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.
chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3819
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 29 Oct 2019 11:10

chetak wrote:@chola ji,

I don't wish to rain on anyone's parade but our problems are more in the HR area and less in the facilities area. As we had access to the russki testbed then, we still have the same access today. In fact, we may now have easier access today to the testbeds in multiple countries, an option that we did not have then.

...

why haven't we returned to the flying testbed with the kaveri after we last used it more than a decade ago. The answer is obvious. We have nothing to test.

We seem to have done all that we could for the present and are now looking for help to proceed further.

Don't take this the wrong way but pray tell, why do we need a horrendously expensive white elephant flying testbed.


But Saar, you said you don't want to rain on my parade. But you always do so!! But again I always appreciate your hard edged opinions and reasoning.

Yes, it would be a white elephant if there is nothing to test. But I still believe if we had a testbed at hand we would be able to test in smaller and more rapid increments than saving up changes that one can then go to the beancounters and ask for a trip to Gromov. Maybe you are right and it is just me who thinks it is just the baboos withholding funds. Maybe it is easier to just assign blame to them.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3819
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 29 Oct 2019 11:23

csaurabh wrote:The devil is in the details. When you import something, not only do you have to pay huge cash (+maintenance), you also cannot change anything ( unless you request them, and who knows when they will get around to it ). And this is the real problem with that approach.

I myself work in such an area. Let us say you import an equipment which imparts 3.6kJ to a material in order to show some results. But to get the results which you want, you need 4.8kJ. But, boo-hoo, you can't change anything, even if it is fairly simple. without voiding the warranty/contract.

Not to mention, your understanding of the system is quite limited when you have a black box. A lot of our equipment is like that.


Thanks for your reply and your relating your experience, Saurabh ji.

So my question is what now? Can we wait for home ground tools industry to mature before we try again with a new engine? That sounds too far into the future.

Should we just pony up the money to the French and bring in their M88 core to help us bridge the gap for now? Do we have a choice? Unless we are satisfied with just importing F414s.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20231
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 29 Oct 2019 11:42

chola wrote:
csaurabh wrote:The devil is in the details. When you import something, not only do you have to pay huge cash (+maintenance), you also cannot change anything ( unless you request them, and who knows when they will get around to it ). And this is the real problem with that approach.

I myself work in such an area. Let us say you import an equipment which imparts 3.6kJ to a material in order to show some results. But to get the results which you want, you need 4.8kJ. But, boo-hoo, you can't change anything, even if it is fairly simple. without voiding the warranty/contract.

Not to mention, your understanding of the system is quite limited when you have a black box. A lot of our equipment is like that.


Thanks for your reply and your relating your experience, Saurabh ji.

So my question is what now? Can we wait for home ground tools industry to mature before we try again with a new engine? That sounds too far into the future.

Should we just pony up the money to the French and bring in their M88 core to help us bridge the gap for now? Do we have a choice? Unless we are satisfied with just importing F414s.


The F414 is a landmine that is politically sensitive to untimely detonation, especially in times of maximum need.

the expiry date on such products is never mentioned.

A new POTUS can easily mean a new policy that may impact us like a savage jab to the solar plexus. The US deep state has never been India friendly ever. Since 1947, they have always preferred the immorally pragmatic, corrupted, transactional and "for sale" paki establishment which mirrors their own national philosophy as demonstrated so openly and ably in their saudi + gulf relationships.

the amerikis have been at the vanguard of engine technology denial to India for decades now.

Only ISRO (and DAE) have so far managed to wriggle out of their deadly embrace.

this military jet engine is proving a hard nut to crack with a cartel of countries ganging up on us to ensure that we do not make any progress in this domain.
Last edited by chetak on 29 Oct 2019 11:56, edited 1 time in total.

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9530
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Yagnasri » 29 Oct 2019 11:50

Even if they are our "all weather friend" they will not give these kind of sensitive and critical tech to us. No one will. So either we spend money, time and effort or continue to be exposed to blackmail.

csaurabh
BRFite
Posts: 748
Joined: 07 Apr 2008 15:07

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby csaurabh » 29 Oct 2019 13:38

chola wrote:So my question is what now? Can we wait for home ground tools industry to mature before we try again with a new engine? That sounds too far into the future.

Should we just pony up the money to the French and bring in their M88 core to help us bridge the gap for now? Do we have a choice? Unless we are satisfied with just importing F414s.


There is no easy answer. Orgs. like HMT and HEC which were supposed to have developed machine tools in India are basically a joke ( minus a few exceptions ) - and these were set up even before ISRO (for comparison!). There are some good private industries and startups coming up, but they are few and far between. And will take time to come up.

I don't have any first hand knowledge about what's going on in GTRE. I have heard rumours that the top mgmt of GTRE are ITI-passed diploma holders. Sounds absurd, but that might explain the problems. An active aircraft engine program would be having regular testing, so if we have nothing to test for the last 10 years, that indicates some very deep issues.

