Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

vina · Post by **vina** » 04 Aug 2008 13:21

Hmm. Looks like it is going to be Safran /Snemca.

French Firm to Help Develop Kaveri

The article talks about the French pitching in with the M88 Eco core (from the M88-3). I guess it would be a scaled core from the M88-3 if it needs to get between 25K and 30K lbs thrust that the IAF wants. But dang..Here goes another instance of indian money going to develop a foreign system. The downside is that the GTRE wont get any design knowledge on designing a core. Something better than nothing I guess.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 04 Aug 2008 13:46

its better than letting GTRE play around for another 5 yrs and then telling us it aint gonna happen.

the french surely will not transfer all their design data but some amt of diffusion will take place
if gtre/goi is interested in developing manpower.

Drevin · Post by **Drevin** » 04 Aug 2008 14:13

vina isn't the eco term applicable to the m88-2. First time I am hearing a M88-3eco. Plz clarify if you have extra info.

And if the gurus confirm this news is true then serious implications for the mrca as well i suppose.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 04 Aug 2008 18:22

vina wrote: The article talks about the French pitching in with the M88 Eco core (from the M88-3). I guess it would be a scaled core from the M88-3 if it needs to get between 25K and 30K lbs thrust that the IAF wants. But dang..Here goes another instance of indian money going to develop a foreign system. The downside is that the GTRE wont get any design knowledge on designing a core. Something better than nothing I guess.

When we have such attitude towards our scientists, that what they can give us in return - "something better than nothing".

GoI doesn't have ready to pay mere $2,000 a month to Indian scientists and spend $1lk on world class facilities and project management training, but they are ready to dole out $1 billion to foreign suppliers so that they can pay 20 times to their scientists.

Mere a case of corruption. Nothing more.

We have world-class scientists in metallurgy sitting on their asses in this country but problem is with GoI, because these people are not even in GTRE team.

Solution is to invite correct people into GTRE team and more important is, monitor the project through a professional private industry body.

GoI is taking a wrong route.

vishwakarmaa · Post by **vishwakarmaa** » 04 Aug 2008 18:30

This import of "help" from outside will solve the problem with Kaveri. Oh, maybe. But, it will not solve the problems with GTRE.

They might build this LCA engine eventually, but main root of the problem still remains there. And that problem is, "structure" of GTRE and caste system.

Instead of dealing with this, as usual Indian babus are focusing on short-term gains, but not solving real problem.

After 15 years, during MRCA project, they will say - "oh, we don;t have time. We should have dealt with this poor-class manpower problem during LCA. Now, we should goto americans to buy X-ABC engine as a gap-filling measure"

History is repeating.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 04 Aug 2008 20:48

this is like mig-29 k order., for the french. if we want to improve kaveri, it has to be gtre alone. else, forget about it.

why not directly use f414 or ef200 per our specs, and get the damn apis and precision setup details, so that we at least have that capability and maturity established.

Sri Harsha · Post by **Sri Harsha** » 04 Aug 2008 22:58

Exactly, why waste money on below powered engine which IAF is not going to accept.

Unless this engine can produce 100Kn of trust as required by IAF. Which is not certain. OR
Unless it can be used for MCA, which I doubt it, by the time MCA evolves we would require much higher trust (even for twin engine MCA).

shetty · Post by **shetty** » 05 Aug 2008 02:39

What is this for?

India's gas turbine research establishment will partner French company Snecma SA to build engines for Tejas, the country's light combat aircraft, after efforts by the defence lab to develop an engine on its own faltered.

And what is this for?

Meanwhile, the Aeronautical Development Agency, the aeroplane design lab of DRDO, has invited General Electric and Eurojet Turbo GmbH, a German engine maker in which Rolls-Royce has a stake, for higher-powered engines that would be modified for the Indian fighter, but has not settled on the vendor. IAF has insisted new planes other than the initial requirement of 48 Tejas fighters should have a higher-powered engine.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 05 Aug 2008 03:42

I think that long time ago there was some paper talk of M88-4 or M88-2K engine of 110kn. Can this be its revival???????

