Navy, DRDO headed for a tug of war over Kaveri engine

power_monger

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
642
Likes
643
Country flag
Source: Navy, DRDO headed for a tug of war over Kaveri engine | Millennium Post

The Navy wants a few of these engines to be provided to them to power some of their smaller ships. The engine – primarily an aeronautical one — has been tested successfully in Russia more than three years ago in a four-engine Ilyushin-76, in Russia. At its end, the DRDO had stated that these fully indigenous engines will be used for powering the heavier Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) that it plans to develop.

But the GTRE and its supervising director general (aeronautics), Dr K Tamilmani have so far demurred from entertaining the Navy's request, for it requires at least two major modifications of Kaveri. Reason: the Navy is seeking less than 10 of these engines, which does not provide the scale of production for which GTRE can divert human and other resources.

The two changes that the navalised version of Kaveri requires is on 'thrust' and 'torque' or the ability to turn on a smaller angle. The aeronautical Kaveri has a higher 'thrust' and a lower degree of 'torque.'
The question that arises with a navalised version is that it does not require so much of thrust that an aircraft requires. The thrust poses the problem with the exhaust. How does the naval engine in a ship release its 'exhaust'?

The problem of torque or the angle of turn is also much higher in a ship as it need not take sharp turns that an aircraft does.

These changes in the engine will raise the costs of development that will not be worthwhile with the navy requirement of small numbers of engines incurring smaller expenditure. The GTRE is unwilling to deploy its own resources for those engines, in turn.

But there are signals that the Navy is unwilling to give up its demand easily. Further ahead, one shall have to wait to see how this drama unfolds considering that for the first time in GTRE's history some service actually wants to procure its engine.
 

Defcon 1

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
2,004
Likes
1,381
Country flag
Useless blabber again. Instead of making itself look like a fool, GTRE should simply amortize the cost of R&D over the small number of engine and send its proposal to navy. Let the navy decide what it wants to do.
 

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
5,565
Likes
4,959
Country flag
Useless blabber again. Instead of making itself look like a fool, GTRE should simply amortize the cost of R&D over the small number of engine and send its proposal to navy. Let the navy decide what it wants to do.

I find this article confusing instead. The navy had shown interest in KMGT from day one which it had planned to repower the Rajput class. The theoretical difference of a marine turbine to aircraft one was known to GTRE from day one. Also the fact that Navy would never have a demand of 100 examples.

So, why get in the situation in the first place? The initial test bed was tested with the help of Navy at Vizag. Why did GTRE waste public money on that if it had no plans to provide Navy with final product.
Even when possibly Navy will foot the bill. The man power issue is a hogwash, Aura isn't coming anytime soon. But having a domestic MGT will increase the chances of exporting indigenous warships to a great extent.
 

Defcon 1

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
2,004
Likes
1,381
Country flag
I find this article confusing instead. The navy had shown interest in KMGT from day one which it had planned to repower the Rajput class. The theoretical difference of a marine turbine to aircraft one was known to GTRE from day one. Also the fact that Navy would never have a demand of 100 examples.

So, why get in the situation in the first place? The initial test bed was tested with the help of Navy at Vizag. Why did GTRE waste public money on that if it had no plans to provide Navy with final product.
Even when possibly Navy will foot the bill. The man power issue is a hogwash, Aura isn't coming anytime soon. But having a domestic MGT will increase the chances of exporting indigenous warships to a great extent.
Looks like GTRE doesn't want to divert resources from K10. If only our bureaucracy would allow navy to foot the bill. The whole problem is that the budget of research organizations is still kept independent from the budgets of the armed forces. If GTRE had been a private organization, such a problem would never have occurred.
 

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
5,565
Likes
4,959
Country flag
Looks like GTRE doesn't want to divert resources from K10. If only our bureaucracy would allow navy to foot the bill. The whole problem is that the budget of research organizations is still kept independent from the budgets of the armed forces. If GTRE had been a private organization, such a problem would never have occurred.
DRDO can't be hostage to scientists using funding's for their doctoral and post-doctoral research and publication. They need to deliver. They are into the Marine modification of Kaveri since 2008, can't just abandon it now. Specially when client is interested.

I don't know the details but I think funding can be worked out.
 
