Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

[Rakesh]

...

Please visit link: viewtopic.php?p=2629396#p2629396

Thank you in advance

[Kailash]

Idrw reports France is more open to tot on shakti after noticing htse-1200 making progress.
link

We are who we are, only because of them. Once we have become them, do we still need them? Hope India does not abandon it's research, exhibits some long term vision in aero engines.

HTSE is our long term future and means to becoming a sanction-proof exporter.

[A Deshmukh]

we need to put the damn thing in the air......SWIFTly.
all will offer ToTs and deep ToTs after that.

[SRajesh]

A noob pooch :
How difficult a jump from Turboshaft to Turboprop??
If the HTSE 1200 is a success then can we anticpate a Turboprop variant
We need :
1. Turboshaft for all the whirlybird requirements (all rumours about 2025 some limited series production and test bed of Dhruv)
2. A robust Turboprop : useful both for Military and Civilian use (given potential for air travel increase in the subcontinent) if the jump is not big
3. A Turbofan ( all depends on Mata Kaveri's bounty!! )
4. Marine Engine (Hoping against Hope that Zelensky's crown jewels are squeezed so hard that they drop into out hands )

[Rakesh]

...

Noob pooch...would US $3-4 billion be enough to complete Kaveri development? Asking for a friend...

https://x.com/SJha1618/status/1836423702356926879 ---> I am sorry but the case for spending $3-4 billion on some 31 MQ-9Bs is making less and less sense with each passing moment.

[maitya]

...

Noob pooch...would US $3-4 billion be enough to complete Kaveri development? Asking for a friend...

https://x.com/SJha1618/status/1836423702356926879 ---> I am sorry but the case for spending $3-4 billion on some 31 MQ-9Bs is making less and less sense with each passing moment.

One way of looking at it is - the current haggling for funding of the the 5th Gen TF (for AMCA) devpt, is centered around $6B ask from Safran et all (there's a news link a few pages back) and it seems we were stuck at close to 50-60% of it.
Plus this includes Tech Transfer costs as well, which should be very steep.
So, from that benchmark, $3-4B should be enough if we are to start a K9 class of TF design/dev now, afresh - however since the 4.5Gen tech has been already developed and mastered quite a few decades back, so I doubt, if that much funding would be required for any incremental tech enhancements etc, that are normally bound to happen in such kind of a program.

So frankly, no idea - but actually if your are alluding to the low-BPR 51KN/81KN original TF spec, most of which is already developed in form of the K9 etc platforms, then such an amount should be much more than enough - as nothing much is left to develop in it, in the first place.
Yes, maybe a brand-new A/B section (by Brahmos Aerospace etc), but that wouldn't cost so much.
What is left there, is approx 1-1.5K hrs of flight testing, but no idea how to cost these aspects etc.

However, I think, and as it has been publicly reported before, if the way-forward path chosen is via dry-Kaveri development program (and also includes building a brand new A/B section for it) - and it seems, the aim is for a 54-55KN/86-88KN variant, which would be somewhat different (and will have to be slightly more technologically advanced) from the original K9 variants - especially, and I speculate, in the HPT (and maybe even the LPT section) section.
Now these kind of thrust increments should be well within GTRE et all capability, technologically, so I doubt the funding required would be as much as $3-4B etc.

Bigger issue is, wrt transitioning to mass-manufacture level - which is where quite a large amount of capital expenditure is required, mostly in building-up the mfg ecosystem (presuming all private industries) and, to a lesser extent, in the lead-integration setup (at HAL).
No idea how to forecast the costs involved, but if Pvt industries are ready to make the capital investment themselves, then just for the TF integration setup, I doubt it will cross, max-to-max 1B.
Do note TF integration setup will include setting up a very comprehensive testing infrastructure, down to various component levels, which certainly won't be cheap - but even then, crossing $2B etc funding would be quite a stretch, IMVHO.

But even bigger issue is - are we going to invest in setting up the national TF test facilities (and including flying test bed etc). If yes, $3-4B etc should be required just for that aspect.
But then again, such a facility would cater to multiple TF dev programs in future, but only if they are taken up in the first place.

[rrao]

we need both HTSE1200 and HTFE25. HTFE25 is more complex than HTSE1200, but this also needs high temp materials. Well the progress on HTSE1200 is praise worthy HAL is silent on HTFE25 which also we need . seems HTFE25 is stuck somewhere technically. Hope new HAL CMD pumps up HTFE25.development.

[mody]

X-Post from the Air Force Tejas Mk1A: News & Discussions: 02 January 2022 thread...

And that is where Kaveri program was so crucial ... Kaveri is almost a gen ahead of 404 technologically, and any hint of it about to be getting into mass-manufacturing phase would have done the trick - i.e. a flying Kaveri (even with suboptimal wet thrust rating) would have "rightly incentivized" OEMs like GE to agree for true ToTs etc.

Oh well, here I go again ...

How HAL's HTSE-1200 Breakthrough Helped Secure Complete ToT of Ardiden 1H1 Shakti Engine From Safran
https://defence.in/threads/how-hals-hts ... ran.10012/

Not related to the Tejas, but now as HAL is close to completing the development of the HTSE-1200 engine, Safran has promptly offered complete ToT for Shakti Engine!! Already more than 400 Shakti engines have been built and India had paid for the development of the Shakti Engine itself.
HAL should complete the HTSE-1200 engine development and get it certified and start using the engine in place of Shakti engine, if it can match atleast 95% of the performance of the Shakti.

Just goes to prove the point Maitya is making, not that anyone had any doubts about it. We've all seen this movie play out multiple times from the AESA radar to multiple other technologies.

[Rakesh]

...

I had to edit your above post, due to improper formatting (i.e. my name was put in quotes, instead of Maitya-ji).

I also had to move your post to this thread, as it not Tejas related. Thanks.

Please check your post above to confirm that is what you have typed.

[Rakesh]

It took decades for them to determine that it was a rookie mistake?

DRDO Chief Admits Kaveri Engine Development Alongside Tejas a "Rookie Mistake", Seeks New Path for Future Engines
https://defence.in/threads/drdo-chief-a ... nes.10119/
22 Sept 2024

[Rakesh]

https://x.com/FighterPiloting/status/18 ... 9936007456 ---> 1962 photo of Indian modification of additional 22kN jet engine retrofit on IAF's Packet aircraft. Flew like this till 1980s. Similarly, 53kN Kaveri can be fitted on IAF's IL-76 any day. Unless Indian engineers of 1960s were better than Indian engineers of 2020s.

[sanman]

https://x.com/FighterPiloting/status/18 ... 9936007456 ---> 1962 photo of Indian modification of additional 22kN jet engine retrofit on IAF's Packet aircraft. Flew like this till 1980s. Similarly, 53kN Kaveri can be fitted on IAF's IL-76 any day. Unless Indian engineers of 1960s were better than Indian engineers of 2020s.

That's entirely possible -- much less exam cheating back then.

[basant]

It took decades for them to determine that it was a rookie mistake?

DRDO Chief Admits Kaveri Engine Development Alongside Tejas a "Rookie Mistake", Seeks New Path for Future Engines
https://defence.in/threads/drdo-chief-a ... nes.10119/
22 Sept 2024

Kaveri is a strategic goal, to ensure that our a/c keep flying despite sanctions. So we have three options there:

• Develop Kaveri before LCA

• Develop Kaveri alongside LCA

• Develop Kaveri after LCA

LCA development took about 25 years? Kaveri would have taken too the same time if the programme was kept running and reasonable funds were allocated. Even if it comes a little later, we would be having it for the MLU. So what's the problem? And how do the other choices fare better? Kaveri programme was backstabbed. Not just once for the Mk1. It should have been selected for TEDBF. That it wasn't selected shows what the rookie mistake was.

[bala]

https://x.com/FighterPiloting/status/18 ... 9936007456 ---> 1962 photo of Indian modification of additional 22kN jet engine retrofit on IAF's Packet aircraft. Flew like this till 1980s. Similarly, 53kN Kaveri can be fitted on IAF's IL-76 any day. Unless Indian engineers of 1960s were better than Indian engineers of 2020s.

India is missing a live testbed aircraft and IL-76 would be ideal. Russia has a similar setup and they tested the Kaveri on an IL-96. Why the babus of MoD are not sanctioning an effort for a live testbed - beats me in terms of logic. The only way to fine-tune the Kaveri is by live testing with real-time data feed. That is how GE does it for all their engines. They have data live streamed from all their Jet engines worldwide. Data on every component is known to them so that they can fine tune each and every component. GTRE has to graduate beyond the rookie mistakes and work hard to turn Kaveri engine into reality. How many donkey's years are they going to take to get to proven working engine.

[Rakesh]

India is missing a live testbed aircraft and IL-76 would be ideal. Russia has a similar setup and they tested the Kaveri on an IL-96. Why the babus of MoD are not sanctioning an effort for a live testbed - beats me in terms of logic. The only way to fine-tune the Kaveri is by live testing with real-time data feed. That is how GE does it for all their engines. They have data live streamed from all their Jet engines worldwide. Data on every component is known to them so that they can fine tune each and every component. GTRE has to graduate beyond the rookie mistakes and work hard to turn Kaveri engine into reality. How many donkey's years are they going to take to get to proven working engine.

There is a concerted effort - by certain stakeholders in India (in cahoots with international lobbies) - to not have India develop her own turbofan.

Imagine if India had her own turbofan, then would the MRFA contest exist in triple digits?

* GE only wanted to know from GTRE how far along they were in the Kaveri development cycle, but had no intention of offering any ToT under the Jet Engine Technology Joint Working Group (JETJWG).

* Once the HTSE-1200 turboshaft was developed, Safran offered full ToT (whatever that means) for their Ardiden 1 turboshaft, variants of which power the HAL Dhruv, the HAL Prachand and the HAL Light Utility Helicopter.

Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth - Arthur Conan Doyle.

We are to blame for this criminal mess, not the international lobbies. We are our own enemy.

[bala]

There is a concerted effort - by certain stakeholders in India (in cahoots with international lobbies) - to not have India develop her own turbofan.

* Once the HTSE-1200 turboshaft was developed, Safran offered full ToT

We are to blame for this criminal mess, not the international lobbies. We are our own enemy.

One point: HAL's effort on HTSE-1200 turboshaft shows that HAL has more expertize on engines. GTRE excluded HAL from Kaveri, no wonder they did not progress to a working engine. HAL has that insight into working engines.

BTW the first working jet engine was by BMW and the allies/russia got their hands on the engine after WWII. Britain's Frank Whittle's engine was yet to be proven to work but he got all the patents on Jet Engine! Another weaseling by the Britshits.

[maitya]

...
One point: HAL's effort on HTSE-1200 turboshaft shows that HAL has more expertize on engines. GTRE excluded HAL from Kaveri, no wonder they did not progress to a working engine. HAL has that insight into working engines.
...

Ummmm ... GTRE, at it's inception atleast, is nothing but hand-picked (mostly) HAL Engine Division - that ofcourse doesn't mean, 100% GTRE was from HAL Engine Div etc, but majorly yes.

To be frank, with HAL it has been a mixed bag really, when it comes to "original" TF D&D work ... and mostly due to its legacy of so-called ToTs for >half-a-century etc.
That's understandable as well - no amount of this assembly (and some testing) in guise of the so-called ToT, will add anything to D&D capability at all - barring maybe some manufacturing process capability etc.
And that's precisely why you'll not hear an improved Turbine design, or a higher efficiency compressor design etc for AL-31F (or even RD-33MK) - despite all these bombastic claims of 100% ToT, and "manufacturing from raw material stage" etc for 2+ decades now.
All innovations, a precise few that have got publicly whispered around (and I'm sure there are many more which are secretive, and rightly so) have got attributed to DMRL, MIDHANI, IRDE etc etc - but not a single one to HAL.

Worse, it has been very well known that the Kaveri core has been without any issue, and it's the A/B which led to cancellation of the Kaveri program in the first place - why nothing from HAL wrt this for 2+ decades now.
If you turn the clock back by about 4-5 decades, exact same situation unfolded wrt the Orephus program etc.

Even now, it's the Brahmos corp that is getting entrusted with the brand new A/B for the resurrected Kaveri (based on dry Kaveri) - and not HAL.

But what does that tell us about HAL capability wrt TF D&D etc ...

Issue is all of the above is just one-side of the story - just as an example, HTFE program is an ample demonstration of the HAL's TF capability, really. I'll not belabor the details of the HTFE program, but technologically it's actually on-par (if not more) to the Kaveri program.
HTSE program is also noteworthy, but the cutting edge TF technological aspects are there in HTFE - too bad, things have gone completely silent on that front, hoping something new gets reported soon, wrt it.

[bala]

Maitya ji, You are correct as far as personnel are concerned. I am talking about HAL exclusion from GTRE in terms of ownership. This is the big difference. HAL, as such, is not into R&D, other agencies are tasked with such tasks.

From an outside perspective only successes count!

[basant]

HAL does do a lot of R&D. HAL ALH (Dhruv) and all its sisters are a testament to that.

[bala]

HAL Helo division is different than the traditional HAL aircraft division.

[basant]

Aren't manufacturing divisions always separate from R&D division? Anyway, the HAL website itself has a link to its R&D centers with some description. They include:

• Aircraft

• Aero Engine

• Rotary Wing

• Strategic Electronics

• Aircraft Upgrade

• Transport Aircraft

• Mission & Combat System

• CMPL and NDT Centre

• ASERDC Lucknow

• ASERDC Korwa

[drnayar]

https://x.com/FighterPiloting/status/18 ... 9936007456 ---> 1962 photo of Indian modification of additional 22kN jet engine retrofit on IAF's Packet aircraft. Flew like this till 1980s. Similarly, 53kN Kaveri can be fitted on IAF's IL-76 any day. Unless Indian engineers of 1960s were better than Indian engineers of 2020s.

That's entirely possible -- much less exam cheating back then.

not to mention selections on merit !!

[maitya]

Maitya ji, You are correct as far as personnel are concerned. I am talking about HAL exclusion from GTRE in terms of ownership. This is the big difference. HAL, as such, is not into R&D, other agencies are tasked with such tasks.

From an outside perspective only successes count!

Actually, Aero Engine Research & Design Centre (AERDC) is HAL's Engine R&D setup - both HTFE and HTSE D&D (and many other programs) are entrusted to it.

And, must say, they did a fabulous job wrt HTSE ...
Wrt HTFE, what they'd aimed for, was nothing less than path-breaking advanced manufacturing technology (e.g. 3D printed parts/blisks) - which even many established OEMs have not yet fully implemented.

...
Casting to be replaced by 3D printing while forging, sheet metal processes retained.
Nozzle GV 3D printed with Inconel material – intricate cooling passages with additional which would not be possible with conventional techniques are easily made with 3D printing.
...
From here:

Addn Ref:
1. Ref-1
2. Ref-2

Maybe that's the reason, it's taking a bit of time ... but if they are successful in developing it (and the HTFE-40, the A/B version of it), it will be absolutely brilliant.

PS: Just to provide a feel of what level of perf improvements such technological advances entail, refer to the following perf comparo with Adour (3rd Gen TF) - both having comparable dry-Thrust levels.

HTFE (Adour) Specs:
Length: 1730mm (2900mm)
Diameter: 590mm (570mm)
Weight: 350Kg (809Kg)
PR: 20 (10.4)
BPR: 0.50 (0.75-0.80)
Air Mass Flow:43kg/s ()
TWR: 7.27 (4.725)

Disclaimer: This is not to critique etc of an in-service TF etc - it's merely to demonstrate what kind of perf improvement, technological changes can bring about.

PPS: Current TeT of HTFE and Adour are comparable - both being target to IJT/AJT applications. But, I will leave to the gentle rakshaks, to deduce which one will easily allow such an initiative, given their respective technological base.

[fanne]

Btw a dour engine (and hence htfe) has been used in many varied application - from powering small transport planes to ijt, Ajt, large size ucav, jaguar etc.).

It is indeed a very sweet spot and a very good engine tech to master.

[sanman]

It took decades for them to determine that it was a rookie mistake?

DRDO Chief Admits Kaveri Engine Development Alongside Tejas a "Rookie Mistake", Seeks New Path for Future Engines
https://defence.in/threads/drdo-chief-a ... nes.10119/
22 Sept 2024

[bala]

Oh, yes AERDC started initially as test beds for manufacture of Videshi engines - british and russian. The focus was on manufacturing and testing. Over time it morphed into other areas and now we have PTAE-7, Hindustan Turbo Fan Engine (HTFE) of 25 kN thrust for powering trainers, UAV’s, twin engine small fighter aircraft or regional jets and Hindustan Turbo Shaft Engine (HTSE) of 1200 kN thrust for powering light and medium weight helicopters (3.5 to 6.5 tonnes in single/ twin engine configuration). Various other starter kits were developed e.g. GTEG-60 for starting An-32 aircraft, Air starter ATS 37 & Air producer for starting Adour-Mk 804E/811. The emphasis is on practical working things, rather than pie in the sky flat rating engine (now deemed by DRDO as a rookie mistake) of GTRE. HAL R&D focus is on working models and better manufacturing techniques. They have expertize in manufacturing techniques and given the limited budget and limited vision of babus they have established something eminently doable. If HAL can get the HTFE & HTSE into production then AERDC must be co-opted in other national efforts like Kaveri.

[isubodh]

It took decades for them to determine that it was a rookie mistake?

DRDO Chief Admits Kaveri Engine Development Alongside Tejas a "Rookie Mistake", Seeks New Path for Future Engines
https://defence.in/threads/drdo-chief-a ... nes.10119/
22 Sept 2024

The current chief did not green light the project and has to deliver on what was started by someone else.

So saying it's a mistake is easy and helpful.

Question should be asked, what's his plan after accepting the issue?

[A Deshmukh]

I am not happy with the DRDO chief saying its a rookie mistake. Maybe the headline is distorted, need to read the fine print and context.

When LCA project started - the goals were ambitious.
4 tech areas were targeted - 1) Composite Airframe, (2) Digital Fly-by-wire laws, (3) Radar, (4) Engine.
We succeeded in 3 and not in the 4th.
Engine development needed more funds, which we did not have.

In one way, starting afresh on all 4 techs or even any one of the 4 tech areas are rookie mistakes.
But we took a challenging route.

If we had not made these "rookie mistakes", we will be still building Mig-21-like metal planes, manually steered and with imported radars and engines.
and we would still not have ordered them as they were technology behind, and we would have imported planes with limited numbers (budget constraints) and no aerospace industry. Today we are talking of exporting Tejas to Asia, Africa, South America.

I am quite proud of what we have achieved so far.
Including efforts on Kaveri in spite of lack of facilities and investment. Some technologies need more effort, time, and $s than anticipated.

[fanne]

I am not defending but if I understand it right
He is not against initiating/building Kaveri but making a new plane around a non existing engine. Today an unproven but say magically working Kaveri of 75 kn engine , if we need tejas 2 like output we can go with 2 engine plane. Build a plane around it.
But we are splitting hair and getting worked up on nothing. I just hope that we have Kaveri working, it’s derivative then worked on after that (maybe 110 kn class) or some replacement of f404 f414 variant) along with Luca mk2, amca and tedbf. Ada has its hand full. This is time to prove one’s worth.

