Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Drishyaman »

Dear Shiv,

I fully agree with what you have said in your last line (Thatz the bottomline).
shiv wrote:We can buy those years of experience by buying people though.

Now, my question is if India is capable of buying Jets off-the-self for $ 10-12 billion, why can't we buy experienced professionals as well. At the same time you must agree the professionals at GTRE are no new comers and they just need to brush off with the latest technology.


Again, I would like to agree with what Geeth has said.


I would also like to emphasis on the point its only the niggling gaps needs to be filled up with TOT.
Suresh S
BRFite
Posts: 859
Joined: 25 Dec 2008 22:19

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Suresh S »

shiv wrote:
We can buy those years of experience by buying people though.


agree with everything shiv has said except that people who have India,s best interests in their hearts and minds can not be bought for a price
JimmyJ
BRFite
Posts: 211
Joined: 07 Dec 2007 03:36
Location: Bangalore

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by JimmyJ »

Reverse brain drain is a scenario that has already begun and will continue to accelerate if India speeds ahead its economic growth. For it to amplify I guess the defense industry sector too need to grow, both in private and public sector. There are lot of desis in foreign land working on critical technology who could come back, if they find that home turned out to be sweeter home.
Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Drishyaman »

vic wrote:
I think it would be better if GTRE pursues 4 programmes:-

K9+ for improved Kaveri

K10 for Snecma M88 called Kaveri JV for saving H&D by spending Indian taxpayer money

K11 for developing all new fully indigenous engine (similar tech level as k10) as a fail safe for refusal of other nations to transfer full tech for K10-One should involve pvt sector from the beginnning in this progamme

K12 to start planning for next gen engine after K10-K11 so that we can come level with the world - One should involve pvt sector from the beginnning in this progamme also
Probably, Great Idea Sirji.

But, that will again require investment and support from GOI.
asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by asprinzl »

I think the long write-up by Narayanan on the Kaveri and matters surrounding it is priceless.
Avram
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by vic »

Cross post

EJ has made a intelligent choice as I continue to believe that LCA production for Mark2 will be IAF=200, IN=50-60, Trainer using EJ derivative 100-159, UCAV using EJ derivative 100-200, AMCA using EJ derivative 300x2=600 engines etc. So the opportunity is to get something like 1000 engines contract apart from MRCA contract which can go upto 300x2= another 600 engines i.e. 1600 engines. Apart from spin offs!
P Chitkara
BRFite
Posts: 355
Joined: 30 Aug 2004 08:09

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by P Chitkara »

B_Ambuj wrote: Remember the Swedish are prepared to transfer the Complete Technology for Grippen. Don't they have the fear of creating another competitor for themselves? So, it again boils down to money.
Deep TOT on engine was a part of the sukhoi deal. Have we been able to use it to overcome our problems with Kaveri? Proof of the pudding lies in eating it sir. So far the pudding hasn’t turned out quiet as expected.
B_Ambuj wrote: Czechs were willing to do the Complete Technology Transfer for Aero L-29 Delfín,which was on offer to India sometimes back. Why? Its for the Money again.
Frankly speaking, I don’t have any knowledge on it, so can't comment.
B_Ambuj wrote: Why did Russians rope in Indians for their 5 th Gen Fighter Aircraft. Its for Money again.
They are merely reducing costs for themselves by sharing development cost and ensuring the production numbers. One can be rest assured, we will be confined to non-critical or non-cutting edge areas as far as stealth is concerned.

There are no short cuts to success. With 21 years of exp. GTRE needs just a gentle push in the right area. Others are ready to give it now because they see the inevitable. They know we will be there in x number of years. They just want to make money by making it x - n number of years.
jai
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 08 Oct 2009 19:14

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by jai »

We can buy those years of experience by buying people though
Only if the GOI was smart enough to find ways to do it....we could have got tremendously capable resource earlier when Soviet Union broke up, and perhaps this may be possible even now as western economies are not really rocking.

Unfortunately, the BABU's will not allow it or let it happen on some pretext or the other...for example, will not let scientists get better salaries than lets say..a certain babu at a certain level of experience/service..etc etc.

