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.
sivab
BRFite
Posts: 955
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby sivab » 18 Nov 2019 11:46

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... 101751.cms

Is development of an indigenous fighter jet engine a priority?
DRDO chief: Yes, it’s a priority for strategic autonomy. The development of an indigenous jet engine through the Kaveri programme has boosted the know-how and industrial ecosystem in the country. Presently, we are working on the flagship programme to develop an Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft. It requires an advanced 110kN thrust class engine. We will involve academia, industry and defence PSUs to develop this high-thrust engine. We are open to international collaboration.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 18 Nov 2019 12:25

^^^ I hope us success.

But I somewhat think we are again shooting for the moon. When we started on the Kaveri back in the 1980s we tasked GTRE with building an elite medium class turbofan that even the Russian had a hard time with in the RD-33 -- when we've never even developed a production turbojet. Now we are asking for a 110kN medium engine that even the Amreekis and Russkis do not have at the moment.

The F404 (and Kaveri) were spec'ed at 80kN. Even the Al-31 a heavyweight class on our MKI is only rated at 123kN. At any rate, I think we have learnt enough from the LCA to not couple the airframe with the engine. The AMCA can continue with the F414 (100kN) but it still worries me that we are setting ourselves up for another Kaveri in the engine department. Once again our ambition is grand instead of realistic?

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11531
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 18 Nov 2019 12:41

It is also the Kanjus nature of bean counters in India., better to buy Test bed planes and develop a family of Engines with varying sizes, so even if are not able to come up with best of materials/ Metalurgy, we can have something slightly oversized but works- and with none of the Flat rating BS. I am not an expert but how many engines are flat flat rated, is the AL31FP flat rated, M-53 flat rated, RD 33 and RD 93 flat rated??

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 18 Nov 2019 12:57

I think we've chosen a harder path for ourselves with these lightweight airframes in the LCA and now AMCA. Supposedly when we envisioned them during design that they would be cheaper to produce but the engine required to power them need to be light as well and we envision these advanced thrust requirement in that smaller powerplant which means more pressure/heat per inch than a larger engine.

HAL makes 70% of the AL-31. I sometimes think we could have gone for a heavyweight desi 5th gen as a followon to the MKI and leverage that engine experience. We were planning for a heavyweight 5th gen in the FGFA anyways.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21388
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 18 Nov 2019 20:54

USAF Research Lab builds an ‘open source’ jet engine in 13 months



12 NOVEMBER, 2019

The US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) says it has designed, built and tested an “open source” engine in 13 months.

The AFRL says its Responsive Open Source Engine was tested for the first time on 6 November at its headquarters, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base.

The small jet engine was built by the Aerospace Systems Directorate and is the first turbine designed, assembled, and tested exclusively in-house, says AFRL.

The lab did not disclose the jet engines thrust rating, though the small turbine appears to be sized to fit into a small unmanned air vehicle (UAV) or cruise missile.

The AFRL developed the engine in-house to test the theory that it could create engines faster and cheaper than private companies.

“We decided the best way to make a low-cost, expendable engine was to separate the development costs from procurement costs,” said Frank Lieghley, Aerospace Systems Directorate Turbine Engine Division senior aerospace engineer and project manager.

The US Air Force (USAF) owns the design and intellectual property of the small engine. “Therefore, once the engine is tested and qualified, the Air Force can forego the typical and often slow development process, instead opening the production opportunity to lower-cost manufacturers better able to economically produce the smaller production runs needed for new Air Force platforms,” the service says.

The AFRL says high costs for developing small jet engines have held back the creation and use of new aircraft. The lab is aiming to cut the cost of developing such turbines by 75%.

“There’s no end to what might be done, but it’s all enabled by inexpensive production,” says Greg Bloch, Aerospace Systems Directorate Turbine Engine Division chief engineer. “It’s the ability to turn the economics of warfare around.”

The AFRL did not say how it was able to develop its Responsive Open Source Engine so quickly and for less money, though the process centered on empowering a small team of engineers to handle the entire process.