DUBAI '95 - SNECMA/S KOREA DISCUSS M88 FOR KTX-II.

345 words
22 November 1995
Flight International
10
English

(SNECMA IS PUSHING a derivative of its M88 engine as the powerplant for installation in South Korea's KTX-II advanced jet trainer/light-fighter project, as well as pursuing an increased power variant for a re-engined version of the French Dassault Mirage 2000.

The M88 is a 50kN dry-80kN with reheat (11,000-18,000lb)-class turbofan whose only application is the Dassault Rafale, but Snecma chairman Bernard Dufour says that it is "just the start of a family of engines".

The company is already in talks with South Korea to offer the M88-2K, based on a proposed non-afterburning variant of the M88, the 50kN M88-2S.

Alongside projecting a family of "dry" M88s, Snecma is also looking at developing the 110kN M884. This project is at the preliminary design stage, but is aimed at eventually replacing the M53K in the Mirage 2000.

Dufour says that Snecma has begun studies into the eventual re-engineing of the Mirage 2000-5, whose single M53 engine would be replaced by an M88. The company is already looking at uprated versions of the M88 for projected higher-weight versions of the Rafale - the M88-3 with a thrust of 90kN, and the M88-4 with 110kN - and he sees these as being suitable for the Mirage 2000.

"I don't see why the [re-engined] Mirage 2000 should not be in production in ten years' time - the delta planform still seems to be the best, and there's nothing very new in airframes," Dufour says.

The French company has already proposed the engine to Saab as a potential replacement for the Volvo Aero Engines RM-12 (General Electric F-404) in the JAS39 Gripen, but Dufour says that the marketing tie-up between Saab and British Aerospace for the Gripen has "diminished" the chances of such a substitution being made.

He holds out more hope of his company selling the M88 - possibly in a non-afterburning "S" or "dry" form to South Korea

asbchakri · Post by **asbchakri** » 05 Aug 2008 08:47

shetty wrote:What is this for?

India's gas turbine research establishment will partner French company Snecma SA to build engines for Tejas, the country's light combat aircraft, after efforts by the defence lab to develop an engine on its own faltered.

This is for the solution of issues for Kaveri engine or a complete new engine co-Developed by GTRE a nd SNECMA with probably inputs from Kaveri engine development from our side

shetty wrote:What is this for?

Meanwhile, the Aeronautical Development Agency, the aeroplane design lab of DRDO, has invited General Electric and Eurojet Turbo GmbH, a German engine maker in which Rolls-Royce has a stake, for higher-powered engines that would be modified for the Indian fighter, but has not settled on the vendor. IAF has insisted new planes other than the initial requirement of 48 Tejas fighters should have a higher-powered engine.

This is for the further batch, after first 48 with GE engines, of the LCA

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Aug 2008 10:33

they are talking of the core from snecma. the compressor, afterburner and fadec from kaveri.
as we heard the afterburner was also lacking in some 10% of the desired peak thrust so snecma
expertise will be sought there too. safran & hispano suiza will be roped in for sure. and manufacture
of high quality compressor blades is also an issue...with some $$ we could buy the single crystal
blade tech or blisk tech via snecma's contacts in industry.

there is a big gap between a prototype working engine & a manufacturable and reliable engine
so this collab must cover that gap also to make kaveri a USEFUL PRODUCT.

after that, a derated version for AJTs, UCAVs and further scaling up, enhancements would be
feasible if we play cards right and improve human resources.

GTRE needs to be cleaned up and perhaps put under control of NAL or ADA. major new capex
investments need to be ploughed in and recruitment of bright people on high contract payscales
done. by declaring it as a Instt of national importance (like barc, tifr, iisc..) some scope could
emerge to work around govt payscales. and such instts are exempt from reservation policies.