Is an aircraft engine really all that more difficult than a cryogenic turbo pump and combustion chamber? We do the latter.
A side note: A CIA conspiracy to frame ISRO scientists in a 'spy plot' derailed our cryo tech for a decade. Wonder if something similar is going on in aero engines as well.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 30 Oct 2019 01:49

Yagnasri wrote:Even if they are our "all weather friend" they will not give these kind of sensitive and critical tech to us. No one will. So either we spend money, time and effort or continue to be exposed to blackmail.


Can we give this doom and gloom a rest.

Its being worked on at the highest levels.

Previous govts never wanted to fund jet engine technology even when it was available for little money claiming its too costly and limited use.

Now its realized its a lynch pin technology.

BTW none of the scientist/air force community made an effective case for it.

Air Force was always can import from some body.

Scientist community would promise bleeding edge forget cutting edge even when they did not have blunt edge technology mastery.
They wanted to do research and not technology.

Now all that is being squared away I hope.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 30 Oct 2019 01:54

csaurabh wrote:
chola wrote:So my question is what now? Can we wait for home ground tools industry to mature before we try again with a new engine? That sounds too far into the future.

Should we just pony up the money to the French and bring in their M88 core to help us bridge the gap for now? Do we have a choice? Unless we are satisfied with just importing F414s.


There is no easy answer. Orgs. like HMT and HEC which were supposed to have developed machine tools in India are basically a joke ( minus a few exceptions ) - and these were set up even before ISRO (for comparison!). There are some good private industries and startups coming up, but they are few and far between. And will take time to come up.

I don't have any first hand knowledge about what's going on in GTRE. I have heard rumours that the top mgmt of GTRE are ITI-passed diploma holders. Sounds absurd, but that might explain the problems. An active aircraft engine program would be having regular testing, so if we have nothing to test for the last 10 years, that indicates some very deep issues.

Is an aircraft engine really all that more difficult than a cryogenic turbo pump and combustion chamber? We do the latter.
A side note: A CIA conspiracy to frame ISRO scientists in a 'spy plot' derailed our cryo tech for a decade. Wonder if something similar is going on in aero engines as well.


That is a lie. Many of GTRE are Phd Engineers.
But emphasis is on Research not on technology.
Add to that the funding by MoD/DRDO is deliberately held at very low levels.
No engine can be developed for that little funds.
its a marvel that the Kaveri did develop that much thrust.

And add to that a hostile press who cant design a village bullock cart give advice to GTRE.

For example press thinks screech is noise problem.
Any way said too much.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7700
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 30 Oct 2019 02:08

GTRE is definitely not short of degrees!

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11230
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 30 Oct 2019 11:01

What it is short of is funding, an Indian Industrial ecosystem supplying aviation parts and equipment, Test bed infrastructure on the Ground and in the AIr. Having to fly Russia to test an engine is like asking someone with an external vested Interest to correct your school papers, they will always give the results late with lesser marks.

Simple facts lost on Indian society as a whole. As a nation we value Sakuni mentality - i.e being cunning and worldly wise over hard work, this is seen in simple things like our road discipline, movies etc.

Hard work and discipline, innovation by the other person is never appreciated.

csaurabh
BRFite
Posts: 748
Joined: 07 Apr 2008 15:07

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby csaurabh » 30 Oct 2019 11:26

ramana wrote:That is a lie. Many of GTRE are Phd Engineers.
But emphasis is on Research not on technology


Oops. My bad.

Anyway one more thing I wanted to point out is our constant and almost complete reliance on foreign engineering software.
We think that manufacturing hardware is the only problem, but modern engg. is highly reliant on software, algorithms and mathematics.
Despite our 'reputation' as 'IT supapowah!1!', we are hardly anywhere when it comes to developing engg. software. ( Unless counting MNCs )
ISRO for one is a big importer of engineering softwares.
This can be nullified to some extent by using open source, but those are never of the best quality.

I'll give you one example, let's say I want to solve an ILP optimization problem ( ILP = Integer Linear Programming ). What kind of solver should you use? Well if you want the best, you probably want something like IBM's CPlex Studio. But ofc if you have no money, you make do with some open source like python's MIP solver. ( Not to mention, software can be sanctioned as well ).

Compared to traditional softwares, engg. softwares involve a high level understanding of engineering mathematics, which is typically the domain of academia. But, Indian academia is just too disorganized and too incompetent to carry out such activities. Now technically, it is just possible that somewhere in our large country there is a small team of mathematicians and programmers working to develop something like IBM's CPlex. But in all my experience (at the very best institutes), I have never come across such people, and if indeed they do exist they would be impossible to contact.

DRDO's CAIR lab are the only ones I have encountered who show an awareness about the importance of algorithms and software. I wonder when this understanding will filter through to the top decision makers!

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20231
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 30 Oct 2019 12:28

Indranil wrote:GTRE is definitely not short of degrees!


Maybe this is not the situation obtaining now and the gentleman hasn't updated.

However, in the earlier days of DRDO and across labs, there were many in the top echelon who were just diploma holders.

This was true as late as the early 90s for sure.