That method echoes a similar development effort by Pratt & Whitney’s (P&W) prototyping arm, GatorWorks. The company recently gave a team of about 15 hand-picked employees three performance specifications around which to develop a small turbine. By focusing only on thrust-rating, cost and size, the team was able to create a new engine core that was designed, built and tested in less than a year.

P&W and AFRL are responding to demand for faster and cheaper engine development from the USAF. The service envisions hordes of low-cost missiles and attritable UAVs that can overwhelm, dodge or outdistance Chinese and Russian air defence systems. It needs cheaper and higher performance engines to power that strategy.

The USAF's attritable concept comes from the word "attrition," meaning aircraft built cheaply and quickly enough to be affordably lost to attrition in combat.

The AFRL has said it plans to invest up to $725 million in jet turbine research and development between fiscal years 2018 and 2026, through its Advanced Turbine Technologies for Affordable Mission programme.

Beyond faster and cheaper development of engines, the AFRL also notes that giving its employees hands-on experience has other benefits.

“By teaching our people to do this themselves, we’re instilling in them a level of gravitas that will serve the Air Force well when we then apply that oversight to the traditional engine manufacturers,” says Bloch.

The AFRL says it is analysing data from its first engine test and plans to build a second version of the engine that will be smaller and lighter. The lab says with the tools and knowledge it gained from the first engine it should be able to finish the second engine in less time.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8263
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 20 Nov 2019 04:40

https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1196796346432278529 ---> Hopefully, New Delhi has understood why India needs an indigenous fighter class low-bypass turbofan in the 110-120 kN category by *hook or by crook*. Any further equivocation on this matter will completely belie any claims to becoming a major power/great power yada yada yada.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53942
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 20 Nov 2019 06:41

I don't know why use such words. India won't get by hook or crook.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 20 Nov 2019 09:17

Rakesh wrote:https://twitter.com/SJha1618/status/1196796346432278529 ---> Hopefully, New Delhi has understood why India needs an indigenous fighter class low-bypass turbofan in the 110-120 kN category by *hook or by crook*. Any further equivocation on this matter will completely belie any claims to becoming a major power/great power yada yada yada.


Again 110kN is an extremely tall order for a medium class engine needed for the AMCA. Even a heavyweight engine like the AL-31 for our MKI is 123kN.

Right now neither the US nor Russia have a medium engine of that power. The closest is the F414 at 100kN. The F404 powering the Tejas is at 80kN. We can't even RE something. We need to leapfrog the Amreekis and the F414.

prasannasimha
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1191
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:22

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby prasannasimha » 20 Nov 2019 09:54

I think we must build separately some engine as a science project that works and build a plane around it. This way we will get out of the long term cgicken and the egg situation. The science project continues to evolve the engine in stages

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6823
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby habal » 20 Nov 2019 10:00

chola wrote:Again 110kN is an extremely tall order for a medium class engine needed for the AMCA. Even a heavyweight engine like the AL-31 for our MKI is 123kN.

Right now neither the US nor Russia have a medium engine of that power. The closest is the F414 at 100kN. The F404 powering the Tejas is at 80kN. We can't even RE something.


that for you is confidence.

Even earlier we have been hearing this figure of 100Kn+ being thrown around. Surely there is some substance to it. Some rudimentary tests, wind tunnel tests of a new gen engine well has produced this level of output for this figure to start floating.

I personally think, some building blocks are there for a 110Kn engine. We have indeed shot ahead in some areas and in some areas we lag. We need to collaborate with the french or rolls-royce or IHI Japan or even the ukrainians to fill in the gap which has been thus created.

