Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 26 Oct 2017 00:51

Chola,

Thanks for teh effort.

I agree that the Kaveri is a great effort. Too bad, though not surprised, they fell a wee bit short. Engines are the most difficult to tackle. IF France is really out to outfit the Kaveri, then it is time India invests in this technology.

BTW, I was looking into "AI" and to my amazement found India to be in the top 3. Found out that some 300K Indians are involved ...................... but, most, if not all, are employed by foreign companies!!!!! Point being brain power is there. It is something else that is missing.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 02:27

In weapons systems wee bit short doesn't make it.

So they Jet Engine community in India has to rethink the program.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 26 Oct 2017 02:56

Question out of curiosity:

What happened to Pratt&Whitney Chair at IISC? Or at U. Hbad (Roddam Narasimha was selected for that). With endowed chairs from the top engine company, there is still no visible progress?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 03:29

UlanBatori wrote:Question out of curiosity:

What happened to Pratt&Whitney Chair at IISC? Or at U. Hbad (Roddam Narasimha was selected for that). With endowed chairs from the top engine company, there is still no visible progress?

http://www.iisc.ac.in/about/endowed-cha ... ng-chairs/

PRATT & WHITNEY CHAIR in Gas Turbine Engineering:

This chair was instituted by M/s. United Technologies Corporation, Pratt & Whitney Division in July 2008 with an endowment in the Department of Aerospace Engineering to strengthen the Gas Turbine Research initiative. Currently, this is offered for period of one to two months.

Prof. Dilip R Ballal, “University of Dayton, USA”, 2011
Dr. Jayant S Sabnis, “Pratt & Whitney Corp, USA”, 2012
Prof. Timothy C Lieuwen, “Georgia Institute of Tech., Atlanta, Georgia, USA”, 2014
Prof. Hukam C Mongia , ”Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana”, 2014-15
Prof. Ravi N Banavar, IIT Bombay, 2015-16

looks like a useless tourist perk.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 26 Oct 2017 06:21

What I don't see in the list is any materials ppl - maybe the last person? The others AFAIK, don't and never have done diddly in materials.

Also, the emphasis was clearly on the "gas", not on the "turbine" which is the real problem in desh.

Their mandate was to "strengthen gas turbine RESEARCH". The relevant metric would be more papers in the International Symposium on Combustion every 2 years in exotic places, with Opera in the evening. So one could check in Google Scholar on Papers from IISc in this area in the past few years to see if there is any impact. What I also don't see is anyone who goes into fundamental/first principles high-ticket computation (like with 25,000 simultaneous reactions) or into Direct Numerical Simulation. So from that pov, the above is plain-vanilla GeneratePapers types of research, not really pushing the state of the art in anything, sorry to say. They know how research works, they are good, tough people who know how to survive in the research jungles of the Combustion wars (pretty brutal jungle too). Maybe this is what happens when a Chair is established by a phoren entity. Consider that all these ppl would be subject to arrest if desh actually came out with a better military engine where "better" could be traced directly to them without first going through Published Open Literature. So they would take care.

Anyway, good example of the standard approach. U c what eej mijjing, ramana. And why that was the path described in the 1-pager. Most importantly, there is no Fire In Da Belly in desh on this.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 26 Oct 2017 06:26

BTW, 1 to 2 months is the new research program funded by NaMo. Wonder why that is identical to this Chair bijnej.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 09:20

I agree. Sad.

Most likely for fellowship abroad.

There must be more in the Mech Engg dept.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 26 Oct 2017 12:59

chola wrote: In theory, yes you can leapfrog. Especially if you are experimenting in a lab. Which in a sense is what we had done with the Kaveri. Leapfrogging in the business world usually means copying someone else advances or simply buying them. In either case, you need lots of money. Leapfrogging isn’t easy or cheap.

At any rate leapfrogging is much harder when you are setting up an actual industry that depends on capacity (infrastructure needed to build things) and capability (skills needed to build things) both of which, again, require funding.

If we had developed a reliable piston that can power that segment then we can build the factory, the production lines, train our staff, set up contracts with suppliers and in general develop the eco-system. Then once set up, we can sell and get into the all-important feedback loop where feedback and income from customers are used to improve your engine, thereby gaining more customers and more feedback and income to improve or develop new products in a virtuous circle. All the while, your staff becomes more and more experienced, your suppliers and supply chain more efficient, etc.

This cannot be done with a turbofan design stuck in the lab that we cannot finish because of tech level or funding. Make what you are capable of technically or financially and begin the process of industrialization.

I disagree. There is no way in 80s GTRE could have started with piston engine and waited until its perfected to start on gas turbine. In 80s making piston engine was a trivial enough task that general industry should have been able to do it. Even after 25yrs of liberalization, Indian auto companies have not one IC engine that we can brag about. I don't believe they could not have done it if they had tried. The issue is again one of attitude - they could make do without doing the hard-work, then why do it at all.? Makes good business sense. But zero engineering sense. Even if DRDO had to work on IC engine, it could have been done elsewhere, Piston Engine Research Establishment (PERE) or something else, for Arjun or BMP or something else. There are various levels. Mass Industrialization should have started with lower tech, but GTRE/DRDO is not set up to work with lower strata, and we don't have to wait to start work on high tech manufacturing. (West took 200+ years to reach to this level. Do we want to spend another 100yrs to reach to level where world would be in 2020..?) They were always suppose to work on the top tier of technology. Work needs to be done at multiple levels simultaneously. If we work serially we will never catch up. Thus it was imperative to start on GT despite having no IC engines. And here the leap-frogging comes into picture while dealing with high end technology development when you are lagging. You are at an advantage than those who developed the technology first some years ago. You know roughly where things are heading. Use that knowledge for course correction.

