If the new engine needs a 90Kg/s flow, then AMCA will be designed with that inlet in mind from the start.
Btw, Enhanced Engine requires 85Kg/s and it's a drop fit on the SH that's carrying the same 77Kg/s version.
If the new engine needs a 90Kg/s flow, then AMCA will be designed with that inlet in mind from the start.
Btw, Enhanced Engine requires 85Kg/s and it's a drop fit on the SH that's carrying the same 77Kg/s version.
If the US is willing to offer 100% ToT, then they are capable of matching the French development offer too.
It's no secret that the US is ahead of France in this area.
In that case I think US may have offered ToT of F-414-400 first and then subsequent co-development of F 414 EE based engine for AMCA mk 2. Though it is also good offer but putting all eggs in one basket seems risky. By engaging two different OEMs we may get the best out of both of them although it will be cost intensive.
If we make 100% of the engine in-house, then there is very little to no risk anyway. The point of ToT is to become sanctions-free.
France and Russia are already in our market anyway.
Shakti engines didn't give us even 100% production ToT. In 2005 that was the best we could have hoped for and we got it.
Vikas engine has also done its job, and it has created an ecosystem.
AL31 has 4 times longer life than Chinese New engines. If we had the capability to replicate even 50% the reliability of AL31, we would have already done it. The ToT for engine and PESA in Su30 were very extensive.
If HAL and GTRE are made to share their know how with just each other, we will have at the very minimum a RD33 class engine within few months. 18-24.
With 414 what we should aim at is full licence assembly capability at highest level of localisation that's economically possible. And have the capability to service them and test them, ensuring that at the very minimum, an American sanction 10 years down the line, doesn't disrupt our operations.
ToT of licence manufacturing is different than ToT to allow R&D.
They till date are not ready to share the ToT of Javelin and we are expecting a licence manufacturing ToT of 414 to allow us to gain true know how and replicate that ?
I have been to atleast 4-5 exchanges organised by US Embassy. They bring up defence cooperation everytime. And we ask them about setting up R&D capability in Indian partners and they make 1 excuse. Business is difficult in India and dodge the question.
Americans will not share with us the know how of anything contemporary.
The risk is a OEM backing out at last moment to share the critical part of ToT when it knows now you are stuck without other option. It has happened many a times to us. Moreover, foreign OEMs in the past have tried to influence indigenous capability developments by illicit means to keep us dependent. By having more than one we can get good bargain without their unnecessary tantrams.
I have no hopes from France of meaningful ToT, we have been deceived by them plenty of times. They have no record to speak of any meaningful ToT. I would prefer RR for engine co development. British alwyz are more advanced than France in jet engine tech and have much better ToT record.
Last edited:
No doubt Russia has given us the best TOT over the years.
Mazagon Dock CMD Vice Adm Narayan Prasad suggests bold steps in trials & testing of Scorpene submarines - ET Infra
The head of India’s biggest warship builder, the State-run Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd, wants the government to take “some bold steps” on submarine manufacturing in the country.infra.economictimes.indiatimes.com
Read this and you will know how France does its business. France has never provided enough ToT to anybody. They have only extracted it from others.
If we would have been technically incompetent we wont be developing HTSE 1200 and made improvements to AL 31. We have built Arihant Sub from Russian ToT and now building its improved versions but we cant do it with Scorpene due to French.
Btw, isn't Project Ganga about creating an AL31FP equivalent 140kn engine? Or is it about indegenisation of AL31FP??!!
Anyways, domestic engine with full IP is a must for our future fighters. Can't put all out eggs in an unreliable basket(US).
As I already said earlier we dnt want Russian or chinese standard engine because they are neither reliable enough nor advanced enough but instead we want latest western standard engine from the word go thats why we are struggling. We have always aimed for western standards for indigenous products. HAL has already improved the relability of AL 31 produced by them so there is no question about capabilities. We also didnt want AL 41 for Super Sukhoi upgrade but instead wanted further improved AL 31 with more local tech but russians have not allowed that.
HAL & GTRE do share know hows thats not a problem.
Last edited:
There is only one type of ToT and that's only for manufacturing. There's no such thing as ToT that allows R&D. At best, all you can do is take or steal something and put it in your own stuff. But when it comes to engines and other high tech equipment, it won't work, you have to make it on your own specifically for the design. It's not a jigsaw puzzle.
Being denied Javelin ToT is old news. If we ask for it now, they will give it up, even without considering the success of MPATGM. The laws of the time didn't allow that to happen.
What's important about engine ToT is that's the only way the Americans can get the development contract for the new engine. France has offered 100% ToT for the Rafale's M88 engine, so America has to match that offer to be taken seriously, especially if they are to win the MRCBF contract.
If they break contract, we can take them to court. So they are unlikely to do that. We can't go for more than one because we can only afford one. The JV program will easily cost us up to $3-4B. Anyway the engine partner will be chosen via a competition anyway, US, UK and France and participating.