Kakarat
BRFite
Posts: 1970
Joined: 26 Jan 2005 13:59

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Kakarat » 26 Nov 2019 13:02

Exclusive Updates From The HAL Tejas Mk1 & Mk1A Programmes - DDR

On engine development
Now as is known, the entire Tejas Mk1, Mk1A and Mk2 i.e. MWF fleet will be equipped with General Electric F404 and F414 series engines. The Kaveri programme has as such failed to deliver a viable domestic engine that can meet the thrust requirements of even the Mk1. Although, the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) has been able to achieve the targeted dry-thrust in the Kaveri engine it has not been able to meet the wet-thrust requirement. Presently, efforts to make use of single-crystal turbine blades developed by Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory (DMRL) as well as research into afterburner design is underway at GTRE to ‘fix’ the Kaveri design. Unless, an indigenous engine becomes available when it does, there is currently no plan to develop alternate engine sources for the fleet.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36402
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby SaiK » 15 Dec 2019 01:27

Who wrote that article last month on DDR? I was thinking it was Nilesh & Sriram. I doubt it is not. Anyway, please whoever, provide details.
Presently, efforts to make use of single-crystal turbine blades developed by Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory (DMRL) as well as research into afterburner design is underway at GTRE to ‘fix’ the Kaveri design./

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7438
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Prasad » 15 Dec 2019 11:20

That is the last bit of info we have SaiK. No further information. GTRE is clammed up and we have no information about feedback about these blades yet. So poruthar bhoomi alwar.

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 482
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby maitya » 16 Dec 2019 18:08

Prasadji, have highlighted the operative word of the below quote:
... Presently, efforts to make use of single-crystal turbine blades developed by Defence Metallurgical Research Laboratory (DMRL) ...


As we all know we have had lab-production-level DMS4 based (4th Gen) SC blades from atleast 2015 onwards ... pls refer to the very old picture of DMRL produced SC blades ...Image


Also do refer to this chart (again very very old) ... Image


Now, if you look at the dark-blue column in between, you will see how the Dry and Wet thrust levels can be enhanced by the classical "hot-section improvement route" i.e. without tweaking the inlet geometry and other physical/geometrical aspects etc too much,

1) first increase the TeT of the HPT (both blades and vanes)
THEN
2) matching it with an OPR increase by improving SPR for BOTH the HPC and the Fan stages
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) for improving SPR of the Fan Stages, the LPT itself needs improving.
2) while looking at the chart figures, pls ignore the absolute Thrust values mentioned in it - instead compare % improvement achieved and draw your own conclusions.


Aka a complete re-design of the core - and gazillion years (and money) of dedicated and iterative testing etc.

For comparisons, Kabini currently is at 1,455deg C (or 1,728deg K) TeT level - while M88 is at 1,850 K (1,580 °C) - so ~125deg improvement is required.

TeT improvement from pure material would be ~30-40deg levels - remaining 100 odd deg improvement have to come from utilizing the superior thin-wall etc properties of a typical SC casted blades/vanes and implement,
a) better various Blade Cooling techniques (e.g. Film/Convection cooling)
b) Thermal Barrier Coating (TBC) application

etc etc etc.

:(( One of these days I'll be able to get some b/w and finish my latest write-up regarding all these ... Sigh!! :((

Until then ... maybe this very very very old post of mine may provide some details.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7438
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Prasad » 16 Dec 2019 20:43

Yes sir. Specifically these blades have the ysz tbc-coating by ebpvd done at arci with cooling holes.

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 482
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby maitya » 17 Dec 2019 00:26

Prasad wrote:Yes sir. Specifically these blades have the ysz tbc-coating by ebpvd done at arci with cooling holes.

Actually I's hoping (against hope and almost a wet dream) that GTRE would take the easy way out and go for a LZ-YSZ bilayer TBC tech for both HPT and LPT blades and vanes, without delving too much into blade-geometry changes or redesigning of the current impingement and convective cooling design etc
The tech for improving Film/Convection cooling scheme (and also the internal cooling passages for impingement cooling etc) is as cutting edge (laser drilling, "black-art" of S&W avoidance etc) as it gets and also at best, very incremental in nature.

On the other hand, recent breakthrough at IERL for the LZ-YSZ bilayer TBC tech application should enable GTRE/DMRL to get the existing DMS4 based SC blades coated (via ebpvd etc) with this bi-layer and quickly add 100deg to the TeT - and be done with the turbine part of it.

Details of LZ-YSZ bilayer TBC can be found here and here.

