GTRE Kaveri Engine

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.


 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Abheer, Chain Smoker, Ashwin and 1 other person

 
  • Like
Reactions: Chain Smoker, TARGET and randomradio

Things are moving after 7-8 years of delay.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Rajput Lion, YoungWolf and Chain Smoker

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TARGET, suryakiran, jetray and 2 others
Ashwin said:

Things are moving after 7-8 years of delay.
Click to expand...
this is just the completion of a facility tight? the actual engine development and deals with vendors will take much longer afterwards
 
Ashwin said:

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.
Click to expand...

That will just result in delays. GTRE was even fine with a Mig-29 as an FTB.
 
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.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: randomradio, Sathya, suryakiran and 5 others
vstol Jockey said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
randomradio said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
randomradio said:
Can operating the F404 at its lowest setting possible alleviate the problem?
Click to expand...

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?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rajput Lion
Sathya said:
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?
Click to expand...

I don't know. Someone from GTRE will have to explain. Maybe they think it is safe.

Sathya said:
Why not test in transport / Passenger jets?
Click to expand...

That's more desirable, but I guess GTRE is happy with whatever they can get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sathya and Rajput Lion
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom