Tejas Mk2 Medium Weight Fighter: News & Discussion - 23 February 2019

[Rakesh]

India is seeking an active partner for a new generation turbofan for AMCA. From what has been reported in the media, it is only Rolls Royce that has offered to collaborate on this. None of these things are out of the reach of GE (and Pratt & Whitney) who is by far the leader in turbofan technology. However if GE approaches India on this, there would be apprehension on India's part to agree to an arrangement. After 123 Tejas Mk1As being powered by a F404 turbofan, it is only logical to continue that relationship with the OEM i.e. General Electric for turbofans for a new variety of platforms. Thus the reason for the selection of the F414 for the Tejas Mk2 and for the first two units of the AMCA.

So certainly it is not unreasonable for the IAF to ask for something much better beyond the initial IOC configuration and logically the best OEM to go forward with this is General Electric, however the State Department does not really help the situation with constant CAATSA reminders. And that plants a level of mistrust between the nations, despite all the collaboration that is going. It would honestly be nice to know what the consequences will be, so plans can be made accordingly. But I guess we will find out sooner than later.

As Donald Trump said, "India will soon find out."

[brar_w]

India is seeking an active partner for a new generation turbofan for AMCA. From what has been reported in the media, it is only Rolls Royce that has offered to collaborate on this. None of these things are out of the reach of GE (and Pratt & Whitney)..

GE and P&W don’t have an interest in that thrust class given where they are with their adaptive engine testing. RR is not doing great and the Tempest is likely to require an engine in the same class as the AMCA. Given the billions required to develop and certify a next gen engine, GE and P&W can’t really justify unsolicited offers to collaborate when they don’t have a domestic market (self funding engine development in a class that has no domestic need is unheard off in defense circles). So the UK and France are more natural partners on this if favorable terms can be negotiated that would help accelerate the work . My point was more about there being perfectly legitimate performance reasons for the IAF to seek a new engine on the AMCA mk2. Whether that is acquired fully domestically or via a partnership with a foreign vendor remains to be seen. GE is unlikely to have anything in this category that can be called a gen leap or more over its current offering. All those will be in higher thrust classes / size. By the time the AMCA gets fielded hundreds of Tejas Mk1A and MWFs would be flying with GE engines and I doubt they will get a new foreign engine so if engine sanctions are coming as was speculated a few posts back, then that would mean the Chief was banking aircraft that won’t have an engine (100 GE engines ordered in August) which seems unlikely.

[Prem Kumar]

Rakesh: this whole "sanctions" talk is a red herring. The IAF was always after the MRFA (which is the same as MMRCA, which they felt they got short-changed on). When Manohar Parikkar was there, he bashed some heads and made the IAF sign on to Tejas. With him no more, sadly, the IAF is back to its usual import-giri.

And even if you say "sanctions", what will the MRFA solve?

1) Rafale: sure, even those of us who want Tejas MK2 are saying that it might make sense to order a couple of more Rafale squadrons as stop-gap. But there is no money for 114 of them
2) Typhoon: out of the equation. Too expensive and for the same money, why not buy Rafales instead
3) Vipers: IAF wouldn't touch (shouldn't touch) with a barge pole. But this is the only option that might actually ward off a sanctions-threat
4) Russki maal: I don't think the IAF is gonna buy any more aircraft from the Russians. More Rambhas maybe. But that's all
5) Gripen: subject to the same "engine sanctions" as Tejas MK1, MK2 or AMCA

So, whichever way you look at it, if sanctions happen, we will have to face it - MRFA or no-MRFA. One has nothing to do with the other.

[Rakesh]

GE and P&W don’t have an interest in that thrust class given where they are with their adaptive engine testing. RR is not doing great and the Tempest is likely to require an engine in the same class as the AMCA. Given the billions required to develop and certify a next gen engine, GE and P&W can’t really justify unsolicited offers to collaborate when they don’t have a domestic market. So the UK and France are more natural partners on this if favorable terms can be negotiated that would help accelerate the work . My point was more about there being perfectly legitimate performance reasons for the IAF to seek a new engine on the AMCA mk2. Whether that is acquired fully domestically or via a partnership with a foreign vendor remains to be seen. GE is unlikely to have anything in this category that can be called a gen leap or more over its current offering. All those will be in higher thrust classes / size. By the time the AMCA gets fielded hundreds of Tejas Mk1A and MWFs would be flying with GE engines and I doubt they will get a new foreign engine so if engine sanctions are coming as was speculated a few posts back, then that would mean the Chief was banking aircraft that won’t have an engine (100 GE engines ordered in August) which seems unlikely.

This foreign partner that is being sought will be an India funded affair. So whatever billions that are involved in this partnership will be provided by India. The crucial hand holding will be done by the OEM. However that was a bit too much for GE to do, as indicated below.