I am guessing that it may have petered out, at most, by the end of the 90s, taking into account, retirement and other natural attrition factors.

But as Ramana ji correctly said,
But emphasis is on Research not on technology.


what is the use of such a largely impractical approach. The need of the hour is technology and its critical application to produce much desired results.

Almost all the masters and Ph.D. qualifications in DRDO have been obtained at the expense of the GoI and there has to be some measure of control and direction in specifying subjects and topics so that the objectives of the lab are taken forward and the overall path of the DRDO is oriented towards organic and self realized goals.

Even a very cursory scrutiny of the grades obtained by a majority of such GoI paid for candidates after graduation from "elite" institutions will tell a very sorry tale indeed.

Research in pure sciences is generally the prerogative of some well known and reputable institutions who have been doing excellent work in theoretical studies. Such institutions are not usually counted in the DRDO domain and vice versa.

DRDO is more of a technology development organization and is meant to cater largely to practical applications in critical and diverse fields with the ultimate aim of successful technology transfer to local industries to foster, indigenize and develop a successful MIC.

Yes indeed, in the DRDO, there may well be a very small collection of the truly gifted individuals who excel in the pure sciences. Nurture them, by all means, but when are we going to get on with the practical and the applications side, producing an output commensurate with the huge investments already made and investments that are being made, even as we speak.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4312
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 30 Oct 2019 13:04

csaurabh wrote:
ramana wrote:That is a lie. Many of GTRE are Phd Engineers.
But emphasis is on Research not on technology


Oops. My bad.

Anyway one more thing I wanted to point out is our constant and almost complete reliance on foreign engineering software.
We think that manufacturing hardware is the only problem, but modern engg. is highly reliant on software, algorithms and mathematics.
Despite our 'reputation' as 'IT supapowah!1!', we are hardly anywhere when it comes to developing engg. software. ( Unless counting MNCs )
ISRO for one is a big importer of engineering softwares.
This can be nullified to some extent by using open source, but those are never of the best quality.

I'll give you one example, let's say I want to solve an ILP optimization problem ( ILP = Integer Linear Programming ). What kind of solver should you use? Well if you want the best, you probably want something like IBM's CPlex Studio. But ofc if you have no money, you make do with some open source like python's MIP solver. ( Not to mention, software can be sanctioned as well ).

Compared to traditional softwares, engg. softwares involve a high level understanding of engineering mathematics, which is typically the domain of academia. But, Indian academia is just too disorganized and too incompetent to carry out such activities. Now technically, it is just possible that somewhere in our large country there is a small team of mathematicians and programmers working to develop something like IBM's CPlex. But in all my experience (at the very best institutes), I have never come across such people, and if indeed they do exist they would be impossible to contact.

DRDO's CAIR lab are the only ones I have encountered who show an awareness about the importance of algorithms and software. I wonder when this understanding will filter through to the top decision makers!


your last few posts seem like you are just shooting in dark.

Indian academia definitely has enough depth to deliver such technologies. It is not in academia's nature to be organized and focused on only certain things. They by nature tend to be explorers. Even a negative result is considered learning, many times research lines with no visible near term applications are pursued. Academia is there to provide the options across the spectrum and they work everything from advanced maturity technologies to complete fantasies for current time. Its the top level programs which decide the focus and fund academic research accordingly and drive it in certain direction. I have seen examples, even in US, professors along with their research groups completely switching line of research after years of hard work, due to switch in the funding availability. Indian academia barely gets a fraction of money that their counter parts receive in other countries.

There is no point in lamenting over lack of enabling technologies. Other countries have funded development of those technologies as a top down approach by pouring money in big projects which trickle down ultimately in all layers of technology development. Just look at the defense and space funding by US, USSR, EU 3-4 decades after WW2. Massive numbers. Just as an example, UK was investing over 10% of its GDP in Defense related activities. Space budget in US alone in heydays of Moon Landing mission was ~4% of US GDP. Those massive funds have resulted in subcidizing technology for their private industry and now they can sustain incremental technology gains on own funds (still their govts give significant amount of funds for research). Even we have tried that with projects like LCA. But we have not done enough. France sunk 50B in Rafale program which basically went into development of all sorts of technology right from CAD sw to hi-end technologies like AESA. Bottom up approach will never work for enabling technology development with steep technology barriers and now the economic barriers are also in play. So no point in expecting technologies like some SW or machine tool will develop on its own without targets set from the very top, with focused funding, subsidizing technology for everyone so that the cost of the enabling tech products remain commercially competitive.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2580
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 30 Oct 2019 14:00

DRDO does not do pure science and in fact it should not. It is not a university.

However DRDO has been funding projects in IIT and IISC for science and tech which it can use. DRDO may not have all PhD, however wouldn't the ones getting the funding are definitely highly qualified.

GAN and metamaterial are two areas I can think of which received DRDO funding 10years back.

