Today, DRDO's GTRE issued tenders for the modification of an LCA-specific AMAGB (Aircraft Mounted Accessory Gearbox) for utilization in the Kaveri Dry Engine. Recently GTRE had also issued tenders for the upgrade of one unit of GTSU 110 Mk2 (LCA Tejas' engine starter unit) for use in the 'Flying Test Bed' of the Kaveri Dry Engine.These developments are further indications of GTRE's intent to use an LCA airframe as test bed for the Kaveri Dry Engine.
The proposal here is to use MKI as kaveri test bed but under the wing pylon.
This, I feel, is unnecessary in many ways. There are simply no inherent restrictions that prevent us from having a flying test bed with a civilian airliner aircraft or Il-76. It's just that we have never invested money or effort into it. Therefore, using a fighter airframe for such a role is wasteful. A dedicated flying test bed is very affordable and future-proof. A jugaad approach is unnecessary.
this is just the completion of a facility tight? the actual engine development and deals with vendors will take much longer afterwards
These are part of basic test facilities required to certify an aero engine.
List of Japanese test facilities: Aviation Technology Directorate
Using Su-30MKI for testing Kaveri either on center station or on wing station with counter balance will not help as that will add thrust to the airframe for which it is not designed for. On wing station it vl add to highly assymetric thrust which can cause SU-30MKI to go into flat spin as there will be no equivent thrust on the opposite wing. The whole idea seems stupid to me.
Once a flying test bed program is cleared on the cheap with an existing jet, it will become easier to upgrade the aircraft rather than propose a new more expensive gambit right from the start.
Or just carry a second engine, F404, to compensate.
It will create problems for the main engines of SU-30MKI as they will have to run at lower thrust rating at speeds which will be much higher.
Can operating the F404 at its lowest setting possible alleviate the problem?
Even when everything is planned to perfection, we ll delay for a long time to make it least useful..
If there are issues in planning itself, means it won't take off.
Hopefully we ll acquire some proper platform to test all future engines.
If there are issues in planning itself, means it won't take off.
Hopefully we ll acquire some proper platform to test all future engines.
The best location will be centerline station. Anyother pylon will be a disaster.
Until talks were about Mig 29 as platform for testing, we thought one engine will be replaced with Kaveri.
With Su 30 mki, why it became pylon held testing?
Why not test in transport / Passenger jets?
I don't know. Someone from GTRE will have to explain. Maybe they think it is safe.
That's more desirable, but I guess GTRE is happy with whatever they can get.
This remains the best solution as this will allow Kaveri to be tested in actual engine bay to supersonic speeds and all altitudes. Even the airflow requirements for both the engines is same.
I am surprized why Kaveri wasn't tested a decade and half ago on such platforms.
Once Kaveri does trouble free 100 hrs on Mig-29 aircraft, it can be easily used in a new prototype aircraft. M88 was installed in Rafale after 100hrs of flight testing.
It was, back in 2004, in Russia. Failed then. Succeeded in 2010.
Tested on an IL-76, both times.