[A Deshmukh]

IMHO,
As far as Kaveri is concerned, the Tejas ship has sailed.
Instead of trying to improve Kaveri and make it more powerful and capable of Tejas,
we need to make a UAV, that will be utilized to test Kaveri under different regimes - heights, speed, temperatures, and flying conditions.
Even if the UAV crashes a few times, no harm done.
but the feedback received on the failures will improve the Kaveri.
this improved Kaveri can be fitted into Ghatak - full-fledged armed UAV.

We need more Ghataks then Tejas in the future.

[chetak]

I am not defending but if I understand it right
He is not against initiating/building Kaveri but making a new plane around a non existing engine. Today an unproven but say magically working Kaveri of 75 kn engine , if we need tejas 2 like output we can go with 2 engine plane. Build a plane around it.
But we are splitting hair and getting worked up on nothing. I just hope that we have Kaveri working, it’s derivative then worked on after that (maybe 110 kn class) or some replacement of f404 f414 variant) along with Luca mk2, amca and tedbf. Ada has its hand full. This is time to prove one’s worth.

fanne saar,


This explains why the funding for so many projects simply dried up and/or remained so tightly throttled because no one from the project(s) community could point to a viable way forward or even provide a halfway decent leadership that would have generated some level of confidence and reassured the wary politicos.

Has anyone ever stopped to think how APJ succeed so spectacularly ...... , how he was so revered, and ..... how he was so loved and admired, .... in every single role/project lead that he undertook in his life

One has seen these FAs (financial advisors, the guys with the veto power) at close quarters, in meetings, many of these financial advisors who are mandatorily attached to any project are placed there only to protect the interest of the GoI, by looking at everything with a forensic eye and also to assure the biggest bang for the govt's/taxpayer's buck. They are extremely competent, ruthlessly result oriented, and their follow up is meticulous and fastidious

To put it bluntly, these bean counter guys, based on long experience and exposure, are able to home in on to the very core of any issue, cutting through the BS, able to understand the technology to the extent necessary, to analyze the risk factors and, while seeing the big picture, are able to easily (and usually) separate the wheat from the chaff, if not on the spot, then they know where to find very reliable and competent help them to give a carefully considered opinion that can usually make or break a project

The FAs don't interfere with project specifics but enforce and streamline project declared timelines, audit expenditures, and pinpoint accountability. Obviously, these parameters are unpalatable to most project leads and departmental heads

whereas, most of the guys at the opposite side of the table are, to put it mildly, all hat and no cattle. All of them are looking for the big bucks for their projects and feel very insulted when asked to justify their requirements

The smart guys from the forces always come with their FAs. These guys from the forces will not survive even a small mistake because their careers and futures will evaporate in an instant.

So they are careful, focussed, watchful, and always come doubly prepared

so when some project related big shot admits that a major mistake, (or "rookie mistake", if you will) was/has been made, one can imagine the the sheer magnitude of the feelings that would have been unleashed in so many quarters, especially people who were wilfully sidelined, people whose advice was ignored, and so many people whose budding careers were tanked on purpose, because they did not agree with a capricious boss

just like the IAS guys who pass one exam, and they think that they can administer a hugely complex country, these project guys also pass one exam and they think that they can handle mindbogglingly complex projects. That's how so many "rookie mistakes" get made and also, so very easily, get brushed under the carpet, with no one any the wiser

with very few exceptions, almost all these guys have a hugely exaggerated opinion of themselves, are mostly generalists, jacks of all trades, but sadly, we have masters at none. Yes, there are good and bad apples in every ecosystem, but have you seen or heard anyone ever referring to mediocre apples, which are the ones that overwhelmingly dominate ecosystems everywhere

We need the vertically specialized types, competent, capable, focussed and able to work as part of larger, goal oriented teams ...

But instead, what we sadly have in abundance, omnipresent everywhere, in all nooks and corners of India, are all entitled rajahs with no dedicated prajah

[vera_k]

Has anyone ever stopped to think how APJ succeed so spectacularly ...... , how he was so revered, and ..... how he was so loved and admired, .... in every single role/project lead that he undertook in his life

Fair to say here that APJ benefitted from the TINA factor for strategic tech?

Whereas other tech can be obtained for a price even if if the supply is throttled or the price is high.

Only an extended war can create a TINA factor for this type of tech. Like how much of it was originally developed, because there were no alternatives in WW2.

Or like the Chinese, a political goal to prosecute an offense for Taiwan justifying a WW2 type build up of equipment.

[basant]

The TINA (There Is No Alternative) factor remains relevant today, especially when it comes to critical technologies like nuclear missiles and the ATV. Large-scale funding flows from visionary leadership; without it, we witness the consequences of neglect. Arranging thousands of crores for defense projects is far beyond the remit of 'bean counters.' Sadly, we don’t need to look far to understand the bureaucratic neglect—or even antipathy—towards the Kaveri engine project. Even in defense forums such as BRF, Kaveri is often dismissed as a failure, a partial success, too advanced, outdated, too heavy, etc. These were the same arguments once used against the LCA—criticisms that still persist today, even from some so-called experts and professors.