Jet Engines are not just material science projects. It is iteration of experience gained. This iteration cost money, lots of it.

nam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2580
Joined: 05 Jan 2017 20:48

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby nam » 30 Oct 2019 14:06

Just to give an example of how Europeans spend money on tech. A large euro company, I know of, has been trying to build a silly ecommerce site to sell its product.

It has been doing it for the past 10 years, still not able to achieve it to its satisfaction. It has done 3 iteration already, spending more than 3-4 millions everytime.

They don't care about the money spend, but they want a solution they can own and works how they want.

All for a ecommerce portal!

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4312
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 31 Oct 2019 13:16

Brar has shared a slide about USAF's planned expenditure in International Mil Aviation thread. Just look at the numbers there. The Classified projects in will see $228 B invested in it, easily 2x of rest of the publicly known capex. Where is all that money going..? A large chunk of it is going in developing blue sky technology and systems for future. Massive investment. And this is just USAF alone.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20231
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 31 Oct 2019 14:23

JayS wrote:Brar has shared a slide about USAF's planned expenditure in International Mil Aviation thread. Just look at the numbers there. The Classified projects in will see $228 B invested in it, easily 2x of rest of the publicly known capex. Where is all that money going..? A large chunk of it is going in developing blue sky technology and systems for future. Massive investment. And this is just USAF alone.


That's ok for the US.

Given their tax payer base and their tax collection efficiencies and the total tax collected that is ginormous, they have the revenue to do this. Plus, and most importantly, they print dollars at will.

they have their global reach to sustain and maintain.

they have their global ambitions and objectives to nurture, further and spread.

They need the tools to do all this.

and this is the unimaginable power that they wield:

One rogue president, bucking the established system, so carefully gamed by the hans, over the decades after nixon, has put the fear of god into the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and has succeeded in nudging the han economy into a potential tailspin.

no more "ugly american" taunts as very real fears have gripped the snooty, condescending, haughty and ever freeloading EU sophisticates.

whereas, we are, in many ways, still recovering from the savage after effects of colonization and the seeds of communal dissension sown by the maliciously meddling britshits.

Perforce, our priorities have to be very different as far as military spending goes and the pace of defence development will also take a hit because of the constraints forced on the planners by competing calls on the already meager resources.

Given all this, we seem to have done fairly OK, considering all things. Patience will pay.

The pace will pick up, going forward but will never ever match either the US or china.
Last edited by chetak on 31 Oct 2019 16:06, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4312
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 31 Oct 2019 16:06

chetak wrote:
JayS wrote:Brar has shared a slide about USAF's planned expenditure in International Mil Aviation thread. Just look at the numbers there. The Classified projects in will see $228 B invested in it, easily 2x of rest of the publicly known capex. Where is all that money going..? A large chunk of it is going in developing blue sky technology and systems for future. Massive investment. And this is just USAF alone.


That's ok for the US.

Given their tax payer base and their tax collection efficiencies and the total tax collected that is ginormous, they have the revenue to do this. Plus, and most importantly, they print dollars at will.

they have their global reach to sustain and maintain.

they have their global ambitions and objectives to nurture, further and spread.

They need the tools to do all this.

and this is the unimaginable power that they wield:

One rogue president, bucking the established system, so carefully gamed by the hans, over the decades after nixon, has put the fear of god into the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and has succeeded in nudging the han economy into a potential tailspin.

no more "ugly american" taunts as very real fears have gripped the snooty, condescending, haughty and ever freeloading EU sophisticates.

whereas, we are, in many ways, still recovering from the savage after effects of colonization and the seeds of communal dissension sown by the maliciously meddling britshits.

Perforce, our priorities have to be very different as far as military spending goes and the pace of defence development will also take a hit because of the constraints forced on the planners by competing calls on the already meager resources.

given all this, we seem to have done fairly OK, considering all things.

The pace will pick up, going forward but will never ever match either the US or china.


That cannot be an excuse for us not doing more than what we are doing today. No one is saying we should spend hundreds of Billions of dollars. But even in terms of % of GDP our defense R&D expenditure is negligibly small. Even as % of Defense budget its only 5-6% compared to 10-12% minimum (publicly known) by most countries of relevance. We in fact need to spend more than them, but we are not even matching. Take our 4 metro cities and the money wasted there in substandard roads alone would easily surpass DRDO's yearly budget. Just cleaning one metro city's governance could fund entire DRDO. Resources are not meagre but the utilization is terrible. Roads in my childhood used to last 5-6yrs without repair, as they should, now they cannot see one Monsoon. that's 10x reduction of effective usage of funds. Image the wastage of funds nationwide. Just an example. Just couple of clean Metro city municipal corps can double DRDO's budget easily. We cannot blame everything on others for this mess.

Anyway its OT.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20231
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 31 Oct 2019 16:27

Given all our economic constraints and electoral compulsions and the preponderance of different interests and diverse interest groups in various states and cities, one would be very safe in assuming that the funding wise, DRDO is fairly low on the totem pole as far as priorities are concerned.

Our nuclear weapons have actually made us quite complacent on defence spending. Many projects have lost their urgency and with it, their all important funding.

