Was that video from this year? After March? The news of the flameholder fix is from March this year. They would have tested it only after the that.
I think it was a 2020 video. But good to know that flame holding has stabilized. Has the engine been tested on a flying testbed since? We go to Ruskies for that, right?
Not yet, I think. It will be a big news whenever it happens.
Could post that video which you are talking about ?
ABSOLUTELY !
Gathering empty weight and fuel capacity from
www.omnicalculator.com
True, that reason alone might not be enough. I was looking at the thrust to weight from an engine perspective, and remembered the thrust to weight ratio of 9 for GE-404 and 7.8 for Kaveri. Actually 9 was thrust to weight of GE-414Gathering empty weight and fuel capacity from
What are the specs of Tejas Mk 1A ?
Joy Bhowmick's answer: General characteristics * Crew: 1 * Payload: 3,500 kg (7,716 lb) external stores * Length: 13.20 m (43 ft 4 in) * Wingspan: 8.20 m (26 ft 11 in) * Height: 4.40 m (14 ft 9 in) * Wing area: 38.4 m² (413 ft²) * Empty weight: 6,560 kg (14,300 lb) * Loaded weight: 9,800...qr.ae
weight of K9 kaveri from
HTTP://[email protected]/forums/threads/gtre-kaveri-engine.93/post-188500
thrust of -IN20 from
T/W calculator from
Thrust to Weight Ratio Calculator
Estimate the thrust-to-weight ratio for real aircraft or your designs using the thrust-to-weight ratio calculator.
this is what the numbers look like
K9 Kaveri 6560-1072+1235+2458=9181
empty weight - weight of F404 + weight of K9 Kaveri + full fuel
52kN/81kN
.578/.9
GE F404 6560+2458=9018
empty weight + full fuel
48.9(?)/84kN
.553/.95
I understand a heavier engine will guzzle more fuel and run higher temperatures in the core but the T/W difference between F404 and K9 is in the second place of decimal! Is that reason enough for rejecting K9?
I think you have read that post in Strategic Frontier forum right? They are developing a new High Pressure Compressor , which will increase the Overall pressure ratio from 21 to 27True, that reason alone might not be enough. I was looking at the thrust to weight from an engine perspective, and remembered the thrust to weight ratio of 9 for GE-404 and 7.8 for Kaveri. Actually 9 was thrust to weight of GE-414
Lets just hope they get a good enough specific fuel consumption. Kaveri has a pressure ratio of just 21:1. GE-404 has it at 28:1. Should mean that Kaveri ends up guzzling more fuel.
Kaveri afterburner will be redesignedThere is a lot of research going on , I believe we have solved most of the problems regarding Kaveri Engine , need to go back to the flight testing for further evaluation . Ground trials are some what succesful.
In pics study regarding Afterburner. GTRE/DRDO made significant progress in Materials and thermal coatings atleast 20 research papers are in my laptop , but my laptop stopped working so can't share with you guys .
Thermal Spray Coatings From India Of Interest To NASA | A&A Thermal Spray Coatings
Explore why thermal spray coatings from India are catching NASA’s attention and how we at A&A Coatings offer top-notch alternatives.www.thermalspray.com
Please read this .
And few pages back I have posted few pictures of the materials , further iterations are also Developed will post when my lap is ready. Hope we can pull this technology off , that's why RR and others are now interested in JVs , purely my opinion . May be money also a factor.
View attachment 117189View attachment 117190View attachment 117191View attachment 117192View attachment 117193View attachment 117194
The BATU(1500hp, for Altay MBT) engine is on test stand. We have a working prototype and according to the plan, we'll integrate it with the tank in 2024. In the mean time we'll use a Korean engine.
HPC is still under development and the pressure ratio of new fan will also be improved
Are developing or have already developed? If they are developing then it will take more time.
Reminds me, the new fan should also lead to some improvement in pressure ratio.
If it happens it would be a great achvmnt of India.
Different thing. The high altitude test facility is used to test the engine's performance in different altitudes, different speeds and different weather conditions. Each test may take more than hours. The techs level, power consumption and costs are much higher than rocket engine.
Yes, other than a land based fixed testbed you must need a flying testbed to validate everything on that new engine. Not every country can build this kind of testbed, these testbeds are one of the engineering marvel of their own. I've heard once Kaveri had some vibration related issues, our fixed test bed couldn't even notice the problem but when we took the engine to germany and put it on a MTU's engine test rig and we found a lot of hidden issues of Kaveri. Also these platforms comes under startegic systems so not every country gonna sell us these state of the art testbed. We are soon gonna form a JV with Rolls Royce (most probably) for a 110 KN class engine and i'm pretty sure we are going to get our own flying testbed from that JV.
Any reason why no flying test bed has been built? Yes, it would cost money but it was known from the time Kaveri was initiated that it would need to be tested on a flying test bed. The usual story of absence of planning and commitment, I suppose.
