What's new

Kaveri engine to fly futuristic unmanned aircraft

SpArK

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
22,519
Reaction score
18
Country
India
Location
India
Kaveri engine to fly futuristic unmanned aircraft



Kaveri+test+bed.jpg

The Kaveri undergoes testing at the GTRE



Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), Bangalore
Business Standard, 26th Dec 12

The Defence R&D Organisation’s (DRDO’s) faltering project to develop an indigenous jet engine has sparked into life again. With the Kaveri engine, born from this project, found short on power for the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the MoD has nominated the Kaveri to power the hush-hush Unmanned Strike Air Vehicle (USAV), a pilot-less bomber aircraft that the DRDO is developing.



The veil of secrecy surrounding the USAV project was thrown off on Dec 10, when the defence minister told parliament that, “(The) Kaveri spin-off engine can be used as propulsion system for (the) Indian Unmanned Strike Air Vehicle.”

Already drones, or unmanned air vehicles (UAVs), are changing the nature of air power with their ability to strike targets without endangering pilots lives. USAVs are bigger, 8-10 tonne drones, akin to strike fighters in their ability to carry heavy weaponry including bombs, rockets and missiles. Since they are piloted by remote control, they can be built lighter, stealthier, and sent on even the most risky missions.

The Indian USAV project is a lease of life for the Kaveri engine. Although India will import jet engines worth Rs 1,60,000 crore over the next decade (DRDO projections) none of these can be used for the USAV. The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) prohibits its 34 signatories --- including every major engine manufacturing country --- from selling engines for unmanned systems with ranges of over 300 kilometres.

An Indian jet engine, therefore, must power the USAV and the Kaveri is the only option. Although underpowered for fast-moving fighter aircraft, the DRDO believes the Kaveri is well suited for the USAV, which is lighter, flies slower and manoeuvres less sharply.

Business Standard visited the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), the DRDO laboratory that is developing the Kaveri engine. It reached a key landmark last year, when a prototype Kaveri was flight-tested in Russia at the Gromov Flight Research Institute (GFRI). The engine’s performance was measured on a “flying test-bed”, a four-engine IL-76 transport aircraft that had one of its original engines replaced with a Kaveri.

During this test the Kaveri did well, generating 49.2 KiloNewtons (KN) of “dry thrust”, marginally less than its target of 51 KN. But there was a serious shortfall in “wet thrust”; the Kaveri generated just 70.4 KN, well short of the targeted 81 KN.

[“Dry thrust” refers to the standard output of an engine in routine flight. “Wet thrust” refers to the enhanced output that is generated when the fighter requires maximum power, e.g. during take-off or in aerial combat. Termed “lighting the afterburner”, this is achieved by pumping fuel into the engine’s exhaust.]

The Kaveri’s dry thrust is deemed adequate for the USAV, which does not require wet thrust since its survival depends on stealth (invisibility to radar) rather than on speed or manoeuvrability. The Kaveri will propel the USAV with dry thrust alone, eliminating the afterburner.

“Since the USAV will weigh less than 10 tonnes, the Kaveri’s 50 KN will suffice. And, with the afterburner removed, we would significantly reduce the weight of the Kaveri,” says a top DRDO scientist.

GTRE has a three-fold plan for perfecting the Kaveri for the USAV. First, it will remove the design flaws that were detecting during testing in Russia in 2010-11; then, after ground testing in Bangalore, the Kaveri will undergo a round of confirmatory tests in Russia; finally, it will be fitted on a Tejas fighter for flight tests.

Meanwhile, the Bangalore-based Aeronautical Development Establishment (ADE), another DRDO laboratory, will develop the USAV. Four years from today, the Kaveri --- having proved itself on the Tejas --- will be mated with the USAV.

“After extensive ground testing at GTRE, the Kaveri will go back to Russia for flight-testing to ascertain that all the problems have been solved. This is essential for airworthiness certification. Finally, we will test the Kaveri in the single-engine Tejas fighter,” says Dr CP Ramnarayanan, Director, GTRE.

The Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA), which oversees the development of the Tejas, confirms that it will provide a Tejas prototype for flying with the Kaveri. It has even nominated an aircraft --- the first prototype, numbered PV-1 --- which is currently being used for flight-testing new systems.

“(The PV-1) was originally built to support the Kaveri engine. While the engine, in its present form, would not suffice for the Tejas, a Kaveri “dry engine” could be used for one of the futuristic unmanned systems,” says PS Subramanyam, Director, ADA.