The average man on the street would be hard pressed to recall even the name DRDO.

ISRO yes, nuclear reactors & BARC yes, DRDO not so much.

Maybe the DRDO should project themselves on national TV, just like the IA, IN and the IAF do for recruitment drives. There are no interviews, no panel discussions on LSTV and RSTV highlighting the DRDO's achievements and future plans. They have no instant recall icon like APJ Abdul Kalam to showcase their organization.

The LCA project, for instance, could be glamorized on TV like a snazzy documentary. That would be pretty interesting. In reality, it is already a glamorous project, just waiting to be leveraged by the DRDO.

Why not invite Modi ji to fly in the LCA in Dilli, to save his time as well as better the chances of him saying yes.

Sadly, there is not much interest in the DRDO, except in some pockets of the MoD and maybe the PM and a few concerned cabinet ministers.

BTW, funding for DRDO has to come from the MoD only.

Savings on ditch digging from ranchi or choice of honest contractors in bombay resulting in lower spends on pothole filling will never ever reach the DRDO, no matter how tortured and complex the route maybe. That's not how things work in India.

As you say, this is OT.

my last on this.

csaurabh
BRFite
Posts: 748
Joined: 07 Apr 2008 15:07

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby csaurabh » 01 Nov 2019 14:34

JayS wrote:
your last few posts seem like you are just shooting in dark.

Indian academia definitely has enough depth to deliver such technologies. It is not in academia's nature to be organized and focused on only certain things. They by nature tend to be explorers. Even a negative result is considered learning, many times research lines with no visible near term applications are pursued. Academia is there to provide the options across the spectrum and they work everything from advanced maturity technologies to complete fantasies for current time. Its the top level programs which decide the focus and fund academic research accordingly and drive it in certain direction. I have seen examples, even in US, professors along with their research groups completely switching line of research after years of hard work, due to switch in the funding availability. Indian academia barely gets a fraction of money that their counter parts receive in other countries.

There is no point in lamenting over lack of enabling technologies. Other countries have funded development of those technologies as a top down approach by pouring money in big projects which trickle down ultimately in all layers of technology development. Just look at the defense and space funding by US, USSR, EU 3-4 decades after WW2. Massive numbers. Just as an example, UK was investing over 10% of its GDP in Defense related activities. Space budget in US alone in heydays of Moon Landing mission was ~4% of US GDP. Those massive funds have resulted in subcidizing technology for their private industry and now they can sustain incremental technology gains on own funds (still their govts give significant amount of funds for research). Even we have tried that with projects like LCA. But we have not done enough. France sunk 50B in Rafale program which basically went into development of all sorts of technology right from CAD sw to hi-end technologies like AESA. Bottom up approach will never work for enabling technology development with steep technology barriers and now the economic barriers are also in play. So no point in expecting technologies like some SW or machine tool will develop on its own without targets set from the very top, with focused funding, subsidizing technology for everyone so that the cost of the enabling tech products remain commercially competitive.


Well I try to be not too pessimistic. But the idea that Indian academia is 'competent' simply doesn't match my personal experiences.
There is an ongoing program for the development of FEM software at ISRO. One mathematics faculty asked for a 'collaboration' , made fancy promises, and as expected palmed it off to a phd student after giving them some code he copied off the internet and asking her to 'improve' on it. ( passing it off as his own code ). And the communication from the other side was pretty inconsistent too.. mathematicians not understanding programmers, programmers not understanding mathematics. Results are as you'd expect. And this one doesn't even involve funding. Many other horror stories are there, such ISRO funding some IIT prof for 2 cr. and spending it all on fancy equipment to land a journal paper, while not solving their problem. Bitter lessons learned from such experiences. Nowadays the academics would need to go through a strict vetting process to get any funding, as a result of their overall incompetence and untrustworthiness in contributing to national interests.
Anyway this is all OT. my last post on the topic.

SriKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1810
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby SriKumar » 01 Nov 2019 18:44

I think while your individual data points are fine, generalizing them across the entire domain is unnecessary, and leads to 'WhatWuzDat?!' moments. As for the software development you are talking about above, it has nothing to do with IT (Bangalore/Hyd will not be able to help). It is usually the domain of civil engg or mechanical engg. and the people who can do justice to it are not mathematicians per se, though there is some level of mathematics involved but does not require a specialist math dept faculty. In fact they may not appreciate certain aspects of its practical usage and makes it less useful. Commercial codes in this domain, if you check when they were launched, and their history prior to commercial launch, required several 100 man-years of effort (actually 10X that). It is not going to happen with a 2-year project between a faculty of a top-reputed institute+grad student- may be something extremely narrow scope and therefore not of broad use. And with all else needing money, just like the reliance on the GE engine, they have to rely on foreign software, which of course, can and has been embargoed.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 01 Nov 2019 22:28

SriKumar, Early during development of Finite element method in late 1970s, IITM was quite good. But there was no plan to develop a IITM analysis tool like STRUDL or similar programs.
Most of the teachers were working to get a fellowship abroad and took of half way through courses.

