What's new

IAF to induct ‘Tejas’ squadron in June with 4 aircrafts

Thank U Sir.


Thank U again Sir. Its understood that Kaveri would not be left to die like that as even earlier it was reported that it ll power Aura UCAV. But is contract for Tejas Mark-II with IAF finalised? If yes then like reported would IAF be flying only 20 Tejas Mark-I till 2018 or till Mark-II gets FOC? AMCA or Mark III have quite long way to go. Is HAL offering an aircraft which is in design phase? Even if we consider same Tejas with Modifications and stealthy features as AMCA then still its a long way to go.

1. No IAF haven't given any order for MK-2 of LCA. Actually there are 2 teams of ADA is working on the project one on the Naval variant of LCA mk-2 powered by GE F414 engine, and another one on MK-2 variant of LCA tejas for IAF. But important part is MK-2 is actually N-LCA, because without more powerful engine thrust, the LCA won't be able to takeoff with substantial weapon load in the carrier operation of SKI JUMP.

2. LCA was always designed around Kaveri Engine specification, and Kaveri had highter inlet pressure spec, than the F-404 engine, so its air inlet desing was desinged for the Kaveri and not F-404 engine, thats why it was unable to fulfill the IAF ASQR, and ADA tried few patches by opening bypass near air inlet, to release the pressure, which some of our experts, and Media reported as FLAW, and DESIGN ISSUES of DRAGS.

3. Kaveri is just a prototype and the proof of the technology, the real engine will be developed on the technology developed with the Kaveri prototype.

4. As for UAV AURA, its highly possible, that it will be powered by M88 initially, that's why India, took so much time for the Rafale deal.
 
3. Kaveri is just a prototype and the proof of the technology, the real engine will be developed on the technology developed with the Kaveri prototype.

Kaveri was NOT a prototype,it was a full fledged engine, development of which gulped away close to $400-500mn!
I would like to add though that the real problem with kaveri was the acoustic instability.This lead to increased fatigue on the shaft and the blades.
If they can successfully implement the corrections to newer engine-which essentially means design of newer combustion chamber to mitigate the onset of instability-i am sure a new engine can indeed power our fighter jets.However for now,we need to be contend with smaller indigenous engines powering un-armed drones,cruise missiles etc
 
Kaveri was NOT a prototype,it was a full fledged engine, development of which gulped away close to $400-500mn!
I would like to add though that the real problem with kaveri was the acoustic instability.This lead to increased fatigue on the shaft and the blades.
If they can successfully implement the corrections to newer engine-which essentially means design of newer combustion chamber to mitigate the onset of instability-i am sure a new engine can indeed power our fighter jets.However for now,we need to be contend with smaller indigenous engines powering un-armed drones,cruise missiles etc

Sorry Sir, but this is 10th times I am reading about Acoustic Instability theory, which your professor told you.

Kaveri is just the technology Demonstrator, because the real engine will be now developed on the learning which we learned with the Kaveri and it is waiting for the Supersonic Test Bed aka Mig 29 swaped by its one engine.


AND

Regarding integration of Kaveri with LCA, from the old source

Quote:
What’s the latest on the Kaveri engine? GTRE’s association with LCA Tejas programme?

GTRE has so far developed 9 prototypes of Kaveri engines and 4 prototypes of Kabini (Core) engines. The engines have run cumulatively for over 2200 hours at ground and altitude conditions for various requirements including performance, operability, endurance, environmental etc. Further endurance testing is under progress at GTRE. Two major milestones achieved viz. successful completion of Official Altitude Testing (OAT) and completion of first block of flights of Kaveri engine in Flying Test Bed (FTB) have demonstrated the technological capability and maturing of the indigenous efforts. A Kaveri engine prototype was integrated with IL-76 aircraft at Gromov Flight Research Institute (GFRI), Russia and flight tests have been successfully carried out. Issues required to be addressed have been identified and are being addressed and it is planned to commence flight trials for technology demonstration of Kaveri engine with LCA Tejas Mk-I in about three years
time.
 
Last edited:
Sorry Sir, but this is 10th times I am reading about Acoustic Instability theory, which your professor told you.

Kaveri is just the technology Demonstrator, because the real engine will be now developed on the learning which we learned with the Kaveri and it is waiting for the Supersonic Test Bed aka Mig 29 swaped by its one engine.

Hi dear @knight11
I am afraid you might have to hear it for another 100 times because that happens to be the reason why Kaveri is NOT performing the way we wanted it to performance.And no kaveri was NOT a "TD" as you have wrongly mentioned it(developing prototypes doesnt mean kaveri was a "technology demonstrator".).I have so many of my collegues/seniors working in DRDO. Secondly,we must learn to live in realities,IAF hasnt even sanctioned a single mig-29 to DRDO to carry out any structural changes to fit their "imaginary" engine.Kindly furnish technical literature in support of your claim.
And no my professor did NOT tell me,he patented a system that not only predicts the onset of instability but also controls it!
PS- when you get down to designing an engineering product you come up with various prototypes.Kaveri was our full fledged engine program that was ruined because someone failed to take measures at the design stage of combustion chamber. The only way one can save it is by re-designing a completely new combustion chamber!
 
Secondly,we must learn to live in realities,IAF hasnt even sanctioned a single mig-29 to DRDO to carry out any structural changes to fit their "imaginary" engine.Kindly furnish technical literature in support of your claim.

I know very well that IAF haven't sanctioned a single MIG-29 because the MIG 29 test bed will be coming from Russia, and modified by HAL for fittment.

And no my professor did NOT tell me,he patented a system that not only predicts the onset of instability but also controls it!

Kindly provide data and more information.

PS- when you get down to designing an engineering product you come up with various prototypes.Kaveri was our full fledged engine program that was ruined because someone failed to take measures at the design stage of combustion chamber. The only way one can save it is by re-designing a completely new combustion chamber!

I am not a mechanical Engineer, but if you insists, I am ready to take the challenge to discuss the technical issues and calculation with you, just allow me some time, while you can post the data to back up your claim.
 
Kindly provide data and more information.

Oh here is the report-
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...gas-turbine-glitches/articleshow/46901161.cms

Here is another link.This has been patented,for more details look for prof sujith IITM-
http://iit.org/blog/2015/04/26/iit-m-finds-way-to-predict-gas-turbine-glitches-42315/

I am not a mechanical Engineer, but if you insists, I am ready to take the challenge to discuss the technical issues and calculation with you, just allow me some time, while you can post the data to back up your claim.

Yeah sure,go ahead,neither am I. But let me tell you as you move up in your academics,things start to merge together.For instance even a structures engineer working in aerospace might have to learn stochastic processing,hilbert spaces etc.And similarly an electronics/control engineer might have to learn the dynamics of flight and aerodynamics(as i am doing right now!).And this is not the ordinary dynamics but something more intricate and requires one to have insight that comes with tools like bifurcation analysis(and of course allied mathematics).My point here,is,it doesnt matter what engineering background one belong to,as one moves up the academic ladder,things become heavily intertwined

I know very well that IAF haven't sanctioned a single MIG-29 because the MIG 29 test bed will be coming from Russia, and modified by HAL for fittment.
Again,a proof is lacking,kindly provide a statement from GTRE.
 
Last edited:
Tejas stealth version should be our goal by2022 instead of MK2

Easier said than done! Let me tell you something. Its not the product that decides the doctrine but the doctrine that does. A stealth Tejas would fit into the same roles as that of Mk1 and you cannot spend too much on something that's meant for just point defense. In simpler terms a Tiger or a Lion cannot replace the job of a Horse or an Elephant no matter how powerful the former is.

Tejas as is fills the requirement of the forces. Its better to work on enhancements rather redesigning it.
 

Sir, that's only the news, but since the technique used has been patented, kindly explain the technical aspect of the technique used to predict the vibration caused in the turbo fan engine.

Yeah sure,go ahead,neither am I. But let me tell you as you move up in your academics,things start to merge together.For instance even a structures engineer working in aerospace might have to learn stochastic processing,hilbert spaces etc.And similarly an electronics/control engineer might have to learn the dynamics of flight and aerodynamics(as i am doing right now!).And this is not the ordinary dynamics but something more intricate and requires one to have insight that comes with tools like bifurcation analysis(and of course allied mathematics).My point here,is,it doesnt matter what engineering background one belong to,as one moves up the academic ladder,things become heavily intertwined

I am an Electrical engineer, so pls allow me some time, to gather all the informations, material specific values, and formulae for calculation. Till then if you have any such tool to do calculation, kindly post it. For many things, we have make assumptions. I think for further discussion a new thread would be needed. I will tag you there.

For MIG-29 test bed, the unconfirmed news was given by Saurabh Jha in his Tweets.