Yes it wont be super duper 1600+ deg C level tech, but 1560-1580deg C level will be quite within reach (and let there be a Kaveri-III for 1600-1650 deg C level TeT beast as a future gen etc).

And instead focus on increasing either OPR or atleast the mass-flow rate or both, via redesign of the Fan/LPC stages - and if possible go for different wide-chord blade geometries etc for the HPC stages. Just like what GE did with the 1st Gen F414s (that were derived from F404 without touching the HPT and LPT).

It is much less risky that way ... but then again, above is just a layman's musings bordering wishful thinking etc. :oops:

Added Later:Links to some of my old posts on LZ-YSZ bilayer TBC etc.
Last edited by maitya on 17 Dec 2019 00:44, edited 1 time in total.

ArjunPandit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3245
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 06:37

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ArjunPandit » 17 Dec 2019 00:36

folks there was an article on IDRW that HAL will have its own Su30. Can't some of them be used as test beds for kaveri..I understand it can't replace the Al31, but is it completely impossible to ..fit the engine externally...

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7438
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Prasad » 17 Dec 2019 09:41

Maityaji
I've read the paper and spoken to people involved. The lanthanum zirconate tbc was for something else entirely, With no plans (afaik) to try it on blades at the moment. And if you notice it was deposited by sps. So there would be a need for studying pvd (atleast a year). Or atleast that is what i gathered. Drilling holes is also 'not a problem'.

Thakur_B
BRFite
Posts: 1601
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Thakur_B » 04 Jan 2020 09:42

Image

Purported image of the K10 engine model. Credits to Porky Kicker on DFI.

sivab
BRFite
Posts: 955
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 07:56

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby sivab » 04 Jan 2020 11:31

^^^
Wrong credit. It is from a tweet by PM himself.

https://twitter.com/narendramodi/status ... 1814089729

Image

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6823
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby habal » 04 Jan 2020 12:50

that is one clean looking engine. I have to admit this, I love the incremental way our scientists scrape and nibble at improving their turbofan tech without much hype and hoopla at x variations and n+1 iterations. At some point of time in future they will come up with a credible and high-performing engine that is comparable to the median western tech available at that point of time.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 04 Jan 2020 16:12

habal wrote:that is one clean looking engine. I have to admit this, I love the incremental way our scientists scrape and nibble at improving their turbofan tech without much hype and hoopla at x variations and n+1 iterations. At some point of time in future they will come up with a credible and high-performing engine that is comparable to the median western tech available at that point of time.


Sir, I'm sorry but one cannot love an incremental lab process that has taken nearly three decades. It would be one thing if it were in even limited production today but right now there are still no more than a handful built in a lab basically.

That said, what the GTRE scientists did was amazing when compared to most of the world. Not many had gotten a medium turbofan to the testing phase including countries that built aircraft for decades like Brazil, Sweden or Germany.

But if we are not taking that next step into production then this work could be all for naught. Our main competitor is not Brazil or Sweden but Cheen and Cheen puts many engines into production.

RKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1146
Joined: 26 Jul 2009 12:29
Location: Evolution is invention, explosion is destruction.

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby RKumar » 04 Jan 2020 16:20

They have major issues with all their engines as well as earlier copies of J-10 and J-11, it is one thing to have lot of money and spending it on immature products. I agree they have mastered the art of mass production but their basic r&d is limited to stealing the know-how. And by stealing you can learn only to an extent.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6823
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby habal » 04 Jan 2020 16:49

cheen makes a lot of noise based on their NPT status access to western tool and die replicating mass production tech, but they tend to hurtle harmlessly when it comes to focussed research. Then they will want to copy the missing bits, but then again mere copying is insufficient in getting grip of turbine technology.

One good thing is they are putting immature tech into platforms and getting real time feedback as to how specific omissions and underperformance can hamper full scale integration. Now that in a way is also experience and they are gaining experience in whatever limited way they can.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 04 Jan 2020 17:13

RKumar wrote:They have major issues with all their engines as well as earlier copies of J-10 and J-11, it is one thing to have lot of money and spending it on immature products. I agree they have mastered the art of mass production but their basic r&d is limited to stealing the know-how. And by stealing you can learn only to an extent.