Last edited:

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
5,565
Likes
4,959
Country flag
Bloody, they even designed their assembly shop keeping Marine GT in mind

Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), Bengaluru, has commissioned a prototype engine assembly facility, a floor area of more than 2000 square meters, and the necessary auxiliary facilities to support the engine building activities. Provident measures have been taken by providing high roof and wider shop area and by setting-up higher capacity hoists to undertake oversize assemblies such as integrated marine engine and power turbine on base frame.
drdo.res.in:8080/alpha/drdo/pub/newsletter/2014/june_14.pdf
 

Twinblade

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
1,491
Likes
2,714
Country flag
Useless blabber again. Instead of making itself look like a fool, GTRE should simply amortize the cost of R&D over the small number of engine and send its proposal to navy. Let the navy decide what it wants to do.
I find this article confusing instead. The navy had shown interest in KMGT from day one which it had planned to repower the Rajput class. The theoretical difference of a marine turbine to aircraft one was known to GTRE from day one. Also the fact that Navy would never have a demand of 100 examples.

So, why get in the situation in the first place? The initial test bed was tested with the help of Navy at Vizag. Why did GTRE waste public money on that if it had no plans to provide Navy with final product.
Even when possibly Navy will foot the bill. The man power issue is a hogwash, Aura isn't coming anytime soon. But having a domestic MGT will increase the chances of exporting indigenous warships to a great extent.
Kaveri marine was borne by converting one of the older Kaveri prototypes into a marine engine. It was a desperate attempt to salvage something out of the Kaveri engine, and now when they have the chance, they are letting it go. The KMGT, essentially a prime mover instead of an aero engine, can easily be adopted for railways and industrial systems once accepted by navy and GTRE will recover their costs, that is a guarantee.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
6,910
Likes
7,959
Country flag
Source: Navy, DRDO headed for a tug of war over Kaveri engine | Millennium Post

The Navy wants a few of these engines to be provided to them to power some of their smaller ships. The engine – primarily an aeronautical one — has been tested successfully in Russia more than three years ago in a four-engine Ilyushin-76, in Russia. At its end, the DRDO had stated that these fully indigenous engines will be used for powering the heavier Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) that it plans to develop.

But the GTRE and its supervising director general (aeronautics), Dr K Tamilmani have so far demurred from entertaining the Navy's request, for it requires at least two major modifications of Kaveri. Reason: the Navy is seeking less than 10 of these engines, which does not provide the scale of production for which GTRE can divert human and other resources.

The two changes that the navalised version of Kaveri requires is on 'thrust' and 'torque' or the ability to turn on a smaller angle. The aeronautical Kaveri has a higher 'thrust' and a lower degree of 'torque.'
The question that arises with a navalised version is that it does not require so much of thrust that an aircraft requires. The thrust poses the problem with the exhaust. How does the naval engine in a ship release its 'exhaust'?

The problem of torque or the angle of turn is also much higher in a ship as it need not take sharp turns that an aircraft does.

These changes in the engine will raise the costs of development that will not be worthwhile with the navy requirement of small numbers of engines incurring smaller expenditure. The GTRE is unwilling to deploy its own resources for those engines, in turn.

But there are signals that the Navy is unwilling to give up its demand easily. Further ahead, one shall have to wait to see how this drama unfolds considering that for the first time in GTRE's history some service actually wants to procure its engine.
GTRE has a limited resource, and it has a substantial job to do in refining K-9 and pursuing k-10. So how can it divert those resources for just an order of ten engines?

Also supporting just ten engines with good quality spares with in time delivery will be very difficult, even if the navy is ready to foot the bill for the naval versions development, lower order quantity and ensuing k-10 development makes it very hard for GTRE to divert man power for just ten engines.

lets see how the problem is resolved in the long run.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
6,910
Likes
7,959
Country flag
Kaveri marine was borne by converting one of the older Kaveri prototypes into a marine engine. It was a desperate attempt to salvage something out of the Kaveri engine, and now when they have the chance, they are letting it go. The KMGT, essentially a prime mover instead of an aero engine, can easily be adopted for railways and industrial systems once accepted by navy and GTRE will recover their costs, that is a guarantee.
GTRE has a limited resource, and it has a substantial job to do in refining K-9 and pursuing k-10. So how can it divert those resources for just an order of ten engines?

Also supporting just ten engines with good quality spares with in time delivery will be very difficult, even if the navy is ready to foot the bill for the naval versions development, lower order quantity and ensuing k-10 development makes it very hard for GTRE to divert man power for just ten engines.

lets see how the problem is resolved in the long run.

Other than you, every one else is not so desperate !!!!!

Pratt and whitney has said that the engine is of good quality and merits its participation in future development.

