Kaveri Engine

[MonaLazy]

Really?
Which one provide them more profit? The India keeps buying engines from them, or the India which buys only Indian engine?

That money tap will run dry after the JV engine. If not US, it will be someone else. So from American PoV they will think why not us (the Americans)? They will sell us engines till they can, then sell us tech and make more $$s from joint ownership.

Strategically, India is in Indian Ocean area. Who is currently dominating Indian Ocean? It is USA not China. A self-reliant India will challenge USA first.

You think? We don't challenge Nepal & Sri Lanka! Unless India bares teeth more often, that scenario is just a figment of your imagination.

After seeing what Japanese and Chinese did after absorbing foreign techs, no one buy this kind of idea any more.

They both developed their engines on their own didn't they? What collaboration did they seek?

French or British? Both have too much American technologies in their engines and neither of the two is offering more. That is why until today, India is still in the talking about the JV.

What American tech in M88 or in EJ200? JV is simply because they want to copy the Brahmos model. Initially, it was expensive- mostly imported so Russians made good money. Later many foreign components were substituted with Indian parts- cost went down but volume of orders went up. Progressively we Indianised the missile and made it better suited to our requirements. For the foreign OEM it was a steady source of profit. Same model to be replicated with jet engine JV. India has asked for ownership of IP whoever the partner is. US has already offered 70% tech transfer for F414 engines it builds here- obviously not the hot core section so far.

How about keep paying big money for every western engine you imported;

How about that can slow down your speed of catching up and the huge profit generated from your effort of catching up;

Currently, you are still buying from them, that says all.

There is no paying big money. It is joint ownership in a company- profits are split. We are already pushing Kaveri as far as we can- so there is no question of slowing down. The OEM will cut a journey of 10 years into say 3 years- that's the expectation- and provide help with certifying the engine.

 

[no smoking]

That money tap will run dry after the JV engine. If not US, it will be someone else. So from American PoV they will think why not us (the Americans)? They will sell us engines till they can, then sell us tech and make more $$s from joint ownership.

The question is when is the right time for them to set up JV and what kind of JV.

You think? We don't challenge Nepal & Sri Lanka! Unless India bares teeth more often, that scenario is just a figment of your imagination.

No, you don't challenge Nepal & Sri Lanka, you already partially controlled them, fortunately nobody else cares about these 2 countries. You haven't flexed your muscles because your power hasn't reach that level.
It is not whether or not India wants to challenge US, when your power grows to certain level, you will have to challenge US. For example, with India's economy growing, the demand for oil import will grow. Last time, when US imposed sanction on Iran, India cut her import from Iran. However, what about next time? When India's power grows, will India still follow US? If not, then India will be challenging US's dominance!

They both developed their engines on their own didn't they? What collaboration did they seek?

Well, yes and no.
They developed on their own, but both have a lot US technologies or US components in their engines. They can replace these with European suppliers, but the cost.....

What American tech in M88 or in EJ200? JV is simply because they want to copy the Brahmos model. Initially, it was expensive- mostly imported so Russians made good money. Later many foreign components were substituted with Indian parts- cost went down but volume of orders went up. Progressively we Indianised the missile and made it better suited to our requirements. For the foreign OEM it was a steady source of profit. Same model to be replicated with jet engine JV. India has asked for ownership of IP whoever the partner is. US has already offered 70% tech transfer for F414 engines it builds here- obviously not the hot core section so far.

No, no one want to replicate Brahmos model. That was the best deal India can get when Russia was in the most difficult period. Even Russians themselves don't want to repeat.




There is no paying big money. It is joint ownership in a company- profits are split. We are already pushing Kaveri as far as we can- so there is no question of slowing down. The OEM will cut a journey of 10 years into say 3 years- that's the expectation- and provide help with certifying the engine.
[/QUOTE]

 

[LondonParisTokyo]

It is not about us- it never was, but about them. The Chinese dragon snapping at their heels for global influence having already achieved self sufficiency with home grown fighters powered by home grown engines. It is in American interest to prop us up. Just like China props up Pakis. See how they didn't create a shindy about S-400 & CAATSA in our case so i wouldn't be so pessimistic.

