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.
Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3549
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Neela » 03 Oct 2018 06:17

I'm trying to understand what is needed to hook up an experimental engine onto an existing aircraft.
I can think of following
- fuel lines must be modified
- FADEC must hooked up

But is data like thrust, fuel consumption etc fed back _and_ integrated into the host aircraft? Wouldn't that mean having to know the source code for say a 747?

Or is the experimental engine in complete isolation except for say shared fuel?

I would assume that going for a relatively older large aircraft would make it easier given more analog parts than current day ones.

It really worries me that a crash or collapse would set us back by several years as was seen in Saras and AEW Avro test bed. The ownership and risk involved with this test bed might be a huge challenge for anyone.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6886
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Prasad » 03 Oct 2018 11:14

Protection from an exploded engine and Instrumentation too.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35889
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby SaiK » 03 Oct 2018 11:29

what! even ilyushin will not survive any type of explosion, however the housing definitely can be made robust

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50411
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 03 Oct 2018 19:45

Prasad wrote:Protection from an exploded engine and Instrumentation too.

With this mindset can put wings on Arjun and call it Flying Test Bed.

Neela wrote:It really worries me that a crash or collapse would set us back by several years as was seen in Saras and AEW Avro test bed. The ownership and risk involved with this test bed might be a huge challenge for anyone.


You have two points here.

1) Crash of FTB will set India back like Saras and AEW prototypes.
I read the Saras crash investigation report and it clearly was due to pilot error as he was told to not restart the engine and let it glide. This was the root cause. Off course along the way they found many other design deficiencies that have been fixed. Example they now have more powerful engine and more composite parts to reduce dead-weight.
The NAL folks were bureaucrats without skin in the game so to speak and just let it slide in stupor all these years. Never advocated for the Saras even when IAF had given firm commitment to buy these planes if ever it was made in quantity.
AEW aka "flying chapati" I did not see the crash investigation. But looking at pictures the antenna struts attachment to the aircraft structure looked flimsy. I don't know but that attachment would rip off in bad winds.

2) Flying experiments is risky but one cant certify a penguin will fly. All engine programs did eventually get flown on test beds and certified. By now DRDO could have bought a plane and dedicated for FTB use but they want IAF to hand over a plane!
Why could they not use one of the Canberra's which had quite a bit of useful life? Or bought from the Eastern Europe.
I think there was no confidence that Kaveri will ever reach this stage. Any decent engineering development program would have activities related to getting the engine certified on a FTB.
Relying on Russian plane for one shot deal was planning for success.
I think here DRDO and GTRE and all who have oversight on Kaveri were checked out.
Most likely the committee attitude was like that uncle who nods approvingly when you bring a handmade toy made from bits and pieces.
Now they are caught when SAFRAN says this contraption is ready to be flown.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 03 Oct 2018 20:03

Neela wrote:I'm trying to understand what is needed to hook up an experimental engine onto an existing aircraft.
I can think of following
- fuel lines must be modified
- FADEC must hooked up

But is data like thrust, fuel consumption etc fed back _and_ integrated into the host aircraft? Wouldn't that mean having to know the source code for say a 747?

Or is the experimental engine in complete isolation except for say shared fuel?

I would assume that going for a relatively older large aircraft would make it easier given more analog parts than current day ones.

It really worries me that a crash or collapse would set us back by several years as was seen in Saras and AEW Avro test bed. The ownership and risk involved with this test bed might be a huge challenge for anyone.


AI would have a large holding of spares for its 747s and an already trained crew for maintenance. Why look elsewhere at all?? Such expertise is not available in any of the services and since the aircraft would be DGCA certified, it would need a legally DGCA licensed engineer to work on it. There is no getting around this.

If someone does not want to accept the responsibility for the FTB, then rest assured that no one will volunteer to do so. Ideally, the ball is in the GTRE/DRDO court.

If the design agency will not accept the responsibility or it will not establish a separate flight test unit under its administrative/operational control, no one else will bother, actually why should they??. This is the easiest way to kill the project.

No requirement for any data from the test engine be fed back to the to the host aircraft system except for recording (as a backup) or real time monitoring after the test data was telemetered out.?? The test engine would be an independent and isolated system.

The test engine would not hook up to the host aircraft FADEC but it would have its own independent FADEC.