2+2 should finally yield 4
https://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes. ... y-yield-4/

At its last meeting in July, DTTI’s jet engine working group was shut down for lack of progress. They chose to call it a “strategic pause”. Apparently, the divergence between what India wanted and what the US and General Electric were willing to offer was too wide. It’s obvious that GE will not part with its crown jewel having spent billions in R&D. As someone said, “it’s the one thing the company has”. GE executives saw it as a compromise of their intellectual property to even suggest improvements in an indigenous Indian engine (Kaveri). Differences also emerged because the US wanted a measure of where India was in terms of indigenous engine technology. India was not keen on open access and benchmarking.

The F404 engines ordered in August are part of a deal of the 83 Mk1As ordered in February. Too late to stop that now. The Mk2 has not even started metal cutting yet. Long way to go.

[Rakesh]

Rakesh: this whole "sanctions" talk is a red herring. The IAF was always after the MRFA (which is the same as MMRCA, which they felt they got short-changed on). When Manohar Parikkar was there, he bashed some heads and made the IAF sign on to Tejas. With him no more, sadly, the IAF is back to its usual import-giri.

And even if you say "sanctions", what will the MRFA solve?

1) Rafale: sure, even those of us who want Tejas MK2 are saying that it might make sense to order a couple of more Rafale squadrons as stop-gap. But there is no money for 114 of them
2) Typhoon: out of the equation. Too expensive and for the same money, why not buy Rafales instead
3) Vipers: IAF wouldn't touch (shouldn't touch) with a barge pole. But this is the only option that might actually ward off a sanctions-threat
4) Russki maal: I don't think the IAF is gonna buy any more aircraft from the Russians. More Rambhas maybe. But that's all
5) Gripen: subject to the same "engine sanctions" as Tejas MK1, MK2 or AMCA

So, whichever way you look at it, if sanctions happen, we will have to face it - MRFA or no-MRFA. One has nothing to do with the other.

Prem-ji, the IAF will not get 114 MRFA in one go. They will buy it in batches.

But since you state there is no money for 114 MRFA, what is going to fill the gap then?

So no money for 114 MRFA and no Tejas Mk2 either. AMCA is ways off. How to address the gap?

[brar_w]

Neither GE nor P&W have ever, to the best of my knowledge, successfully completed an international defense engine program that has no US DOD backing, interest or use case and where they were basically supplying IP and TT for a fee. DTTI is probably the wrong framework for this. Policy alignment is generally much easier to achieve when there are common requirements. I feel this will be a lot easier to do with UK and perhaps France where those OEMs will be able to offer terms that are mutually beneficial to both them and their respective domestic military programs. Trying to get GE to part with next gen engine tech for a program that has zero US interest and likely no domestic market for it was always a strange undertaking. I don’t think there was any precedent for this in recent history.

[Rakesh]

Now that makes sense

[Rakesh]

I wish sincerely that sanctions ARE applied. No other way to remind IAF about how important "sovereign" arms sources are necessary. Time to get GTRE off their behinds to produce something!!

100% Fully agree. Apply the sanctions!

[kit]

I wish sincerely that sanctions ARE applied. No other way to remind IAF about how important "sovereign" arms sources are necessary. Time to get GTRE off their behinds to produce something!!

100% Fully agree. Apply the sanctions!

Indeed agree..that's the thing that will motivate everyone!!...tejas would not have been where it is now , if it was not for the American sanctions. I say bring it on ! F@$k CAATSA

[nachiket]

The contest as it runs right now - 114 MRFA deal - will not ever see the light of day. So you are correct there. Even the OEMs who are taking part in the contest are well aware of that fact. It is an open secret among the OEMs, that the IAF wants more Rafales and nothing else.
It appears that the plan is to order the Rafale in smaller batches. So perhaps an order of 36 - 72 birds and when payments are complete (in relation to deliveries), another batch will be ordered. Or it could be an order of 90 aircraft with screwdrivergiri, so 126 in total or 7 squadrons.

IAF is living in la la land if they still believe Rafales getting screwdrivered in India will happen. It did not work last time and nothing has changed. In fact things are even worse because of the Rafale scam nonsense peddled by the opposition. The govt. will not announce any such deal before the next elections and who knows what will be the situation after that. Even a repeat order of 36 is difficult at this point.

It is that very ambiguity nachiket, that is worrying the IAF i.e. what sanctions? which program? Remember the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report on MMRCA 1.0? It was documented by the CAG that it was the IAF that did not want an American bird in their stables for this very reason. And back in the late 2000s, there was nothing called CAATSA.