What helped Tejas was sustained funding, which enabled its continuous upgrade and improvement. It is surprising how few people consistently asked the crucial question: what happens if sanctions are imposed? This is especially relevant given the LCA’s own history and the fact that about 60% of IAF in future will be using GE engines. Anyone with foresight would recognize that the Kaveri engine, or its derivatives, are essential for the long-term success and operational stability of our defense systems, especially in times of war. And that no one would give the tech for free or even for a bomb.

Yet here we are, facing ongoing criticisms of the Kaveri: it’s unproven, too late, too heavy, or an underperformer. While we take pride in derivative projects of Tejas like the Mk2, TEDBF, and AMCA, and acknowledge critical importance of LCA for their success, the same courtesy is rarely extended to the Kaveri engine. IAF at least made and now continues to make positive noise towards LCA. When have we last heard from IAF about need for Kaveri? How is that even individuals who buy a car are concerned about its engine and maintainability 10-15 years down the line while our national client remains silent on the issue? Is there a parallel in current times of any such attitude in other countries?

[maitya]

^^^^ If we (the IAF and the decision makers, the MoD Baboons included) haven't yet realized that indigenous TF capability is a TINA factor, well only God can help us.
And if somebody is thinking ToAsT deals like F414 manufacture or ToAsT++ deals like AMCA TF manufacture, is the future insurance, well even God may not be enough to save us in the future.

LCA-Mk1/Mk1A/2, AMCA, TEDBF etc are all but 2-legged cheetahs, without an indigenously D&D (and thus 100% indigenously manufactured, from raw materials) powerplant - ToAsT deals are nothing but vaporware, designed primarily to obscure this basic fact.
So we can continue to fool ourselves by tom-toming such deals, but military aerospace atmanirbharata will never come about, without this capability.

Let me say again - enough TF technological (both metallurgical and manufacturing) base exists in the country today to D&D (and Manufacture) a 120KN (or even 130KN) class TF - thanks to Kaveri and HTFE programs.
Yes that may not match up to the 5th Gen F119/F135 or Izdeliya-30 class, but a 4th Gen (or a 4+ Gen) class TF, is very well within our current capabilities.

All it needs sustained support (read funding, and more funding) and putting a stop to these bean-counter approaches of tying them, with the so-called concrete-outcomes etc.
Strategic programs can never be held hostage to such bean-counter oversight and accountability (ironically, the much celebrated IGMDP, is a very good example of that freedom) - anybody trying to do so, is actually committing a "rookie mistake".

Any strategic program like these, is all about incremental capability building, spanning decades and no-holds-barred funding.
These can never be tied to bean-counting concrete-outcome/product achievements - and any binary decisions wrt meeting (or not meeting) these outcomes/products, is a sure shot way to exhibit our "rooki-ness" wrt governing the strategic programs.

I ask, with this bean-counting-driven-so-called-accountability-fixing approach,
1) had the short-range SAM D&D funding was stopped with the Trishul program, would the plethora of indigenous short-ranged SAM products be available today.
2) Or, would we have got Agni-III/IV/V and now ICBM (and SLBM K-series as well) capability, had it been stopped at the Agni-I series
etc etc.

Actually, all these talk of "having a mature OEM as a partner" (to mitigate the failure-risk) etc, is a pure tactical thinking - in line with the tactically-mindset-rooted orgs like IAF/IA et all.
Hidden within such tactically-brilliant-thought-processes, is another "rookie mistake" assumption that such ToAsT partnerships will ensure OEMs will hand-over their obscenely-costly-and-matured-over-decades-R&D based IP to us, on a platter (and for a fee).
Whatever happened to handing-on-a-platter of the liquid ramjet engine tech/capability of the Brahmos program, by our all-weather friend Russia - why do we have to then D&D it from scratch for NG, II and other subsequent variants?

Ofcourse, that doesn't mean we stop/abandon these ToAsT and ToAsT++ deals - they are in fact, very useful/crucial as risk-mitigating (or fallback) factors, wrt the respective parent programs (Mk2/AMCA/TEDBF).
In fact, both (the pure-indigenous-D&D and these ToAsT partnerships) needs to be supported/funded, in parallel, as an insurance-factor (to the parent programs) of each other.
It ain't be cheap though - but then again, who said, developing true-atmanirbharata in Aerospace is cheap or easy!!

But, with such attitude (like this hind-sight declaration of "rookie mistake" etc) on display, nothing much is going to be achieved.

[basant]

+100

[chetak]

The TINA (There Is No Alternative) factor remains relevant today, especially when it comes to critical technologies like nuclear missiles and the ATV. Large-scale funding flows from visionary leadership; without it, we witness the consequences of neglect. Arranging thousands of crores for defense projects is far beyond the remit of 'bean counters.' Sadly, we don’t need to look far to understand the bureaucratic neglect—or even antipathy—towards the Kaveri engine project. Even in defense forums such as BRF, Kaveri is often dismissed as a failure, a partial success, too advanced, outdated, too heavy, etc. These were the same arguments once used against the LCA—criticisms that still persist today, even from some so-called experts and professors.

What helped Tejas was sustained funding, which enabled its continuous upgrade and improvement. It is surprising how few people consistently asked the crucial question: what happens if sanctions are imposed? This is especially relevant given the LCA’s own history and the fact that about 60% of IAF in future will be using GE engines. Anyone with foresight would recognize that the Kaveri engine, or its derivatives, are essential for the long-term success and operational stability of our defense systems, especially in times of war. And that no one would give the tech for free or even for a bomb.

Yet here we are, facing ongoing criticisms of the Kaveri: it’s unproven, too late, too heavy, or an underperformer. While we take pride in derivative projects of Tejas like the Mk2, TEDBF, and AMCA, and acknowledge critical importance of LCA for their success, the same courtesy is rarely extended to the Kaveri engine. IAF at least made and now continues to make positive noise towards LCA. When have we last heard from IAF about need for Kaveri? How is that even individuals who buy a car are concerned about its engine and maintainability 10-15 years down the line while our national client remains silent on the issue? Is there a parallel in current times of any such attitude in other countries?

basant ji,


the bean counters come in only after the project has been sanctioned, that is their role

The cheenis have begged, stolen, bribed, or bought technology

The israelis sold their lavi aircraft project, lock stock and barrel, to the cheenis and you can see that design manifestation in one of the cheen designs today

we were offered the entire Dornier 328 plant, jigs, tools and fixtures at a very reasonable price. Our own India designed regional jet could have been been developed from this one single project, with military variants if we had been serious. But many big topes (big guns) wanted to build their own personal empires and so that golden chance went down the drain

the pakis stole, bought, traded nuke goods, and managed their nuke technology from various countries and cobbled up a dogs breakfast of a design, mated with cheen missiles

the foundations of north korea's nuclear development was entirely based on the bedrock of a japanese nuke development understructure that was built while the japs were trying to develop the bomb for themselves

the NK missiles came from the cheen who were messing with the amerikis in an attempt to contain them

Towards the end of WWII, piston engine tech had peaked with no further development possible that would be able to significantly advance fighter aircraft performance

RR built the Crecy, the most advanced two stroke aero engine ever built, and it did not even reach the flight stage because it was overtaken by the new jet engines

All advances in the west, post WWII, on rocket tech, space tech, jet aircraft tech, jet engine tech, nuke tech and submarine tech were all stolen from the germans. A lot of medical tech and data was also stolen from german and the japanese experimentation on live prisoners in their death camps and that data, procedures, and insights, were used by the goras to better their medical ecosystems.

the only thing people know is werner von braun and his american romance with the space race. Rarely is anyone's else's name mentioned. Over the years it has added to the myth of a very advanced, technologically sustained, and outstandingly innovative amriki society. They are shy of telling the truth, that they stole from the germans and falsified a narrative of ameriki exceptionalism.

the jet engine flew in germany some years before whittle's engine did, the germans bench tested their engine by 1937 and a fully operational jet aircraft, the He 178, was flown on Aug 27, 1939

Their V1 and V2 rocket programs is the basis of various evolutions of missiles in countries around the world

the ameriki stealth bomber, essentially a flying wing, which the amrikis claim is the greatest invention since sliced bread was granted a german patent in 1910.

The germans flew the first of the swept wings, both forward and backward swept examples

Even the amriki highways are based on the concept and design of the german autobahn

Almost everything the west claims as their own today is the result of stolen german tech

Morality simply does not enter into matters of NATSEC.

India fought so many wars since 1947, where was the so called TINA factor then or where is it now

So, either do what everyone else has done/is doing or just sit and weep

It is not just the lack of money alone that has landed us in this situation.

Other factors have been staring us in the face for decades now

[chetak]

^^^^ If we (the IAF and the decision makers, the MoD Baboons included) haven't yet realized that indigenous TF capability is a TINA factor, well only God can help us.
And if somebody is thinking ToAsT deals like F414 manufacture or ToAsT++ deals like AMCA TF manufacture, is the future insurance, well even God may not be enough to save us in the future.

LCA-Mk1/Mk1A/2, AMCA, TEDBF etc are all but 2-legged cheetahs, without an indigenously D&D (and thus 100% indigenously manufactured, from raw materials) powerplant - ToAsT deals are nothing but vaporware, designed primarily to obscure this basic fact.
So we can continue to fool ourselves by tom-toming such deals, but military aerospace atmanirbharata will never come about, without this capability.

Let me say again - enough TF technological (both metallurgical and manufacturing) base exists in the country today to D&D (and Manufacture) a 120KN (or even 130KN) class TF - thanks to Kaveri and HTFE programs.
Yes that may not match up to the 5th Gen F119/F135 or Izdeliya-30 class, but a 4th Gen (or a 4+ Gen) class TF, is very well within our current capabilities.

All it needs sustained support (read funding, and more funding) and putting a stop to these bean-counter approaches of tying them, with the so-called concrete-outcomes etc.
Strategic programs can never be held hostage to such bean-counter oversight and accountability (ironically, the much celebrated IGMDP, is a very good example of that freedom) - anybody trying to do so, is actually committing a "rookie mistake".

Any strategic program like these, is all about incremental capability building, spanning decades and no-holds-barred funding.
These can never be tied to bean-counting concrete-outcome/product achievements - and any binary decisions wrt meeting (or not meeting) these outcomes/products, is a sure shot way to exhibit our "rooki-ness" wrt governing the strategic programs.

I ask, with this bean-counting-driven-so-called-accountability-fixing approach,
1) had the short-range SAM D&D funding was stopped with the Trishul program, would the plethora of indigenous short-ranged SAM products be available today.
2) Or, would we have got Agni-III/IV/V and now ICBM (and SLBM K-series as well) capability, had it been stopped at the Agni-I series
etc etc.

Actually, all these talk of "having a mature OEM as a partner" (to mitigate the failure-risk) etc, is a pure tactical thinking - in line with the tactically-mindset-rooted orgs like IAF/IA et all.
Hidden within such tactically-brilliant-thought-processes, is another "rookie mistake" assumption that such ToAsT partnerships will ensure OEMs will hand-over their obscenely-costly-and-matured-over-decades-R&D based IP to us, on a platter (and for a fee).
Whatever happened to handing-on-a-platter of the liquid ramjet engine tech/capability of the Brahmos program, by our all-weather friend Russia - why do we have to then D&D it from scratch for NG, II and other subsequent variants?

Ofcourse, that doesn't mean we stop/abandon these ToAsT and ToAsT++ deals - they are in fact, very useful/crucial as risk-mitigating (or fallback) factors, wrt the respective parent programs (Mk2/AMCA/TEDBF).
In fact, both (the pure-indigenous-D&D and these ToAsT partnerships) needs to be supported/funded, in parallel, as an insurance-factor (to the parent programs) of each other.
It ain't be cheap though - but then again, who said, developing true-atmanirbharata in Aerospace is cheap or easy!!

But, with such attitude (like this hind-sight declaration of "rookie mistake" etc) on display, nothing much is going to be achieved.

maitya saar,

we really had no business exporting the brahmos

most of the buyer/interested countries are deeply infested with cheeni sleepers and trojans

soon, some clown may even okay the export of our nuclear submarine

[basant]

Chetak sir, no 'ji' for me pl! I did not mean to say that we could not have got tech the other way. What I am saying is that the 'intent' was missing to go after it both (government and 'customer'). In all the cases listed, the respective governments were strongly after the tech and supported its acquisition by whatever means. That's understandable, and even ATV got a lot of help from USSR/Russians. In absence of such a compulsion, the project managers are left with little, or as with Kaveri, no funds. Development of such an engine cannot be done by a single organization alone. Even LCA required ADA and ADA itself collaborated with many organizations to get LCA flying. But an unfunded prototype jet engine of a country that susceptible to multi-front war and sanctions with no alternative engine is unheard of. GTRE did not have any tech/infra for the class of engine Kaveri was when it started. Why is it so difficult to believe we would have not have it flying when more funds are available either to fix the issues or design a derivative? For understand the affection of IAF towards Kaveri we should remember what Sherlock Holmes deduced in Silver Blaze:

Holmes: To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.
Gregory: The dog did nothing in the night-time.
Holmes: That was the curious incident.

[SRajesh]

^^ chetakji
We are becoming prisoners of our devices.
We are being held prisoner to our age old values and told : be honest, not cheat, forgive and forget(what I call the Prthviraj Complex) and other nobel ideals.
Most Politocos are fools when it comes to NASTEC and cutting edge techs. The Baboos know how to play the game and will never allow a MIC to take root given the Gandhian values beng the other stick(ahimsa) used to beat the fools to get into line.
If anyone wants to read Post WWII sudden resurgence of tech especially Jet and Space please read Carl Sagan book "Space" (thought a fictionalized account still gives an idea) how the West(especially Unkil) and the Bear stole tech and leapfrogged.
Saam Dhaam Dhanda Bhed Chal Kapat we have to use all and say Tenga to the Goras

[bala]

operational jet aircraft, the He 178, was flown on Aug 27, 1939

All successful jet engines of the world are based on Hans von Ohain work and Frank Whittle is credited with Jet Engines! Hans von Ohain emigrated to the US.

Almost everything the west claims as their own today is the result of stolen german tech

There is study in the US about who is succeeding amongst immigrant white population. It turns out that those with Germanic background are ahead of their other counterparts including those from Britland. DJ Trump is one example though he is both german and scottish.