And that was when KAV Pandalai was the Director.

Each prof had his own deck of programs to use for consultation work.
India lost a good chance to develop such software on mainframe and then port it over.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2007
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Picklu » 08 Nov 2019 23:30

csaurabh wrote:
JayS wrote:
your last few posts seem like you are just shooting in dark.

Indian academia definitely has enough depth to deliver such technologies. It is not in academia's nature to be organized and focused on only certain things. They by nature tend to be explorers. Even a negative result is considered learning, many times research lines with no visible near term applications are pursued. Academia is there to provide the options across the spectrum and they work everything from advanced maturity technologies to complete fantasies for current time. Its the top level programs which decide the focus and fund academic research accordingly and drive it in certain direction. I have seen examples, even in US, professors along with their research groups completely switching line of research after years of hard work, due to switch in the funding availability. Indian academia barely gets a fraction of money that their counter parts receive in other countries.

There is no point in lamenting over lack of enabling technologies. Other countries have funded development of those technologies as a top down approach by pouring money in big projects which trickle down ultimately in all layers of technology development. Just look at the defense and space funding by US, USSR, EU 3-4 decades after WW2. Massive numbers. Just as an example, UK was investing over 10% of its GDP in Defense related activities. Space budget in US alone in heydays of Moon Landing mission was ~4% of US GDP. Those massive funds have resulted in subcidizing technology for their private industry and now they can sustain incremental technology gains on own funds (still their govts give significant amount of funds for research). Even we have tried that with projects like LCA. But we have not done enough. France sunk 50B in Rafale program which basically went into development of all sorts of technology right from CAD sw to hi-end technologies like AESA. Bottom up approach will never work for enabling technology development with steep technology barriers and now the economic barriers are also in play. So no point in expecting technologies like some SW or machine tool will develop on its own without targets set from the very top, with focused funding, subsidizing technology for everyone so that the cost of the enabling tech products remain commercially competitive.


Well I try to be not too pessimistic. But the idea that Indian academia is 'competent' simply doesn't match my personal experiences.
There is an ongoing program for the development of FEM software at ISRO. One mathematics faculty asked for a 'collaboration' , made fancy promises, and as expected palmed it off to a phd student after giving them some code he copied off the internet and asking her to 'improve' on it. ( passing it off as his own code ). And the communication from the other side was pretty inconsistent too.. mathematicians not understanding programmers, programmers not understanding mathematics. Results are as you'd expect. And this one doesn't even involve funding. Many other horror stories are there, such ISRO funding some IIT prof for 2 cr. and spending it all on fancy equipment to land a journal paper, while not solving their problem. Bitter lessons learned from such experiences. Nowadays the academics would need to go through a strict vetting process to get any funding, as a result of their overall incompetence and untrustworthiness in contributing to national interests.
Anyway this is all OT. my last post on the topic.


A few of the MNC do have their global research center in india and some of them are doing extremely good work on mathematical software. Maths and IT both comes naturally to us compared to many other countries out there and we do well in an appropriate set up.

The work that progresses are essentially done by a very small team, usually of only 2 SMEs - one from math and one programmer sitting together, both of whom get paid in 8 figures and micro managed by another very good SME as a manager with weekly check on progress. As a rule, none have high number of direct reports at lower level whereas the higher ups directly manage many such small teams. You can understand the cost of such HR structure.

Not every org can manage to pay at that level for such long term goal consistently for decade, that needs the level of access to cheap capital that we as a country do not have.

That's the kind of set up that built the IBM software you mentioned and similar stuff.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 20231
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chetak » 09 Nov 2019 00:55

Please do not get carried away by this MNCs and their India based R&D stories.

Some relatively low end work is undoubtedly going on.

The local teams are purposely fragmented and carefully isolated physically so that no one person is able to see the bigger picture. There is no cross pollination and the data is stored as well as backed up offshore.

That is exactly how they have set it up, it's what they want and they are paranoid to keep it that way.

Even the local networks are not connected to each other.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2007
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Picklu » 09 Nov 2019 03:02

chetak wrote:Please do not get carried away by this MNCs and their India based R&D stories.

Some relatively low end work is undoubtedly going on.

The local teams are purposely fragmented and carefully isolated physically so that no one person is able to see the bigger picture. There is no cross pollination and the data is stored as well as backed up offshore.

That is exactly how they have set it up, it's what they want and they are paranoid to keep it that way.

Even the local networks are not connected to each other.


Oh absolutely, i am not denying that the local guys do a minuscule thing in the overall scheme of things and they are purposefully disjointed.

The point that i was making is that their work is still top notch and the investment and structure behind them is what is required for the success and our current socio-governmental setup and access level to cheap capital is nowhere close to provide it.