Well it will be clear after December then won't it after the first S400 unit comes in? If the IAF is going to reject the Mk2 because of American engines then ADA should scrap the project immediately. Otherwise it'll end up being an Arjun-esque wild goose chase with lots of money and resources wasted on an aircraft which the IAF has no intentions of buying. After which we might as well shut down the ADA itself and declare that we will henceforth give up trying to make indigenous aircraft and continue to buy foreign aircraft in perpetuity.

The proof lies in the pudding ---> why is the IAF insisting that after the first two AMCA squadrons, the turbofans must be of Indian origin? Why not continue with the F414 turbofan?

Because we have to bite the bullet and invest in our own engine program at some point. At least I thought that was the reason why an Indian engine was insisted on.

[brar_w]

Now that makes sense

The reality of most western engine OEM's (and most wester military suppliers in general) is that they are internally expecting to lose money when it comes to R&D (you are competing and generally spending out of pocket for product development even in cost-plus reimbursement environments), you make a small profit margin when it comes to production (particularly initial production) and you make your largest margin over the life of the program through sustainment (because you have all this time to cut cost and negotiate PBL's). What the DTTI-engine initiative appears to have been negotiating with GE and/or P&W is for them to sell R&D, consulting, technology and production for the loss making phase but not to expect anything for either the production or sustainment phase (because there is no domestic need for it) where they actually make money and recover investments. And do this at a time when both companies are locked in a battle over who will supply engines for the two sixth gen fighter programs, F-35 re-engining and who know what else.

Had there been joint requirements, the carrot the DTTI could have thrown at GE or P&W CEO's would be the fact that they would be producing a 1000+ engines for the US domestic consumption, and allowing an Indian design and production partner to produce another 1000 engines for its own programs. Source selection criteria could have been who supplied a better deal to the two as far as pursuing DTTI was concerned. A new military combat engine program can have the production or sustainment phase span anywhere from 30 years to 70+ years. For reference, look at when GE was selected to develop the F-404 (1970s), and when the USAF plans to retire its last T-7A (2060+). It would have quite literally contributed to GE's revenues for more than a century if you count some of the variants (like F-414). Without this sort of incentive, there isn't enough money in the world to convince these players to offload their IP even at a cost when they see no upside to their business on the other side (once development is complete). The financial case for them is always through supporting a multi-decade program and very rarely through very short and targeted program or TOT deals.

The situation with RR is much different. The company is fighting to stay in the next gen combat aircraft propulsion market, and has had financial issues. If Tempest stumbles and the UK, Italy and Sweden join the FCAS or a US program then RR will likely become just a supplier as opposed to the engine prime contractor. So it is very much an existential issue for them when it comes to getting the development of this class of engine right. It could see a shared core or a shared engine technology development with India as a lifeline to inject similar tech into its tempest offering. France could offer some assistance here as it too is likely to need a similar engine class, and needs Rafale sales amidst competition form 5th gen aircraft. Even then the odds of it happening are 50/50. There are just too few examples of this sort of thing working out. The entire DTTI engine attempt was policy overruling common sense and business case. A Brahmos like partnership would have been much easier to execute across a weapon, platform, or another product where a joint need existed. Instead they attempted to crack the hardest of the hardest problems first which have little, if any, historic precedent both globally and particularly with US OEM's that generally have independence on matters where the technical baseline is owned by them. My guess is that it was being run by policy and R&D wonks with very few folks with an industry background trying to figure out how to make this all work (who would have advised against doing this first given non-alignment in terms of requirements).

[S_Madhukar]

What’s wrong with. Russki engine or French one on mk2? Ghee or nothing?

[Vivek K]

The US would have to be suicidal to Block weapons sales to India. China is making a good case for India to remain a strong partner. That said, India needs to throw money and talent at GTRE and make a strong attempt to develop the Kaveri, the HTFE 24/20 into usable engines. There is a lot of domestic talent that needs to be unlocked! If there is a will - a solution will come abo

[nachiket]

What’s wrong with. Russki engine or French one on mk2? Ghee or nothing?

Changing the engine in a fighter program this late in development when the design is frozen and the first prototype a year away from being rolled out would be disastrous. The program would get delayed by years and probably fail. This is leaving aside the question of which engine? Neither the Russians nor the French have a ready engine which fits the size and performance requirements without requiring major design changes to the aircraft. So you would have to first pay them to develop one and then wait for them to do so. The IAF is not going to wait endlessly for that to fructify. It is non-starter. The only other option would be the EJ200. But then the Brits are poodles. What happens if they follow their master in sanctioning us for buying the S400?