By leap-frogging I mean completely or almost completely skipping certain technological steps wherever future tech is almost independent of previous developments. Lets take an example. Kaveri does not have SCBs as of now. Why did we waste time in developing SCBs..? By the time SCBs will be productionized in India the world would have moved ahead by 20yrs. Why not simply put all efforts in CMCs..?? A completely different field which has no bearing on it by SCB. One could theoretically completely skip SCB and still be able to develop CMC tech independent. Had we planned it since 90s (CMC is not a new thing, it was projected that 2000s would see widespread use of CMCs, but perhaps end of cold war pushed the timelines.) We might have had decent working CMC by say 2030s and be almost in the same stage as the rest of the world. Meanwhile we could bridge the gap by simply importing SCBs if possible or simply avoid using them. Just one example. But can be applied in all sorts of technology fields.

Whether its organic research or RE, the amount of resources and money needed are not significantly different at the individual engineering project level. Organic R&D does need more investment at the base level in academia and R&D institutes but the future benefits are also in the same proportion and having a base has a force-multiplying effect not limited to single engineering product. Money-wise I do not see organic development as any more costly than trying to RE, when the returns on the investment and capability development on the output side is considered. RE is at best a stop-gap measure for immediate need and as such cannot be full substitute for organic tech development. Thus there is no working around it.

The point regarding tech being stuck in lab is one of intent and not of technology maturity. If we were hell-bent on making Kaveri work we would have productionized it long back. It was working well as marine engine, we could have produced it as off-shore powerplant or ship-powerplant product. We could have made kaveri version for railway engine or as electricity generator, if not for LCA. There were multiple ways of kick-starting Kaveri production. No I don't think Kaveri is stuck in lab because its not mature enough to come out. Americans didn't wait until they made T:W ~ 8 engine to produce it in numbers. Earlier jet engines were crap by today's standards. Even F404 had its fair share of teething problems during initial days of service and was under significant restrictions, especially in life numbers. What should be done is, rather than waiting for perfect product endlessly, a decent enough version should be put to real life use, even if it has limited utility to begin with. We are not trying to flight test Kaveri even as a science experiment. Just fly the damn thing. GTRE is not able to get a spare LCA frame or a Mig29 that they are begging for years now. This is not how high-tech engineering programs are run anywhere in the world.

And I am also not in favor of going back a step and starting with something low tech again. That's counter productive. That's like trying to solve a wrong problem. Today's design tools are far far better that what it was in 70s or 80s. If we can't make Kaveri today with the advances available at hand, then perhaps we are good for nothing. But I again reiterate, its not like we do not have technological capability to produce T:W ~8 class engine. The issue has always been one of insincere attempt and insufficient efforts.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 26 Oct 2017 17:22

Practice makes perfect, as Mullah Confucius said. IOW, produce 100s, 1000s. For that u have 2 have a market. For WW2 nations that market was the national terror of impending genocide and slaevery, and thousands of lives lost every day for 7 years. The real question is how to achieve same result in India without having to go through that. So you need a market that can tolerate experimentation, and a system that strives to capture all lessons from the experience. I will leave it there. The path to do it for all the gas turbines that desh needs has been conveyed all the way to PeeEmMo, if the baboon buried that then they can wait for the cheen-paki invasion to kill off a few millions and hope their families are not among those captured by the cheen-pakis.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 26 Oct 2017 17:43

UlanBatori wrote:Practice makes perfect, as Mullah Confucius said. IOW, produce 100s, 1000s. For that u have 2 have a market. For WW2 nations that market was the national terror of impending genocide and slaevery, and thousands of lives lost every day for 7 years. The real question is how to achieve same result in India without having to go through that. So you need a market that can tolerate experimentation, and a system that strives to capture all lessons from the experience. I will leave it there. The path to do it for all the gas turbines that desh needs has been conveyed all the way to PeeEmMo, if the baboon buried that then they can wait for the cheen-paki invasion to kill off a few millions and hope their families are not among those captured by the cheen-pakis.

Gone are the days when things were produced in thousands. I don't think even in WW3, we will see the same kind of scale. The consolidation happening in Aerospace industry over last couple of decades is precisely due to this. Not enough space for so many to survive. In my mind, the Answer is by diversifying application and leveraging technology that is developed across the spectrum of products to spread out the initial investment burden. If we keep thinking that Jet engine is only for aircrafts, then we are doomed to failure, due to lack of business case, we will never have more than 200-300 numbers as requirement for a specific model.

As I mentioned, the Kaveri in existing form itself can be spun off in marine and land based power-plant versions to increase numbers. Commonality is high in such versions and spin-offs are relatively easier to make work as compared to the fighter power plant due to less complexities and less stringent requirements. This could easily give few hundred more numbers in addition to whatever we could muster from LCA et all.

Apart from that GOI will have to see the big picture, considering that whatever technology developed for Kaveri can be cut-copy-pasted to all the jet based engines across the spectrum - turbojet, turboshaft and turbofan. And quite a bit of fundamental level technology such as materials, manufacturing methods, design tools can be used in innumerable other applications. In fact in India, these big programs have always been used to drive technology development from top-down. For example, in my Madarassa, we had received a low speed co-axial open jet WT of the shape of Kaveri exhaust under the Kaveri program funding. It was supposed to be used for some basic level research on co-axial jet mixing. Only thing is there has been so less invested from top, there's hardly anything remaining to trickle down to lowest level. Else in an ideal world these programs could have had much larger impact. Lets not forget only about 2x00Cr were sanctioned for Kaveri. Funny thing, out of that paltry sum as well, some 500Cr were never used. (I forgot what is was for, but the fund is still waiting to be used since 2000 or so, our bubudom would have never let it be used for anything else anyway).