Americans will open their doors to technology provided a bigger interest is served. They are more pragmatic than foolish. Infact quite selfish hence i cited AUKUS. A mix of American greed to corner one of the largest jet engine market & correct reading of the tea leaves vis a vis aligning against China could result in a bumper lottery for us. Come to think of it, RRs offer is also possible after Uncle's blessings only.

This is some level of cope. US does not give two ****s about India. I'm being serious. Not china either. The US hasn't realized how serious the Chinese threat is. I hope if US offers anything, Indians don't take it. Safran is the best bet, but even then I'd prefer to go ahead alone. As the other guy said nicely, the needs get more intense as soon as some basic level of technology is met. You can't refine anything if the requirements keep changing.

 

[MonaLazy]

This is some level of cope. US does not give two ****s about India. I'm being serious. Not china either.

Just your blinkered view of the world. & totally unsubstantiated. What is the source of your assertion? As for me, I did buttress my PoV with a fact..

US unlikely to impose CAATSA sanctions on India for S-400, but other Russian deals won’t be easy

The $5.43-bn S-400 ‘Triumf’ missile systems deal is going to be at the centre of the upcoming India visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

theprint.in

The US hasn't realized how serious the Chinese threat is.

Admire your confidence, but you sir are calling dibs on the security situation of the lone super power that runs the world's largest MIC, military budgets, controls global financial institutions, oil, a multitude of defence oriented think tanks. Would respectfully disagree, they don't need no telling, it is you that needs some waking up. Here's an article from 2015:

Dempsey: U.S. Forces Must Adapt to Deal With Near-Peer Competitors

For the first time since the end of the Soviet Union, the United States is facing a near-peer threat, and that is unsettling to many in the services, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the

www.defense.gov

How's about something recent from the office of Director of National (US) Intelligence:

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ATA-2021-Unclassified-Report.pdf

I hope if US offers anything, Indians don't take it.

& I hope nobody takes this rotten advice. The US offered 404, we took it. They offered the 414, we grabbed it with both hands. How's that working out for you?

Safran is the best bet, but even then I'd prefer to go ahead alone. As the other guy said nicely, the needs get more intense as soon as some basic level of technology is met. You can't refine anything if the requirements keep changing.

French are prohibitively expensive- that's the only downside & are silent on IPR, unlike RR. Going alone is definitely an option. How many decades more to create a production 90/120kN engine?

Well, yes and no.
They developed on their own, but both have a lot US technologies or US components in their engines. They can replace these with European suppliers, but the cost.....

Care to elaborate what parts in Chinese WS-10 or Japanese XF-9 are American?

No, no one want to replicate Brahmos model. That was the best deal India can get when Russia was in the most difficult period. Even Russians themselves don't want to repeat.

Source? I thought that JV was the most viable way to transfer closely guarded high tech- like a supersonic cruise missile or military jet engine.

 

[Blank]

No, no one want to replicate Brahmos model. That was the best deal India can get when Russia was in the most difficult period. Even Russians themselves don't want to repeat.

From Wiki :

Indo-Russia Rifles Private Limited (IRRPL) is a rifle-manufacturing facility in Korwa, Amethi district in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. The factory will manufacture the AK-200 variant of the Kalashnikov family of rifles. The factory is a joint-venture of the Ordnance Factory Board of India and Kalashnikov Concern of Russia, with Rosoboronexport holding a minority stake and will produce 750,000 AK-203, a 7.62×39mm variant from the AK-100 family.

 

[no smoking]

From Wiki :

Indo-Russia Rifles Private Limited (IRRPL) is a rifle-manufacturing facility in Korwa, Amethi district in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. The factory will manufacture the AK-200 variant of the Kalashnikov family of rifles. The factory is a joint-venture of the Ordnance Factory Board of India and Kalashnikov Concern of Russia, with Rosoboronexport holding a minority stake and will produce 750,000 AK-203, a 7.62×39mm variant from the AK-100 family.

Two different things:

The deal of Brahmos includes massive TOT which boost India's missile tech development significantly. The similar one is India expected or proposed Su-57 deal which Russians rejected.