There is no relationship between the analog instruments on the aircraft and the test instrumentation. The test instruments would be almost completely digital. The host aircraft itself could have a glass cockpit. The 400 series have a glass cockpit available and many have been installed.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 03 Oct 2018 21:46

Prasad wrote:Protection from an exploded engine and Instrumentation too.

Every engine's casings are designed to contain any thing flying out of it (rotating blades that is). If some thing cames out then there is something seriously wrong with the engine design. This is not to say such things do not happen. We have seen quite a few incidences even in recent times, where some stuff flew out of an engine and hit the aircraft on well established Jet airliners, let alone Flight test prototypes or FTBs. Point is no special thing is needed for FTB in this respect. Its already inbuilt into any aircraft and any engine. Whatever happenes after this is unforeseen and perhaps unavoidable. Any tests where engine might explode or it is supposed to explode happen on the ground.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 828
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 03 Oct 2018 22:31

A flying test bed is not just about the plane that carries the engine. tHe faulty engine can alys be shut down if it malfunctions. What is important is the data collected during the testing and thus the sensor suit and its processing is what makes a plane really a flying test bed. So just biying a plane will not be enough. We can always get one-what is important is the ability to garner data from the tested engine. It can be done but requires money and political will to fund it.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 03 Oct 2018 23:28

chetak wrote:
The converted boeing should be certified by DGCA, we don't need anyone else for this. Certainly not CEMILAC who have nil exposure and experience in this type of work. Since its a transport aircraft, DGCA is mandatorily involved, and IIRC, it is also involved in mil transport aircraft.

DGCA will most likely classify this testbed as an "experimental" aircraft.

Once classified as "experimental", you are well and truly on your own.



I have high doubts on technical competency DGCA to handle something which may not be as simple as copy pasting from FAA..? DGCA made a random rule than one cannot have an experimental aircraft with weigh <1500Kg. From all that I hear about DGCA (even after giving a good margin for said and heard things) I don't think DGCA is in any situation to do any certification on its own. CEMILAC on the other hand seems to have much better competency due to working with LCA like projects.

There might be benefits to keep the FTB in Military domain. It could be completely shielded from any kind of public disclosure that way, I tend to think.

Anyway how to handle the certification is easy matter relatively speaking. Should not be bottleneck for acquiring FTB.

It will definitely be classified as "Experimental".

US Govt comes into picture because many things that have even remote chances of being used for Military application falls under dual use technology category and have restrictions on export. Even if we work with Israel or Europe, if the program involves anything from US, the ITAR would be applicable. And I am pretty sure something or the other will fall under dual use category. They even have alloys, which are widely used even in India, under export control. (The recent upgradation to Tier 1 country, should be helpful for us in getting clearances in many situations). You may get it, but still need to do all the documentation with export control licenses to be acquired from USG.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 03 Oct 2018 23:29

prasannasimha wrote:A flying test bed is not just about the plane that carries the engine. tHe faulty engine can alys be shut down if it malfunctions. What is important is the data collected during the testing and thus the sensor suit and its processing is what makes a plane really a flying test bed. So just biying a plane will not be enough. We can always get one-what is important is the ability to garner data from the tested engine. It can be done but requires money and political will to fund it.


Instrumentation is costlier than the cost of the aircraft itself, I would expect. And yes, even operating costs would be on higher side. We cant have a FTB with trickle funding that typically is sanctioned.

ramana wrote:[

By now DRDO could have bought a plane and dedicated for FTB use but they want IAF to hand over a plane!


Saar, do you really think DRDO can buy anything as large as an aircraft without signature of multiple babus..? Do you really think they could buy FTB on their own..? At least I think not. They have no earnings of their own. Every single rupee given to them is already marked for use. The budget given to DRDO is always about 25-30% lower than what they ask for. FTB is costly. Indian MPs seating on Def Committee can be bought way cheaper.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 828
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 03 Oct 2018 23:55

People keep blaming GTRE but no one hears the other side of the story.- They want an alloy manufactured that cannot be imported - no one is ready to cast small batches and no one is ready to set up a small special manufacturing unit as it costs a lot. Same for flight testing - they have asked for a test bed but non came and were forced to do limited tests in Russia. testing is iterative and not a one shot affair. Engine design and testing takes years and costs money. You cant doit if you do not spend, allocate resources and give facilities

VKumar
BRFite
Posts: 434
Joined: 15 Sep 1999 11:31
Location: Mumbai,India

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby VKumar » 04 Oct 2018 00:00

It would make me very happy just to see Kaveri in a LCA just for Taxi trials. No need to get airborne.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 04 Oct 2018 00:53

JayS wrote:
chetak wrote:
The converted boeing should be certified by DGCA, we don't need anyone else for this. Certainly not CEMILAC who have nil exposure and experience in this type of work. Since its a transport aircraft, DGCA is mandatorily involved, and IIRC, it is also involved in mil transport aircraft.