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 18:42

Very good points.
To summarize:
UB says GTRE needs to make more of the Kaveri and learn by doing.

Practice makes perfect, as Mullah Confucius said. IOW, produce 100s, 1000s. For that u have 2 have a market.

Currently there is no market as its tied to LCA.

JayS says

As I mentioned, the Kaveri in existing form itself can be spun off in marine and land based power-plant versions to increase numbers. Commonality is high in such versions and spin-offs are relatively easier to make work as compared to the fighter power plant due to less complexities and less stringent requirements. This could easily give few hundred more numbers in addition to whatever we could muster from LCA et all.

both, GTRE has no manufacturing capability. HAL does and they won't commit to a development engine to be produced. There is no requirement for them to do so.
That brings us to

JayS

Apart from that GOI will have to see the big picture, considering that whatever technology developed for Kaveri can be cut-copy-pasted to all the jet based engines across the spectrum - turbojet, turboshaft and turbofan. And quite a bit of fundamental level technology such as materials, manufacturing methods, design tools can be used in innumerable other applications.

Who in GOI?

GOI has divided this role over many ministries and individuals,

I start with the Scientific Adviser to the Raksha Mantri. I could go higher but that violates single point of accountability. We need people with vision there who can push for technology development that helps the military forces.
Next come the services especially the IAF that would be end user.

How many officers get seconded to GTRE to learn the intricacies of jet engines?
A handful and they get retired to take up Engineering college teaching.

Lest we forget the GTRE first director was an IAF officer!!!

To have the Kaveri on slow funding and snail pace shows the establishment didn't see much chances of its maturation.

Maybe there are forces above all these who think its a bargaining/hedging tool?
If GE engine is not available then Kaveri would get productionized?
Getting GE engines as pro quid quo the Kaveri wont get funded.

Many of IITM went to GTRE and were quite smart.
I don't think its lack of talent but something bigger going on.

There could be compact to not develop jet engine technology as an inducement to Russia and West.

GOI always keeps up its side of bargain while it gets shafted.

chola · Post by **chola** » 26 Oct 2017 19:42

There is no way in 80s GTRE could have started with piston engine and waited until its perfected to start on gas turbine.

Jay ji, I do not believe in waiting and that is why the piston, turboprop and turbojet engines (all within our capability unlike the turbofan) should have been productionized while we shot for the moon with the Kaveri.

But “waiting” was exactly what we did (and what we are still doing) by going solely for an apex class of engine that even Russia has issues with.

Look at my chini synopsis. The PRC built and sold UAVs like the CH-4 by the hundreds because they have local pistons and turboprops. They’ve sold light utilities like the Y-12 all around the world because they have pistons and turboprops. They’ve built and sold trainers and light attack craft like the JL-9/FTC-2000 because they still manufacture the WP-13 turbojet. None of this (money making) activity involving earlier engines had stopped them from finishing up their WS-10 turbofan and putting that on hundreds of their Flanker rip-offs.

And all of the above happened during the Kaveri’s lifetime. Oh, put the Iranian success in REing the American J-85 turbojet into the J90 for their Kosar and Saeqeh trainers and fighters during that same time period too.

To leapfrog manufacturing techniques (3D printing, etc.) I fully agree with you.

But to “leapfrog” whole classes of engines that power big segments of the aviation industry, I do not agree.

Something is seriously fvcking broken when we cannot build things lower on the technology level in the meantime and can shoot for the moon (and get stuck getting there) onlee.

Mass Industrialization should have started with lower tech, but GTRE/DRDO is not set up to work with lower strata, and we don't have to wait to start work on high tech manufacturing. (West took 200+ years to reach to this level. Do we want to spend another 100yrs to reach to level where world would be in 2020..?)

Ah, that is the crux of the matter. The PSU-dominated defense sector.

Private firms dependent on income from customers would have identified the same prop and turbojet markets that Cheen had and attacked them with technology that they could handle. The feedback loop would have created the testing and integration “facilities” needed to create better upgrades. The income would have been contributed to the research of new products like a turbofan. This is how the American system works. And increasingly how the Chinese system works too.

We are still Soviet-style. More commie than the commie Chicoms when you are expecting the GOI to fund everything including the “facilities” which should be organic to the industry. How can we even expect license-raj babus and politico-first netas to know enough chit to fund the infrastructure of something immensely technical like aero-engines?

I’ve seen enough in the world of business to know that without a foundation you are just an startup working with experiments or a college research project where you are building samples not an industrialized product.

So even if we were successful with the Kaveri I think we’ll have an even worse time productionizing it than HAL had with the LCA airframe. Because the industrial foundation simply isn’t there.

And even if we were lucky and HAL manages to manufacture the Kaveri in decent numbers, we would STILL need to import engines for planes from basic trainers all the way to C-130 class transports and, if we ever get a CATOBAR, a E-2 class AEW.

Look at the experience of Japan, Cheen and even Iran. None went directly to the top with a turbofan by “leapfrogging” the other classes. Iran even has the F-14’s F110 turbofan at hand but still RE the J-85! That tells me a full body of work is required. We are attempting to sculpt a beautiful head onlee with a turbofan but no body underneath to support it.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 20:34

HAL makes the Continental piston engine under licenses for eons. No changes or any concern to have a local design.
HAL makes turbo-props for eons. Again no changes or concern to make it local.
HAL make jet engines for eons. Same no changes or concerns.

There are two sides of this problem HAL and GTRE.