This rifle deal is just like any other normal JV, Russians give production equipment and India responsible for manufacturing. The keys are those production lines and rifle design, neither has TOT in this deal.

 

[no smoking]

Care to elaborate what parts in Chinese WS-10 or Japanese XF-9 are American?

It is public knowledge Chinese WS-10 was based on US CFM56 even though Americans were not happy about it.

Regarding Japanese XF-9, well, you can look at IHI's product line, except F-3 & F-7, you can almost call her - GE's Japanese Branch.

Source? I thought that JV was the most viable way to transfer closely guarded high tech- like a supersonic cruise missile or military jet engine.

No, in Generally, JV is a form of Joint manufacturing in local. Technology transfer is dependent upon the term of contract, or say upon negotiation. In most of case, TOT is very limited. No one is stupid enough to create another competitor. Otherwise, how do you think the foreign partner to control the local manufacturer? You can look at the example of India's Mig-21.

 

[MonaLazy]

It is public knowledge Chinese WS-10 was based on US CFM56 even though Americans were not happy about it.

Regarding Japanese XF-9, well, you can look at IHI's product line, except F-3 & F-7, you can almost call her - GE's Japanese Branch.

Will look it up. Thanks for pointing it out! However, it just reinforces the fact that outside Russia which is trailing in engine technology we will have to deal with either US, UK or France- not a very wide basket of choices but is a fact of life on planet Earth.

No, in Generally, JV is a form of Joint manufacturing in local. Technology transfer is dependent upon the term of contract, or say upon negotiation. In most of case, TOT is very limited. No one is stupid enough to create another competitor. Otherwise, how do you think the foreign partner to control the local manufacturer? You can look at the example of India's Mig-21.

Fair point- but we have been asking for jet engine tech for at least a decade (since the JETJWG days)- 110kN jet engine JV is too strategic to lump it with other "will create local jobs" ToTs. Having made both fighter planes and jet engines for long via screwdrivergiri in India GoI has surely realised it is not helping. Mig-21 is from a different era so may not be relevant today. On why they would create another competitor- because there's money to be made. India will get there on her own, though it may take 3x the time. This JV is all about cutting that time short.

Two different things:

The deal of Brahmos includes massive TOT which boost India's missile tech development significantly. The similar one is India expected or proposed Su-57 deal which Russians rejected.

Exactly! That's the kind of JV we are looking for otherwise no deal. From various sources posted several times on this forum- US has offered to manufacture the GE 414s locally, UK has committed to transferring 100% IPR to India & France has spoken of unprecedented levels of ToT never offered to anyone else before. All pointers to the fact that we are playing the three against each other quite nicely. Let's wait and watch the announcement of this JV sometime this year to see who the chosen partner is and what exactly is offered. Hard to imagine the mercantile Americans will just fold up and lose such a gigantic market to the other two.

 

[LondonParisTokyo]

Just your blinkered view of the world. & totally unsubstantiated. What is the source of your assertion? As for me, I did buttress my PoV with a fact..

US unlikely to impose CAATSA sanctions on India for S-400, but other Russian deals won’t be easy

The $5.43-bn S-400 ‘Triumf’ missile systems deal is going to be at the centre of the upcoming India visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

theprint.in

Admire your confidence, but you sir are calling dibs on the security situation of the lone super power that runs the world's largest MIC, military budgets, controls global financial institutions, oil, a multitude of defence oriented think tanks. Would respectfully disagree, they don't need no telling, it is you that needs some waking up. Here's an article from 2015:

Dempsey: U.S. Forces Must Adapt to Deal With Near-Peer Competitors

For the first time since the end of the Soviet Union, the United States is facing a near-peer threat, and that is unsettling to many in the services, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the

www.defense.gov

How's about something recent from the office of Director of National (US) Intelligence:

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ATA-2021-Unclassified-Report.pdf

View attachment 131063



& I hope nobody takes this rotten advice. The US offered 404, we took it. They offered the 414, we grabbed it with both hands. How's that working out for you?



French are prohibitively expensive- that's the only downside & are silent on IPR, unlike RR. Going alone is definitely an option. How many decades more to create a production 90/120kN engine?