And Snecma was ready to mate Eco core with k-9 to give a 90 Kn engine when it comes for a new engine replacement after ten years,that would increase the present tejas mk1 specs ,

It may even be good enough for mk2 without weight increase.

Also we have a working engine for AURA. SO why all the desperation?
 
Last edited:

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
5,565
Likes
4,959
Country flag
GTRE has a limited resource, and it has a substantial job to do in refining K-9 and pursuing k-10. So how can it divert those resources for just an order of ten engines?

Also supporting just ten engines with good quality spares with in time delivery will be very difficult, even if the navy is ready to foot the bill for the naval versions development, lower order quantity and ensuing k-10 development makes it very hard for GTRE to divert man power for just ten engines.

lets see how the problem is resolved in the long run.
So you want the navy to give a order of 100?

Navy is not sitting with ships empty of turbine, to put KGMT and put it to trials when GTRE scientists make up their mind and mood. Navy too can provide a limited window of opportunity.

Why did GTRE waste tax payers money and enter into KGMT if it had no plans to provide final product to navy?

Navy has been steady in support for DRDO. Don't take it for a ride.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
6,910
Likes
7,959
Country flag
So you want the navy to give a order of 100?

Navy is not sitting with ships empty of turbine, to put KGMT and put it to trials when GTRE scientists make up their mind and mood. Navy too can provide a limited window of opportunity.

Why did GTRE waste tax payers money and enter into KGMT if it had no plans to provide final product to navy?

Navy has been steady in support for DRDO. Don't take it for a ride.
Who wants k-9 to go waste without benefiting navy? Not the least DRDO and GTRE. They have been receiving all round flake for their delays .

but if the KGMT project delays work on further finetuning of K-9 or the proposed K-10, then it will be a hard decision. AMCA and tejas mk2 re engine projects depend upon k-10.

lets see what happens,
 

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
5,565
Likes
4,959
Country flag
Who wants k-9 to go waste without benefiting navy? Not the least DRDO and GTRE. They have been receiving all round flake for their delays .

but if the KGMT project delays work on further finetuning of K-9 or the proposed K-10, then it will be a hard decision. AMCA and tejas mk2 re engine projects depend upon k-10.

lets see what happens,
'A bird at hand is better than two in a bush'

GTRE should understand the value of the proverb.
 

Defcon 1

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2011
Messages
2,004
Likes
1,381
Country flag
Kaveri marine was borne by converting one of the older Kaveri prototypes into a marine engine. It was a desperate attempt to salvage something out of the Kaveri engine, and now when they have the chance, they are letting it go. The KMGT, essentially a prime mover instead of an aero engine, can easily be adopted for railways and industrial systems once accepted by navy and GTRE will recover their costs, that is a guarantee.
And that will never happen because no government agency will divert its resources to meet the navy's or industries demand. Thats why I said, if GTRE was a private player, this problem wouldn't have arisen. A private party would have been much more flexible if it saw genuine profits coming from the project.
Another reason for giving the R&D budget directly in the arms of forces rather than R&D organizations.
 

shankyz

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
704
Likes
3,595
Country flag
And I thought GTRE/DRDO was a Design organization , not a production agency. This smacks of arrogance - neither could they deliver Kaveri to IAF , nor are they going forward with KGMT with Navy ...
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
6,910
Likes
7,959
Country flag
And I thought GTRE/DRDO was a Design organization , not a production agency. This smacks of arrogance - neither could they deliver Kaveri to IAF , nor are they going forward with KGMT with Navy ...
please explain the meaning " I thought GTRE/DRDO was a Design organization , not a production agency" and context of GTRE's reluctance on marine K-9.

Do you know enough to say GTRE is declining will fully? Or it too may have constraints in finding spare man power for a limited 10 engine order that requires significant redesign , provided it will be tasked with JV responsibility for K-10 on whose completion AMCA and tejas mk2 re engine program depends upon.GTRE is main job is to do this.

You should know a lot more to pronounce judgement. One newspaper article is no way of knowing the complexity of problem at hand.
 
Last edited:

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
6,910
Likes
7,959
Country flag
And that will never happen because no government agency will divert its resources to meet the navy's or industries demand. Thats why I said, if GTRE was a private player, this problem wouldn't have arisen. A private party would have been much more flexible if it saw genuine profits coming from the project.
Another reason for giving the R&D budget directly in the arms of forces rather than R&D organizations.
Why dont you ask a private industry to modify their product for just ten pieces order that involves significant redesign , product support through out its life time and see what happens, that too when they are about to take up a much bigger project that requires more man power than it ever had.
 

shankyz

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
704
Likes
3,595
Country flag
please explain the meaning " I thought GTRE/DRDO was a Design organization , not a production agency" and context of GTRE's reluctance on marine K-9.

