Kaveri NG Engine : Developmental Gas Turbine Engines upto 130 kN thrust class at GTRE, Bangalore

[GuardianRED]

Don't be angry bro... just a fact ... we simply do not have the metallurgical and manufacturing expertise to straightaway completely absorb an Engine like M88. The challenges in jet engine are totally different than rockets.
I am just saying, it will be hard for us to get a handle on everything. Remember we had bofors spec and design since ages and still had metallurgy issues with desi guns. (there was a political component as well)

And with all the problems and issues - The Dharnush is Born! The metallurgy was learnt and developed and orders placed!

Rocket engines are far MORE complex! and im sure in time this gas turbine will too!

 

[Blue Marlin]

it will be usuall. make re engineer the m88 so it meats the thrust requirements. makes the non critical stuff in india and the rest in france. just like what ge has been doing to japan,south korea,and turkey. if you think the french will hand over the m88s blueprints then your a fool for thinking so. they spent over a decade developing the engine. some thing just dont have a price.
@Vergennes what do you think.

persoanlly i would go for the ge-f414-epe which is already in development and has a thrust of 120kn which is near the required 130kn.

 

[Nilgiri]

Kaveri NG Engine : Developmental Gas Turbine Engines upto 130 kN thrust class at GTRE, Bangalore

Some points from a tender found in DRDO site

View attachment 327519



View attachment 327522


View attachment 327523

View attachment 327524

View attachment 327525
http://www.drdo. gov. in/drdo/drdojsp/downloadtndr.jsp? tenderName=18043&McrId=GTRE*Gas%20Turbine%20Research%20Establishment&p=RFINewTestCell130kN.pdf


So finally curtain is being raised..

Is this the reason Safran is also roped in via rafale offset deal?

Kaveri and Kaveri NG which eventually should power LCA (variants), future AMCA and may be Indian MII Jets...

Why would we want GE 414 when we can get all this done with investment of time and money by ourselves.. and now Safran investing makes that also taken care of .. Does it not showcase the game changer tipping point..

Why would you start this project unless the earlier one will soon roll out and go for the actual deployment? Unless that has been evaluated by someone like Safran and this point of Kaveri NG becomes their binding promise for Rafale MII orders...

Tagging all users. Enjoy.. Good days will come in our MIC soon...

@Abingdonboy @anant_s @Taygibay @Picdelamirand-oil @Vergennes @randomradio @Ankit Kumar 002 @MilSpec @Koovie @Echo_419 @Dash @hellfire @ito @SR-91 @AMCA @DesiGuy1403 @ranjeet @hellfire @fsayed @SpArK @AUSTERLITZ @nair @proud_indian @Roybot @jbgt90 @Sergi @Water Car Engineer @dadeechi @kurup @Rain Man @kaykay @Joe Shearer @Tshering22 @Dandpatta @danger007 @Didact @Soumitra @SrNair @TejasMk3@jbgt90 @ranjeet @4GTejasBVR @The_Showstopper @guest11 @egodoc222 @Nilgiri @SarthakGanguly @Omega007 @GURU DUTT @HariPrasad @JanjaWeed @litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular @Spectre@litefire @AMCA @Perpendicular@Ryuzaki @CorporateAffairs @GR!FF!N @migflug @Levina@SvenSvensonov @-xXx- @Perpendicular @proud_indian @Mustang06 @Param @Local_Legend @Ali Zadi @hellfire @egodoc222 @CorporateAffairs @Major Shaitan Singh @jha @SmilingBuddha @#hydra# @danish_vij @[Bregs] @Skillrex @Hephaestus @SR-91 @Techy @litefire @R!CK @zebra7 @dev_moh @DesiGuy1403 @itachii @nik141993 @Marxist @Glorino @noksss @jbgt90 @Skull and Bones @Kraitcorp @Crixus @waz @WAJsal @Oscar @AugenBlick @Star Wars @GuardianRED @others

For some reason I didn't get the tag...looks like the issue is expanding to you now too

On topic:

This is all a really welcome development....but as I understand it, the real challenge will be mounting reliability + MTBO issues (from another avenue of materials research compared to thrust uprating which deals with LP spool in general compared to HP spool).

I could potentially pull off a small "xerox khan" maneuver with what I have access to at PW....but I would get in lots of trouble hehe....and I think with the safran tie up....these issues will be sorted out more comprehensively anyway.