We need to find alternate path and no point blaming either the corrupt govt or the lazy scientists; the malaise is far more systemic and not always in our control

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3819
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 09 Nov 2019 16:19

This includes a lot of what we discussed here but this twitter thread explains the urgency of needing to have a clear plan for an indian engine in stark terms.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Aerodynamic111/status/1190865681945751552

Aerodynamics
@Aerodynamic111
IAF will have operating nearly 395+ F414+F404 engine by 2035 with 0 local production of spares, even if IAF never inducts any US jet, leaving the IAF fleet vulnerable to sanctions and restriction on the supply of spares, in the event of the fallout of relationships with US
...
So, India not to be depended on American developed F414/F404 family engine will need to develop at least two engine variants that can be locally developed with a foreign aero-engine maker. India should strive to develop a de-tuned 100kN thrust class engine
...
+MWF and Tejas Mk1A fleet will require 3.5 engine swap for its entire flight worthy life of nearly 40yrs so India will neither sud upgrade the fleet of Tejas MkII and Tejas Mk1A fleet wth the same 110kN engine we plan to develop for the AMCA MkII or
...
++we can plan to develop a de-tuned variant of the same engine with lower thrust, Selection of the same 110kN thrust class engine for all 3 programs will mean that the production rate of the engines will be high and due to the commonality of engine among all 3 fighter jet fleet,
...
++logistics and maintenance of the jets at a base level will also improve considerably. India will require at least 10 years for the new engine to be ready for the production so, in next two to three years, India will need to take a call on development partner it ws to choice fr
...
+++the new engine and also invest in the required infrastructure like flying test-bed and multiple rig and ground engine facility for the program to succeed.



If we do not invest in an indigenous engine -- whether it is the Kaveri or a new project -- and the infrastructure behind it then we will always be beholden to the whims of others.

We need to make a call soon. The lead time in these things are long. This is like our carrier program. Without a decision, the future path is uncertain because it will take more than decade at least even if we start today.

kit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3393
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 18:16

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby kit » 09 Nov 2019 17:34

chetak wrote:
chola wrote:
Thanks for your reply and your relating your experience, Saurabh ji.

So my question is what now? Can we wait for home ground tools industry to mature before we try again with a new engine? That sounds too far into the future.

Should we just pony up the money to the French and bring in their M88 core to help us bridge the gap for now? Do we have a choice? Unless we are satisfied with just importing F414s.


The F414 is a landmine that is politically sensitive to untimely detonation, especially in times of maximum need.

the expiry date on such products is never mentioned.

A new POTUS can easily mean a new policy that may impact us like a savage jab to the solar plexus. The US deep state has never been India friendly ever. Since 1947, they have always preferred the immorally pragmatic, corrupted, transactional and "for sale" paki establishment which mirrors their own national philosophy as demonstrated so openly and ably in their saudi + gulf relationships.

the amerikis have been at the vanguard of engine technology denial to India for decades now.

Only ISRO (and DAE) have so far managed to wriggle out of their deadly embrace.

this military jet engine is proving a hard nut to crack with a cartel of countries ganging up on us to ensure that we do not make any progress in this domain.


The best way is to get the current engine flying and powering a test bed. Nothing else. No need to wait for fancy iterations now.

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Raghunathgb » 10 Nov 2019 19:08

Good news after long time.


DMRL’s expertise in investment casting technology has also resulted in a civilian spin-off for the manufacture of large size blades used in land-based turbines for power generation (BHEL and NTPC). NTPC is operating several gas-based power plants in the country and the blades for gas turbine engines are being imported at high cost to replace the worn/damaged blades during the overhauling. With the help of CAD model, a wax pattern injection die has been designed and fabricated. It was quite challenging to produce a class-I casting since the individual blade is heavier (3 kg) than the Kaveri aero-engine blade (200-300 g) produced so far. However, with existing expertise of developing aero-engine blades, technical difficulties were overcome through optimisation of process parameters. One engine set, consisting of 125 numbers of IN738 alloy blades, was produced with an acceptable yield of 60 per cent and handed over to NTPC. This is an outstanding example of civilian spin-off benefit of the technology developed for defence.


DMRL has developed the process technology for making highly intricate, aerofoil shaped, sintered silica cores used for the production of hollow gas turbine engine components. This is one of the critical material processing technologies in the gas turbine engine development programme. Through sustained research and development efforts, a viable process based on Ceramic Injection Moulding (CIM) has been successfully developed. The capability of the process has been demonstrated by making highly complex and intricate ceramic cores meeting stringent dimensional requirements. The process is used for making silica cores for production of turbine blades and vanes of Kaveri engine and land-based gas turbine. The process is also being adopted for preparing alumina cores required for producing single crystal aerofoil castings.



https://www.drdo.gov.in/large-aerofoil- ... ne-engines

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Raghunathgb » 10 Nov 2019 22:12

The above shows that even a failed project can create lot of spin-offs and positive stories(I will still not declare it sucessfull until bhel starts using it) . This will keep project alive as many technologies used for Kaveri engine will ultimately end in various other sectors thereby multiplying it's value.

Picklu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2007
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Picklu » 11 Nov 2019 04:01

While we should accept even a 20% yield, what's the global standard in this case, compared to the 60% yield mentioned above?