We need a separate compensation and benefits strategy to attract the best talent out of the existing big engine houses, as no one will ever come at less than what they earn abroad. Netas and Babu's would have to agree to paying scientists more than/equal to comparative Pvt/multinational salaries to get this talent, which I do not sadly see happening. :cry:
Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Drishyaman »

P Chitkara wrote: Deep TOT on engine was a part of the sukhoi deal. Have we been able to use it to overcome our problems with Kaveri? Proof of the pudding lies in eating it sir. So far the pudding hasn’t turned out quiet as expected.
Is the Sukhoi Engine in the same Class as the Kaveri Engine? Is the Sukhoi-30 (AL-31FL) engine as technologically advanced as the Eurojet EJ200?
Let us have a look(as per wiki).

AL-31FL
Dry weight: 1570 kg
Maximum thrust: 122.58 kN with afterburner
Thrust to weight ratio: 7.14:1

EJ200
Dry weight: 989 kg
Maximum thrust: 89 kN with afterburner
Thrust to weight ratio: 9.175:1

Kaveri
Dry weight: 1,100 kg
Maximum thrust: 81.1 kN with afterburner
Thrust to weight ratio: 7.8:1

The Thrust to weight ratio proves that Kaveri's Thrust to Weight Ratio is better than AL-31FL. The Kaveri Engine has infact produced 83-85 KN in June 2010 with the Snecma Core. An engine with 85 KN thrust actually doesnot meet the current requirement. The current requirement is for a 90 + KN engine for Tejas MK-II.

Are you sure that what ever Kaveri has achieved in June, 2010 has been done by GTRE and that GTRE has not taken any input for achieving the same from the Deep TOT on Sukhoi Engine or from Snecma? How are you so sure?

Yes Sir, The proof of pudding is in eating but not in eating a half cooked pudding. The Kaveri is still in development. Ok, you can say, the pudding is taking too much time in getting cooked. I agree. This is the reason why I suggested in some of my earlier post that the Kaveri Project needs to accelerated with some measures like fast tracking and crashing the timelines.
P Chitkara wrote: They are merely reducing costs for themselves by sharing development cost and ensuring the production numbers. One can be rest assured, we will be confined to non-critical or non-cutting edge areas as far as stealth is concerned.
My argument was whatever the Russian are doing is for money and You seem to agree. I no where mentioned that the Russians are going transfer the full futuristic stealth technology to India for the FGFA.
P Chitkara wrote: There are no short cuts to success. With 21 years of exp. GTRE needs just a gentle push in the right area. Others are ready to give it now because they see the inevitable. They know we will be there in x number of years. They just want to make money by making it x - n number of years.
Yes, I fully agree with this and this is the point for my argument i.e. reduce the development time of an acceptable Kaveri Engine, by hook or by crook.
Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Drishyaman »

jai wrote:
We need a separate compensation and benefits strategy to attract the best talent out of the existing big engine houses, as no one will ever come at less than what they earn abroad. Netas and Babu's would have to agree to paying scientists more than/equal to comparative Pvt/multinational salaries to get this talent, which I do not sadly see happening. :cry:
There can be a walk arround for the same issue. We need not directly employ the foreign scientists/engineers because they won't be coming in at the same price as the Indians. But, they can be taken up as consultants who are not in the direct pay-roll of the organisations and they can be paid higher packages. This way is actually followed by many companies in India :D
yantra
BRFite
Posts: 185
Joined: 28 Jul 2010 03:46

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by yantra »

The GoI can overtly invite NRI citizens to come back offering them (at least a cream of 20-30 in each identified area/s) attractive packages and requisite infrastructure and of course, positions/titles. Can even create a Padma Award style Awards and titles for the scientific community and shower the best with these awards. Yes, all this will cost a couple of (or a few) billion dollars, but it will help create a stream of second line engineers/scientists and a really effective transfer of technology. It needs vision and a lot of guts (read political will) to layout and pursue this program in the long-haul.. :)
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by vic »