Unless you are from GE, Dassault, RR, PW, Saturn or Klimov, you will be creating immature products because no one else in the world has that kind of experience and maturity in developing jet engines. Full stop. We cannot create a mature engine in a GTRE lab.

That is the state not just for India but for any nation not the US, UK, France and Russia. And it includes a westernized industrial powerhouse like Japan.

What Cheen has done is to understand this and then create its own history of experience.

Stealing blueprints allowed Cheen to build something in the lab quicker but it cannot create experience and it cannot create production lines for them. They had to build those out themselves. But here is where they really learn by putting things into those production lines and re-iterating.

Take the original WS-10, it was a chitty engine that performed worse than the Kaveri when both were testing at Gromov. Now it powers hundreds of J-11Bs and J-16s as well as recent production J-10s and J-20s because it had systematically gone through many iterations and variants (check out the chini mil thread on those.) They are building over 300 a year today and by 2026, they will be building 450. It has become a success story no matter how you slice it -- 450 means hundreds of fighters a year. And there are many other engine types as well.

Their medium engines -- the class of the Kaveri -- are the WS-13 which has already taken off in a JF-17 testbed and the WS-19 which will be in LSP.

Are they poorer quality than those from the West and Russia? Of course. But they are good enough to power their own aircraft by the hundreds and they are getting better with each engine they build.

They are racing away from us by actually manufacturing engines and fixing things in a process that can never be perfected in a lab.

We will not take off with the Kaveri or any new subsequent project unless we get it into a production line. That sounds too simple and common sense and yet it is not something we do.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2847
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 04 Jan 2020 17:25

To get a engine in to production, you need a platform to which it can be applied. One of the publicly known issue with Kaveri is that it is overweight by 150kg.

You cannot put this on LCA, as the jet would require redesign to maintain the CoG. Fundamentally you need a new platform, which has been designed with this extra 150kg in mind.

We don't have any such manned platform and given the lower thrust it cannot go on MWF/TEDBF/AMCA. Hopefully the new platforms are designed keeping this weight penalty in mind, so that in future we can try to swap the engine.

The best way to use Kaveri is to use it on UCAV, which is the plan. A new platform, designed keeping the weight penalty in mind and not having to worry about high thrust to weight ratio. We need to create UCAV which can use afterburner as well.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2847
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 04 Jan 2020 17:29

One thing you cannot deny: GTRE created a 75KN engine(equal to M88) in F404 form factor for $500M. F404, which is the gold standard in engines.

Although overweight by 150kg!

Peanuts of what others have spend..

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 04 Jan 2020 17:55

nam wrote:To get a engine in to production, you need a platform to which it can be applied. One of the publicly known issue with Kaveri is that it is overweight by 150kg.

You cannot put this on LCA, as the jet would require redesign to maintain the CoG. Fundamentally you need a new platform, which has been designed with this extra 150kg in mind.

We don't have any such manned platform and given the lower thrust it cannot go on MWF/TEDBF/AMCA. Hopefully the new platforms are designed keeping this weight penalty in mind, so that in future we can try to swap the engine.

The best way to use Kaveri is to use it on UCAV, which is the plan. A new platform, designed keeping the weight penalty in mind and not having to worry about high thrust to weight ratio. We need to create UCAV which can use afterburner as well.


Nam ji, the LCA was designed for the Kaveri. And the Kaveri has dimensions which made it comparable to the RD-33.

If safety was a concern, we could have converted a series of MiG-29s to use as testbeds and then create a project to re-engine a number of them while we kept a Kaveri-engined LCA project alive.

But if we look at the J-10/WS-10 saga, the chinis tested the WS-10 repeatedly on the J-10 in the past decade even when the bulk of the production machines were built with AL-31s. They tested the WS-10 on limited production J-10As and J-10Bs until finally converting fully to the WS-10 with the latest J-10C variant.