And above them IAF, MOD and
above them PMO.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Oct 2017 20:44

A turbofan is easier to make from a turbojet than a turboprop because the latter requires a kick-ass gearbox, while the turbofan is merely extra large blades placed in front of a turbojet to bypass air and rotated by a co axial rod to a turbine section in the back of a turbojet. But making either of them work reliably and efficiently is not that easy. It is a relatively easy step to incorporate a bypass "fan" to a turbojet. But making a gearbox that reduces a turbine rotating at tens of thousands of RPM to thousand or hundreds in a turboprop is an additional technological hurdle over the plain gas turbine (aka "turbojet")

These suffixes "jet", "fan" and "prop" are just add ons to a basic "external combustion" engine, where fuel is not burned in a closed chamber like piston engines. That is what a gas turbine is. Turbojet, turbofan and Turboprop start from the basic gas turbine. If you get the gas turbine right all the others will follow.

Internal combustion engines are piston engines. One can make 5000 types of piston engines and still not create even one turbojet or turbofan because there is no direct step-up technological connection

The Kaveri is a working, reasonably reliable, fairly efficient (80s level tech?) turbofan engine. It should be placed in some airframe and test flown.

just sayin..

chola · Post by **chola** » 26 Oct 2017 21:15

There is no argument concerning the complexity of turboprops but there is a reason why Cheen was able build and mass produce the WJ-6 turboprop and its variants since the 1960s but still needed help from the Russians on the final steps of their CFM-56/F-101 derived WS10 turbofan. And the PRC has the experience of building thousands of turbojets for the J-6/J-7.

Turbofans are simply harder to produce whether it is temperature requirements, thrust requirements or whatever. Not harder but astronomically harder which is why truly modern turbofans with proper lifespan is a Western monopoly with even the Russians not really in the same league.

So turboprop as shown by history is far more achievable. And if Cheen could mass produce the WJ-6 turboprop all this time then we certainly can today.

If I look at what is being powered by this fvckng propeller engine these days and imagine where we should be today with such a platform, it makes me sick to my stomach.

AEW, MPA, AWACS, ASW. Those are aircraft every bit as important, if not more, as a light fighter with a turbofan.

This was and is something completely attainable within our technology level, perhaps decades ago. But instead we need to import, import, import even for prop platforms.

So let’s fly the Kaveri (as if GTRE hadn’t thought about and estimated the risks after two fvcking decades) but please let’s start making engine classes that we KNOW we could make within our current tech level.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 26 Oct 2017 21:46

To quote the Mullah:

It should be placed in some airframe and test flown.

Exactly.
Uninhabited Cow-Augmented Vehicle (UCAV)
The thinking "gone are the days of 1000s" is, well, not thinking.
ramana: keep them talkin. Like the Drones Club trying to solve the problem of the Tied Games, they will eventually see the same as v did.. Then there is no ITAR.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 22:50

shiv, OK Kaveri is good enough as a science project.
Its not good enough to power the LCA.
No amount of sprinkling teertham will make it into a Ganga.
We need to get out of the Kaveri mode.
And look at comprehensive jet engine development program.
This relying on imports will not do if India will ever get into MII and provide jobs for the numerous technical people graduating.

Let GTRE concentrate of Gas which they are good at.

Split the engine design group and merge with HAL Jet Engine design group and create new mission oriented production designs.

Jet fighter turbo-fan
Civil airliner turbo fan
Turbo prop for airliners and drones.
Turboshaft engine for helicopters

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Oct 2017 22:51

And Chola, the gear box for the turboprop has spin offs in the turbo shaft helicopter engines and Arjun tank reduction gearboxes.

Zynda · Post by **Zynda** » 26 Oct 2017 23:21

This was mentioned some where...at least the current GoI is looking to build strategic influences through various high-ticket defence acquisitions. Since the financial resources are limited, I guess at the moment indigenous R&D is not a very high priority. Of course, on things like avionics, electronics, munitions development continues to happen. I guess we trying to follow Israeli model i.e. establish good competence on avionics, munitions etc., which does not require huge capex investments like a jet turbine or even a good UAV system/platform. Perhaps hope is that through strategic alliances, we won't get shafted (spare parts, OEM support etc.) in time of need?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Oct 2017 07:28

UlanBatori wrote: Uninhabited Cow-Augmented Vehicle (UCAV)

Exactly. the Kaveri is reliable enough to be placed on an unmanned platform and tested.. That is what should be done. It is not as though jets have not been built in the past. PTAE-7 has been flying in the Lakshya for decades. Even the HJE 2500 used to work but found no application

We have whined for too many years that India is trying to produce chicken and egg simultaneously. When we have an airframe we have no engine and when we have an engine it is no good for existing airframes. The solution is simple. Make a UAV with experimental airframe and engine. the engine itself is reasonably reliable. Put it on a UAV.

The comparison with Chinese UAVs is interesting. Is the Indian inability/reluctance to put a working engine on a UAV because we cannot make suitable airframes? No not really. We make lots of airframes that have flown and are flying. Is it because we do not have control systems to control a UAV? I doubt that. This may be an issue of bureaucratic sloth, lack of funding and general gandugiri at the highest levels

Meanwhile I hope HAL gets on with their new turbofan and turboprop( HTP??) and places them on suitable airframes.

If we are looking for chaiwala info I would like to hear chaiwala about HTFE-25

Dart Turboprop engines for the HS 748 have been made from the 1960s. No mention of who makes the gearbox, but they are overhauled by HAL. Apart from that Orpheus and and Adour have been made for decades. IMO it is useless to ask for import component of new products like LCA. What is the import component of Adour? Of Orpheus? these will give an idea of existing skills. These are not huge secrets but any secrecy may be one of shame because something is being imported from 1960. Anyone in any phoren nation who exports Avon or Adour engine parts will know perfectly well what HAL can and cannot do.

