a silver platter just because you purchased RR, you will be sorely disappointed and also out of many many billions of pounds foolishly spent.

These are not just commercial secrets but also state secrets. Period.

There is no business model for weapon technology in all the formats it encompasses. There are only state interests.

It is currently in the interest of every weapon technology country in the world to deny us access. no matter which fancy business management book tells you how to slice it in the commercial world or which block head sandal wearing, personal hygine challenged, latest on the block, long haired whizkid flavor of the month economics professor tells you that it is so.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ashthor, Kakarat, Karthik S, Yahoo [Bot] and 24 guests