[bharathp]

Changing the engine in a fighter program this late in development when the design is frozen and the first prototype a year away from being rolled out would be disastrous. The program would get delayed by years and probably fail. This is leaving aside the question of which engine? Neither the Russians nor the French have a ready engine which fits the size and performance requirements without requiring major design changes to the aircraft. So you would have to first pay them to develop one and then wait for them to do so. The IAF is not going to wait endlessly for that to fructify. It is non-starter. The only other option would be the EJ200. But then the Brits are poodles. What happens if they follow their master in sanctioning us for buying the S400?

could be the reason why the US is holding India's progress and self dependence on arms for ransom.
I cant think of any country that learnt or bought IP off US and created successful competition - the chinese had to steal it, the UK had to become subservient to it.

[ramana]

Folks the MRFA and imports are kalma every IAF chief has to recite on assuming office.

Don't worry.

[Atmavik]

Folks the MRFA and imports are kalma every IAF chief has to recite on assuming office.

Don't worry.

I would wager to say the chances of Mrfa are much lower thank Tejas mk2. There is no money for it. If there was then the evil fascist Merchant of death would have ordered it.

[Rakesh]

Folks the MRFA and imports are kalma every IAF chief has to recite on assuming office.

Don't worry.

So true

[Rakesh]

IAF is living in la la land if they still believe Rafales getting screwdrivered in India will happen. It did not work last time and nothing has changed. In fact things are even worse because of the Rafale scam nonsense peddled by the opposition. The govt. will not announce any such deal before the next elections and who knows what will be the situation after that. Even a repeat order of 36 is difficult at this point.

If we are not even sure of getting 36 Rafales (forget 114 MRFA and 100+ Tejas Mk2s), on what basis are we expecting anything that the Air Chief said in that press conference to be true? He was making claims of 5th and 6th generation technology in the MRFA deal. Which OEM will give you this tech for anything less than an order for 100+ aircraft? But putting that aside, even his claim of at least 35 squadrons will not work out then. In the absence of large (in batch) orders of local or phoren maal, what is the IAF expecting to face the PLAAF and/or PAF with?

What is the IAF planning to replace the Jaguar, MiG-29 and Mirage 2000 fleet with (which will all be retired by the early 2030s), if additional MRFA are not going to come? 83 Tejas Mk1As and 36 Rafales will do nothing to stem the tide of numbers. Additional MRFA are now an absolute must. I believe a repeat order of (at *BARE* minimum 36) Rafales will be done before the 2024 elections. In fact, I expect a repeat order by next year itself. And if BJP wins again in 2024, additional orders of the Rafale will happen again.

If the IAF is going to reject the Mk2 because of American engines then ADA should scrap the project immediately. Otherwise it'll end up being an Arjun-esque wild goose chase with lots of money and resources wasted on an aircraft which the IAF has no intentions of buying. After which we might as well shut down the ADA itself and declare that we will henceforth give up trying to make indigenous aircraft and continue to buy foreign aircraft in perpetuity.

While the Air Chief did not mention the Mk2 in the press conference, I do not believe that the Mk2 is dead. However I do believe that the IAF has concerns of integrating any American kit on their fighter fleet. This same concern does not exist for their transport and helicopter fleet. The Navy is surprisingly the same story. Rafale is reportedly the leading contender in the gold dust contest that is the MRCBF competition. But yet the Navy has no qualms about P-8I, MH-60R, etc. And both services have nothing but glowing reviews of their American platforms in the transport and helicopter streams.

Because we have to bite the bullet and invest in our own engine program at some point. At least I thought that was the reason why an Indian engine was insisted on.

Yes, that is one of the reasons. But I doubt that is the only main reason. The advantages of having your own turbofan is worth its weight in gold.

Well it will be clear after December then won't it after the first S400 unit comes in?

On the issue of sanctions...if India rolls over now, what is the guarantee that Amreeka will not pull the same stunt again?

1) Are you thinking of leasing two Akulas? I believe that qualifies for CAATSA sanctions!
2) Did you purchase four Krivak III Class frigates? I believe that is a clear CAATSA violation.
3) Why did you award Russia with a contract to upgrade your Su-30MKIs? Are'nt you aware that violates CAATSA? But you can avoid those sanctions with an order of F-15EX

At what point does India push back on the nonsense that the US State Department is peddling? India must not dhoti shiver over this blackmail. Apply those sanctions if America feels that is the best course of action to teach us a lesson. It may hurt bad, but it is better to pay that price. But lets see what these consequences will be in December. And like Turkey is planning to do, place an order for even more S-400s if required. But at no point, must India blindly follow the United States.

And I agree with you ---> upgrade those Su-30MKIs. Long overdue and as important (if not more) as getting more MRFA.

[Rakesh]

...

Thank You brar. Great explanation.

[titash]

Now that makes sense

The reality of most western engine OEM's (and most wester military suppliers in general) is that they are internally expecting to lose money when it comes to R&D (you are competing and generally spending out of pocket for product development even in cost-plus reimbursement environments), you make a small profit margin when it comes to production (particularly initial production) and you make your largest margin over the life of the program through sustainment ...