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 05 Aug 2008 14:55

Singha wrote:GTRE needs to be cleaned up and perhaps put under control of NAL or ADA.

How about starting with banning the unions in defence PSUs because national security is at stake ? Besides with the Left out of coalition, Government was anyways planning Labour reforms.

Singha wrote:with some $$ we could buy the single crystal
blade tech or blisk tech via snecma's contacts in industry.

No one would part with this. Let's start with first step, local manufacture in collaboration first.

Found an interesting comment on youtube video of Su24, apparently Russia started making jet engines by reverse engineering a Rolls Royce engine sold under license to them for Mig15 and ended up violating the agreement with british.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 05 Aug 2008 15:24

yes I was talking of local manufacture with foreign help. whoever supplies the
engines for 126 MRCA is going to be a in co-operative mood imo. a guaranteed
stream of revenue on 100s of engines over a 40 yr period.

Russia was supposed to give us some tech under mki project but pulled the rug
as usual

rahulg · Post by **rahulg** » 05 Aug 2008 16:38

Regarding Single Crystal Blade Tech, can't we just get the info from the patents filed, like US Patent 5756225 Single crystal oxide turbine blades

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 05 Aug 2008 17:22

rahulg wrote:Regarding Single Crystal Blade Tech, can't we just get the info from the patents filed, like US Patent 5756225 Single crystal oxide turbine blades

Easier said than done. While useful, patents still leave out a lot of information and give info in terms of broad ranges (of temperature for example). Also the patents attempt to be general and not too specific in giving out parameters. What goes into the actual product is often a small subset of entire domain protected by a patent.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 05 Aug 2008 23:09

I suggest these changes for GTRE:-

Stakeholders:-

Tatas or L&T- 20%
ISRO - 40%
GTRE - 20%
HAL - 10%
ADA- 10%

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 05 Aug 2008 23:20

SaiK wrote:ISRO - 40%

Why ISRO? Rocket & Cryogenic engines are an entirely different ball game.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 06 Aug 2008 07:24

per last year note:-

Defence Ministry has told the committee that proposals were under study for co-development of F-125 engines with US Honeywell .

"HAL should be allowed to function on the lines of ISRO and Indo-Russian Brahmos cruise missile project"

"HAL should be totally independent from DRDO. It should be re-structured so as to make it an autonomous research and development organisation,"

high-level committee be appointed to work out the re-structuring of HAL

armed forces should have permanent representation in the HAL board

--►

but why f-125?
http://www.honeywell.com/sites/portal?s ... A6B0&sel=4

sunilUpa · Post by **sunilUpa** » 06 Aug 2008 07:54

SaiK wrote:I suggest these changes for GTRE:-

Stakeholders:-

Tatas or L&T- 20%
ISRO - 40%
GTRE - 20%
HAL - 10%
ADA- 10%

The result will be same as that of Daimler-Chrysler marriage...Daimler quality went down the tube.

venkat_r · Post by **venkat_r** » 06 Aug 2008 10:07

I think it is imperative to get a working model of engine and protect the knowledge already learned, rather than loosing all that in search of a perfect one ourselves. For now this is probably the best solution. There has to be a lot more investment which is already being fought tooth and nail to get some good results. This itself is the shortcut, have to learn by working on each piece ourselves, but might not be able to work on each piece ourselves at the same time.

Also like Singha suggested, some sectors should have kind of a "Over ride" on payments, salaries, hire and fire rules for a period of Say "5, 10 or 15" years and only select rules apply. This is until private sector comes up to an acceptable level of knowledge.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 06 Aug 2008 12:39

SaiK wrote:I suggest these changes for GTRE:-

Stakeholders:-

Tatas or L&T- 20%
ISRO - 40%
GTRE - 20%
HAL - 10%
ADA- 10%

Don't forget Triveni and BHEL who have the only manufacturing experience with Turbines. Though even Reliance would be good, they will get talent from all over the world and then also use Kaveri derivatives in their projects as indutrial engines