I think GE-414 is still a very important hedge especially if it can be done relatively cheaply....because there is no 100% guarantee what the final product will be (i.e what the "safranised" kaveri will be like and what its best immediate uses are beyond the LCA series and potentially marine environments)

You have to remember that leapfrogging is notoriously difficult in this sector. Pratt is trying to do it with geared turbofans now....but they are still wise enough to hedge with regular run of the mill stuff. The same concept must be followed by India in this sector especially given its taxpayer money....there are 3 -4 notable issues which need RnD intensity/quality beyond base level funding ....ramping up funding will not solve it.

 

[Abba_Dabba_Jabba]

@PARIKRAMA Is Safranised Kaveri engine will be developed in 50-50 partnership ? who will have the majority share in this venture ?

Ontopic : Great development by GTRE, but still it is in initial stage and all the specification has the word "shall be" in the front, so don't expect any dramatic development here. But if Safran could help GTRE, correcting the inefficiency then we might see improvement in the timeline of this new engine.

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

Kaveri NG Engine : Developmental Gas Turbine Engines upto 130 kN thrust class at GTRE, Bangalore

Some points from a tender found in DRDO site

View attachment 327519



View attachment 327522


View attachment 327523

View attachment 327524

View attachment 327525
http://www.drdo. gov. in/drdo/drdojsp/downloadtndr.jsp? tenderName=18043&McrId=GTRE*Gas%20Turbine%20Research%20Establishment&p=RFINewTestCell130kN.pdf


So finally curtain is being raised..

Is this the reason Safran is also roped in via rafale offset deal?

Kaveri and Kaveri NG which eventually should power LCA (variants), future AMCA and may be Indian MII Jets...

Why would we want GE 414 when we can get all this done with investment of time and money by ourselves.. and now Safran investing makes that also taken care of .. Does it not showcase the game changer tipping point..

Why would you start this project unless the earlier one will soon roll out and go for the actual deployment? Unless that has been evaluated by someone like Safran and this point of Kaveri NG becomes their binding promise for Rafale MII orders...

Tagging all users. Enjoy.. Good days will come in our MIC soon...

What have you got to say about weight- I presume Its the dry weight- 2170 kg

With 130 kN full thrust- T/W is 6.1
With 90 kN dry thrust- T/W is 4.2

As per current specifications Kaveri with dry weight of 1235 kg

With 52 kN dry thrust- T/W is 4.3
With 80 kN dry thrust- T/W is 6.6

Kaveri in present form seems to be a better performing engine when It comes to T/W ratio in comparison with this so called next Gen- Kaveri-

Another wastage of Public money I see here- unless there is some misprinting about the weight-

 

[Nilgiri]

What have you got to say about weight- I presume Its the dry weight- 2170 kg

With 130 kN full thrust- T/W is 6.1
With 90 kN dry thrust- T/W is 4.2

As per current specifications Kaveri with dry weight of 1235 kg

With 52 kN dry thrust- T/W is 4.3
With 80 kN dry thrust- T/W is 6.6

Kaveri in present form seems to be a better performing engine when It comes to T/W ratio in comparison with this so called next Gen- Kaveri-

Another wastage of Public money I see here- unless there is some misprinting about the weight-

Did you read what I typed? Its not only about thrust. A significant consideration are issues like creep which affect MTBO (serviceability of the engine). I mean there is a real qualititative difference between western and russian engines of the same thrust and T/W class for exactly that reason.

I don't want our aircraft to be less than 40% serviceable (or worse) because we rushed to incorporate Kaveri as it stands into them.

 

[PARIKRAMA]

@PARIKRAMA Is Safranised Kaveri engine will be developed in 50-50 partnership ? who will have the majority share in this venture ?

It wont be JV route. It will be 100% Indian engine with Safran help.

In all probability for the 1bn euro investment or $1100Mn, the basic logic will be a potential cost of Kaveri to be around $3Mn price implying 370 kaveri approx or at least 120 single engine fighter lifetime needs. So I guess it will be a royalty arrangement.

@randomradio
I remember your words in the other forum where you said this
Kaveri requires test beds. Test beds are expensive. If the French get involved, they will bring technology with them. Along with that they will bring technology to modernize the engine. So Kaveri can even be uprated to 120KN, that's something GTRE needs help with in order to save time.

Looks like your words are coming true if Safran is involved in this as well.

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

Did you read what I typed? Its not only about thrust. A significant consideration are issues like creep which affect MTBO (serviceability of the engine). I mean there is a real qualititative difference between western and russian engines of the same thrust and T/W class for exactly that reason.

I don't want our aircraft to be less than 40% serviceable (or worse) because we rushed to incorporate Kaveri as it stands into them.

