EOI for manufacturing and assembly of 80kN thrust class engine

[GURU DUTT]

Let's hope AMCA & AURA are delivered in a time bound manner

MP has made it pretty clear to top honchos in both DRDO and HAL/ADA either they make AMCA/AURA on time and make up for all the lost time or they might get worst treatment than what kamla beniwal got

 

[GR!FF!N]

RD 33 MK fitted on Mig 29 SMT & K produces 79 kn thrust
RD 33 fitted in JF 17 gives 84 Kn thrust but have total engine life reduced to 2200 hrs from 4000 hrs.
I am talking about re engining option of MIG 29 K of navy when their respective engine life expires as Airfoece Mig 29 already are in process of reengining with new RD 33 MK.

First,JF-17 uses RD-93,which is a variant of RD-33.it has lesser service life than RD-33.Its thrust is 79 KN Dry,98 KN Wet.

RD-33 MK is latest variant of RD-33.It is smokeless,has thrust of 88.8 KN and has multiple improvement over RD-33..Its service life is 4000 hours.

another point is,Kaveri project got shelved.Now,K-9 and K-10 are running.But nothing is concrete on them.so why should we switch to a good engine to an untested one??IMO,RD-33 MK or something of its upgrade will do fine.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Yes.. But last year they officially shelved Kaveri. Will be clear in coming future which engine DRDO is talking about.

Officially shelved kaveri for Tejas projects. Kaveri was planned to be used in UAV's.

 

[Manindra]

First,JF-17 uses RD-93,which is a variant of RD-33.it has lesser service life than RD-33.Its thrust is 79 KN Dry,98 KN Wet.

RD-33 MK is latest variant of RD-33.It is smokeless,has thrust of 88.8 KN and has multiple improvement over RD-33..Its service life is 4000 hours.

another point is,Kaveri project got shelved.Now,K-9 and K-10 are running.But nothing is concrete on them.so why should we switch to a good engine to an untested one??IMO,RD-33 MK or something of its upgrade will do fine.

Russian proposed Chinese that they could develop 98 kn wet thrust engine but may be China declined in favour of their WS series engine.
88 KN varint are for MIG 29 OVT aka MIG 35 which is heavier than typical fulcrum variant.
I am just speculating that as none of other class category this engine fit the bill except AURA UCAV.

 

[anant_s]

Seriously though, why would they shelve the project if it achieved 80 Kn?

Apart from thrust requirements (where Kaveri fell short), there were issues of engine stability (blade throw off) and we are still to master Single Crystal Blade technology. Inspite of all the developments and milestones achieved, the program had become laggard and it was first decided to De-copule it from LCA program and then when foreign engines became easily available, the whole program was pushed to back burner.

 

[Manindra]

Apart from thrust requirements (where Kaveri fell short), there were issues of engine stability (blade throw off) and we are still to master Single Crystal Blade technology. Inspite of all the developments and milestones achieved, the program had become laggard and it was first decided to De-copule it from LCA program and then when foreign engines became easily available, the whole program was pushed to back burner.

Blade throw off problem solved as previously they don't know why blade thrown out but after testing in Germany they found that it causes due to excess vibration which later they rectified.

 

[anant_s]

Blade throw off problem solved as previously they don't know why blade thrown out but after testing in Germany they found that it causes due to excess vibration which later they rectified.

I was not aware of this development, Thanks for the share.
Also i recall there were issues with Digital control System (FADEC) which remain to be solved.
I guess when the program was abandoned, a lot was achieved and injection of foreign assistance should have been taken. After spending enormous amount of money and investing time, a little more push could've seen the program meet its objectives.

 

[HariPrasad]

RD 33 MK fitted on Mig 29 SMT & K produces 79 kn thrust
RD 33 fitted in JF 17 gives 84 Kn thrust but have total engine life reduced to 2200 hrs from 4000 hrs.
I am talking about re engining option of MIG 29 K of navy when their respective engine life expires as Airfoece Mig 29 already are in process of reengining with new RD 33 MK.

Kaveri ran for 53 hours continuously. Kaveri just need some refinement.

 

[Manindra]

I was not aware of this development, Thanks for the share.
Also i recall there were issues with Digital control System (FADEC) which remain to be solved.
I guess when the program was abandoned, a lot was achieved and injection of foreign assistance should have been taken. After spending enormous amount of money and investing time, a little more push could've seen the program meet its objectives.

FADEC issue solved much before blade thrown out issue.
GTRE starved for funds from many years & they didn't have money to buy for fuel to run 9 prototypes of Engine.
Main remaining problems of Kaveri are weight, fuel economy, engine life, MBTO & wet thrust required for LCA MK I
But if they didn't have fund then what can they do ?