Care to elaborate what parts in Chinese WS-10 or Japanese XF-9 are American?



Source? I thought that JV was the most viable way to transfer closely guarded high tech- like a supersonic cruise missile or military jet engine.

Talk is cheap. Talk is very, very cheap. This is all talk from the American establishment. They will kowtow before they lift a finger to Xi.

The US offering things to India is the exact reason why the domestic industry constantly is in a state of flux and why the Kaveri has basically not gotten off of the ground. These small things they offer are like when you see your chacha and he offers you food but you already ate before coming. Next time you see him he doesn't offer anything. It's an insult to us. But keep living your delusion that the US is supapowah #1 and we should constantly do what they want.

 

[LondonParisTokyo]

"Care to elaborate what parts in Chinese WS-10 or Japanese XF-9 are American?"

Do you say this proudly? Do you think either of them care if they have American parts or not? They are in fact proud to not have American parts. Why are you shilling so hard for America?

 

[MonaLazy]

Talk is cheap. Talk is very, very cheap.

Had asked you for a source for your claims:

1. US does not think of China as an enemy
2. US does not give two $hits about India
3. China does not give two $hits about India

Prove it if you can (i already provided links to back up my PoV), or shut up. Because hey! Talk is cheap. Talk is very, very cheap.

Cheap talk and unlimited bandwidth proving to be your nemesis on these pages??

"Care to elaborate what parts in Chinese WS-10 or Japanese XF-9 are American?"

Do you say this proudly? Do you think either of them care if they have American parts or not? They are in fact proud to not have American parts. Why are you shilling so hard for America?

Again! You are exhibiting chronic confirmation bias & a lack of comprehension. Maybe take off your coloured glasses & re-read? I'm only shilling for India & all I'm saying is we should look hard at the US option also for 110kN engine JV.

 

[no smoking]

Exactly! That's the kind of JV we are looking for otherwise no deal. From various sources posted several times on this forum- US has offered to manufacture the GE 414s locally, UK has committed to transferring 100% IPR to India & France has spoken of unprecedented levels of ToT never offered to anyone else before.

There is lot of tricks can play within this 100% IPR. You have to understand there are lots of IPRs are owned by GE, Snecma's suppliers, such as raw material, processing tools, etc.
They can give you the blue print and assembling map, then give your freedom of produce and sales. That is 100% IPR but in actual, it doesn't help your learning about jet engine. Remember: IPR is opening knowledge already. Those critical ones are never made public. That is where the TOT is really about. Sometimes, the engineers don't even know where the tech issues are until they start to produce completely independently.

One good example is: Chinese deal of Spey from UK. It was supposed to be 100% IPR deal too. But after British left, it took Chinese almost 20 years to figure out all the tech issues.

 

[Kalkioftoday]

There is lot of tricks can play within this 100% IPR. You have to understand there are lots of IPRs are owned by GE, Snecma's suppliers, such as raw material, processing tools, etc.
They can give you the blue print and assembling map, then give your freedom of produce and sales. That is 100% IPR but in actual, it doesn't help your learning about jet engine. Remember: IPR is opening knowledge already. Those critical ones are never made public. That is where the TOT is really about. Sometimes, the engineers don't even know where the tech issues are until they start to produce completely independently.

One good example is: Chinese deal of Spey from UK. It was supposed to be 100% IPR deal too. But after British left, it took Chinese almost 20 years to figure out all the tech issues.

Facts guys. Know How can be transferred but Know Why cannot, for that we need our own knowledge base. And only after that we can expand that Know How to Know Why. TOT/IPR means nothing if we don't invest on our own R&D

 

[India Super Power]

Kaveri to get its date with LCA-Tejas – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org

What are they saying is it true ?

 

[Lonewolf]

Kaveri to get its date with LCA-Tejas – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org

What are they saying is it true ?

Check it's source .

If it's idrw exclusive then it's a fake news

 

[THESIS THORON]

Kaveri to get its date with LCA-Tejas – Indian Defence Research Wing

idrw.org

What are they saying is it true ?

whoever has written this, had taken bucket of afghani hash.

kaveri has achieved 83kn with after burner, now tell me why they will aim for 77kn ??

and the 77kn thrust is nowhere NEAR current f404.