DGCA will most likely classify this testbed as an "experimental" aircraft.

Once classified as "experimental", you are well and truly on your own.



I have high doubts on technical competency DGCA to handle something which may not be as simple as copy pasting from FAA..? DGCA made a random rule than one cannot have an experimental aircraft with weigh <1500Kg. From all that I hear about DGCA (even after giving a good margin for said and heard things) I don't think DGCA is in any situation to do any certification on its own. CEMILAC on the other hand seems to have much better competency due to working with LCA like projects.

There might be benefits to keep the FTB in Military domain. It could be completely shielded from any kind of public disclosure that way, I tend to think.

Anyway how to handle the certification is easy matter relatively speaking. Should not be bottleneck for acquiring FTB.

It will definitely be classified as "Experimental".

US Govt comes into picture because many things that have even remote chances of being used for Military application falls under dual use technology category and have restrictions on export. Even if we work with Israel or Europe, if the program involves anything from US, the ITAR would be applicable. And I am pretty sure something or the other will fall under dual use category. They even have alloys, which are widely used even in India, under export control. (The recent upgradation to Tier 1 country, should be helpful for us in getting clearances in many situations). You may get it, but still need to do all the documentation with export control licenses to be acquired from USG.


If what you say about DGCA applies, then CEMILAC is way below that.

I have interacted and also worked with both of them.

Do not underestimate the DGCA, their guys are in constant technical interaction with ICAO for various reasons. They are in daily touch with all aircraft and engine manufacturers, the world over, including the russian ones. DGCA has technically matured aircraft engineers with a vast technical repertoire of transport aircraft/ engine clearance and certification. CEMILAC has very limited exposure to military aircraft only and their exposure to engines is even less.

Please, an FTB is not a mil application and ITAR does not apply . Whats ITARish about a modified old boeing?? ONLY the KAVERI is a MIL item, if at all. After the mod is complete, the FTB can carry the kaveri, which will simply one among a number of other engines that can also be carried with small mounting redesign and modifications, if the FTB is chartered out for productive work.

It israel did the job, would ITAR still apply?? What if it had no US sourced components at all?? Where exactly are you anticipating the US made "dual" use components?? What if we supplied french or german or russkie made alloys instead?? They are as good if not actually better.

Why persist in involving the US when it is not needed.

Get the aircraft, modify it, instrument it, test fly it and use it.

Is the US the only known source for everything in the world??

How do the russkies manage?? Why did we go to them for the first FTB trials of the kaveri?? Do they not know the kaveri inside out by now?? Technical discussions may have been undertaken with a number of foreign contractors, requiring us to expose the kaveri in a bid to find the proper expertise as well as the right fit, no?? The frenchies also know for sure.

The kaveri has been thoroughly exposed to one and all. That's why a high price is being quoted to help us. They know right down to the last person, the competency of guys working on the kaveri. Many creative youngsters have already left to find lucrative employment outside, just like in every other DRDO lab.

Even if CEMILAC did clear it, the FTB boeing/any aircraft FTB cannot fly in India without DGCA clearance, period. Even if it flew under an Indian MIL tail number, DGCA is still involved.

Many years ago for a critical engine repair, I was looking for a very specific welding rod. After failing to find it anywhere else, I finally found an exact match in an Airbus product, a source that no one had thought of tapping. The old alloy that I was working on was easily available under an airbus part number and the chemical composition was an identical match.

No need to go to the US for everything. Angel trump, with his magic wand can just as easily sanction a Tier 1 country as he is currently doing with his until recently much prized non NATO ally, the pakis.

The amerikis are completely transactional and immorally so. If they manage to corral the hans in this trade war thingee, they will drop us like a hot potato, until the next time that need us.

Then, we may even get promoted to the ultimate, one and only, "tier 0" country, no??

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 04 Oct 2018 01:05

prasannasimha wrote:People keep blaming GTRE but no one hears the other side of the story.- They want an alloy manufactured that cannot be imported - no one is ready to cast small batches and no one is ready to set up a small special manufacturing unit as it costs a lot. Same for flight testing - they have asked for a test bed but non came and were forced to do limited tests in Russia. testing is iterative and not a one shot affair. Engine design and testing takes years and costs money. You cant doit if you do not spend, allocate resources and give facilities


Why was this alloy chosen in the first place??.