Right now, France is the most reliable source for ToT from the West. Both Jaguar and Scorpene came with ToT.
Do you think GE F414 will have enough power to make Tejas Mk2 competitive against Gripen E( Given the flaw in aerodynamic design of Tejas)?
Whats the use of taking any OEM to court?? At the most they will be blacklisted or bear some penalty. Investment of time & money will be lost and our program will be delayed or may even get cancelled. We have tried that before and got nowhere. The loss will be irreversible for us.
France has never been reliable source of ToT u can read this regarding Scorpene:
Mazagon Dock CMD Vice Adm Narayan Prasad suggests bold steps in trials & testing of Scorpene submarines - ET Infra
The head of India’s biggest warship builder, the State-run Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd, wants the government to take “some bold steps” on submarine manufacturing in the country.
Btw jaguar ToT was provided by British & not French.
French HAL JV is already in place for heli engine as u have stated earlier so, why not have jet engine with RR who are more advanced in this field. 2 JVs with Europeans and ToT from US will create a tremendous ecosystem for us. Meanwhile we may continue R&D for next gen engine.
Last edited:
What flaw? The LCA Mk2's specs are expected to be better than Gripen E's with the same engine. It has more fuel, more payload, higher MTOW.
You have earlier said that Gripen C is aerodynamically better than Tejas Mk1.
Ok. Do you think ADA/HAL will be able to deliver ?
Whats the use of taking any OEM to court?? At the most they will be blacklisted or bear some penalty. Investment of time & money will be lost and our program will be delayed or may even get cancelled. We have tried that before and got nowhere. The loss will be irreversible for us.
France has never been reliable source of ToT u can read this regarding Scorpene:
Examples like these are many. Cannot reveal much but I know french companies doesnt even give any meaningful ToT to even their wholly owned Indian subsidiaries for petty items leave alone meaning ToT for jet engines to a JV. Mostly they do the same as stated by MDL CMD. There are other issues as well while dealing with French companies. They are only reliable in terms that they won’t sanction us easily.Mazagon Dock CMD Vice Adm Narayan Prasad suggests bold steps in trials & testing of Scorpene submarines - ET Infra
The head of India’s biggest warship builder, the State-run Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Ltd, wants the government to take “some bold steps” on submarine manufacturing in the country.
Btw jaguar ToT was provided by British & not French.
French HAL JV is already in place for heli engine as u have stated earlier so, why not have jet engine with RR who are more advanced in this field. 2 JVs with Europeans and ToT from US will create a tremendous ecosystem for us. Meanwhile we may continue R&D for next gen engine.
That's the risk we have to take. It doesn't matter if it's French or American, if they backtrack, we can only fight it in court. Both can backtrack even if there's competition. Even if we choose both, both can backtrack at the same time. Backtracking on such a contract will be a political decision. The alternative is to make the engine on our own.
What the MDL chairman is talking about is something else entirely. It has nothing to do with France. What he wants done, we have to do ourselves, like we are with the SSN program. For tenders, the ToT limit is 50%. Only in specific cases, like the engine JV, we have asked for 100% ToT and IP.
For the Jaguar, both countries need to provide ToT.
Yes. Mk1 has a lot of flaws and C is a really good design. But they are not Mk2 and E.
LCA Mk2? Yeah, it's doable. The additional MTOW gives it enough leeway to drop down to E equivalent if something goes wrong.
It appears moving the landing gear from the fuselage to the wings has affected the E's performance quite a bit, 'cause all that weight is in the wings now. Otoh, Mk2 has bigger and lighter wings, which gives it much lower wing loading, which in turn has given it a better loadout design.
There is very less probability of both parties back tracking together. That can only happen if govts of both countries take that decision in close co operation. In current geopolitical scenario it is not possible. Infact in the presence of other OEM, no party will dare to backtrack bcoz they will know the alternative is present. Back tracking mostly happens when we have reached a point of no return with no other option available.
Read carefully again what CMD, MDL has said. Its absolutely true about French companies. I myself know that they do similar things as I have told in previous post. while promising absolute independence they will not allow it to happen. Look at Shakti engine also for which we have IP but couldnt get the know why.
50% ToT limit is for P75I tender by value. We also want IP for design and independence to modify and upgrade on our own which was also required of P75. Jet engine tech is more protected and sensitive tech than subs.
For jaguar, deal was signed with BAC only so only BAC was obliged to ToT and they did transfer whatever was in their scope.
Which is why it's unlikely they will back out after signing a contract. We have to become their enemies for the program to stop.
All we will do is pick a winner and go along with them. If they decide to sanction us, then that's that.
Dude, he's talking about something else entirely. He's just pushing for a domestic submarine program, but under MDL.
He's literally saying what we need, OEM won't give, so we gotta do it ourselves. Which is also what I said would be our alternative.