Kaveri ran for 53 hours continuously. Kaveri just need some refinement.

53 Hrs continuously ?
Can you give me source for it.

 

[datalibdaz]

Well my congenital moron frnd, we are not talking about a Pakistani military complex, which never fails in it's testing but disintegrated rockets rains over general population. If you have any solid information then please share with us or else just buzz off.

Yes a**hole friend...you couldn't make the tejas fly yet....keep throwing paper tejas planes in air....

Kaveri was designed to generate thrust of 85 KN ..whereas it generated only 81 KN not 70 KN ........Along with weight issue ..

Yes....The target was 80KN+ Wet thrust....The issue is what it achieved.... It did achieve 71 KN and could not provide more thrust than that....Lower thrust was the reason it didn't go well...and yes it was overweight...There are indian article which clearly shows what kaveri achieved..Search for them...I read them few months ago...

 

[kṣamā]

Yes a**hole friend...you couldn't make the tejas fly yet....keep throwing paper tejas planes in air....

It is better to keep mum and to be thought as dumb than to open your mouth and prove it.

 

[migflug]

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 11m11 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi

Development of the Kaveri core for UCAV applications is progressing well.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 34m34 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi

Work on new gas turbine related testing facilities is underway. land has been acquired.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 30m30 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi >>

* And as I had said earlier, a strategic decision to perfect a 80 KN domestic engine has been made. And the kaveri program is being expanded
* under a new name.
* The design can be up-rated to even 90 KN. But some patriotic 'NRI' support can come in handy for that.

 

[datalibdaz]

Here enjoy!!!
Planned Dry Thrust 11,500lb / 51.15 KN
Achieved Dry Thrust 11,100lb / 49.37 KN

Planned Wet Thrust 15800lb / 70.28 KN
Achieved Wet Thrust 18200lb / 80.96 KN

India's Kaveri Engine - Good For Something?
Jan 1, 2013by Graham Warwick in Ares

• India's indigenously developed Kaveri engine may be unfit to power the country's Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) - itself not a stellar performer - but it has found a new home.
  
  On Dec 10, in written reply to a parliamentary question, defense minister AK Anthony says a derivative of the Kaveri can power India's Unmanned Strike Air Vehicle (USAV),planned to enter service by 2020.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Graphic: DRDO
  
  
  According to the Business Standard, India has no choice but to use a dry (unreheated) version of the Kaveri in the USAV because the international Missile Technology Control Regime bars the export of engines for unmanned aircraft with ranges more than 300km.
  Under development by India's Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), the Kaveri's afterburning thrust is less than designed and well short of that needed to power the overweight LCA, but its dry (unreheated) thrust is adequate to power the under-10-tonne USAV, the report says.
  
  The Business Standard says tests at Russia's Gromov Flight Research Institute, mounted on an Il-76 flying testbed, showed the Kaveri's afterburning thrust is 15,800lb, versus the planned 18,200lb. But dry thrust was almost 11,100lb, close to the planned 11,500lb.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Photo: Wikipedia
  
  
  The Kaveri has been under development at the GTRE since March 1989. Anthony, in his written reply, says 2,200hr of ground and altitude testing have been completed on nine Kaveri prototype engines plus four Kabini core prototypes. In Russia, the engine was flown to Mach 0.7 and almost 40,000ft over 27 flights totalling 57hr.
  Development was scheduled to be completed in December 1996 at a projected cost of $69.5 million (Rs.382.81 Crore). But because of technical failures and delays, the program was extended and its cost revised to $515 million, of which $362 million has been spent so far, says Anthony.
  
  Because of the Kaveri's failure, the Tejas Mk1 is powered by an imported 19,000lb-thrust GE F404-IN20. But the aircraft is overweight and underpowered, so an enlarged Mk2 version is planned powered by a 22,000lb-thrust GE F414-INS6.
  
  India's USAV, meanwhile, looks a lot like Europe's Dassault-led Neuron unmanned combat-aircraft technology demonstrator (below), which made its first flight in France in early December. The Neuron demonstrator is powered by a 9,000lb-thrust Rolls-Royce Turbomeca Adour.
  
  
• India's Kaveri Engine - Good For Something? | Ares

 

[Suman]

Yes a**hole friend...you couldn't make the tejas fly yet....keep throwing paper tejas planes in air....



Yes....The target was 80KN+ Wet thrust....The issue is what it achieved.... It did achieve 71 KN and could not provide more thrust than that....Lower thrust was the reason it didn't go well...and yes it was overweight...There are indian article which clearly shows what kaveri achieved..Search for them...I read them few months ago...

REPORTED, Mod please take care of this guy, he is abusing