As I heard it, we have force landed in the ameriki lap once more with no means of escape. If we are sanctioned once again, and this specific alloy is targeted, kaveri is as good as dead.

Or are we talking of two different alloys??

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50411
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 04 Oct 2018 01:45

Prasanna you are talking to silly people.
There is a minimum economic quantity for every thing.

You can't buy ten fasteners, You need to buy the box.

Can say I need 10 kgs please make 15 kg including wastage.
Alloy lot would be in 500 kg minimum buy to fire up the furnace etc.

I have worked with special glass.
Again minimum buy was quoted, so we said we will use for production lot.

in fact i suggested life of type buy so don't have material changes headaches later on.

Why can't GTRE say OK whats your minimum buy quantity and procure it for future use in the production run of the Kaveri?
All these are just excuses like "If only...., I could fly to Saturn and come back in nanoseconds"

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6876
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 04 Oct 2018 09:13

Because Ramana saar, to procure minimum buying quantity from a non desi source needs a budget which has to be signed a hundred babus and their peons. And then gobaarment people look at the file and say “itna mehanga! Kyun chahiye itna quantity. We are poor country only. Abhi jitna chahiye, utna hi procure kijiye. Please file ko update karke agle AoN meeting me laiye.”

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 828
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 04 Oct 2018 09:42

I had replied but it failed to upload. Indranil's reply is actually what happens. Its easy to blame the scientists. How are they to work when you have to pass the file through death through a thousand meetings ? One vlerk is enough.

Its not that they did not ask for life cycle procurement. They have but such costs are not approved. Also its not so simple when you need to experiment and develop the engine when you need to develop different materials for different components especially those with embargoes etc. Remember they have an engine which has been shown by a gara to work. They were not idle. This being done while goung through major beaurocratic hoops. Its not just about one alloy the cycle has been repititive.
If it really has to be succesful it must be put as project of mational importance directly under PMO. Then things csn move.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 828
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 04 Oct 2018 09:47

Its not just one alloy. Many materials. This is a problem when material science is not givven importnce in our industrial development and research

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6876
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 04 Oct 2018 09:48

Also Scientist are third class citizens of our country. A Flying engine testbed costs upwards of 400-500 million. Who will sanction a plane for the scientists? VVIP travel: fastest procurement. Hundreds of fighter jets (some now costing over $200 million dollars a piece). Flying test bed: kyun chahiye? It is like: “soccer team to Asian games: kyun chahiye?”. Bulletproof laal batti gaddis: yes sir. Bulletproof helmets: kyun chahiye.

After Airavat's crash, we did not procure a single testbed till the recently procured Dornier. The Hack championed on with its limited capability. The Dornier can test small belly mounted radars, antennas radomes etc. This, they got after 20 years of pleading!

About the alloys, I was recently talking to a GTRE gent (he has appeared a few times at AI-seminars). I asked him why are you guys going for the holy grail. Why don't you start with a good marine GT where TWR is not an issue. Then you could refine it to a good aero engine. He first schooled me on how my said path is not taken in the industry. And then he said, "If we we ask them for money to build a marine engine first, they will not even give us what they are giving us now."

I ask all here who feel that a private company would have been or would be panacea to all our MiLInd problems. Those who feel that we would have had an aero engine but for the incompetence of GTRE. What is stopping a private entity to develop an engine. There's a benevolent govt. and customer(s) who are ready to buy a good-enough engine. Then why isn't a desi private-designed engine on the market? There are the Ambanis with the deep enough pockets who don't need any background experience to excel at most complex of engineering projects.

Gyan
BRFite
Posts: 1030
Joined: 26 Aug 2016 19:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Gyan » 04 Oct 2018 10:14

10-15 year old Boeing 747 can be picked up for around USD 50-75 MILLION dollars and converted. But considering we have junked even trisonic wind tunnel test lab to be built by Boeing as offset, this FTB is not happening.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 04 Oct 2018 10:25

ramana wrote:Prasanna you are talking to silly people.
There is a minimum economic quantity for every thing.

You can't buy ten fasteners, You need to buy the box.

Can say I need 10 kgs please make 15 kg including wastage.
Alloy lot would be in 500 kg minimum buy to fire up the furnace etc.