Arya Sumantra · Post by **Arya Sumantra** » 06 Aug 2008 19:59

Split the work of GTRE engine into smaller projects: (1) Engineering projects (2) Applied research projects (3) Fundamental research projects
Engineering projects for components to be made with existing/established industrial knowhow. Execute with private industrial collaborators.
Applied research projects for work to be done in bringing lab-level technologies(demonstrated in India/Overseas) to production floor
Fundamental research projects: Split between labs like DMRL and PhD students at Postgraduate research institutions. These could include all the research for new materials and make use of metallurgical experts elsewhere in the country outside the GTRE/DRDO.

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 06 Aug 2008 20:28

SaiK wrote: but why f-125?

Saik
High powered comittee and their family members in this searing hot weather can take a trip to US on Indian Taxpayer expense, do some shopping.

F-125 only produces thrust of 41.1Kn that is when uprated-boosted. IAF requirement is of 90Kn IIRC. Don't know how does this engine fits in this requirement. But again strange things happen here.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 07 Aug 2008 00:10

Baljeet,

Regarding why F125 ?

1. Alternate option for AL-55I, which as of now planned to be used for HJT-36, as India may opt for F-18 option in MMRCA contract so ,it will be easy for IAF to train indian pilots on HJT-36 with an American engine.

2. We have seen the fate and result of PRC's indegenous fighter project F-CK-1.which used F125.
From wiki...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDC_F-CK-1_Ching-kuo
says...
"There is also speculation that the use of weaker engines was due to political rather than technical reasons, namely that the US did not want to see Taiwan provoke the PRC and thus mandated the IDF to have a "range no greater than the F-5E" and "ground attack capability no greater than the F-16". Regardless of the reason, many people consider the F-CK-1 to be somewhat underpowered, meaning that its performance is not at the same level as other ROCAF fighters (i.e the Block 20 F-16).[citation needed]".

So if at-all F125 is planned to be used for LCA/MCA then it is the begining of a strategy by Powerful people in Politics plus People in Defence arena..to provide the same fate for LCA/MCA..for political reasons and also for strategic reason (to provide IAF engines with less power).

Regards,

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 07 Aug 2008 01:46

sunilUpa wrote:
SaiK wrote:I suggest these changes for GTRE:-

Stakeholders:-

Tatas or L&T- 20%
ISRO - 40%
GTRE - 20%
HAL - 10%
ADA- 10%
The result will be same as that of Daimler-Chrysler marriage...Daimler quality went down the tube.

Are you saying Chrysler is GTRE or ISRO? I am sure you wouldn't even think about the later being in that category? May be we are reading into this too much?

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 12 Aug 2008 17:20

There does not seem to be any other report on Kaveri-M88 JV combination except one report aforesaid. I think whenever the JV is signed it should be broad and cover:-

1. setting up labs for future research

2. Further engine for FGFA/MCA

3. TVC for LCA-MCA

4. Marine engine

5. AJT engine

6. Industrial and power engines

7. Turboprop & Turbo-shaft variants

8. Passenger aircraft and MTA engine variants

ajay_hk · Post by **ajay_hk** » 13 Aug 2008 09:53

X-post

EADS Test & Services installs test systems at the Indian Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) to support combat aircraft development

01 February 2008
==============================================
EADS Test & Service’s first sale of Throttle Systems into India.
Kaveri Engine for India’s Light Combat Aircraft (LCA).
==============================================
EADS Test & Services (T&S) will support the development of the first jet engine to be completely designed and manufactured in India. Following successful acceptance trials, EADS Test & Services will install its Universal Throttle Systems at the Indian Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE). The Throttles will support the Kaveri Engine Development Programme, the Kaveri being the first jet engine to be completely designed and manufactured in India specifically to meet the requirements of the Indian environment and is a key component for India’s Light Combat Aircraft (LCA). The throttle systems have been configured by EADS Test & Services to meet the exacting needs of GTRE in providing a flexible and capable test platform for the Kaveri Engine and they will play a significant role in the development and proving of the Kaveri Engine.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 13 Aug 2008 11:14

I think it is good step to start upgrading the labs as part of technology transfer. What is not clear is that – Whether it is just one off import or full contract has been signed with Snecma to re-design/re-build the Kaveri.

Around the year 2000 I had posted a gist of my conversation with a scientist with 30 years in turbine engineering who correctly stated that Kaveri programme is not getting anywhere.

He also stated that “jet turbine” is a God among all machines and if one can make jet turbine then one can make – reverse engineer almost any machine in the world.

My feeling is that primary failing of Kaveri is due to miniscule budget and later refusal to quickly take foreign help when sanctions were lifted.

Note :- France spent US$ 2 Billion to develop and productionise M88 in 1980’s even though it started off from a more advanced industrial base. Therefore we need to spend around US$ 10 Billion on Kaveri and its derivaties in next 10 years to absorb and advance this technology. As I said before whenever the JV is signed it should be broad and cover:-

1. setting up labs for future research

2. Further engine for FGFA/MCA

3. TVC for LCA-MCA

4. Marine engine

5. AJT engine

6. Industrial and power engines

7. Turboprop & Turbo-shaft variants

8. Passenger aircraft and MTA engine variants

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 27 Sep 2008 00:56

Kaveri engine programme delinked from the Tejas

Kaveri engine programme delinked from the Tejas

Ravi Sharma

BANGALORE: In a move that will significantly affect two of India’s most ambitious aerospace endeavours, the Kaveri engine and Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programmes are to be delinked from one another.

The projected development costs of the two programmes presently totals around Rs. 9,000 crores.

Launched specifically as the engine for the LCA, the developers of the Kaveri - the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) – have, despite spending almost 20 years and Rs. 2,000 crore, not been unable to come up with a workable product.

And more crucially even if the Kaveri does materialise in the years to come its present design configuration will not be able to satisfactorily power an overweight Tejas.
Relief

The delinking of the two programmes will bring relief to the customers of the Tejas, the Air Force, since it was they who had indicated over a year ago that the Kaveri with its present design configuration will not be able to power an overweight Tejas, to air staff requirements (ASRs).

The Air Force also indicated that they would place substantial orders for the LCA only if it meets their ASRs.
Dual path

Given the scenario of a long delayed Kaveri engine jeopardising the LCA programme, the top echelons of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) have decided to pursue a dual path. The delinking now allows the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the designers of the Tejas, to go ahead in issuing a request for proposal (RFP) for a more powerful engine that can produce a thrust of around 95 kilo Newtons (kN).

The thrust that the Air Force has projected will be needed if the overweight (by 1.5 tonnes) Tejas is to be powered to meet ASRs.

The RFP is likely to be sent out to two global engine houses - the European consortium Eurojet Turbo for their EJ200 and General Electric for the GE F414.
French assistance

The delinking though is not the end of the road for the Kaveri. A committee headed by Air Vice Marshal M. Matheswaran, has been asked by Air Headquarters to scrutinise an offer made by the French engine house Snecma to co-develop and co-produce an engine along with the GTRE.

Snecma will have to convince the committee that they can indeed co-develop with the GTRE, an engine with a thrust of around 95 kilo kN. Crucial aspects like the transfer of technology to GTRE, number of engines to be produced and costs involved will be studied by the committee.

The delinking will mean that the Tejas will get a ready made engine in the immediate future, while an indigenous GTRE-Snecma developed Kaveri could fructify in five or six years.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 27 Sep 2008 08:44

so they haven't yet sent out the RFPs for the Ej-200 and F-414 ? great, now we won't see a decision on that for another 2 years, which is going to delay any further orders because the IAF won't order more Tejas' unless it satisfies ASRs (which will again change by the time the engine is mated to the Tejas) and there will be at least a year lost in integration and flight testing that will be necessary after the engine choice is made..