So, is the lack of information

a. general idiocy and gandugiri from gormint organizations
b. secrecy because 1960s stuff is still imported and sold as Indian
c. All made in India, old hat and nothing to show off about

This is the info I want

chola · Post by **chola** » 27 Oct 2017 08:12

I don’t think there was ever any pretense made that the Orpheus or Adour were indigenous. They were no different than the Tumansky 25 we assembled for the MiG-21 or the AL-31 for the MKI. In all four cases, they were HAL offsets for the respective plane they powered which meant screwdrivergiri with critical parts shipped in from the OEM. Engines in those deals were secondary to the aircraft.

The truth is, with our long history with the Gnat/Orpheus turbojet and then the Harrier’s Pegasus turbofan which used the Orpheus as its core, we would have been pretty far along our path to a successful turbofan by the time the Kaveri was conceived if we have gotten a deep license. But obviously we did not. Though that is not surprising.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Oct 2017 08:43

What I am looking for is specific information on what components for the Dart engine or Orpheus were imported for a period of 40 years from the 1960s. That would be more useful to me than generalities. Most obsolete stuff becomes obsolete when the OEM abroad stops making the replacement parts.

Did HAL cope with this by
a. Contracting small foreign workshops to make the replacement parts
or
b. Did HAL indigenze?

This information will help me understand what HAL has been doing on the engine front for 40 yeasr

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 27 Oct 2017 08:54

if its any help i believe the RR avon is/was used as a captive power plant on ONGC offshore rigs. the HAL marine GT division behind GTRE used to overhaul them or atleast thats what the signboard said.

click on product tab http://www.hal-india.com/IMGT%20Divisio ... ore/M__100

this was the engine that powered the comet, canberra, even the mighty lightning, v-bomber valiant, hunter, caravelle...all icons of their era
and its industrial variant has sold 1200 units

have to give it to UK, despite being a sly chamcha of the khan, they had a massive aerosspace complex and even now are really good in aerospace via EU tieups and engines via RR on their own. they keep their strategic industry like defence shipyards well fed and ignore COTS solns from khan stable like building daring class DDG and vanguard/astute N-boats ..... as do the french with DCN , snecma, aerospatiale, thales, sextant, sagem, matra and dassault. and both have a cluster of world class univs like oxbridge/imperial and some of the top Ecole's to do the basic STEM work.

the nose to tail food chain starts with great human resources in high school edu and ends in the platform flying,sailing and shooting and priceless data banks which cannot be purchased for love or gold because half the technology, ie the deep insight is in people's heads and is passed on in informal networks to the next gen of team members. the benefit of having a top1% type in a team is immense , far beyond his individual output its the training and mentoring of the whole team.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Oct 2017 09:51

Well, I see that all here atleast agree that Kaveri should be flown in whatever condition it is in. I wonder why MoD cannot see the obvious thing..? The aim is no more to make it work for LCA. The aim is to make it work reliably. Performance is secondary at this stage. I can be worked on side by side through Performance Improvement Program.

Its probably a good idea to mate design agency with its own manufacturing agency. While I like the idea of spinning off HAL's engine division and clubbing it with GTRE, I can think of another way. Why not met GTRE with a private manufacturing company..? I am sure Baba Kalyani would be very much interested, if he's given a sustainable business proposal. I JV can be formed between GOI and an interested pvt company. Again I would suggest the model I have been suggesting for LCA. GOI to fund entire venture on its own money including pvt company share. The half equity of the pvt company as collateral with GOI against this. The Pvt company can repay this zero interest loan and buy back equity as per agreed time line. IN fact they can be given an option to buy fill 100% equity eventually. I can think of couple of issues with HAL's engine devision, so I am thinking on alternative. One being, the screwdrivergiri projects like Su-30 come as package. I am not too confident, Russians will let the engine manufacturing to a company outside HAL, that too, the one working on desi Jet engine. Another issue is it administrative. It would take too much time to do the work. MoD will "brainstorm" for decades on it, before we can see it happening. And now with HAL's disinvestment, I don't think government will like to do that. At least Koraput plant will be difficult to take out of HAL.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 27 Oct 2017 09:52

Singha wrote: have to give it to UK, despite being a sly chamcha of the khan, they had a massive aerosspace complex .

Before 1950 UK was far ahead of Khan in Aircraft tech, Of course it was a super power then but faded.

US has taken, from UK
1. Canberra
2. Concept of swing wing
3. Harrier - whose engine was world's first thrust vectoring
4. Hawk

Uk was ahead of US in supersonic commercial flight - but US killed it out of sheer competitive jealousy

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Oct 2017 09:54

Chola sahab, I am not in disagreement with you on developing other types of engines. My disagreement was only over the point that its an necessary condition for Kaveri to be successful. IN fact I have proposed a couple of times here that we should have an Engine dev program on the framework of IGMDP, which would include DRDO and private companies. One engine from each class. We could cover perhaps 10 classes of engines across the spectrum and lay foundation for futuristic propulsion technology. I think I even tweeted the suggestion to PMO once.

PS: Just to add some context to my thinking, I was only considering what we can do in existing set-up without a significant change in paradigm. Because frankly I don't see it coming. I see only possible solution is that GOI gives free hand in funding and clear mandate to all agencies involved. I am not expecting GOI to make any big-ticket reforms in the system for quite a while to come. Whatever small things that are happening, are happening at snail's pace. GTRE is completely dependant on GOI for funding. HAL has some freedom and own source of money, they invested it in HTFE/HTSE. The silence on progress of HTSE testing in uncomforting. Last I heard on it is in AI-17 from HAL engineer, that too in general terms. Godspeed to them. Hope atleast this efforts bear some fruit. It will cover a huge requirement on Helicopter and trainers/small civilian airliners' front. And perhaps could asher the proliferation that Chola is pointing to.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Oct 2017 09:56

shiv wrote:
Singha wrote: have to give it to UK, despite being a sly chamcha of the khan, they had a massive aerosspace complex .
Before 1950 UK was far ahead of Khan in Aircraft tech, Of course it was a super power then but faded.