 

[India Super Power]

whoever has written this, had taken bucket of afghani hash.

kaveri has achieved 83kn with after burner, now tell me why they will aim for 77kn ??

and the 77kn thrust is nowhere current f404.

If kaveri reached 83kn
Then why didn't we use it in tejas what's the issue

 

[THESIS THORON]

If kaveri reached 83kn
Then why didn't we use it in tejas what's the issue

it needs more thrust and is overweight.

 

[India Super Power]

it needs more thrust and is overweight.

F404 also gives 83kn right?

 

[MonaLazy]

If kaveri reached 83kn
Then why didn't we use it in tejas what's the issue

Apparently, all of the technical problems plaguing Kaveri have been solved- but there is still in-flight testing and certification pending. As to why we did not use it in Tejas:

1. Kaveri has spent a lot of time on ground testing- very less testing in the air because of absence of flying test bed in India- because of a paucity of funds for such an important project!
2. Can't use an unproven engine on a single-engined fighter where the only course of action is pilot bailing out and loss of aircraft and engine for any major problems (and there will be many) discovered in testing. That's a costly way to iron out problems!
3. To prove the engine we need to send it for costly flying tests to Russia & elsewhere. Which we have been doing, here is a list of foreign consultancy we sought up to 16 May 2006:

TABLE​

Sl. No​	Name & Address of Foreign Company​	Contract Number and Date​	Nature of technical services​
(1)​	(2)​	(3)​	(4)​
1​	M/s. Snecma Moteurs, 2, boulevard du General Martial Valin 75724-Paris Cedex 15 -France​	KAV/FFEC/1081/GTRE dated 28.09.2001​	Technical Audit of Design Works relating to The Kaveri Engine Programme​
2​	Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Russian Technologies", 1, 1-ja Tveskaja-Yamskaja str., Moscow, 125818,​	KAV/FFEC/1020/GTRE dated 01.03.2000​	Exploratory Altitude Testing of Kaveri Engine​
3​	Federal State Unitary Enterprise, 'Rosoboronexport", 27/3, Stromynka Street, Moscow, Russia, 107076​	Amendment No. 335634211707 to KAV/FFEC/1020/GTRE dated 01-03-2000​	Exploratory Altitude Testing of Kaveri Engine​
4​	Federal State Unitary Enterprise, "Rosoboronexport", 27/3, Stromynka Street, Moscow, Russia, 107076​	P/135634011927-KAV/FFEC/1045/GTRE dated 22.03.2002​	Fan Casing Containment Test for Kaveri Engine​
5​	Federal State Unitary Enterprise, 'Rosoboronexport", 27/3, Stromynka Street, Moscow, Russia 107076​	P/135634011930-KAV/FFEC/1042/GTRE dated 22.03.2002​	Testing for Main Combustor at Sea level and Altitude conditions​
6​	Scientific Centre, Russian Federation, M/s Gromov Flight Research Institute Zhukovski, Moscow Region.​	KAV/FFEC/799/GTRE dated 22.03.2002​	Various Technical services for Kaveri Engine​
7.​	M/s. Kolb+Baumann Prazisions-Messeuge Daimlerstra Be 24 D63741, Aschaffenburg, Germany​	GTRE/MMG/FEKV/3026/ 02/FPO/03 dated 14.07.2003​	Consultancy services for CMM using 'KOBA STEP GAUGE" with GUK-S Software.​
8.​	M/s. ACRI, 260, Route Du Pin Montard BP 234-06904 Sophia Antipolis, France​	KAV/FFEC/1065/GTRE dated 31.10.2001​	Development of Software using 3D flow field analysis for the fabrication of Combustor for Kaveri Engine.​
9.​	Test Devices INC., 6, Loring Street, Hudson MA 01749, USA​	GTRE/MMG/FEKV/3017/ 02/FPC/A/03 dated 30.09.2003​	Over speed & Burst margin test on K6HPC Rotor assembly​
10.​	Test Devices INC., 6, Loring Street, Hudson MA 01749, USA​	GTRE/MMG/FEKV/3018/ 02/FPC/A/03 dated 17.10.2003​	Over speed & burst margin test on K6 Fan Rotor assembly​
