I think that they will go for developing the engine with CMC core using funds from India as that engine will do wonders for whole lot of aircraft including F-15SE.
What about the difference in dimension for F15 &F18 engine? I think you need to redesign f15 to accommodate GEf414 class engine
The F15SE are presently equipped with bigger GE F110-129 engines. The dimensions of F414 enhanced further IMHO will be much smaller to these engines and so fitting them inside F15SE should not pose more of a problem. The problem comes if the engine is bigger and needs more airflow.
Russian engines have their gearbox on top while GE engines have it below. so for the 142KN model to be fitted into Su-30MKI they will need to create a version with gearbox on top like russians created some versions of their engines with gearbox below as a replacement for some western engines.
I would want them to make just a single version with gearbox on top and future aircraft designs be created with gearbox on top engines. Such a set up is very very usefull while designing stealth aircraft with internal weapons bays as the air duct need not get highly curved resulting in very good pressure recovery at engine face with least distortion and eddies.
If I have my way, I will ask for the three airstream design with CMC core and components since they have already made the offer to use 116KN design as the baseline design. Even RR has this tech as they have worked on the 6th Gen three air stream engine development as a partner to GE.
- adaptive engine
- 3rd stream (thermal management system to put more & more mission systems)
- advanced materials and manufacturing technologies including CMCs ('00s of degrees of increased temperature capability, lighter weight & durability) & additive manufacturing (to print any part you need without being constrained by limits of traditional manufacturing & design)
The Air Force is eyeing groundbreaking new engines for the F-35 - Sandboxx
On Friday, the Air Force made the first meaningful step toward sourcing advanced new adaptive cycle engines for its primary stealth fighter, the F-35. These new engines, while still a ways from service, would offer a significant leap in capability for the aircraft practically across the board...
www.sandboxx.us
@Picdelamirand-oil
Looks like we now see the writing on the wall. MRCBF will go to the Super Hornet. GE will give us 100% ToT on the production of the engines for LCA, TEDBF and AMCA. So a common engine for the entire indigenous fleet with India possessing full control.
America gets the political deal they need. France gets MRFA. India gets technology and capability for the forces and the industry.
The F15EX is already under production, it doesn't need a new engine.
The deal seems to be for what's already available on the existing engine developed a decade ago under EDE/EPE, 'cause it's enough for AMCA.
What do you think of this deal?
Good OR Bad Or Ok??
@Vstoljockey You evaluation of this deal?
If the Americans provide full ToT then they will grab this deal for sure.They knows if they are hesitating one way or another we will acquire the know of how most advanced engine and instead of a partner they will get arival after 2 or 3 decades.In our case it seems our folks will use this a stop gap measure and eventually develops our own.We are not going to put everything in one basket .
For AMCA they will use this for a certain extent but later we will use ours.It seems we fund both at same time
TOT for 98 KN engines
Co development for 116 KN based engine for Amca Mk2.
Means GE wants the whole pie.
Where are we going to use our own engine?
We all know GE co development may not be ours at all..
@suryakiran
Can we add a poll on which engine maker should we choose as partner for co development?
Last edited:
They have to compromise one way or another.We already have enough experience in aero engine development .Then you have RR and Safran there.Its business .
We have time and money .
The best and most intensive ToT we ever had was for AL-31FP.
The ToT which we might get for 414 will be same as we had for rd33 manufacturing.
I have no apprehension, we have already made this type of proposal more than 5 years ago, but joint development is too expensive for you and you have refused all our proposals. There is no reason for that to change.
It's excellent, if the US actually sticks to it. The widespread commonality is the biggest advantage, helps the IN out a lot too. With the SH and TEDBF on their side and LCA and AMCA on the IAF's side, it will allow HAL to bring in a lot of efficiency. All our future drones will also be on the new engine. For the IAF, the ratio of foreign engines to common engines in this case will be 50:50, MKI/Rafale and LCA/AMCA.
Otoh, say we choose SAFRAN or RR, then commonality's gone down the drain. All 4 types will be on different engines. The IAF's operation tempo will suffer significantly.
The joint development that originally failed was for a different engine, it was meant to improve the Kaveri. This is a wholly different engine based on a clean sheet design with a different budget proposal. SAFRAN was participating in both.
Our own engine plan was discarded long ago after the deal with SAFRAN failed due to costs. It was gonna power the LCA Mk2, but ADA decided to go ahead with the F414.
Now Kaveri and its derivatives will be used in other programs like drones, ships, trains etc.
The ToT for F414 and co-development plan based on F414 are expected to come with 100% ToT.
No, the budget necessary was more than anticipated, and the time taken would have delayed LCA Mk2. I suppose the Americans stepped in with 100% ToT offer to kill the deal as well. The French offer was also 100% ToT for this engine.
Last edited: