Can Pakistan successfully build Engines for Tanks and Jet Fighters?

[The Huskar]

@The Huskar

Can't we have a twin engine plane concept? I mean two engines equal to 170KN power or is AMCA will fitted with two Kaveri??

The plan is for AMCA to be fitted witth 2 Kaveri Engines but the dry weight of Kaveri and its T/W ratio is a big deterrent.If you compare the engines of contemporary fifth generation fighters,we will see that Kaveri is heavily lacking when compared to P&W F119 or Saturn Al41 or P&W F135 which produces more than 130 KN thrust each.Also we can argue that AMCA will be medium class and require less powerful engines but fact of the matter is that with increased capability of flight avionics,more power is required to operate them.Faster the the mission computers,more power it consumes.So the present Kaveri configuration is not at all good for AMCA. But GTRE has started project K9+ and K10.Let's see what that brings forth

 

[trainer]

I thought that they rejected Snecma's offer due to its insistence on using M88 core instead of Kabini core.Is it true?

Yes, this was the main reason apart from some other riders too.

 

[kṣamā]

Your patriotism isn't the only ingredient needed for making engines.

Now I didn't say that we cannot build jet engines. we just can't build turbofans. we need to think out-of-the-box.

Just forget turbofans. We can do research on Scramjet technology because it is a new technology and it's not based on turbofans.

@MastanKhan

Well scramjet is definitely the future...but one should not forget that to build the four floor building one has to build basement-up, not the other way around. The ideas learned during a IC or a turbine engine are not lost or mutually exclusive. Both have many similarities and many differences. and solving them is the stepping stone for the next stage.

I will give a very small example. The company I work for has many clients. One of them is a F1 racing team and an other client makes commercial turbine engines. Both these clients had similar issues with engine performances under certain operational environmental parameters. There where many solutions to solve them. But the solution which was suggested by my firm was a very effective and not so costly. We where able to do that bcoz we had the experience dealing with an earlier gen engine with a similar problem. We build upon it to deliver result. ( Sorry fellas could not divulge finer details, NDA. But the problem and the struggle to solution just blows mind. Hope someday I can discuss them. )

 

[The Huskar]

Your patriotism isn't the only ingredient needed for making engines.

Now I didn't say that we cannot build jet engines. we just can't build turbofans. we need to think out-of-the-box.

Just forget turbofans. We can do research on Scramjet technology because it is a new technology and it's not based on turbofans.

@MastanKhan

Be it Turbofan,Ramjet or Scramjet,the basic engineering challenge that manufacturers faces are same.Thermal insulation,Single crystal blades and use of high grade low weight metal combination are some of the common problem in all types of engines.Unless you have extensive knowledge of the subject,you cannot hope to achieve a high performance engine.

 

[zaid butt]

Making fighter engine is not as easy as making nukes

joke of the year

 

[Hulk]

Engines take years to R&D.

If China is helping with a engine that they will not like to use, like many of their other developments.

 

[zaid butt]

I had read an Article way back that in US, a teenager had ENRICHED Uranium in his House, authorities arrested them before they can go for building Nukes for non-state actors. Just found out the link for the report:


So making Nukes is No Rocket science anymore, esp. when you have the backing of whole state resources, but making a JET ENGINE is.

if it is so easy
then what is iran waiting for?

 

[45'22']

joke of the year

 

[nvKyleBrown]

After extensive research for years,i have come to know that Pakistan only manufacture 70cc bike engine,16HP diesel engine(Ancient era).

That's a lawnmower engine in the US. Shop Troy-Bilt Bronco 17-HP Automatic 42-in Riding Lawn Mower with Kohler Engine at Lowes.com

joke of the year

There is a certain amount of truth to it. The Manhattan Project took 24 months. Jet engine design, both in Germany and the UK began in 1939, and it was 1944 before working aircraft were fielded. Prototypes earlier, but basically, it took longer. Further, more of that time was design/proto cycling, rather than with the Bomb, where they pretty much spent most of the time refining uranium, ie. building the bombs.

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

Engines are must but I feel the push if happens will come from Private Sector as Government is too Lazy to have any initiative and Military heads like while don't understand the need for it to them its commodity that can just be bought

Just need correct machine tools to manufacture the items

 

[aliaselin]

joint venture and a considerable number of pakistani engineers are members of the R&D team of the engine program which started at CAC chengdu in 1999.

You must have mistaken JF-17 project for WS-13 project. CAC doesn't produce WS-13, and WS-13 is produced is Guiyang

 

[kṣamā]

if it is so easy
then what is iran waiting for?

Well the only and rather the most critical building block for a nuke is the fissile material. Purer the material, smaller the critical mass pile and hence smaller the device. But you should understand that "Anything" that spontaneously disintegrate or technically speaking, radioactively decay in to smaller/lighter atoms by breaking bigger atoms and in process releases energy,free neutrons and protons can be termed as "Nuke". These substances do this thing spontaneously only when they come together in critical mass. Now a "Nuke" could have anything in it as a fissile material, but it's quantity will vary. Quantity will have to vary not because of yield but because of the critical mass of the substance. Yes more material than critical mass more yield, But bare minimum weight of the material should be it's critical mass.

Eg: The nominal spherical critical mass for an untampered U235 nuclear weapon is 56 kg. Pu-239 has the smallest critical mass, spherical untampered critical mass is about 11 kg.Pure uranium-233 has a critical mass of about 15kg. Heck even the most un reactive metal in the family Thorium, Th229 can be weponised with a critical mass of 2839Kg or 994Kg with steel reflector plates.

So the above just goes on to show that creating weapons grade material is to have right amount of fissile material. Now one would ask "How can we get theses assorted metals?? Super powers are investing billions on nuclear reactors for harvesting them and won't sell those designs." Well one dose not need those shiny new reactors for creating weapons grade fissile material, if one knows what they are doing. Donn believe me, well then just look at Chicago Pile-1 As described by Enrico Fermi himself ,"a crude pile of black bricks and wooden timbers.".All it was needed was the a solid technical knowledge base. And that was the reason why teenagers are building these reactors in their backyard. The Radioactive Boy Scout . Note the year :1995, before the age of Wikipedia.

So yes it's easier to make Nuke than making a high performance Jet Engine.

 

[Manindra]

I had read an Article way back that in US, a teenager had ENRICHED Uranium in his House, authorities arrested them before they can go for building Nukes for non-state actors. Just found out the link for the report:

Report Finds Troubling Rise In Teen Uranium Enrichment | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

So making Nukes is No Rocket science anymore, esp. when you have the backing of whole state resources, but making a JET ENGINE is.

This is The Onion.
American version of Faking News or Unreal Times

 

[PakEye]

Why is it that Pakistan can fully built a JF-17 or Al-Khalid Tank but always has to import engines from foreign countries such as China or Ukraine?Why hasn't Pakistan invested in developing the technical know how to build and develop its own engines?

after wasting of three decades and million of dollars The Failure of Indian indigenous KAVERI engine (now garbage) is best example.
the technology and best hardware is easily available and our vendor industries are very limited why we waste our time and money for prototypes.

 

[nana41]

You must have mistaken JF-17 project for WS-13 project. CAC doesn't produce WS-13, and WS-13 is produced is Guiyang

Guizouh Aircraft Industries are developing WS-13 engine and thats where most of Pakistani Engineers are working.