I think if it was an FMS deal then we would have got the engines for US$ 1-1.5 Billion with no ToT or Offsets, now we will get wayyyyyy better deal.
Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Luxtor »

vic wrote:Cross post

EJ has made a intelligent choice as I continue to believe that LCA production for Mark2 will be IAF=200, IN=50-60, Trainer using EJ derivative 100-159, UCAV using EJ derivative 100-200, AMCA using EJ derivative 300x2=600 engines etc. So the opportunity is to get something like 1000 engines contract apart from MRCA contract which can go upto 300x2= another 600 engines i.e. 1600 engines. Apart from spin offs!
Ahhhhh, Dreams...Dreams....., Dreams that float on an impatient wind. It's nice to be able to dream. Sometimes dreams do come true. :)
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Indranil »

I have a question ...

If we get the F414 in the LCA Mark-II, when it comes in for re-engining how will we fit the Kaveri into it? Can the mounts be easily changed on an operational airframe? Are there any adverse effects of this on operations ?
vsharm
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 2
Joined: 26 Dec 2008 18:26

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by vsharm »

B_Ambuj wrote:
P Chitkara wrote:
The Thrust to weight ratio proves that Kaveri's Thrust to Weight Ratio is better than AL-31FL. The Kaveri Engine has infact produced 83-85 KN in June 2010 with the Snecma Core. An engine with 85 KN thrust actually doesnot meet the current requirement. The current requirement is for a 90 + KN engine for Tejas MK-II.

Are you sure that what ever Kaveri has achieved in June, 2010 has been done by GTRE and that GTRE has not taken any input for achieving the same from the Deep TOT on Sukhoi Engine or from Snecma? How are you so sure?
Kaveri has certainly NOT been run with a Snecma core- there is no contract signed with Snecma at least not yet.
One does have to wonder if there will ever be one in the light of the choice of the F414. India's strategy is far from clear on what it wants to do engine wise and all this fumbling has put it back at least a decade.
The only sensible long term strategy is to co-develop an engine with as much TOT as you can absorb and put it into production be it a limited run - then you need a follow up buildng on what you have consolidated. But easier said than done...
Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Willy »

]

The Thrust to weight ratio proves that Kaveri's Thrust to Weight Ratio is better than AL-31FL. The Kaveri Engine has infact produced 83-85 KN in June 2010 with the Snecma Core. An engine with 85 KN thrust actually doesnot meet the current requirement. The current requirement is for a 90 + KN engine for Tejas MK-II.

Are you sure that what ever Kaveri has achieved in June, 2010 has been done by GTRE and that GTRE has not taken any input for achieving the same from the Deep TOT on Sukhoi Engine or from Snecma? How are you so sure?


Kaveri has certainly NOT been run with a Snecma core- there is no contract signed with Snecma at least not yet.
One does have to wonder if there will ever be one in the light of the choice of the F414. India's strategy is far from clear on what it wants to do engine wise and all this fumbling has put it back at least a decade.
The only sensible long term strategy is to co-develop an engine with as much TOT as you can absorb and put it into production be it a limited run - then you need a follow up buildng on what you have consolidated. But easier said than done...
Well news coming out that discussions were held with Snecma a week or so ago...
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Austin »

Any news on final Kaveri test scheduled for October on board IL-76 ?
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by SaiK »

Image

single crystals and blisks comes with the F414INS6 engines - of course screwdriver tech, but definitely a learning curve in these assemblies.
Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8426
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Indranil »

^^^ I was speaking to a graduate student at my university. He has some knowledge of single crystal technology and apparently had done some internship at HAL (not sure if it was related to GTRE). He said that it is not the SCB as such. It is the generation of SC technology required that we seem to be behind at.

Ofcourse, he might have been wrong or I could have misunderstood.

Could some enlightened soul educate me more on this.

Thanks
Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Gaur »

^^
IIRC, I think I have read some posts on BR which talk about something similar. The gist of the posts, if I remember correctly, was that it is one thing to produce something in lab for but totally different to create the technology to be able to manufacture it in industries with reasonable attempts and success rate. So it has to do with turning a science experiment into a working product which can be produced and used outside a lab.
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Austin »

I think we already have exposure to Single Crystal Blade and even TOT via AL-31FP but it is some how limited to be used only for AL-31FP.