This would give us an idea about how much further improvement we need to do.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3070
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby fanne » 11 Nov 2019 07:04

does the word 60% yield here means that out of 100 blades made, 60 passed QA?

Raghunathgb
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 23 Apr 2019 18:16

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Raghunathgb » 11 Nov 2019 07:39

fanne wrote:does the word 60% yield here means that out of 100 blades made, 60 passed QA?


My uneducated guess is thermal efficiency. If that's the case it should be good enough.

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7700
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 11 Nov 2019 08:08

fanne wrote:does the word 60% yield here means that out of 100 blades made, 60 passed QA?

In my industry (of semiconductor), it is.

agupta
BRFite
Posts: 221
Joined: 13 Oct 1999 11:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby agupta » 11 Nov 2019 08:18

fanne wrote:does the word 60% yield here means that out of 100 blades made, 60 passed QA?


Quiet so... Fanne ji.

Production yield is a manufacturing technology CTQ. It means that the rest of 40% is "wasted" - and even if raw material is recycled, all the time/effort/cost unto that point is lost and then more cost for recycling is added.

Googling FTY (first time yield) and "Takt time" will shed some light... these are production technology metrics and define what is good and bad.

Its probably the secret why HAL's Su-30 local costs are sky high even if they are being made from "raw material". Its probably the one of the real reasons why HAL does not increase LCA production rates... without yield and other efficiencies under control, producing more will imply they will lose more money faster and cannot make a profit. Or else they will try and jack up prices a ton to hide this. (hey ...does all this sound familiar? pure speculation from my part)

This is true for all manufacturing concerns, from large nuke equipment to has turbines to even down to the Chip manufacturing folks - that's as true a "gating" technology as the chip design itself. And no, one of the reasons that the most commonly held-out BRF prescription for all diseases .."200 items ka order de daalo - MIC mean invest karo :)" can be pointless

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53396
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby ramana » 11 Nov 2019 08:25

fanne wrote:does the word 60% yield here means that out of 100 blades made, 60 passed QA?

Yes. Production process yield.

fanne
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3070
Joined: 11 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby fanne » 11 Nov 2019 08:30

thx bandhus...60% is good. I wonder what is it for more exacting standards, such as Kaveri blades or AL-31 F blades.

Th path anyways goes this way - 10% then 20% the....and eventually high 90s %

JayS
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4312
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby JayS » 11 Nov 2019 15:51

Just to put things in perspective, I remember to have read that the OLED screens had about 16-18% yield that too with repairs, and that was key reason that they were not coming up in TV space. This was a few years ago. Now the manufacturing must have been fine tuned. Engineering is all about doing it in iterations and improving it a step at a time in every iteration. Our problem is we don't do iterations.

chola
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3819
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby chola » 11 Nov 2019 16:44

JayS wrote:Just to put things in perspective, I remember to have read that the OLED screens had about 16-18% yield that too with repairs, and that was key reason that they were not coming up in TV space. This was a few years ago. Now the manufacturing must have been fine tuned. Engineering is all about doing it in iterations and improving it a step at a time in every iteration. Our problem is we don't do iterations.


I second the point. The US Gov. Accountability Office back in 2016 said "F-35A and F-35B engines are still at about 55 percent and 63 percent":
https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-pratt-f35-engine-0324-20160323-story.html

This is from a premier engine maker (P&W) with massive experience in the midst of a gargantuan production run for thousands of 5th gens. Even they are going through tuning in mass production mode. This is what industries do.

We don't do iterations goes back to the fact that we do not have an industry but a lab building our engine programs.

Things in production can't be fixed in "theory" in a lab. Once an engine is tested enough for minimal viability it really needs to be put into an assembly line and fixed through iterations.

I believe that Kaveri was minimally viable a decade ago at Gromov when it ran for 57 straight hours. But we never production-ized it to any extent with a variant of the LCA or a safer two-engine design -- maybe a desi Fulcrum.

Neela
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3631
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 15:05
Location: Spectator in the dossier diplomacy tennis match

Re: Kaveri & Aero-Engine: News & Discussion

Postby Neela » 12 Nov 2019 01:17

JayS wrote:Just to put things in perspective, I remember to have read that the OLED screens had about 16-18% yield that too with repairs, and that was key reason that they were not coming up in TV space. This was a few years ago. Now the manufacturing must have been fine tuned. Engineering is all about doing it in iterations and improving it a step at a time in every iteration. Our problem is we don't do iterations.


Sir, GaN ICs for commercial purposes is yet to reach mainstream. High frequency operation, High temperature stability , ultra low form factor - all of these have been proven . It makes it very appealing for server farms ( less cooling ) , LED ICs, AC/DC converters - a whole range of applications. However, yield is low ~50%. (Still way better than <10% few years back. ) This makes the business case unviable. Yet, foundries, startups etc invest money to understand the manufacturing process, understand failure causes, come up with better manufacturing techniques etc. The expectation is that by 2025 , we should see it appearing commercially.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: rkhanna and 30 guests