I see no reason why we couldn't have done the same for the LCA/Kaveri. Especially since, again, the LCA was designed for the Kaveri.

Where the chinis had an advantage was the engine commonality with the J-11/Sino-flankers which allowed the WS-10 to be installed on a safer twin engine fighter while the kinks were worked out. That is why I suggested a program to re-engine some MiG-29s.

Yes, the way to get the Kaveri into production these days is getting it into ghatak.

But we have the 110kN engine for the TEDBF coming up. I hope we break out of the lab and into a production line as soon as possible for that one.

Being able to attain 75kN for $500M is a great achievement like building a 200hp race car engine in your garage. Your parents will love you and praise you but no one else will care unless you can re-produce it and bring it to the market.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2847
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 04 Jan 2020 18:12

the LCA was designed for the Kaveri. And the Kaveri has dimensions which made it comparable to the RD-33.


The dimensions are fine. It is similar to F404, but not the weight.Extra weight means redesign of LCA.

The Chinese used AL31 dimensions. Neither are Russian engine weight optimized, unlike Uncle's TFTA engines. This allowed the Chinese to come close to AL31 in weight, allowing them to swap the engines on J10/J11.

We held our-self against one of the best engines mankind have ever produced!

We again are planning to have a engine for AMCA, with close to thrust level of Al31 in F414 form factor!

maitya
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 482
Joined: 02 Feb 2001 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby maitya » 04 Jan 2020 20:37

nam wrote:
the LCA was designed for the Kaveri. And the Kaveri has dimensions which made it comparable to the RD-33.


The dimensions are fine. It is similar to F404, but not the weight.Extra weight means redesign of LCA.
<snip>

That's not correct ... accommodating some 100 odd Kg extra weight is easily within reach of the ADA et all.

For example Uttam is 40+ kgs "overweight" - compared to the current PD set being used - easily accommodated!!

The issue with Kaveri is 0-institutional support/risk-taking attitude for an ab-initio high-tech product.
After-all, nobody stopped MoD/IAF/GTRE to simply do what the Chinese did i.e. Accept it as is and force it to, atleast partial, squadron service. And 5-7 years of regular flying would throw-up issues which will then need to be patiently and systematically ironed-out.

Everybody does that - even US did (didn't they face afterburner screech (basically Low-frequency combustion oscillations etc) issue in F135 - they still put it up on the LSPs and of course later resolved it).

But I guess, these things are easier implemented in an authoritarian setup and a very-proud-civilizational-character which obviously we as a nation/society lack - the overwhelming urge to run for imports by all, stems from (and yes, the services very much included) that very fact.

So instead, we continue to tinker along trying to "achieve" the "design goals" to the dot while others like Chinese matures their indigenous product-lines.

Sorry for the digression, normally don't go into non-technical aspects like the above ... hope it doesn't trigger a flame-war etc.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2073
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Picklu » 04 Jan 2020 21:20

maitya wrote:
The issue with Kaveri is 0-institutional support/risk-taking attitude for an ab-initio high-tech product.
After-all, nobody stopped MoD/IAF/GTRE to simply do what the Chinese did i.e. Accept it as is and force it to, atleast partial, squadron service. And 5-7 years of regular flying would throw-up issues which will then need to be patiently and systematically ironed-out.

Everybody does that - even US did (didn't they face afterburner screech (basically Low-frequency combustion oscillations etc) issue in F135 - they still put it up on the LSPs and of course later resolved it).

But I guess, these things are easier implemented in an authoritarian setup and a very-proud-civilizational-character which obviously we as a nation/society lack - the overwhelming urge to run for imports by all, stems from (and yes, the services very much included) that very fact.

So instead, we continue to tinker along trying to "achieve" the "design goals" to the dot while others like Chinese matures their indigenous product-lines.

Sorry for the digression, normally don't go into non-technical aspects like the above ... hope it doesn't trigger a flame-war etc.


This is what I am advocating in this forum for ages. Get the kaveri certified at current performance level. Order another sqadron of LCA MK1 during the switch over period of mk1 and mk1a when the line will be idle and fit the kaveri into it.