It is a good indication that TOT does not help you do things unless you figure out how to do it which is to say try,fail,try,success method.
AdityaM
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2063
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by AdityaM »

India expels Eurojet arms dealer
A well-known German arms dealer has been expelled from India after he audaciously attempted to manipulate a mega defence contract.
ShivaS
BRFite
Posts: 701
Joined: 16 Jul 2010 14:23

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by ShivaS »

Austin wrote:I think we already have exposure to Single Crystal Blade and even TOT via AL-31FP but it is some how limited to be used only for AL-31FP.

It is a good indication that TOT does not help you do things unless you figure out how to do it which is to say try,fail,try,success method.
Do we need proof?

The jokers at HEC are going in for Foreign collobration to make N power plant when every thing is under their roof. So smuch vaunted BARC can easily give blue prints to manufacture the equipment but then...

The forefathers of this country From JLN to ABV were nationlists who wanted to build the infrastructure with initial seeding from Foreign countries, America, Russia Germany, Czechslovakia, UK, France, with hope that our engineering babus and so called super duper IIT grads would build over the edifice they created .... but then nobody wants to move their but and do something, they go to IIMs to sell H Lever products.... or build empires in OFPS till retirements...
BHPV is in doldrums, so is mazagon docks , garden reach, Midhani, HAL, AVADI... you name it ,,,
Jai Ho
Mera mahan...
sunilUpa
BRFite
Posts: 1793
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 04:16

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by sunilUpa »

AdityaM wrote:India expels Eurojet arms dealer
A well-known German arms dealer has been expelled from India after he audaciously attempted to manipulate a mega defence contract.
Hmmm that's pretty damning indictment of Ajai shukla! clicky
Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Austin »

^^^ Indeed and that shows how media can be manipulated by Arms Dealer and even known people can fall for such trap , its a good thing this got discovered and the person got kicked off.

Eurojet was perhaps saved from being blacklisted.
Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Juggi G »

Russia Tests Engine for Indian Fighter Jet
Image
MOSCOW, November 10

Russia has started in-flight tests of an Indian domestically-designed gas turbine engine for an indigenous light fighter, state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport said Wednesday.

The engine, dubbed Kaveri, has been designed by India's Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) for the Tejas light fighter developed under the Indian national program Light Combat Aircraft.

"The first flight of an Il-76LL test aircraft with a Kaveri engine set in place of one of the plane's engines continued for 45 minutes and confirmed the results of ground tests," Rosoboronexport said in a statement.

About 50 in-flight tests have been scheduled for the next few months to confirm the engine's characteristics and reliability.

"After that, the Engine will be Tested on the Tejas Fighter," the statement said.

Despite numerous delays in the development of the Kaveri engine, India still hopes to put it on the later version of the Tejas aircraft.


The current version of the Tejas fighter is equipped with a single GE F404 afterburning turbofan engine developed by General Electric. India has recently ordered at least 99 advanced GE F414 engines for the next production batch of Tejas.

The Indian Air Force is reported to have a requirement for 200 single-seat Tejas fighters and 20 two-seat conversion trainers, while the Indian Navy may order up to 40 single-seaters.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by SaiK »

well.. what have we from royfc!
India Tests Own Engine at Zhukovskiy

((Designated the Kaveri, the engine was fitted to an Il-76 and tested up to Mach 0.6 (690 kilometers per hour). It should produce 93 - 100 kilotons of thrust. Originally reported by Flightglobal. Not further translated.))

Source: 10.11.10, Avia.RU
Is that the one tested or the growth potential of the Russkie -English say?
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by SaiK »

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... debut.html
got it here.. okay, that is a projected requirement.
As of last year, India's state-owned Gas Turbine Research Establishment had spent 20 billion rupees ($455 million) over the 20-year programme, but produced a powerplant that was overweight and that failed to provide the 21,000-22,500lb (93-100kN) of thrust required for the Indian air force's Tejas light combat aircraft. Details of the engine's thrust output during the Moscow test have not been disclosed.
mmm.. now that confuses me. Don't tell me that GTRE did the higher thrust K version?
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Pratyush »