Excellent explanation brar_w-ji. Many Thanks!

[Prem Kumar]

Prem-ji, the IAF will not get 114 MRFA in one go. They will buy it in batches.

But since you state there is no money for 114 MRFA, what is going to fill the gap then?

So no money for 114 MRFA and no Tejas Mk2 either. AMCA is ways off. How to address the gap?

Yes, as we all know, there is no money for MRFA.

Who said "there is no MK2" other than the IAF chief omitting it? If by that, you meant "no MK2 till 2030", then MRFA will take that long as well. So, the gap will exist, no matter how much hand-wringing we do. Its the IAF's own screw-up.

Who asked the IAF to not order Tejas-MK1 or MK1A in larger numbers? They'd rather have their pilots die in Mig-21s than give them a 5X better aircraft! A larger order would help HAL open additional lines and keep the squadron levels up.

But repeated IAF Chiefs would rather intentionally starve & complain, rather than opt for a solution that stares them in the face. They don't mind sacrificing national security, the life of pilots, domestic MIC - all for what - a stupid MMRCA toy that was taken away from them!

Agree with Ramana about the Kalma quote , but its sad that the IAF chief, in his 1st address, missed out MK2. That's unpardonable.

[chetak]

What’s wrong with. Russki engine or French one on mk2? Ghee or nothing?

If we accept the french offer of the rafale line (plus the orders), the french engines will come in sufficient numbers to power the LCAs if US sanctions affect us. The frenchies may even upgrade the engine for you as part of the deal before the deal fructifies, to show their goodwill.

Expect the frenchies to price it suitably, though ie, an arm and a leg, and your first born son

The french love of money is unparalleled but once paid, they will follow through and deliver without any ifs and buts

If it happens, just keep the PSUs out of the equation, or it will become a dog's breakfast

[nachiket]

What’s wrong with. Russki engine or French one on mk2? Ghee or nothing?

If we accept the french offer of the rafale line (plus the orders), the french engines will come in sufficient numbers to power the LCAs if US sanctions affect us

Expect the frenchies to price it suitably, though ie, an arm and a leg, including your first born son

The french love of money is unparalleled but once paid, they will follow through and deliver without any ifs and buts

If it happens, just keep the PSUs out of the equation, or it will become a dog's breakfast

Why do people believe the M-88 is an answer to anything? Its thrust is too low to even power the Tejas Mk1 let alone the Mk2. And every few months like clockwork we seem to have this discussion on BRF about casually changing the LCA's engine like we are replacing an old hard drive on a computer with a new one with more storage space. And every time someone has to point out that integrating and certifying a new engine would be a very expensive and time consuming process and not at all feasible.

[Manish_Sharma]

The IAF is not budging on the S-400 and the GOTUS will not budge either. Avoid-CAATSA-for-MRFA-contract is not going to work either. No engine and Tejas Mk2 will not fly. At that stage, it will be a moot point.

Would it be too many changes in airframe design if EJ200 engine is procured instead of ge414 engine for TejasMk2?

[chetak]

If we accept the french offer of the rafale line (plus the orders), the french engines will come in sufficient numbers to power the LCAs if US sanctions affect us

Expect the frenchies to price it suitably, though ie, an arm and a leg, including your first born son

The french love of money is unparalleled but once paid, they will follow through and deliver without any ifs and buts

If it happens, just keep the PSUs out of the equation, or it will become a dog's breakfast

Why do people believe the M-88 is an answer to anything? Its thrust is too low to even power the Tejas Mk1 let alone the Mk2. And every few months like clockwork we seem to have this discussion on BRF about casually changing the LCA's engine like we are replacing an old hard drive on a computer with a new one with more storage space. And every time someone has to point out that integrating and certifying a new engine would be a very expensive and time consuming process and not at all feasible.

Like it or not, it's the only viable alternate that we can see. If a rafale line shifts to India, they could possibly be induced to upgrade their engine to a higher thrust category as part of their offering

The discussion is picking up simply because the threat of US sanctions is fast looming

If the sanctions actually come to pass, we may yet again be stranded on the LCA engine front

The "new" engine is already certified by the frenchies as also proven in fighter operations.

The french certifications have to be examined and an equivalent Indian certification derived and issued.

Over the years, this has already been done for boeing and airbus aircraft and it is the process by which the DGCA has done all the certifications since its inception. Likewise for the Dornier.

The MIL guys will have to work on this certification because it is beyond the ken and remit of the DGCA babooze

If used on the LCA, the airframe will be modified to accept this new engine and flight testing will be done but without the prior kaveri like need to go to the russkies and use their flight testbeds.

Some of the french engine development and flight test data will be made available to us, though not all of it.