I have worked with special glass.
Again minimum buy was quoted, so we said we will use for production lot.

in fact i suggested life of type buy so don't have material changes headaches later on.

Why can't GTRE say OK whats your minimum buy quantity and procure it for future use in the production run of the Kaveri?
All these are just excuses like "If only...., I could fly to Saturn and come back in nanoseconds"


In the course of my wanderings, I have spoken to some of these people who can maybe make such alloys. It is a risky and long drawn out procedure. Outcomes are often bleak and timelines are really long. It needs a sustainable ecosystem as well as guaranteed funding. In the end, everyone has a boss who will ask some really tough questions and that needs to be answered, oftentimes at the cost of a career.

They say, let these guys put their money where their mouth is.

Enter into a JV with us and invest. Share the risks before you think of harvesting the fruits. They say nobody has ever gotten back to them.

Everybody wants/demands garam garam, bana bana halwa but no one wants to make it.

This is just like the behavior of an entitled son in law. All expenses debited to the inlaw's family.

There is never the factual and realistic analyses of the risks and opportunities involved in any project.

jiski lathi, uski bhains, has always been the shining motto.

once the lathi owner retires, a new lathi owner emerges with a new bhains to drive.

And then, an entirely new set of cowherds, whose day in the sun is coterminous with the new lathi owner's regime, take over and the old set moves into obscurity.

Like a friend of mine says, my son in law is coming to visit, he likes big prawns and so my wife insists on making the big prawns for him and it costs me 6-7,000 rs per day to buy the prawns and the freeloader eats them morning, noon and night.

A week of his visit costs me a fortune.

BTW, whenever we visit him, not surprisingly, his most favorite dish is never ever on the menu and we get fed exclusively vegetarian food.

Go figure.

Why should the DRDO guys not be willing to pay the amortized per Kg cost of any super alloy that they want an Indian organization to make for them??

Sometimes, when I placed orders, I got charged for the die development and production cost of the die itself and this costing was in many many lakhs. Fair enough.

I simply insisted on the delivery of the die along with the product itself as legally, I was now the owner of the die and sure enough, the die was invariably delivered to us.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 04 Oct 2018 11:02

Gyan wrote:10-15 year old Boeing 747 can be picked up for around USD 50-75 MILLION dollars and converted. But considering we have junked even trisonic wind tunnel test lab to be built by Boeing as offset, this FTB is not happening.


No one is willing to touch it with a barge pole.

It is only now that they have figured out that death is the ever present but unforgiving passenger in the "glamorous" world of test flights.

Earlier it was eagerly seen as the sureshot way to out of turn promotions and big awards for scientists.

A couple of fatal test flight accidents later, mostly idly and saras, the rose tinted glasses have quickly fallen away.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6876
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 04 Oct 2018 11:58

Gyan wrote:10-15 year old Boeing 747 can be picked up for around USD 50-75 MILLION dollars and converted. But considering we have junked even trisonic wind tunnel test lab to be built by Boeing as offset, this FTB is not happening.

An used aircraft is less than 10% of the cost.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 04 Oct 2018 12:05

Indranil wrote:
Gyan wrote:10-15 year old Boeing 747 can be picked up for around USD 50-75 MILLION dollars and converted. But considering we have junked even trisonic wind tunnel test lab to be built by Boeing as offset, this FTB is not happening.

An used aircraft is less than 10% of the cost.


AI should transfer at book value of Rs 1.

After all, didn't they do something similar when the A300s were "transferred" to afghanistan??

This is a patriotic and a national cause.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50411
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 04 Oct 2018 19:27

So all this discussion points out to the underlying circumstances of Kaveri is a make work-keep busy program.
No one is serious about it.

Chetak the suppiler asking for tooling development is fair as it wont be used elsewhere and you asking back for it is also fair as you paid for it.

Prasanna I feel their pain but is self inflicted.
They have not made a compelling case for the resources.

I truly blame the program managers of the Tejas program the plane and the engine for this chicken and egg fiasco.
Kota Harinarayana was an aero guy and more interested in the plane and didn't care which engine.
The engine guys didn't have the drive to get the engine completed.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 04 Oct 2018 20:42

ramana wrote:
I truly blame the program managers of the Tejas program the plane and the engine for this chicken and egg fiasco.
Kota Harinarayana was an aero guy and more interested in the plane and didn't care which engine.
The engine guys didn't have the drive to get the engine completed.


