For flying Kaveri you need a testbed platform where you can certify an engine by testing to to more than 1500hrs onboard. Did IAF provided A testbed to GTRE or did gov bought any IL76.
GTRE tried leasing the one from Russia but it would have been cheaper to buy one they charged such outrageous prices. IAF can't afford to lend one of its few strategic airlifters. It needs to be a dedicated testing platform.
GTRE asked a mig29 from the IAF for onboard testing Kaveri.. Not a strategic airlifter.
Kaveri never made it to the stage of entering a fighter aircraft. It is tested on a four engine testbed where it doesn't matter if it fails. If it failed on a MiG-29 it could be fatal.
Ya very correct. on Mammoth transport planes, you can test the engines at its full potential. What you can test is its performance at subsonic speed. So mig 29 should be the right candidate for kaveri.
stop being so ingnorant and look for the facts then answer.
81kN flight worthy prototype is already available. It is not rocket science to just reverse engineer F404 and make another engine. Some parts may be complicated but 80% can be reverse engineered. In 1978, F404 had made a run with 78kN thrust. We have achieved the same. Now, we are upgrading it to 90kN as US had made it in 1984 and then to 100kN as US made in 1989 as F414. It is a matter of few years time - about 2 years more before 90kN is achieved and 4-5 years before 100kN is achieved.
It isn't just about how much thrust the engine generates, the fuel consumption and maintenance cycles are just as if not more important.
The maximum thrust achieved by kaveri is 78kN.
I am speaking if 1978 and you are saying that we are worse than that? You must have some serious inferiority complex
I don't have any inferiority complex and neither i am undermining the efforts of our scientists.
Unless India has some other engine I am unaware of I would think the answer is yes.
Failed when in 2003, or in 2010,it passed high altitude test in 2010....it already established the endurance and reliability of the platform and achieved the initial requirements of 81kN thrust on the ground, however it didn't achieved in some parameters such as in bypass ratio, overall ratio and in TET where it was designed for 1800K.
The max thrust is 81kN achieved by Kaveri in 2013.
Kaveri is a flat rate engine while F404 isn't, kaveri is not operational due to insufficient thrust to weight and overall weight.... Else it is more reliable than F404 if used in the diverse terrain of India .
Speaking randomly will not make any sense. Avoid speaking if you can't answer questions. No one likes to listen to your monologue ranting without answering questions.
Yes, Kaveri K10, similar to F414 with 100kN thrust is being developed for AMCA. LCA will use K9, similar to F404 with 90kN thrust. K10 engine is expected to be developed by 2023 while K9, according to some members of this forum is nearing completion
How does overall weight matter? It is as good as making LCA carry 100-200kg less payload. Whether weight is due to engine or otherwise, weight is weight. Considering that payload capacity is 2.5 tons, reducing it to 2.3-2.4ton will not change much
..... K9 or k9+ is made to produce 95+kN flat rate, and is already in the class of F414, only thing it isn't operational. K10 if someone remembers, it will be a "JV"