US has taken, from UK
1. Canberra
2. Concept of swing wing
3. Harrier - whose engine was world's first thrust vectoring
4. Hawk

Uk was ahead of US in supersonic commercial flight - but US killed it out of sheer competitive jealousy

This thing was discussed in some thread some time ago. UK was spending up to 10% of its GDP on defence to keep its MIC kicking in 1950s. But it was unsustainable and they had to scale back. The WW2 screwed up their economic power.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Oct 2017 10:42

UlanBatori wrote:To quote the Mullah:
It should be placed in some airframe and test flown.
Exactly.
Uninhabited Cow-Augmented Vehicle (UCAV)
The thinking "gone are the days of 1000s" is, well, not thinking.
ramana: keep them talkin. Like the Drones Club trying to solve the problem of the Tied Games, they will eventually see the same as v did.. Then there is no ITAR.

UB ji, I would be happy to be proven wrong on this. And to learn more.

chola · Post by **chola** » 27 Oct 2017 11:44

JayS wrote:Chola sahab, I am not in disagreement with you on developing other types of engines. My disagreement was only over the point that its an necessary condition for Kaveri to be successful.

I don’t believe we are in disagreement about the issue but more about the solution. We both understand what we have in GTRE/HAL is not working. But where you want “facilities” funded by the GOI, I want them to be organic to the industry, built and funded by the companies/bureaus building the engines. This is the foundation I am alluding to. But this can happen only if those firms had begun making and selling technology they can complete and field.

Perhaps the difference is I look at things from the enterprise while you view things as an engineer. I have much respect for your opinions as well.

PS: Just to add some context to my thinking, I was only considering what we can do in existing set-up without a significant change in paradigm. Because frankly I don't see it coming. I see only possible solution is that GOI gives free hand in funding and clear mandate to all agencies involved. I am not expecting GOI to make any big-ticket reforms in the system for quite a while to come. Whatever small things that are happening, are happening at snail's pace. GTRE is completely dependant on GOI for funding. HAL has some freedom and own source of money, they invested it in HTFE/HTSE. The silence on progress of HTSE testing in uncomforting. Last I heard on it is in AI-17 from HAL engineer, that too in general terms. Godspeed to them. Hope atleast this efforts bear some fruit. It will cover a huge requirement on Helicopter and trainers/small civilian airliners' front. And perhaps could asher the proliferation that Chola is pointing to.

I second your hope on the HTFE-25 and the HTSE 1200. Of success then hopefully private firms can design vehicles arond them. The -25 turbofan at 25KN should be more achievable than the Kaveri at twice that.

They both come from HAL. For a real organizational change we might want to look at my chini synopsis once more and gander at the breadth of organizations engaged in developing turbofans.

Shenyang: WS-10, WS-20
Xian: WS-9, WS-15, SF-A
Guizhou: WS-13, WS-17
Chengdu: WS-18
Southern: WS-11
ACAE: CJ-1000A

There are four high-bypass turbofans in development there from four different firms competing for installation in large transports, bombers and civilian airliners currently flying foreign engines.

They are the WS-20, the SF-A, the WS-18 and the CJ-1000A. Like the J-31 airframe, several of these projects are not supported by direct funding directly from the center but are prototypes looking to land a contract. What this means is competition that can drive innovation. It also means a built-in backup plan if a prefered engine fails.

The GOI can never fund that many engine companies, I know. But I don’t want it to. I want the private sector to fight for government contracts so that HAL can get some competition and create that churning eco-system that can wring out efficiencies and drive innovation. A government monopoly like HAL can help but be slow and static.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Oct 2017 12:12

chola wrote:
JayS wrote:Chola sahab, I am not in disagreement with you on developing other types of engines. My disagreement was only over the point that its an necessary condition for Kaveri to be successful.
I don’t believe we are in disagreement about the issue but more about the solution. We both understand what we have in GTRE/HAL is not working. But where you want “facilities” funded by the GOI, I want them to be organic to the industry, built and funded by the companies/bureaus building the engines. This is the foundation I am alluding to. But this can happen only if those firms had begun making and selling technology they can complete and field.

Perhaps the difference is I look at things from the enterprise while you view things as an engineer. I have much respect for your opinions as well.

I would also rather have a broad innovation and technology base with proliferation across the innumerable fields, than it being concentrated in only a handful government organizations. I have already expressed my opinion how government only has to subsidize top end technology research which has intangible benefits in short term and private companies typically are not willing to put money in. And in addition, GOI has to provide sustained market for the private industry through assured orders. Then the private companies will take care of the building MIC themselves. But that's possible only when there is a big ticket reform in procurement policies and exclusive emphasize on building desi products in every field. I don't see that happening. In current scenario, I do not see any private company, existing or new comers willing to bet on anything. Thus my emphasize on government funding through existing government organizations. There is no alternative to government funding in large scale, whether the research happens in government owned organizations or private. Currently we have no capabilities in private sector to undertake such work. The foreign OEMs will not set up RnD centres, even with GOI funding, unless they are allowed to retain full control on IPR, porting them back to their native country. So no, I am not thinking as an Engineer here, but I am thinking from the perspective that I get from being in the industry. As an Engineers I don't give ****'s care who funds the work and where its get done, as long as I get to do good work

. In fact the big biz houses are only willing to get into the projects which will give them ensured profit from day 1, namely screwdrivergiri projects. Frankly I see not much intentions from Ambanis or Adanis or even Tatas to some extent to get into something like LCA manufacturing or Kaveri manufacturing where they will have to invest money, work hard for years to set up thing and perhaps a decade down the line they will have break-even. Perhaps they have cold feet due to unreliable government policies and procurement. Who can blame them..? I have more hopes from companies like Bharat Forge or VEM or L&T or Dynamatic or Alpha tech. But sadly they do not have enough money power and GOI is in no mood to give a helping hand.