From the report it does seem that the higher thrust version of the Kaveri was tested. AS they plan to use the same on a Tejas airframe. If they do and do it with maximum all up weight for the Tejas in the next one year or so. It will surely provide a great deal of confidence to the IAF wrt the Tejas and the AMCA.
Juggi G
BRFite
Posts: 1070
Joined: 11 Mar 2007 19:16
Location: Martyr Bhagat Singh Nagar District, Doaba, Punjab, Bharat. De Ghuma ke :)

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Juggi G »

India-made Kaveri Engine Clears Trials In Russia
Image
India-made Kaveri Engine Clears Trials In Russia
Nov 11, 2010

By Anantha Krishnan M.
Bengaluru

Image

India last week successfully flight tested the indigenously designed and developed Kaveri engine during Flying Test Bed (FTB) trials at the Gromov Flight Research Institute (GFRI) in Russia.

In its first flight, the engine flew for more than one hour up to at an altitude of 6,000 meters (19,685.04 ft.) at a speed of Mach 0.6. Engine control, performance and health during the flight were found to be excellent. With this test, the Kaveri engine has now completed a major milestone of the development program.

An existing IL-76 aircraft was modified as a FTB for this trial, with the Kaveri engine replacing one of the aircraft’s four engines. The modifications included instrumentation required for trials, as well as integration of the mechanical, electrical and fuel systems. The engine was controlled by the pilot from the cockpit. Before the first flight, a number of taxi trials were carried out with the Kaveri engine integrated with the aircraft. The engine data was recorded in the aircraft and transmitted to a ground station by telemetry.

“During the coming months, a further 50-60 test flights will be carried out to mature the engine in terms of reliability, safety and airworthiness. These trials would pave the way for further flight trials of [the] Kaveri engine with a fighter aircraft,” Defense Research Development Organization (DRDO) Chief Controller Prahlada told Aviation Week.

A team of 20 scientists from the Bengaluru-based Gas Turbine Research Establishment, a DRDO lab, have been working along with GFRI for these trials.
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by vic »

The problem with our engine projects like Kaveri and Arjun engine project is utter lack of understanding in a Babu as to how R&D is done and the complexity of a project. Add to it the incapacity of corrupt Babu to understand the financial benefits of indigenous R&^D and we have inability of India to address defense R&D and production inspite of 1000 years of servitude. Now let me explain.

Problem Uno- There is an idiotic motto that simple things we will import (why reinvent the wheel) but complicated things DRDO should make. Hence we try to make Nuke subs while importing pistols, shoes etc. Though the actual reason is that strategic items have political push but for small items nobody cares. The IAF ignored HTT-40 for 20 years before creating emergency requirement.

Problem – Duo- Refusal to pay for technology import. Even when technology is available, the idiotic Babu will refuse to pay for it. For instance, for Su-30MKI import/indigenous manufacture the requirement was that indigenous manufacture + tech transfer + capital equipment should be less than the cost of imported products. So Whisky and candy industry in India gets protection by customs duty but not defense manufacture.

Problem and Problem – Inability to understand the financial benefits. For instance India would need say around 4000 tanks plus 1000 variants plus get benefit of offshoots of indigenous manufacture. It means that order book of US$ 10 Billion plus say around 15 Billon for spares and upgrade. Which means that around US$ 2 Billion is justified to build an indigenous tank. But the budget allocated will be only US$ 100 million which would be 1/20 th of the required amount. If you look at allocations to Barak, Brahmos etc then they are way above what is given to DRDO.