11.​	Test Devices INC., 6, Loring Street, Hudson MA 01749, USA​	GTRE/MMG/FEKV/3007/ 03/FPC/A/03 dated 20.03.2004​	Design, Analysis, Testing & Optimization of Damper for the LP Turbine Rotor Blade​
12.​	MTU Aero Engines, GmbH & Co. KG Represented by MTU Aero engines Verwaltungs GmbH Postfach 50 06 40, 80976 Muenchen Germany​	GTRE/MMG/FEKV/3009/ 03/FPC/A/04 dated 23.08.2004​	Over speed & Burst Margin Test on K6HP Turbine Rotor Assembly​
13.​	MTU Aero Engines, GmbH & Co. KG Represented by MTU Aero engines Verwaltungs GmbH Postfach 50 06 40, 80976 Muenchen Germany​	GTRE/MMG/FEKV/300 8/03/FPC/A/04 dated 23.08.2004​	Over speed & Burst Margin Test on K6 LP Turbine Rotor Assembly​
14.​	M/s. Samtech S.A. Parc Scoemtofoque Du Sart Tilman Rue Des Chasseurs Ardemmais 8, B-4031, Angleur (Belgium)​	GTRE/MMG/FEKV/301 9/02/FPC/03 dated 29.08.2003​	Dynamic Analysis under Blade off condition of Kaveri engine​
15.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Holland House, 30, Old street, Clevedon BS 21 6BY, UK​	KAV/FFEC/997/GTRE dated 31.08.1999​	Consultancy for Reheat System Design Review/Audit​
16.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Holland House, 30, Old street, Clevedon BS 21 6BY, UK​	KAV/FFEC/996/GTRE dated 31.08.1999​	Consultancy for HP Turbine Risk Analysis/Review​
17.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Holland House, 30, Old street, Clevedon BS 21 6BY, UK​	KAV/FFEC/998/GTRE dated 31.08.1999​	Consultancy for Weight Reduction Study​
18.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS 21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1011 /GTRE dated 28.10.1999​	Consultancy for Thermal and Hydraulic Modelling of Kaveri Lubrication System​
19.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS 21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1027A/GTRE dated 14.09.2000​	Consultancy for Kaveri Fan Aerodynamic and Mechanical Design Review/Audit and enhancement.​
20.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS 21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1028/GTRE dated 14.09.2000​	Consultancy for Critical Design Review of the Kaveri Engine Project​
21.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1027/GTRE dated 14.09.2000​	Consultancy for Accelerated Simulated Mission Endurance Test (ASMET) Cycle and test schedule definition and development programme integration.​
22.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1088/GTRE dated 12.06.2001​	Consultancy for Kaveri Integrated Test, Development and Procurement programmes​
23.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1075/GTRE dated 05.07.2001​	Consultancy for Kaveri PFRT Fan Aerodynamic Design 3D Blade-to-Blade and Viscous Analysis (ATC 506 issue 01)​
24.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1074/GTRE Dated 25.08.2001​	Consultancy for Kaveri K4 Build 06 HP Compressor Blade Stage 1 Failure Investigation and Follow-up (ATC 507 issue 01)​
25.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1080/GTRE Dated 25.08.2001​	Consultancy for Review and Proposal for the Resolution of Vibration Problems in the Kaveri Engine​
26.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS21 7RA UK​	KAV/FFEC/1089/GTRE Dated 12.06.2001​	Consultancy for Design Review and Audit of High Temperature High Pressure Heat Transfer Rig​
27.​	Applied Technology Consultants Ltd., Brunel House, 5, Elton Road, Clevedon BS21 7RA, UK​	KAV/FFEC/1080/GTRE Dated 22.01.2004​	​ Consultancy for Kaveri K5 & K8 Compressor Blade Stage I vibration & Rub Investigation Problems in the Kaveri Engine​

For the past few years, Safran has been working with GTRE to improve the engine.

https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/Communications/Notification/920110000000001362.htm