What would you have KH do, hold LCA until Kaveri is made flightworthy..? He had no control of Engine program. Hell ADA didn't have much control over the stakeholders like HAL who were suppose to work on LCA itself. The problem of lack of authority of ADA has been flagged even before it was formed. How exactly would KH had influenced Kaveri program..?

Instead of going from bottom up, why not go from top to bottom..? Start at the highest level which drives everything and has real power of making things happen, i.e. the PM level. Then MoD, then babus and so on till the peon working on the program. Lets see at which level we first encounter the real problem and whom we can truly blame. :)

The Program management was a real issue and perhaps the most important one. But the actual program managers are never fully empowered in our system. The programs in India always run more at wishes and whims of Politicians, babus and the Armed Forces than what the Program in-charge want to do. A bad Program manager will definitely screw up the program, but in our system there is no guarantee than a good Program manager would be allowed to run the program properly. Its a systematic failure and not a person specific one.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 04 Oct 2018 22:31

I had posted this article previously as well IIRC, but still a good refresh given the current discussion context.

http://aviationweek.com/blog/inside-pra ... ng-testbed

Talks about the two B747 test beds PW has. History of one of them, the famous one with GTF mounted near its nose -
The aircraft, now Canadian-registered with the appropriate identity C-GTFF, was originally built for Korean Airlines. First flown at Everett in January 1981, it entered service with Korean in March 1981 and remained in service with the carrier for the next 18 years. Following stints with The Air Medical Foundation and Transatlantic International Airlines, the 747SP spent several years in storage after being acquired by P&W in the mid-2000s.


L3 is one 3rd party company which has done structural modification for this innovative pylon for test engine.
Inside the top of the upper deck hump are the reinforcing structural members, put together by modification specialists L3, which support the stub wing.


https://www.l3t.com/mas/prototyping-and-manufacturing/

The same company had converted a B747 to FTB for Rolls, which is again bought from some airline.

GE seems to have multiple B747 FTBs. One they bought after 21yrs of Airliner service and used for another 26yrs. The plane flew grand total of 47 yrs..!!

Here is small video of GE FTB tour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=995i8v28QEU

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6876
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 04 Oct 2018 23:17

This one is now retired. They got the newer one from JAL (after 20 years in crew service). But, one can imagine the cost of a 747s payload worth of custom instrumentation.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 04 Oct 2018 23:26

I would say 200Mil USD.

nam
BRFite
Posts: 1351
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 04 Oct 2018 23:28

The only way to move things of national importance is have the big danda driving it. i.e. PMO

Just like nuke sub, nukes, ISRO are driven by the PMO, jet engines should be as well.

This is the only way to make sure funds are allocated when required. Need to take jet engine development off MoD and hand it over to PMO.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 05 Oct 2018 08:15

nam wrote:The only way to move things of national importance is have the big danda driving it. i.e. PMO

Just like nuke sub, nukes, ISRO are driven by the PMO, jet engines should be as well.

This is the only way to make sure funds are allocated when required. Need to take jet engine development off MoD and hand it over to PMO.


Get real guys.

PMO is never going to drive the project. Why should he?? to invite more rafale like criticism??

What are the multitudes of scientists doing??

Did anyone ever figure out how and why APJAK was so successful??, both in the DRDO and out of it??

Where he started out, what he did in his working life and where he ended up, like the most beloved president that this country has ever had?? We all forget that his one singular and vital quality was his political astuteness, both at work and in life.

The man produced results, and highly visible results at that. He figured out how to tap the reluctant politician, the recalcitrant babu, motivate the malevolent colleague and most of all work in the corrosive and venal atmosphere generated by the system and it's deeply embedded vested interests. All qualities sadly lacking today.

With all his political astuteness, APJAK was undeniably a committed nationalist. He never benefitted personally, maintaining his extremely frugal lifestyle to the very end of his days and he never gave up his total dedication to results. I just don't see this happening in today's institutions and the guys who run it.

All the senior guys are full of political astuteness too but there is a vast difference in how it is practiced by them and how it was practiced by APJAK and therein lies the rub. These are the very guys who drove away paulraj due to their gut wrenching jealousy and look at what we lost in the bargain.

Anyone ever hear of APJAK complaining about anything??

There is no confidence left in the govt (any govt) for them to keep on funding strikeout after strikeout.

Why are there so few success stories?? right across the board??

