maitya wrote:Cybaruji, I never said that we should do this alone - certifications etc aside, I'm saying yes, by all means, we should go ahead and ask for the hand-me-down cores from GE/Snecma/whosoever.
If we are desperate to reimburse R&D budgets of these orgs, so be it ... but we should atleast maximise the return for these reimbursements, right?
And the way to do that is Lic Mfg of the entire engine (like we do for AL-31FPs).
So, this engine needs to be flown and the technology levels baselined and the empirical parameters recorded out of it, so that any future program can be worked on/derived from it etc.
But that core hasn’t yet flown – so basically, we are back to 1983 then, where-in we have had bench-tested turbojet (and a turbofan) and we struggled for 20+ years thereafter, to build a contemporary turbofan based on it.
All these “joint development” etc would mean we remain exactly in the same state 20 years hence.
Regarding this "... replacing core ..." etc I have no clue what it really means – I mean, how does one replace a core without building and certifying a brand new engine etc etc etc.
Yeah - I agree with you on many of these points. Plus I know nothing about aero engines - with that caveat, I continue to share my opinion.
My argument is
a. that a portion of certification of engine
b. figuring out engine infrastructure/air-test-beds for flight testing new engines
c. getting Kaveri 52/75 KN engine first 500 hours in air remain
and that needs to happen.
This should close the loop on
a. Engine testbed choices
b. certification process
c. learning to ground/air test any engine in the future
Funny enough Kaveri has the same power parameters as the current Rafale M-88 engine. It could theoretically power that if needed..
The engine collaboration should ensure, we get two engines out of it and has us secure for next 20-30 years,
1. We test and certify Kaveri on LCA TD demonstrator, ghatak or retrofit it on Rafale in future
2. Create a new 75-80/110-115 KN engine for AMCA
Ideally that should allow us to do the following in future as all the pieces will now be there
3. Create a 65 KN / 105 KN to power later tranches of MWF if possible -
4. Create 80-85 /130-140 KN engine to power last built MKIs when engine replacement comes up another 10/15 years down the road or if we start a Advanced Heavyweight project.
A collaboration could quite easily cut many years if we structure it right.
Like you say, no change will be possible and all once a engine is made and any change will "lead to lots of cost" - I agree with that statement, and I still think, getting there has immense value for us as a country as it will fill many blanks for us and push us forward quite a bit if we are willing to start and fund other engine programs simultaneously and invest in a testing platform like the Il-76.
So if we get one of our engines (Kaveri) fully functional and another one that we do not have for AMCA (Safran-GTRE) jointly owned engine developed, a lot of things are secure for the future.