What's the source? Look at pictures of random engines. That's how much we can trust words of these desi journalists.
tbh there was previous GTRE consultant work job mentioned about Kaveri integration with testbed aircraft , which is probably this.
Without Govt clearance GTRE can not even buy a single piece of paper, let alone sanction such a project where you would need significant insurance cover & collateral guarantee. We all get frustration, but govt policy prevails in every case which result in delays.
Modi 3.0 is going to be a game-changer. Even the initial days are full of action. Once we master our own aero-engines, we would become complete self-reliant and a legit military superpower.
I am watching for the last 20 years, and apart from the Russian test bed, I've never seen it flown in any other testbed. Where do these folks get their information from? how high-altitude testing was even conducted by Safran? Audit Clear?
This news itself of Kaveri integration into Tejas Trainer prototype is a game-changer. Price Negotiation of Rafale-M is also done. More awesome news shall come soon.
The pivot seems to be way too forward. In TVC nozzles so far only the end panels actuate or the ring holding them.
DoD's slides can be confusing. There is another slide where only the panels actuate.
Last edited:
Comparing Kaveri engine to some similar good engines & also F-22's F119
I made a concurrent graph bringing all parameters of Kaveri to 100 & then adjusting other engines in same ratio, so now we can see what other engines have their parameters less or more.
This is a common person's approach - given a particular cylindrical space, how much air can be sucked in & thrust generated per unit engine volume.
Values near the 100 line with less deviation :
> The Turbine inlet temp. of other engines is just 100-200 K more.
> Dry SFC, except for F119 which is unusually low.
> Compressor + Turbine stages just b/w 10-12.
- EJ-200 has 1 less HPC stage yet its OPR is more than M-88-2 & Kaveri & equal to F119.
- Increasing 1 HPC stage in F414 increases OPR to 30.
> Engine length 349-399 cm. I wonder - after flame holder, how long should be a tail pipe.
> Dry thrust b/w 50-60 KN.
> Air mass flow of others is lesser, except F119 obviously.
Big variations :
> Parameters much higher :
- BPR of all engines is more, especially EJ-200 enabling EF-2000 to SuCr @ Mach 1.5. The F119 BPR is same as of M-88-2 but F-22 SuCr at M 1.8 but Rafale at M 1.4, although there are other design parameters also.
- Dry thrust/engine-weight of M-88-2 & EJ-200 are significantly high.
- Also the dry thrust/engine-volume.
> Parameters much lower :
- Inlet diameter/area, except F119
- Engine volume, except F119
- Engine weight, except F119
So what to do with Kaveri Engine?
> Change BPR from 0.16 to b/w 0.25 & 0.4
> Increase OPR by increasing 1 more HPC stage or re-engineer blades of current stages.
> Increase SFC little bit.
> Decrease engine weight.
> Re-engineer Afterburner & nozzle sections.
That's all an enthusiast can say
I made a concurrent graph bringing all parameters of Kaveri to 100 & then adjusting other engines in same ratio, so now we can see what other engines have their parameters less or more.
This is a common person's approach - given a particular cylindrical space, how much air can be sucked in & thrust generated per unit engine volume.
Values near the 100 line with less deviation :
> The Turbine inlet temp. of other engines is just 100-200 K more.
> Dry SFC, except for F119 which is unusually low.
> Compressor + Turbine stages just b/w 10-12.
- EJ-200 has 1 less HPC stage yet its OPR is more than M-88-2 & Kaveri & equal to F119.
- Increasing 1 HPC stage in F414 increases OPR to 30.
> Engine length 349-399 cm. I wonder - after flame holder, how long should be a tail pipe.
> Dry thrust b/w 50-60 KN.
> Air mass flow of others is lesser, except F119 obviously.
Big variations :
> Parameters much higher :
- BPR of all engines is more, especially EJ-200 enabling EF-2000 to SuCr @ Mach 1.5. The F119 BPR is same as of M-88-2 but F-22 SuCr at M 1.8 but Rafale at M 1.4, although there are other design parameters also.
- Dry thrust/engine-weight of M-88-2 & EJ-200 are significantly high.
- Also the dry thrust/engine-volume.
> Parameters much lower :
- Inlet diameter/area, except F119
- Engine volume, except F119
- Engine weight, except F119
So what to do with Kaveri Engine?
> Change BPR from 0.16 to b/w 0.25 & 0.4
> Increase OPR by increasing 1 more HPC stage or re-engineer blades of current stages.
> Increase SFC little bit.
> Decrease engine weight.
> Re-engineer Afterburner & nozzle sections.
That's all an enthusiast can say
The inlet diameter of Kaveri is 78cms. 91 cms is the overall diameter.
I went back to find infographic or pic with specs. In following pic it says inlet dia. is 75cm & length 390cm.
If there is still spec correction to be made then people can share some link, infographic, etc.
Only managed to take a few slides from the gtre event recently, that too on the 2nd day sessions. Pic credit for the respective presenters there.