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 27 Sep 2008 11:02

I think that runoured Kaveri + M88 child engine should be carefully planned to give us benefit in the future also. A new engine normally has a growth path of around 30%. The kaveri+M88 mating is practically a new engine.

IIRC a M88 derivative was once proposed for Mirage 2000 with 110kn full thrust. At present it seems like LCA requires 90-110kn engine. When TVC is fitted then the engine looses some efficiency as also LCA will grow more. So we need engine of say 120-135kn for LCA-2 & MCA. For the PAKFA & LCA-jsfas thingie we have to look at an engine of 135-175kn.

Hence, we need to plan for the future also, after having Scre#ed the present

namit k · Post by **namit k** » 27 Sep 2008 17:13

how much time this engine development needs?,what r v doing?, even if a batch of 100 engineering students were told to develop such engine over a 10 yr time period while pursuing their research as well ,they could have done it by now, is it really worry that a country of >1 bn could not develop an engine of its requirement in so many years..

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 27 Sep 2008 18:37

namit, cut out the histrionics. they did achieve 90-95% of both dry and wet thrust and the engine was overweight by about 100 kg.
and please remember that those specs match and sometimes surpass those of modern engines like m-88/ge-404.
for a first-timer that is damn good ! if this was the PLAAF, they would have accepted it with open hands !

even if a batch of 100 engineering students were told to develop such engine over a 10 yr time period while pursuing their research as well ,they could have done it by now,

oh yeah, it is that easy ? go and look around how many companies around the world manufacture state-of-the-art turbofan engines.
better yet, look at the chinese programme, with many times kaveri's budget and a no holds barred industrial espionage effort backing it, how much success have they had ?

kaveri is stuck at critical technologies like SC blades that very few have mastered and they are not ready to share !

sum · Post by **sum** » 27 Sep 2008 18:47

kaveri is stuck at critical technologies like SC blades that very few have mastered and they are not ready to share !

Thats fine but going by our still lethargic processes( even after the realisation of the wastage of precious time of these years), the future still looks bleak on the engine front.

sarang · Post by **sarang** » 27 Sep 2008 20:10

namit, cut out the histrionics. they did achieve 90-95% of both dry and wet thrust and the engine was overweight by about 100 kg.
and please remember that those specs match and sometimes surpass those of modern engines like m-88/ge-404.
for a first-timer that is damn good ! if this was the PLAAF, they would have accepted it with open hands !

My understanding says we are not and will never be in a state of Research and development as the westerners unless we match them with political will and budget (for R&D). We want a world class aero engine with auto-rickshaw engine budget.
Even if the budget & political will is provided what the Research houses provide is still a mediocre product (as they also has a internal politics). We are and will remain Copy Cats unless there is a will for innovation (like V1 & V2 of Germans or T-34 of Russians). We are babu-blooded peoples. And That is a bl**dy hard Truth.

namit k · Post by **namit k** » 27 Sep 2008 22:43

sarang wrote:
namit, cut out the histrionics. they did achieve 90-95% of both dry and wet thrust and the engine was overweight by about 100 kg.
and please remember that those specs match and sometimes surpass those of modern engines like m-88/ge-404.
for a first-timer that is damn good ! if this was the PLAAF, they would have accepted it with open hands !
My understanding says we are not and will never be in a state of Research and development as the westerners unless we match them with political will and budget (for R&D). We want a world class aero engine with auto-rickshaw engine budget.
Even if the budget & political will is provided what the Research houses provide is still a mediocre product (as they also has a internal politics). We are and will remain Copy Cats unless there is a will for innovation (like V1 & V2 of Germans or T-34 of Russians). We are babu-blooded peoples. And That is a bl**dy hard Truth.

sarang, you reached the crux of the matter, were already much behind westerers, what we need is abig boost from govt, development will take place automatically,capability issues will be resolved likely,because here were are given a sand bag and asket to develop a computer, russian help is always welcome but thats too limited to economic/business sphere.

