SSridhar wrote:Rakesh....
Thank You SSridhar-ji. Greatly appreciated.
SSridhar wrote:Rakesh....
Vivek K wrote:There we go again - no one will part with their crown jewels for any amount of money. All that will be on offer will be assembly in India. We will need to figure out design details ourselved.
chola wrote: This 110kN engine is something not even the Amreekis nor Russians have.
ramana wrote:110KN engine will be made
brar_w wrote:chola wrote: This 110kN engine is something not even the Amreekis nor Russians have.
To step back a bit, what is so special about 110kN from a technical stand point (with current or even mature technology)? The US and Russia don't have it because they don't need it. That is no reason to make it unobtanium. They have engines that sit below this, and engines that sit above it so don't need it. That said, the proposed GE's F414-Enhanced is a 116 kN engine so even the now decades old F-414 technology can be upgraded to provide that thrust class. And most of what GE planned for the F-414 enhancements is/was matured long ago so it isn't something cutting edge that bears tremendous risk. So why is it that, RR, which is in much need of an international military win, has world class expertise in jet engines, can't deliver on something like that in partnership? For all we know a 110-120kN engine may well be what they are looking for on the Tempest so there may be some technological alignment there. It sure will take some time to develop test and certify it across platforms but what's the alternative at this point (that is faster)?
chola wrote:Brar ji, I don't know. What sits above the F414 now are heavy class engines like the AL-41, F100 and F135 that won't fit into AMCA. It's might not be unobtainium but it can't be run of the mill project no?
chola wrote:It's might not be unobtainium but it can't be run of the mill project no?
chola wrote:After all, the Shornet had been considered underpowered for a long time now. If the F414 were easily uprated to 110kN, wouldn't they have done it? The USN must have weighed the risk of plowing funds into these programs not because there wasn't a need.
They can't pump a few billion dollars into the GE-414 or EJ-200 engines and expect to recover that investment by charging a premium on a per engine basis (the margin simply isn't there)
It requires a government source to fund its development and to buy it and to write off the R&D expenditure as a cost of getting that capability. That is what Britain, and India would have to agree to do.
chola wrote:But the GOI/MoD does share the same risk as the commercial companies.
brar_w wrote:chola wrote: This 110kN engine is something not even the Amreekis nor Russians have.
To step back a bit, what is so special about 110kN from a technical stand point (with current or even mature technology)? The US and Russia don't have it because they don't need it. That is no reason to make it unobtanium. <snip>
brar_w wrote:chola wrote: This 110kN engine is something not even the Amreekis nor Russians have.
To step back a bit, what is so special about 110kN from a technical stand point (with current or even mature technology)? The US and Russia don't have it because they don't need it.
Rakesh wrote:brar_w wrote:
To step back a bit, what is so special about 110kN from a technical stand point (with current or even mature technology)? The US and Russia don't have it because they don't need it.
The turbofans on the F-22, F-35 and Su-57 are even more powerful than 110kN of wet thrust. Or did you mean that the US and Russia do not have any 110kN-specific turbofans?
Tanaji wrote:How will they test this given our spectacular lack of investment in a flying testbed?
Kartik wrote:Nearly the end of the year and neither a contract for the Tejas Mk1A nor any forward movement on the first filght or delivery of FOC Tejas Mk1 fighters. Truly disappointing.
Kartik wrote:Nearly the end of the year and neither a contract for the Tejas Mk1A nor any forward movement on the first filght or delivery of FOC Tejas Mk1 fighters. Truly disappointing.
Cain Marko wrote:So I'm just wondering. Why do they need 110kn engines? The world offers 8kn, 9kn, 12.5kn, 13.5kn ityadi ityadi but we need 110kn. Right in the middle. Sounds like another lightest, smallest boondoggle to me. Another 25 years and they'll be looking for engines from some other country and need to redesign the plane to boot.
Between import lobby, byzantine mod, brochuritis stricken armed forces, and scientific community that is in love with itself, I'm surprised India is still around.
Cain Marko wrote:Another 25 years and they'll be looking for engines from some other country and need to redesign the plane to boot.
Between import lobby, byzantine mod, brochuritis stricken armed forces, and scientific community that is in love with itself, I'm surprised India is still around.
Cain Marko wrote:So I'm just wondering. Why do they need 110kn engines? The world offers 8kn, 9kn, 12.5kn, 13.5kn ityadi ityadi but we need 110kn. Right in the middle. Sounds like another lightest, smallest boondoggle to me. Another 25 years and they'll be looking for engines from some other country and need to redesign the plane to boot.
Between import lobby, byzantine mod, brochuritis stricken armed forces, and scientific community that is in love with itself, I'm surprised India is still around.
nachiket wrote:
The other option is what the Americans went with...a single monstrously powerful engine that is way beyond our capability to design and develop. The Americans won't sell us the F135 of course and continuing our dependency on 100% foreign engines is not a good idea anyway. Even if you somehow did get the F135, it would entail junking all the design work that has gone into the AMCA till now and starting from scratch.
Vivek K wrote:The flaw with the LCA program was mating a new airfrane with an untested engine. Need to not make the same mistake with AMCA or whatever.
chola wrote:The 110kN if we are successful can power the TEDBF as well. But I think we would have had more leadway and cushion from risk if we had started with a heavyweight engine class like AL-31 which we have some experience with since we've made hundreds for the MKIs. But that's a moot point. We've started down on the road with an Advanced "Medium" and that led us to the 110kN medium engine.
nachiket wrote:chola wrote:The 110kN if we are successful can power the TEDBF as well. But I think we would have had more leadway and cushion from risk if we had started with a heavyweight engine class like AL-31 which we have some experience with since we've made hundreds for the MKIs. But that's a moot point. We've started down on the road with an Advanced "Medium" and that led us to the 110kN medium engine.
Every 5th gen fighter program in the world has needed a new, more technologically advanced engine. The reasons aren't hard to see. The requirements of stealth and internal weapons carriage result in design compromises that adversely affect aerodynamics. So if you want 4th gen like performance or better, with supercruising ability, greater range on internal fuel, plus internal weapons carriage in a stealth aircraft, you need engines which can produce higher thrust than their older counterparts of the same size/weight class along with improved efficiency. You can't design a 5th gen aircraft around 2 AL-31's or F110's. If that was possible, everyone would be doing that.
Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”
Users browsing this forum: A Nandy, Ashok Sarraff, Manish_Sharma and 49 guests