I have come to a belief that in given system that we have today only way to make things happen in short term is top-down approach. We are long way from being a Nation where bottom up approach will work. Because we have no bottom left and we have done nothing to build it up, In fact we have made a system which tries mercilessly to kill everything that tries to come up in adverse environment against all odds. Things are changing but its a slow and painful change. May be I am blind and a fool not to understand reality. But this is what I see and think.

JayS · Post by **JayS** » 27 Oct 2017 12:29

chola wrote: The GOI can never fund that many engine companies, I know. But I don’t want it to. I want the private sector to fight for government contracts so that HAL can get some competition and create that churning eco-system that can wring out efficiencies and drive innovation. A government monopoly like HAL can help but be slow and static.

Government does not need to fund them all, nor fund everything. What government should do is to fund the bas level enabling technologies (things which need huge upfront investments and have long gestation time or which are generic in nature) and make them freely available to private players who can then use them and develop solutions at much lower investment. Let me give one example. Our labs ADA, NAL, ISRO has a good number of good design and analysis softwares. Why not make them available freely to all Indians...? Today if a company wants to develop a half-decent turbojet, it will have to invest Crores of rupees per year just in buying licenses for SW from companies like Ansys, MSc etc. But if decent SWs are available for almost no money, then even a small startup can think of working on some great solutions. This is only one example how GOI can subsidize cost of technology development for private companies. There can be many such things. This is not limited to only aero-def companies. Companies working in virtually every sector will be benefited out of such sharing. Billions of dollars worth of cost to private companies can be eliminated and at the same time some SMEs can be provided with far superior tools in their hands which they could not have afforded otherwise. Imagine the hike in productivity of SMEs if they can easily run hi fidelity simulations for even small components. I have worked in a tech startup and I know how lack of quality tools can hamper one's ability to do quality work.

But of coarse, it aint gonna happen in existing system.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 27 Oct 2017 21:24

JayS wrote:
chola wrote: The GOI can never fund that many engine companies, I know. But I don’t want it to. I want the private sector to fight for government contracts so that HAL can get some competition and create that churning eco-system that can wring out efficiencies and drive innovation. A government monopoly like HAL can help but be slow and static.
Government does not need to fund them all, nor fund everything. What government should do is to fund the bas level enabling technologies (things which need huge upfront investments and have long gestation time or which are generic in nature) and make them freely available to private players who can then use them and develop solutions at much lower investment. Let me give one example. Our labs ADA, NAL, ISRO has a good number of good design and analysis softwares. Why not make them available freely to all Indians...? Today if a company wants to develop a half-decent turbojet, it will have to invest Crores of rupees per year just in buying licenses for SW from companies like Ansys, MSc etc. But if decent SWs are available for almost no money, then even a small startup can think of working on some great solutions. This is only one example how GOI can subsidize cost of technology development for private companies. There can be many such things. This is not limited to only aero-def companies. Companies working in virtually every sector will be benefited out of such sharing. Billions of dollars worth of cost to private companies can be eliminated and at the same time some SMEs can be provided with far superior tools in their hands which they could not have afforded otherwise. Imagine the hike in productivity of SMEs if they can easily run hi fidelity simulations for even small components. I have worked in a tech startup and I know how lack of quality tools can hamper one's ability to do quality work.

But of coarse, it aint gonna happen in existing system.

Excellent post. The entire ecosystem of free software, elastic compute & other infra capacity is the reason for so many startups experimenting and taking off. If Indian private companies cannot create an ecosystem yet, the GoI must step in and create an ecosystem of enabling technology. Super important to lower barriers.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Oct 2017 22:43

Zynda wrote:This was mentioned some where...at least the current GoI is looking to build strategic influences through various high-ticket defence acquisitions. Since the financial resources are limited, I guess at the moment indigenous R&D is not a very high priority. Of course, on things like avionics, electronics, munitions development continues to happen. I guess we trying to follow Israeli model i.e. establish good competence on avionics, munitions etc., which does not require huge capex investments like a jet turbine or even a good UAV system/platform. Perhaps hope is that through strategic alliances, we won't get shafted (spare parts, OEM support etc.) in time of need?

This quest is known by the suppliers and their governments.
its not happening.
instead blue sky futuristic projects are being offered which may or may-not see fruition.
These foreign entities know the Indian penchant to work at leading edge technology and forget the present.

Second the strategic alliances are like the rope around the chimpanzee's neck in the Planet of the Apes. Its to control us. Not to give technology to become free.

This is the problem

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 Oct 2017 22:51

X-posting...

vina wrote:Folks, let get back on track and away from some random stuff about "security" and "leaks" or whatever. None of that happens here , though I am sure the BRF is followed very closely by Military Intelligence, spooks of all kinds of all stripes for "analysis" /"spin"/ whatever you want to call it. In fact, the Indo US Nuke agreement text was link-posted FIRST here , and the TV and other types picked it up from here without acknowledging it.. (I still remember Boorkha Didi, "breaking" it without batting an eyelid, as if they sniffed it out.. but I digress) ..

So getting back to topic.

Kartik wrote:The Mirage-2000 overcame many of the core deficiencies of the Mirage III design - lousy cockpit ergonomics, high landing speeds, lack of augmented controls, lack of slats, flaps and most importantly, extremely under-powered, thirsty engines. No wonder the Mirage-2000 was considered to be a superb machine (and the most beautiful by far);
While I agree with everything ELSE you wrote here, I have to disagree with the engine part. The "weakness" of the Mirage 2000 , all versions is the engine and the deficiency in installed thrust. The thrust in the Snecma M-53P2 is 95KN thrust , compare that with the baseline thrust of the original F16 A/B and the latest blocks which top at at what 140KN ?