GTRE has asked the MoD for Rs 595 crore to develop the Kaveri dry engine for the USAV. This will fund the building of two new Kaveri engines, costing some Rs 50 crore each; and flight testing in Russia, which cost Rs 80 crore in 2010-11 and could cost significantly more now.

“We will take 48 months from the date we get clearance from the government, for completing 50 hours of testing the Kaveri on the Tejas LCA. During the last 12 months, we will actually fly the Tejas with the Kaveri,” says Ramnarayanan.

The defence minister told parliament this month that the Kaveri project was sanctioned in March 1989 at an estimated cost of Rs.382.81 crore, and was to be completed by December 1996. This was revised [in 2005] to December 2009, while the cost was enhanced to Rs 2,839 crore. So far, Rs 1,996 crore has been actually spent on the Kaveri.

Defending the cost escalation, GTRE points out that comparable engines --- such as the General Electric F-404 and the Russian Klimov RD-33 --- cost the equivalent of Rs 8,000 crore to build in the 1990s, and would cost Rs 12,000-14,000 crore today.


Kaveri engine to fly futuristic unmanned aircraft
 
so this dead project can continue to screw your nation?

this is a dead project, indians need to learn how to be honest and move on. same for LCA and Arjun.
 
Learning language better will help you read whole article and lift you from serious retardation before getting brain dead.

you nation at the losing side is more than welcomed to commit further funds to this dead engine project. feel free to modify it to fit your UAVs or even airliners. the more you spend, the larger gap we two nations are going to have.

again - this project, LCA and Arjun have all my support! from a Chinese point of view, nothing is better than seeing you guys wasting money and time on such dead projects.
 
This makes me wonder why Indians are always so eager to bash China on anything related to aircraft engines, when our J-11b's are actually flying with WS-10A engines.

Isn't that just too much hypocrisy?
 
you nation at the losing side is more than welcomed to commit further funds to this dead engine project. feel free to modify it to fit your UAVs or even airliners. the more you spend, the larger gap we two nations are going to have.

again - this project, LCA and Arjun have all my support! from a Chinese point of view, nothing is better than seeing you guys wasting money and time on such dead projects.

Why dont u go f urself , without flaming in every Indian threads...

Why the f is this forum called defence forum, when sh!ts like these come on every thread that talks some defence??
 
Grt for Kaveri n India both :enjoy:
As its correctly said that Knowledge gained never go waste...:agree:
The next decade is very crucial for our defence industry resulting in much greater self reliance than ever before...:tup:
 
Learning language better will help you read whole article and lift you from serious retardation before getting brain dead.

Spark, Do you have any update about K10? Is the talk about co-development with France dead now or we will see any surprise? Apart from this UCAV, there is no other news about work on kaveri.
 
you nation at the losing side is more than welcomed to commit further funds to this dead engine project. feel free to modify it to fit your UAVs or even airliners. the more you spend, the larger gap we two nations are going to have.

again - this project, LCA and Arjun have all my support! from a Chinese point of view, nothing is better than seeing you guys wasting money and time on such dead projects.

Can you tell why your engine not able to fly JF-17? why you sue russian engine? please me us engine master .....
 
Spark, Do you have any update about K10? Is the talk about co-development with France dead now or we will see any surprise? Apart from this UCAV, there is no other news about work on kaveri.

Nope. K10 is different. not much info.
 
This makes me wonder why Indians are always so eager to bash China on anything related to aircraft engines, when our J-11b's are actually flying with WS-10A engines.

Isn't that just too much hypocrisy?

Sure, but please make the engine for JF-17 which can fly outside media controlled china to prove....:)
 
Sure, but please make the engine for JF-17 which can fly outside media controlled china to prove....:)

constant humiliations, embarrasment and loathings make your brain less comprehensive i guess`?``where does the engines used on J-17 have anything to do with the media?? lol

but its more like your clownish medias like to boasting over your primitive foreign parts assemble 'indigenous' weapons
 
constant humiliations, embarrasment and loathings make your brain less comprehensive i guess`?``where does the engines used on J-17 have anything to do with the media?? lol

but its more like your clownish medias like to boasting over your primitive foreign parts assemble 'indigenous' weapons

I think the main reason is to keep the funding going so people on the project don't go unemployed.
 
J-11B has been crashing like shooting ducks but of course Chinese media they will not show that.

Kaveri engine can be used in many other aspects so on that note it is not a failure but we should of planned better from the start and brought in a partner for the project instead of down the line when it became clear we needed techical help.
 
Back
Top Bottom