[chetak]

The IAF is not budging on the S-400 and the GOTUS will not budge either. Avoid-CAATSA-for-MRFA-contract is not going to work either. No engine and Tejas Mk2 will not fly. At that stage, it will be a moot point.

Would it be too many changes in airframe design if EJ200 engine is procured instead of ge414 engine for TejasMk2?

depends on the EJ200 engine diameter and other relevant physical dimensions sirji

If there are too many changes, the EJ200 engine simply may not even be a viable option

[ks_sachin]

This is so disheartening...
3 days ago I used to sleep in peace thinking that as my hair turned white I would see a IAF full of LCA's...

Its like the AIr Chief has stolen my retirement fund.....

[Manish_Sharma]

depends on the EJ200 engine diameter and other relevant physical dimensions sirji

If there are too many changes, the EJ200 engine simply may not even be a viable option

EJ200:
Length: 398.78 cm (157.00 in)
Diameter: 73.66 cm (29.00 in)
Dry weight: 988.83 kg (2,180.0 lb)

Maximum thrust: 60 kN (13,500 lbf) and 90 kN (20,200 lbf) (with afterburner)

Thrust-to-weight ratio: 6.11:1 and 9.17:1 (with afterburner)
______________________

GE 414:
Length: 154 in (391 cm)
Diameter: 35 in (89 cm)
Dry weight: 2,445 lb (1,110 kg) max weight

Maximum thrust:
13,000 lbf (57.8 kN) military thrust
22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) with afterburner


Thrust-to-weight ratio: 9
________________________

M88 Engine:

Length: 353.8 cm (139.3 in)
Diameter: 69.6 cm (27.4 in)
Dry weight: 897 kg (1,978 lb)

Maximum thrust: 50 kN (11,200 lbf) and 75 kN (16,900 lbf) (with afterburner)


Thrust-to-weight ratio: 5.68:1 (dry) and 8.52:1 (with afterburner)
__________________

Kaveri GTX 35VS:
Length: 3,490.0 mm (137.4 in)
Diameter: 909.3 mm (35.8 in)
Dry weight: 1,236 kg (2,724 lb)

Maximum thrust:
Military: 52 kN (11,687 lbf)
Afterburner: 81 kN (18,210 lbf)

Thrust-to-weight ratio: 7.8
____________________

EJ200 is 3 inches longer and 6 inch thinner than GE 414

Seems very close fit.

While French M88 is 15 inch shorter in length and 8 inch thinner compared to GE 414

Our Kaveri GTX is 16 inch shorter in length to GE 414 WHILE same thickness

[hgupta]

Kaveri has better performances than M-88 engine and is considered as a failure??? Is it because it weighs the most? Like 300 kilograms heavier? Is that such a big issue?

[Manish_Sharma]

Kaveri has better performances than M-88 engine and is considered as a failure??? Is it because it weighs the most? Like 300 kilograms heavier? Is that such a big issue?

It's parts wear off much quicker than western engines. Kaveri Engine life is very short and high maintenance.

[kit]

Kaveri has better performances than M-88 engine and is considered as a failure??? Is it because it weighs the most? Like 300 kilograms heavier? Is that such a big issue?

It's parts wear off much quicker than western engines. Kaveri Engine life is very short and high maintenance.

Chinese engines had the same problem, yet they used IT...and finally they seem to have perfected it to a reasonable level of MTBF ..

[hgupta]

Kaveri has better performances than M-88 engine and is considered as a failure??? Is it because it weighs the most? Like 300 kilograms heavier? Is that such a big issue?

It's parts wear off much quicker than western engines. Kaveri Engine life is very short and high maintenance.

So? At least it is being paid for in rupees. Money stays in India and can be used to support further R&D sustainment programs. Why can't we implement the Japanese concept of Kaizen where we can continue to improve Kaveri over iterations?

[hemant_sai]

If below wiki info on M88 engine variants is correct then M88-3 and M88-4 are the options for Tejas Mk1 and Tejas Mk2 - isn't it?

Of course if TWR is less compared to GE engines then there will be penalty on external payload capacity - but it is better to keep Tejas alive in case of sanctions with reasonable capacity.

M88-2
A 73 kN (7,400 kgf; 16,000 lbf) thrust variant powering the Dassault Rafale.