The M53 is a classic example of incremental design and refinements of an existing engine which reached it's design limit /pinnacle in the early 80s. It's origin is the BMW 004 engine that the French got their hands on from captured originals, along with the scientists and engineers who developed it (they were moved to France.. just like Dietrich Küchemann and his assistant Johanna Weber , moved to England and worked in Royal Aircraft Establishment), which was developed in to the Atar, the Atar was further modified/developed into the M53.

Just like the original BMW 003, the Atar is a single spool design , as is the M53. The bypass in the Atar was increased to realise the M53. At each stage of that, what enabled/drove the "improvement" as underlying material development. BMW 003 --> Atar , better materials, with higher TeT. Atar-->M53 , better materials with higher TeT.

Even with the M53, the original engines came with 85KN thrust. The materials developed for the Rafale M88 was back ported to M53 , to get the the M53 P2 with a 1 Ton thrust increase, ie to 95KN thrust.

With the M53 single spool architecture, they have reached the technological limits of the single spool architecture with the existing materials. They didn't bother developing a twin spool for that, because, France was moving to the Rafale (M88 is a twin spool design).

If there is a moral in this, when the Kaveri "basic" versions, with existing materials and all is flight tested and bugs ironed out, there is a huge amount of growth possible, with sustained investment (financial, engineering and R&D) over the next 25 to 30 years. Look at the direct descendent of the BMW 003. From wiki, it shows Atar, Japanese Ne-20, Heinkel HS-20, Metropoliten Vickers F2.. etc, basically half a dozen engines which are a direct lift from it. In any case, none of the nations who inherited that BMW 003 (by whatever means), developed that further, invested money and engineering in further versions, built new designs and developed their industries over time. All nations did it, except of course , India, where we seem to be content with "successive" imports and short changing sustained engineering and R&D and other investments.

That apart, coming to Tejas, it has a higher t:w than the M2K, has an engine with a better specific fuel consumption, and my guess , not sure, probably a higher degree of static instability. All that would theoretically mean better field performance, than the M2K. Range wise, my guess is that it is not very different from the M2K. It has a similar fuel fraction with an engine with better SFC.. On paper similar range ! And of course a radar that is a Generation ahead !

~~(will this rant/speculation also be reported to the "powers " that be ?)~~

Something to ruminate on.....

once the Kaveri core is improved based on offset program for Rafale.

Vina, Thanks for the Links to Kuchemann and Weber.

I guess their book was used as text in the madrassa?

One insight I got was the B2 wing owes its shape to their work on the Vulcan.

And Wiki on BMW 003 engine:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_003
The competing Jumo 004 was basis of US engines!!!!

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 02 Nov 2017 05:19

https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/925657472634798081 --> Work with SNECMA for the refurbished core is continuing. GTRE still hopes to fly it in an LCA by Aero India '19.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Nov 2017 07:17

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/925657472634798081 --> Work with SNECMA for the refurbished core is continuing. GTRE still hopes to fly it in an LCA by Aero India '19.

I hope this news is not like "Tejas may also land on Agra expressway"

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 Nov 2017 21:38

shiv wrote:
Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/sjha1618/status/925657472634798081 --> Work with SNECMA for the refurbished core is continuing. GTRE still hopes to fly it in an LCA by Aero India '19.
I hope this news is not like "Tejas may also land on Agra expressway"

Another key concern is, is this another science project or a user-governed and controlled project?

vina · Post by **vina** » 02 Nov 2017 22:25

ramana wrote:The competing Jumo 004 was basis of US engines!!!!

Oh. The Americans got not just the Jumo 004 , but also some absolutely brilliant talent. They also got Max Bentele to the US. He was the man who fixed the vibration and acoustics problems in the Jumo 004 (where the stators were suspended from the casing, he fixed that by changing to the "Christmas Tree', mounted on shaft mode we see today), and also in the blades (where he discovered that the engine rpm matched the one of the higher order harmonic frequencies the blades and set off resonance)..

While Von Braun's team and the Physicsts from all over Europe gave the US a big lead in Rocketry and Atomic stuff, and is well known, what people dont realise is the wealth the US gained from German Engineers & Scientists post war in other fields and also from the Tizard Mission handed to the US in fields ranging from medicine to some of the greatest scientific advances in that time (radar, cavity magnetron, Whittle's jet engine, the plans for feasibility of an atomic bomb, Sonar , the Brits developed it as ASDIC, Penicillin) to mundane stuff like radio fuses for bombs, gunsights , RDX and other plastic explosives).

I had talked about Max Bentele and the Jumo 004 (as James Von Pond Jeero Jeero Phour) when the YakHerder talked about contra rotating spool with at the stators rotating fixed to the casing and rotating (like a Horizontal loading washing machine drum) and reminded him about the vibrations and stuff.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 02 Nov 2017 23:21

ShauryaT wrote:
shiv wrote: I hope this news is not like "Tejas may also land on Agra expressway"
Another key concern is, is this another science project or a user-governed and controlled project?

Please do inform us what will the user govern and control for a jet engine program? How many jet engine experts in R&D does the user have to depute to GTRE? Such pronouncements on "science project" etc are what detract from the seriousness of the task at hand, which requires huge funding and sustained political support. No amount of user governance or control can provide fundamental breakthroughs in engines or material science.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Nov 2017 23:29

KaranM, When DRDO stops using words like 'hope, may and other' weasel words they will be taken seriously.

Worst is futuristic. Means its worse than all those words. Its not even on paper and no plan for ever being completed in this yuga.

All such words are escape clauses.

Its like a sold rock of Jello.