And would It matter- If the aircraft is under powered ?

Usually western engines have T/W ratio of above 8 or 9-

GE404 has T/W ratio of 7.8 max
GE414 has T/W ratio of 9 max
EJ200 has T/W ratio of 9.3 max
M88 has T/W ratio of 8.5 max
RD33 has T/W ratio of 7.9 max

What are they planning to fly with this thing surely not a 4.5 gen combat aircraft let alone a 5th Gen where T/W max can be seen as high as 10- 11- 12-

 

[Nilgiri]

And would It matter- If the aircraft is under powered ?

Thats why I said thrust uprating is very much welcome and an excellent development.

But it must be clear the development does not end there. There are clear areas where Safran can lend much expertise in improving the engines MTBO and other issues.

One example: The thousands of iterations needed for specific modes of thermal creep are something that will take India probably another 5 - 10 years by itself (no amount of money can accelerate it beyond a certain point...and the trade offs are huge if that is the approach chosen). I talked to a friend about it just a cpl weeks ago actually.

But Safran can probably cut to the chase and have India's RnD focus on more crucial maturing areas by providing them this data (just like the data they provided in the 80s in their nuclear reactors for BARC to be able to miniaturise a given reactor in a short time period).

We don't have legions and legions of researchers and scientists in this sector compared to the West....so if we want to catch up in strong significant ways....our human resource in the area must be allowed to focus on the top tier research rather than be relegated to churning through what has already been accomplished elsewhere (as much as possible).....i.e where little is actually learned but is a case of many test iterations to get the data you know others already have and are improving upon.

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

Thats why I said thrust uprating is very much welcome and an excellent development.

But it must be clear the development does not end there. There are clear areas where Safran can lend much expertise in improving the engines MTBO and other issues.

One example: The thousands of iterations needed for specific modes of thermal creep are something that will take India probably another 5 - 10 years by itself (no amount of money can accelerate it beyond a certain point...and the trade offs are huge if that is the approach chosen). I talked to a friend about it just a cpl weeks ago actually.

But Safran can probably cut to the chase and have India's RnD focus on more crucial maturing areas by providing them this data (just like the data they provided in the 80s in their nuclear reactors for BARC to be able to miniaturise a given reactor in a short time period).

We don't have legions and legions of researchers and scientists in this sector compared to the West....so if we want to catch up in strong significant ways....our human resource in the area must be allowed to focus on the top tier research rather than be relegated to churning through what has already been accomplished (as much as possible).....i.e where little is actually learned but is a case of many test iterations to get the data you know others already have and are improving upon.

I don't know what safran is doing and what magic It will work- I have no problem If safran actually gets the thing working-

What I am trying to say is Kaveri is already overweight What do they want to do with an even more overweight engine-

The Saturn engines used in MKI weighs around 1.5 ton what are we going to fly with this 2 ton engine ? Someone tell me there has been a mistake a misprinting or this is just a waste a complete waste-

 

[PARIKRAMA]

@Eminent Mainstream Media @Nilgiri

• We must be very careful when computing the T/W ratio.
• In general airframes and engines are produced by different manufacturers and the same engine can go into different airframes, thus T/W ratio of the engine alone is normally found in open literature sources.
• High T/W is an indication surely but when determining the performance of the aircraft, the important factor is the overall T/W of the aircraft, not just the engine alone.
• Another point to note is the thrust of an engine decreases with altitude while the weight remains constant, so this ratios for engines are often quoted at sea level static conditions, which give the maximum value that the engine will produce.
• Lastly consider one more case like EJ200 versus M88 case. The EJ200 gives a much higher T/W, a very high climbing rate and a superb acceleration. But doing so, it lights up a lot more due to heat emissions. Like this below
• 
• 
  
  
• The first one is EF versus second one rafale
• This is where it was discussed - https://defence.pk/threads/dassault...ussions-thread-2.351407/page-299#post-8567642
• Also dont forget the SFC angle for fuel consumption versus thrust needed.

So it has advantages as well disadvantages ...