M88-3
An 80–93 kN (8,200–9,500 kgf; 18,000–21,000 lbf) thrust variant for single-engine light combat aircraft.[5]: 36  Proposed for an improved JAS-39 Gripen C military aircraft.[6] The M88-3 would have a new low pressure compressor (LPC) with a new variable stator vane stage and an increased mass flow of 73.4 kg/s

M88-4
A 95–105 kN (9,700–10,700 kgf; 21,000–24,000 lbf) thrust variant for heavier single-engine fighter aircraft.[5]: 36 

M88 Pack CGP (for "total cost of ownership") or M88-4E
Based on a study contract, with development and production reported in 2008 by the General Delegation for Armament to introduce technical improvements and reduce maintenance costs. The purpose of this release is to reduce cost of ownership of the M88 and longer inspection intervals of the main modules by increasing the lifetime of the hot and rotating parts. It has been tested in flight for the first time March 22, 2010 at Istres, the Rafale's M02 CEV

[LakshmanPST]

2sq of non upgraded Jaguar will retire by 2025.

4sq (80nos) Darin 3 upgraded Jaguar will serve till 2034-38 according to Hindu report.

3 Mig 29 upg life is extended to 45 years according to news report and will retire after 2032. 1 sq new to be bought will serve upto 2040 .

42 sq by 2040
6 sq MRFA
2 sq Rafale
6 sq AMCA
8 sq Tejas mk2
6 sq Tejas mk1
14 sq Su 30

38 sq estimate by 2030.
3 sq MRFA ?
2 sq Tejas mk2 ?
6 sq Tejas mk1
2 sq Rafale
14 sq Su 30
4 sq Jaguar
4 sq Mig 29
3 sq Mirage 2000

- Su30 Squadrons will be only 13... I don't think they'll form 14...
- 2 sq of Tejas Mk2 won't come by 2030...
- Last few MIG27s when retired were only 30 years old... But were retired due to lack of spares. So, not sure till when or how many Jaguars will be kept in active service...
- Total will be 13 Su30s+4 MIG29s+3 M2ks+6 Tejas+2 Rafale+4 Jags = 32 squadrons only.
- To have 35 squadrons by 2030, IAF need 3 squadrons of MRFA... For that, they need to sign the MRFA contract in 2022...

[chetak]

It's parts wear off much quicker than western engines. Kaveri Engine life is very short and high maintenance.

Chinese engines had the same problem, yet they used IT...and finally they seem to have perfected it to a reasonable level of MTBF ..

so who will convince the pilots to fly such engines while designers are safe on the ground or would they also be willing to fly as passengers on these aircraft during tests

or would you prefer it if the pilots were simply ordered to do so by "higher" authorities

and, what of their families and children, futures and next generations

or could one order them to disregard their futures as well just because the designers got stuck and couldn't progress beyond a point

these engines are not proven, nor are they certified or even considered safe to mate with the airframes, except may be for towing and taxying

In this context, fighter pilots are like apex predators, they need the food chain and the MIC ecosystem to produce and deliver, before they are ordered to go out hunting

sorry to be so blunt, but there it is

[Pratyush]

You mean like the MiG 21.

On a serious note.

It's not like this engine will be flown without any inspection and servicing. Once the decision is made to fly the engine by the services.

They will make sure that adequate supply of spares is available. Along with creating a time table for preventative maintenance in order to make sure that engine certified to fly will complete it's mission.

As the engine is produced and an active feedback channel exists between the manufacturer and the service. Iterative development can happen which will improve the reliability of the engine over the service. Something similar was done with the MiG 29 engine over the course of its service life.

Risk mitigation strategies are available if the forces decided to actually make do with what is available in India. Instead of hankering after the latest shining imports.

[chetak]

You mean like the MiG 21.

On a serious note.

It's not like this engine will be flown without any inspection and servicing. Once the decision is made to fly the engine by the services.

They will make sure that adequate supply of spares is available. Along with creating a time table for preventative maintenance in order to make sure that engine certified to fly will complete it's mission.

As the engine is produced and an active feedback channel exists between the manufacturer and the service. Iterative development can happen which will improve the reliability of the engine over the service. Something similar was done with the MiG 29 engine over the course of its service life.

Risk mitigation strategies are available if the forces decided to actually make do with what is available in India. Instead of hankering after the latest shining imports.

yes, exactly like the MiG-21.

Persist on using it and death will follow in its wake, no matter which chief says what.

why repeat it with the engine...

there is a world of difference between certification and inspection. Spares don't come into the picture at this stage, not in the way that you are thinking. BTW, even the spares have to be validated and certified as fit for use and that is a long process by itself.

a non certified engine could get inspected thousands of times and yet it will continue to sit on the ground, good only for the test bed. It needs atleast a provisional certification to go even a bit further.

For what is being asked, all this is applicable only when the engine is sufficiently matured, people are confident about its reliability and the engine is backed by a whole gamut of tests, with results evaluated, risks understood and either sufficiently mitigated or residual risk determined and accepted. The risk universe for a product like this is enormous and needs experts to properly evaluate and determine this ecosystem.

A single engine going on a fighter is quite different from a twin engined configuration, and we have chosen the tougher of the asks and criticality.