Flying that squadron will give operational data worth it's weight in gold. This is precisely how products are developed and matured. We seriously need matured Product Managers lateral entry into DPSUs (we don't lack much in program management in our MIC; our problem is we try to force-fit a program manager into product manager's shoe)

V_Raman
BRFite
Posts: 580
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 22:25

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby V_Raman » 04 Jan 2020 22:20

Why can’t we mount it on a twin engine plane and test? Maybe on a old F18 bought from USA? Surely Boeing would be open to doing that?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7976
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 05 Jan 2020 03:25

If govts. are not ready to loosen the purse strings for adequate military equipment, you can guess how stingy they must be to loosen the strings for military RnD.

The sticker price for building a flying test bed or an high altitude test range is a non starter for most politicians and babus. You have to spend at least a billion dollars a year for the next 10 years to get to a decent engine. That's the bullet to bite. Chinese have bit it and the Japanese have bit it to some measure.

Will we? I have given up hope.

Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8263
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 05 Jan 2020 05:44

There are a number of silent lobbies at work that will prevent India from ever seeing that goal.

MMRCA purchase is moving ahead, but yet the Govt finds investing money in the Kaveri program to be a waste of money! How myopic and ironic!

No €500 million is available for Kaveri, but got billions for phoren imports - 114 MRCA and 57 carrier based fighters.

May sign the deal for 83 Mk1As by Feb 2020, with the key word being MAY.... but got billions for phoren imports - 114 MRCA and 57 carrier based fighters.

We will never learn.

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 92
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Raghunathgb » 16 Jan 2020 13:26

CSIR, DRDO to join hands to develop Saras engine

https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/csir-dr ... gine-26803

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 16 Jan 2020 15:13

Raghunathgb wrote:CSIR, DRDO to join hands to develop Saras engine

https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/csir-dr ... gine-26803


It is something we should have done decades ago. But never too late. Take what we've learn and put them into an achievable goal that can be mass produced.

I've always believed if we had went for an actual MiG-21 replacement with turbojet we would have been building engines by now.

Skipping the pistons, turboprops and turbojets that other engine makers mastered first before going to the turbofan resulted in the Kaveri being a lab project instead of an industrial program. That was the big difference between the Kaveri and WS-10. While GTRE attempted to perfect the Kaveri in a lab, the chinis were re-iterating the WS-10 in industrial production lines.

We get this turboprop into production and it could power whole families of drones, commercial planes and mil transports and special aircraft like MPA, AEW and ASW not just the Saras. Looking forward to this.

Vips
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2439
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Vips » 16 Jan 2020 18:15

Even if CSIR and DRDO takes forever to make a decent engine the Bharat Forge group is making one and will deliver soon. Only issue is will our import pasand babus accept and use it in our various programs?

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7976
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 16 Jan 2020 20:22

Raghunathgb wrote:CSIR, DRDO to join hands to develop Saras engine

https://m.tribuneindia.com/news/csir-dr ... gine-26803

I don't think they should do this alone. They should join hands with HAL. HAL is halfway there with their HTSE1200 engine.

What HAL, CSIR and NAL could also do is design an extended version of Saras with a carrying capacity of 40 passengers using the low bypass version of the HTFE25 engine. I suspect they can build an engine with 35kN of power using higher bypass ratios.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53942
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 16 Jan 2020 21:36

Rakesh That was then, and its now.. The CCS is aware of all the games and is working to kill the games.
Have patience.
There will be hidden snakes/scorpions that will sting you if you move fast.

Defence is under eye of Sauron.
RNS was shifted to bring in the transformation without publicity.

Kailash
BRFite
Posts: 1062
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 02:32

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Kailash » 17 Jan 2020 10:55

Ex-DRDO chief VK Saraswat to suggest a path for advanced 110kN thrust class engine

https://idrw.org/ex-drdo-chief-vk-saras ... ss-engine/


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Anoop, Arun.prabhu, AshimSharma, Google [Bot], Prem Kumar and 64 guests