 

[Nilgiri]

@Eminent Mainstream Media @Nilgiri

• We must be very careful when computing the T/W ratio.
• In general airframes and engines are produced by different manufacturers and the same engine can go into different airframes, thus T/W ratio of the engine alone is normally found in open literature sources.
• High T/W is an indication surely but when determining the performance of the aircraft, the important factor is the overall T/W of the aircraft, not just the engine alone.
• Another point to note is the thrust of an engine decreases with altitude while the weight remains constant, so this ratios for engines are often quoted at sea level static conditions, which give the maximum value that the engine will produce.
• Lastly consider one more case like EJ200 versus M88 case. The EJ200 gives a much higher T/W, a very high climbing rate and a superb acceleration. But doing so, it lights up a lot more due to heat emissions. Like this below
• 
• 
  
  
• The first one is EF versus second one rafale
• This is where it was discussed - https://defence.pk/threads/dassault...ussions-thread-2.351407/page-299#post-8567642
• Also dont forget the SFC angle for fuel consumption versus thrust needed.

So it has advantages as well disadvantages ...

Yup its well known to me. Didn't want to go into so much detail right off the bat....but excellent post!

Thrust, T/W, Aircraft T/w (esp with dynamic CofG), sfc and all of these at various regimes are a very fascinating and complicated research area.

Stand alone T/W of engine alone is a tiny first step on the entire bridge

What I am trying to say is Kaveri is already overweight What do they want to do with an even more overweight engine-

What you mean its going to be even more overweight?

You presumed something to be a dry weight....thats the first mistake.

We have to compare apples to apples here.

Thrust uprating would not cause the T/W to drop since its the HP core that has the largest sensitivity to changing T/W significantly (since thats what drives the whole thing). Tinkering/refining the LP spool would not alter it in any substantial way...in fact it would probably have increased (stand alone T/w) is my bet.

Wait for better numbers to come out.

 

[Eminent Mainstream Media]

@Eminent Mainstream Media @Nilgiri

• We must be very careful when computing the T/W ratio.
• In general airframes and engines are produced by different manufacturers and the same engine can go into different airframes, thus T/W ratio of the engine alone is normally found in open literature sources.
• High T/W is an indication surely but when determining the performance of the aircraft, the important factor is the overall T/W of the aircraft, not just the engine alone.
• Another point to note is the thrust of an engine decreases with altitude while the weight remains constant, so this ratios for engines are often quoted at sea level static conditions, which give the maximum value that the engine will produce.
• Lastly consider one more case like EJ200 versus M88 case. The EJ200 gives a much higher T/W, a very high climbing rate and a superb acceleration. But doing so, it lights up a lot more due to heat emissions. Like this below
• 
• 
  
  
• The first one is EF versus second one rafale
• This is where it was discussed - https://defence.pk/threads/dassault...ussions-thread-2.351407/page-299#post-8567642
• Also dont forget the SFC angle for fuel consumption versus thrust needed.

So it has advantages as well disadvantages ...

Sir you are going over secondary issues-

The point here is that this Engine will most probably end up in a supposed 5th Gen aircraft India is planning to build- Now we have seen how IAF is unhappy with T-50 engine which they think is under powered for a 5th gen combat plane the engine 117 has T/W of 10.5 max- And I think they are right here T/W should be 12 for max thrust on a 5th gen plane-

Now here what I see is a T/W ratio of 6- about half of what they expect from the Russians- There is a limit to weight reduction of the fuselage, wings etc- How do you think the buyer is going to react- Or this is one of another DRDO science lab projects for learning- How to build an engine-

What you mean its going to be even more overweight?

You presumed something to be a dry weight....thats the first mistake.

We have to compare apples to apples here.

Thrust uprating would not cause the T/W to drop since its the HP core that has the largest sensitivity to changing T/W significantly (since thats what drives the whole thing). Tinkering/refining the LP spool would not alter it in any substantial way...in fact it would probably have increased (stand alone T/w) is my bet.

Wait for better numbers to come out.

My meaning was the 2170kg weight of this engine-

Usually Its the dry weight which is mentioned-

And how much will the thrust be uprated to ? and what for- IMO AMCA with 90kN dry and 130kN with afterburner is perfect- or is there something different going on a Heavy 5th gen plane being planned or A strategic bomber ??

I would wait for further details-

 

[Nilgiri]

My meaning was the 2170kg weight of this engine-

Usually Its the dry weight which is mentioned-

I dunno, that seems a bit of a stretch to me. They will have to write it actually as "dry weight" for me to take it as dry weight.

 

[Joe Shearer]

??

That is why the quote by @PARIKRAMA "now Safran investing makes that also taken care of .. Does it not showcase the game changer tipping point.." to which I agree with Him. Safran will be a game changer for us - Case and point : The Shakti Engines


I'm asking about THIS Setup the testing facility as mentioned in the tender!

@PARIKRAMA

Congratulations.

Now, the thing is, I need a couple of miracles....