Engine failure leaves one with very little options and the airframe is almost always the collateral causality in single engined platforms.

this engine, in its current state is not matured enough, testing is still to be completed and reliability provisionally determined by long run endurance runs and also destructive testing and possibly, it may well go back on the flight test bed again.

The timelines are long so they may be looking at a couple of years at best, or more, if it is a worst case situation

don't put the cart before the horse and start speculating on wishlist rumours.

when the designers get to that stage, then maybe a dialogue can be established with the users for a flight test program on the intended airframe(s)

There is no doubt that we need our own home brew after burning jet engine with a very good growth potential for our fighters, for our own geopolitical relevance and geostrategic independence and also to take a seat at the high table, but

we are stuck not because of the money or the facilities per se. Those can be found provided some realistic and tangible headway/breakthrough is made

why exactly are we looking for gora help in design...

The reason is plain for all to see and it is like the elephant in the room and yet we will not recognize it, call it out or acknowledge it but instead we will dance all around it, as we have doing for years.

but the big तोपs of the defence scientific community are seized of the matter, so we should be OK, right...

[kit]

You mean like the MiG 21.

On a serious note.

It's not like this engine will be flown without any inspection and servicing. Once the decision is made to fly the engine by the services.

They will make sure that adequate supply of spares is available. Along with creating a time table for preventative maintenance in order to make sure that engine certified to fly will complete it's mission.

As the engine is produced and an active feedback channel exists between the manufacturer and the service. Iterative development can happen which will improve the reliability of the engine over the service. Something similar was done with the MiG 29 engine over the course of its service life.

Risk mitigation strategies are available if the forces decided to actually make do with what is available in India. Instead of hankering after the latest shining imports.

yes, exactly like the MiG-21.

Persist on using it and death will follow in its wake, no matter which chief says what.

why repeat it with the engine...

there is a world of difference between certification and inspection. Spares don't come into the picture at this stage, not in the way that you are thinking. BTW, even the spares have to be validated and certified as fit for use and that is a long process by itself.

a non certified engine could get inspected thousands of times and yet it will continue to sit on the ground, good only for the test bed. It needs atleast a provisional certification to go even a bit further.

For what is being asked, all this is applicable only when the engine is sufficiently matured, people are confident about its reliability and the engine is backed by a whole gamut of tests, with results evaluated, risks understood and either sufficiently mitigated or residual risk determined and accepted. The risk universe for a product like this is enormous and needs experts to properly evaluate and determine this ecosystem.

A single engine going on a fighter is quite different from a twin engined configuration, and we have chosen the tougher of the asks and criticality.

Engine failure leaves one with very little options and the airframe is almost always the collateral causality in single engined platforms.

this engine, in its current state is not matured enough, testing is still to be completed and reliability provisionally determined by long run endurance runs and also destructive testing and possibly, it may well go back on the flight test bed again.

The timelines are long so they may be looking at a couple of years at best, or more, if it is a worst case situation

don't put the cart before the horse and start speculating on wishlist rumours.

when the designers get to that stage, then maybe a dialogue can be established with the users for a flight test program on the intended airframe(s)

There is no doubt that we need our own home brew after burning jet engine with a very good growth potential for our fighters, for our own geopolitical relevance and geostrategic independence and also to take a seat at the high table, but

we are stuck not because of the money or the facilities per se. Those can be found provided some realistic and tangible headway/breakthrough is made

why exactly are we looking for gora help in design...

The reason is plain for all to see and it is like the elephant in the room and yet we will not recognize it, call it out or acknowledge it but instead we will dance all around it, as we have doing for years.

but the big तोपs of the defence scientific community are seized of the matter, so we should be OK, right...

You guys are right and in a way answered your own questions, India being a democracy is answerable to anyone with internet access and can write !! .. we are very risk averse ! .. does anyone think we can develop a fighter engine without an element of risk however vigorously tested ? ( off note a couple of tejas crashes could have written it off as well !! ) Hence the need for "foreign" tried and tested maal .. ( another matter being even if the thing has not even left the drawing board, there seems to be no issues with risk taking if its a gora untested engine)

[Manish_Sharma]

so who will convince the pilots to fly such engines while designers are safe on the ground or would they also be willing to fly as passengers on these aircraft during tests

or would you prefer it if the pilots were simply ordered to do so by "higher" authorities

sorry to be so blunt, but there it is

They created a pilotless version of f16 a decade ago. It flew well. Maybe we can also run it as a separate project a pilotless Tejas with Kaveri GTX. Also on Ghatak UCAV.

Anyway EJ200 seems very close to GE F414, so maybe Tejas Mk.2 can fly on that.

M88 is 17 inch shorter and 9 inches thinner than Ge414 and it was able to replace in Rafale. So can EJ200.