Last but most important:- R&D budget is calculated by estimating cost of assembling few prototypes from imported components, basic manpower and constructing administrative offices. Hence nothing is done for basic research like building codes for functioning & CFD, or metallurgy, nor optimizing components, nor advanced labs, nor test stands for individual components etc. That is why we get budgets like US$ 89 million for Kaveri while at the same time France was spending around US$ 2 Billion on M88. We get budget (today) of US$ 10 million for FMBT Engine when it should be something like US$ 500-1000 million. Hence the so called research would be just importing a few components, screwing them together, wasting 10 years and then wondering as to why it does not work. It seems that FMBT engine research is going in the same absurd method. The so called industrial partners are component suppliers who will largely be disinterested as they will be asked to supply Rs. few lakhs of material. Most of the money will go for administrative expense while no basic research will be done on metallurgy, building fuel injections system, turbos, refining design, test stands for each component separately to study its behavior in isolation, high tech labs, high tech cad cam design labs etc. We will end up a failure as one cannot have a MBT engine for US$ 10 million. The costing is basically done on the basis that say 10 prototypes need be assembled and it will cost around US$ 10 Million. I am at a loss of words to explain this lunacy of low budgeting our R&D.
Last edited by SSridhar on 14 Nov 2010 12:13, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: vic, you do not have to belabour the same point in multiple threads.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by SaiK »

Blaming babu akin to USA blaming China for everything. Who created these monsters?
Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Willy »

SaiK wrote:Blaming babu akin to USA blaming China for everything. Who created these monsters?

The British! :(( :(( :((
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by SaiK »

From the flight global link, says pilot controlled the engine from the cockpit. From take off to landing, and including taxi trials, and they indeed spent quite a bit in integrating Kaveri to IL76 from instrumentation required for trials, as well as the integration of mechanical, electrical and fuel systems.

^^check few posts back.

Now, if that means a great deal of confidence to the IAF and tejas and its variants, then it is so. It also says, some 50-60 tests are still remaining. So, you may have to wait for a longer periods of time or some gurujis here could just predict from these links, may give you some more projections.
Drishyaman
BRFite
Posts: 279
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 18:52
Location: Originally Silchar, Assam

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Drishyaman »

nukavarapu wrote:CJ or for that matter can anyone confirm from PAAN WALA, what exactly happened at GROMOV?

What was the thrust rating and did Kaveri participate in providing the thrust for take-off or during the flight or they just kept it running in the altitude at lower thrust, just to test its functioning or did it provide any kind of thrust to IL for sustained flight?
Top Secret !! :-?
Willy
BRFite
Posts: 283
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 01:58

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Willy »

nukavarapu wrote:^^^ They just left us with their bureaucracy and practices, we actually invented our own ways on exploiting the loopholes and the license Raj just added extra octane fuel to the flame. We just have ourselves to blame, nothing more, nothing less !!!
Well yea we do have to take credit for that :D
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36427
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by SaiK »

Well what can I say, it is going to be a big struggle for all "Broadswordsmen" to know the details! :wink:
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by shiv »

nukavarapu wrote: I saw that posts and read the flight global article and also couple of more articles from different sources. They are saying that the pilot was controlling it and taxi trials were done etc. but there is no clear cut confirmation that the engine provided usable thrust to the aircraft or whether it was just running at lower RPMs without providing significant thrust. There is a take off pic of the Illyusin, with all the Turbo fan engines giving out smoke (Typical during take-off) whereas no trail of smoke visible from Kaveri. I guess common sense says that as Kaveri is much more smaller compared ro the Illyusins turbofans and Kaveri is leaky turbojet or low-bypass turbojet, in such a scenario it should emit more smoke than the hi-bypass turbo fans of Illyusin, so that it can match the thrust of the other 3 engines. If Kaveri's thrust is lesser than the other 3, then as long as the other 3 are functioning, kaveri won't be generating a considerable amount of thrust for the aircraft and it would be more or less like a small add-on to the total thrust generated by the 3 turbo-fans.
In fact if you study the photographs carefully you find the following suspicious features
1) The Il 76 is sitting firmly on the ground in every photograph
2) The so called "Kaveri engine" looks nothing like any engine I have seen

The doubt I have in my mind is that the Kaveri never flew at all. The whole thing is a big lie.

As you point out the absence of smoke is the clincher. The low bypass/no bypass turbojets of the 60s used to smoke like a forest fire and, like the dog that did not bark in the night - your deduction is serendipitous. I'm impressed by your technical knowledge of turbojets - I am dazzled by expressions like "leaky turbojet".
Gaur
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2009
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 23:19

Re: Kaveri & aero-engine discussion

Post by Gaur »

^^
That was too good. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Post Reply