At some stage, especially after many many decades, if the bean counter wakes up and says let us look at the research ROI, how come there are so few answers??

Yes, we are a poor country and we just cannot lump this sorry state of affairs forever. Money is just a very small part of the big picture.
Last edited by chetak on 05 Oct 2018 09:11, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 05 Oct 2018 09:09

nam wrote:The only way to move things of national importance is have the big danda driving it. i.e. PMO

Just like nuke sub, nukes, ISRO are driven by the PMO, jet engines should be as well.

This is the only way to make sure funds are allocated when required. Need to take jet engine development off MoD and hand it over to PMO.


The need to drive from PMO itself is an indicator that the entire chain of command is broken. MoD simply doesnt function as it should be. Else what can explain far better performance in Space and Nuclear power and Missiles. The exact same scientists work in those projects. But they were national projects. That was the key differentiator, from the program management perspective. Removal of bureaucratic and political hurdals really helps. A whole lot of weak links removed who could have potentially derailed the progress.

It will take long time to overhaul the system even if someone has will to do it. But short term solution seems to be making Kaveri a National Mission. I cant think of any better way of expediting things on this front.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 05 Oct 2018 09:17

chetak wrote:Did anyone ever figure out how and why APJAK was so successful??, both in the DRDO and out of it??


I expected someone will make such point. But he did fail to make Kaveri program work, didnt he..? Kaveri was not completed when it was supposed to have. APJ was DRDO head in late 90s.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 05 Oct 2018 09:21

JayS wrote:
nam wrote:The only way to move things of national importance is have the big danda driving it. i.e. PMO

Just like nuke sub, nukes, ISRO are driven by the PMO, jet engines should be as well.

This is the only way to make sure funds are allocated when required. Need to take jet engine development off MoD and hand it over to PMO.


The need to drive from PMO itself is an indicator that the entire chain of command is broken. MoD simply doesnt function as it should be. Else what can explain far better performance in Space and Nuclear power and Missiles. The exact same scientists work in those projects. But they were national projects. That was the key differentiator, from the program management perspective. Removal of bureaucratic and political hurdals really helps. A whole lot of weak links removed who could have potentially derailed the progress.

It will take long time to overhaul the system even if someone has will to do it. But short term solution seems to be making Kaveri a National Mission. I cant think of any better way of expediting things on this front.


Break the chain, get rid of the vested interest deadwood and start again with the new chain of command. I have the chance to observe this very entitled and self important "chain of command" guys at various events. I will not say anything further.

We have much better run institutions, for instance, in the nuke and space fields, meaning we can do it and we are doing it. Why is that one institution out of so many is struggling to deliver??

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 05 Oct 2018 09:23

JayS wrote:
chetak wrote:Did anyone ever figure out how and why APJAK was so successful??, both in the DRDO and out of it??


I expected someone will make such point. But he did fail to make Kaveri program work, didnt he..? Kaveri was not completed when it was supposed to have. APJ was DRDO head in late 90s.


Yes, I agree with you.

He is the guy solely responsible for the failures of kaveri over two, three decades.

Good call.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 05 Oct 2018 09:43

Re the FTB,

Please visit any one of the PSU engine test beds if you can and check out the instrumentation installed for engine test runs, along with the engine controls and fuel pipeline connections.

In a nutshell, this is basically and broadly what is needed in the FTB, along with a few bells and whistles for telemetry, recording of parameters, fire extinguishing systems and what not and since it is design work, the designers may decide to add on a whole lot of other parameters to be monitored and recorded to aid their analyses.

This will be an independent system, not connected to the host systems in any way except to get feeds from airspeed, OAT, angle of attack, itayadi and other such environmental stuff. Essentially, inputs from an air data computer (ADC). This computer, rather than individual instruments, can determine the calibrated airspeed, Mach number, altitude, and altitude trend data from an aircraft's pitot-static system.

What one will eventually get in the FTB will be a vastly upsold version of the basic system, with flashing lights et al with plenty of opportunities for folks to make multiple trips abroad for inspections, factory "visits", "acceptance" tests vagera vagera.

I have a young niece who is a senior engineer in the team running the flight test program for a major aircraft manufacturer in the middle of rolling out a major aircraft. Not a big deal, according to her.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 828
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 05 Oct 2018 15:47

Making the FTB will not be difficult per se as it will be an extension of the land based testing unit. What will matter is the entire cost which will not be low and which ahs not been sanctioned by the GOI. It has been asked for but not sanctioned.
I still repeat it must be made a project of national importance.