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 27 Sep 2008 23:34

RaviBg wrote:Kaveri engine programme delinked from the Tejas

Kaveri engine programme delinked from the Tejas

Ravi Sharma

BANGALORE: In a move that will significantly affect two of India’s most ambitious aerospace endeavours, the Kaveri engine and Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) programmes are to be delinked from one another.

The projected development costs of the two programmes presently totals around Rs. 9,000 crores.

Launched specifically as the engine for the LCA, the developers of the Kaveri - the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) – have, despite spending almost 20 years and Rs. 2,000 crore, not been unable to come up with a workable product.

And more crucially even if the Kaveri does materialise in the years to come its present design configuration will not be able to satisfactorily power an overweight Tejas.
Relief

The delinking of the two programmes will bring relief to the customers of the Tejas, the Air Force, since it was they who had indicated over a year ago that the Kaveri with its present design configuration will not be able to power an overweight Tejas, to air staff requirements (ASRs).

The Air Force also indicated that they would place substantial orders for the LCA only if it meets their ASRs.
Dual path

Given the scenario of a long delayed Kaveri engine jeopardising the LCA programme, the top echelons of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) have decided to pursue a dual path. The delinking now allows the Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), the designers of the Tejas, to go ahead in issuing a request for proposal (RFP) for a more powerful engine that can produce a thrust of around 95 kilo Newtons (kN).

The thrust that the Air Force has projected will be needed if the overweight (by 1.5 tonnes) Tejas is to be powered to meet ASRs.

The RFP is likely to be sent out to two global engine houses - the European consortium Eurojet Turbo for their EJ200 and General Electric for the GE F414.
French assistance

The delinking though is not the end of the road for the Kaveri. A committee headed by Air Vice Marshal M. Matheswaran, has been asked by Air Headquarters to scrutinise an offer made by the French engine house Snecma to co-develop and co-produce an engine along with the GTRE.

Snecma will have to convince the committee that they can indeed co-develop with the GTRE, an engine with a thrust of around 95 kilo kN. Crucial aspects like the transfer of technology to GTRE, number of engines to be produced and costs involved will be studied by the committee.

The delinking will mean that the Tejas will get a ready made engine in the immediate future, while an indigenous GTRE-Snecma developed Kaveri could fructify in five or six years.

Interesting to note that not long ago AVM Matheswaran was heading 126 MRCA procurement, those days putting out of MRCA RFP was put on string of moving target dates, and he put Americans on tough spot to be in the tent or outside the tent in the MRCA reckoning, and miss the only US chance to have a presence in Indian military inventory. And then June-18 happened and US gate crashed into the tent. Last public report was he took command of the ASTE Bangalore (nodal agency to support LCA flight test). I hope he judiciously resolve Kaveri/GTRE foreign collaboration mess.

Raj Malhotra · Post by **Raj Malhotra** » 28 Sep 2008 10:28

I think we need to co-ordinate and fine-tune our quest for engine technology across various levels. For instance, we easily need:-

A new engine/upgraded engine for Dhruv after Shakti in the circa 2015 or so
Engine for LCA which must be upgradable for MCA & PAKFA
Turbofan/Turboprop engine for IRTA/MRTA
Marine engine with off shoots in industrial, power and oil/gas industry.

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 29 Sep 2008 05:38

> Kaveri engine programme delinked from the Tejas

Sounds like an Arjun in the making.

In the end, it would seem the only role of GTRE is to get a foreign company to build the engine for India.

m mittal · Post by **m mittal** » 29 Sep 2008 05:47

@Neshant

IMHO building a engine has been one problematic thing for India. Building an engine via JV and getting the technology is gonna bridge the gap of technology.

Anyways we should be thankful that all that taxpayers money is not gone down the drain, atleast it is being used as the Gas Turbine.

Moneesh