This is from Saurav Jha twitter post


Certified Gipsy ‏@CertifiedGipsy 1h1 hour ago
@SJha1618 Saurav, what is the latest status of GTRE Kaveri Engine? Do we have a working Engine? What are its latest features?

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 38m38 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi
@CertifiedGipsy Tested to 72 + KN. Flew for more than 50 hours on the FTB in Russia. Program continues. Rechristening soon.

Certified Gipsy ‏@CertifiedGipsy 30m30 minutes ago
@SJha1618 Doesn't it mean they have a working engine at 80kN?

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 28m28 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi
@CertifiedGipsy What it means is that they have a prototype engine that has achieved 90 % of its designed wet thrust capability.

Certified Gipsy ‏@CertifiedGipsy 25m25 minutes ago
@SJha1618 Brilliant. Also, is it possible for them to to fit two of these Engines in existing MiG 29 and see how it performs?

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 24m24 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi
@CertifiedGipsy Only one engine will be fit first. Standard practice. 20 unit run is to get to a stage where you can talk about MTBO etc.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 25m25 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi
@CertifiedGipsy 90% of the required thrust with existing materials. The 20 new ones will see product improvements leading closer to 80 KN.

Certified Gipsy ‏@CertifiedGipsy 23m23 minutes ago
@SJha1618 But wiki says that the full after burner thrust is 81kN and planned to be upgraded to >95kN. Don't know what their source is.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 20m20 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi
@CertifiedGipsy 90 KN is the final design goal. 95 KN will reduce engine life. 81 KN not achieved yet for legacy prototypes.

Certified Gipsy ‏@CertifiedGipsy 19m19 minutes ago
@SJha1618 90kN would be a great achievement. We can power both single engine jets and twin engine variants with indigenous engines.

Saurav Jha ‏@SJha1618 17m17 minutes ago New Delhi, Delhi
@CertifiedGipsy That is the idea.
 
Easier said than done! Let me tell you something. Its not the product that decides the doctrine but the doctrine that does. A stealth Tejas would fit into the same roles as that of Mk1 and you cannot spend too much on something that's meant for just point defense. In simpler terms a Tiger or a Lion cannot replace the job of a Horse or an Elephant no matter how powerful the former is.

Tejas as is fills the requirement of the forces. Its better to work on enhancements rather redesigning it.
I really wonder what is the use of wasting another 7 years for MK2. I said the same in another thread too. Stealth MK2 could be used for our future AC, iaf
 
I really wonder what is the use of wasting another 7 years for MK2. I said the same in another thread too. Stealth MK2 could be used for our future AC, iaf

To perfect the future you need to perfect the present. Tejas Mk2 will do wonders for AMCA than Stealth Tejas could ever. Tejas Mk2 will generate ideas for AMCA and possible next gen components too. If you work on an entirely new product in then name of Tejas you are not gonna see light for at least a decade.

Though I agree with you that the Stealth Tejas would do wonders but not when priorities are at stake.
 
Tejas stealth version should be our goal by2022 instead of MK2
No, no and no again. Not only would that be a huge undertaking that could never be fulfilled in that timeline but it also goes against the point of the LCA as a light weight (and AFFORDABLE) MiG-21 replacement interceptor with high availability. Add "stealth" into the mix and you'll get an expensive and complex product that isn't fit for its purpose. The LCA is NOT meant to be an offensive asset, it will be the "rear guard" whilst the "heavies" (MKI, Rafale, Mirage-2000) go into enemy airspace.

Not everyone can be Siachin Tendulkar or Michael Schumacher, you need a "journeyman" on the team, a reliable, consistent if not unspectacular team player.

Don't let Lockhead Martin's nonsensical PR cloud your judgement, VLO/"stealth" is not the be all and end all, it is just another feature but isn't worth pursuing at the cost of outright performance (aka the comprimised F-35 design).

I really wonder what is the use of wasting another 7 years for MK2. I said the same in another thread too. Stealth MK2 could be used for our future AC, iaf
The MK.2 will be exactly what the IAF needs- address all of the issues of the MK.1, a more powerful engine, larger internal fuel capacity, a more capable avionics suite and (hopefully) some next generation features from Dassualt.

The IN has no interest in a single engined fighter aircraft for its carriers, it is supporting the N-LCA project to develop the techs for the AMCA. It is the AMCA that needs to be stealth, not the LCA.


+ It's not "wasting" 7 years, the LCA will be developed yet further, capabilities will be expanded and the Mk.2 will be on par with the Gripen NG.

@PARIKRAMA @knight11
 
Back
Top Bottom