I always say make it a competition between two groups of GTRE and who ever wins gets significant incentives (pay bonuses , awards incentives etc etc) just like how they make LM Boeing and GE compete - make groups in DRDO compete. Awards to be given for specific milestones etc. This will invigorate various teams to perform

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17496
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 05 Oct 2018 15:55

prasannasimha wrote:Making the FTB will not be difficult per se as it will be an extension of the land based testing unit. What will matter is the entire cost which will not be low and which ahs not been sanctioned by the GOI. It has been asked for but not sanctioned.
I still repeat it must be made a project of national importance.

I always say make it a competition between two groups of GTRE and who ever wins gets significant incentives (pay bonuses , awards incentives etc etc) just like how they make LM Boeing and GE compete - make groups in DRDO compete. Awards to be given for specific milestones etc. This will invigorate various teams to perform


Caste, creed and religion will immediately raise their very ugly and unionized heads.

Big trouble for the center, especially for the one and only favorite target of commies and urban naxals.

Chaos in the rest of the labs, valid accusations of favouritism and bribery.

TV channels will bless everyone, because their ad revenues will shoot through the roof due to the extensive coverage.

Slogans against brahmins, Hindu nationalists, hindutwa and the RSS sajish will rent the air. Tipu sultan may also make his entry into this charged atmosphere.

It's popcorn and coke time for the rest of us aam aadmis.

Kaveri is the single major project of a lab of national eminence, running exclusively on national resources and on national time for over two, three decades now.

If it is not already a "national project" or a "project of national importance", please tell us what else it is??.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 828
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 05 Oct 2018 16:57

It should be but unfortunately it isn't. Engine development is not a small budget exercise and requires technology and solutions that are expensive and needs direct support from the highest echelons to cut through red tape. In fact if it was made into a black box project like Arihanth and made to move faster it would have been better.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 05 Oct 2018 19:43

chetak wrote:
JayS wrote:
I expected someone will make such point. But he did fail to make Kaveri program work, didnt he..? Kaveri was not completed when it was supposed to have. APJ was DRDO head in late 90s.


Yes, I agree with you.

He is the guy solely responsible for the failures of kaveri over two, three decades.

Good call.


It what a rhetoric statement, but hope you got the point. The problem is not that we do not have more APJ. If he excelled in Missile development, its because it was a national project in all respects. If he failed to do the same wonder elsewhere, I wouldn't blame him completely, but then lets not be hypocrites and not extend the same courtesy to others simply because their names are not as big. I do not want to belittle any of APJ's work but if he was so astute, why didn't DRDO perform equally well under his leadership..? Obviously astuteness is not panacea to all. And Missiles development continued to perform well even after his retirement. Clearly he was not the singular factor behind success of IGMDP.

I have previously seen such arguments on BRF that Aeronautical field lacked visionaries like Sarabhai and Bhabha that's why we are in a slumber now. I disagree politely. There were many good people, just that GOI never bothered about this sector and those good people never got equal chance. There was a suggestion to make Department of Aeronautics on the lines of Space and Atomic Energy, right from 1950s. But even until today its not done. No price for guessing why not.

If we are waiting for messiahs for solving our problems all the time then we are fools. We should be working towards creating a system which performs reasonably well with average working force and not something which only a few chosen ones can wade through the vagaries of it. Without real powers and Autonomy given to the stakeholders like the Armed Forces and the DRDO we will never see any great leap in Defense sector.

Anyways, no more from my side on this.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3498
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 05 Oct 2018 19:46

prasannasimha wrote:Making the FTB will not be difficult per se as it will be an extension of the land based testing unit. What will matter is the entire cost which will not be low and which ahs not been sanctioned by the GOI. It has been asked for but not sanctioned.
I still repeat it must be made a project of national importance.

I always say make it a competition between two groups of GTRE and who ever wins gets significant incentives (pay bonuses , awards incentives etc etc) just like how they make LM Boeing and GE compete - make groups in DRDO compete. Awards to be given for specific milestones etc. This will invigorate various teams to perform


We don't have money to do give to one group and you think two will be created..?

Anyhow eventually HAL will provide the alternative engine design capability to GTRE. There thinking is to start small, and once they make HTFE and HTSE work, they will take up bigger engines like Kaveri. I better like Ramana's suggestion to merge GTRE with HAL's engine division.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dennis, Kakarat and 37 guests