Do you know enough to say GTRE is declining will fully? Or it too may have constraints in finding spare man power for a limited 10 engine order that requires significant redesign , provided it will be tasked with JV responsibility for K-10 on whose completion AMCA and tejas mk2 re engine program depends upon.GTRE is main job is to do this.

You should know a lot more to pronounce judgement. One newspaper article is no way of knowing the complexity of problem at hand.
KMGT project spin off was made for what purpose then - to sink tax payers money for 5 years for a redesigned technology demonstrator ? That too on an existing engine core ....

IN had backed the project and even KMGT was tested at IN's Marine Gas Turbine Test Bed @ Visakhapatnam.

Does GTRE want Navy to order 100's of engines , where there are not equivalent ships for so many engines ?
Given the history of Kaveri , it's wise not to put all eggs in the same basket - even when Navy has given the maximum backing to DRDO among all services.

AMCA projects design work came in later for GTRE.

If you know enough , enlighten us with a reason.

No wonder Narendra Modi is also pissed off at DRDO's performance.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...delivering-products/articleshow/40768843.cms
 

power_monger

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2014
Messages
642
Likes
643
Country flag
ER Shakthivel,

I think GTRE is at fault here because it was they who had started KGMT project. Did Navy approach them prior to it? Before starting on KGMT they should have realised the issues wrt resource availability and others. This speaks a volum on their planning.When Navy is ready to purse with the project,why pull your feet now.
 

ersakthivel

Brilliance
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
6,910
Likes
7,959
Country flag
ER Shakthivel,

I think GTRE is at fault here because it was they who had started KGMT project. Did Navy approach them prior to it? Before starting on KGMT they should have realised the issues wrt resource availability and others. This speaks a volum on their planning.When Navy is ready to purse with the project,why pull your feet now.

KMGT project spin off was made for what purpose then - to sink tax payers money for 5 years for a redesigned technology demonstrator ? That too on an existing engine core ....

IN had backed the project and even KMGT was tested at IN's Marine Gas Turbine Test Bed @ Visakhapatnam.

Does GTRE want Navy to order 100's of engines , where there are not equivalent ships for so many engines ?
Given the history of Kaveri , it's wise not to put all eggs in the same basket - even when Navy has given the maximum backing to DRDO among all services.

AMCA projects design work came in later for GTRE.

If you know enough , enlighten us with a reason.

No wonder Narendra Modi is also pissed off at DRDO's performance.

Narendra Modi extremely unhappy with DRDO’s failure to meet deadlines in delivering products - The Times of India
Saurav Jha's Blog : Interview with Dr Avinash Chander, DRDO Chief and Scientific Adviser to Defence Minister

Saurav Jha: Turning to the Kaveri Marine Gas Turbine. What is the status of that program?

Avinash Chander: KMGT has been taken up as a major joint activity between DRDO and industry. Because it has vast potential.
TOI's defence reporting is a strange art, they want to play up whatever they want against local effort.

That pandit guy's news is mostly amusement divorced from real world, for giving news with no connection to real issues involved.

So I will wait for much more credible report from some one else

lets see what happens,

K-9 itself is still a work in progress with many things needed to be ironed out as said by Avinash chander in the interview,
Saurav Jha: And what is the status of the flagship Turbofan development, the Kaveri?

Avinash Chander: Kaveri was tested continuously for 53 hours on a flying test bed in Russia where all the major parameters were proven. There were certain observations which are now being addressed at the lab level. We have put up a proposal to the government to continue. So that we have a viable engine at the end of it. More importantly Kaveri will have to be modified for use in the unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV). As that comes under MTCR and nobody will give us engines. So Kaveri will essentially be a lifeline for that program.
So how can GTRE refuse to give a finished product immediately to navy, they dont have one at present in their hands.

note the words "there are certain observations which are being addressed at the lab level" by Avinash chander.

you dont see a single informative interview in TOI, mostly some cock and bull stuff parading as DELAYS BY DRDO without comprehending the issues involved.

For example Egypt when it pursued an engine program in the 80s bought dedicated high altitude testing platform then itself for their jet engine development effort. GTRE still does not have one. And GTRE chief has gone on record saying that they wasted many years in solving the blade throw problem here because the testing facility was not built here. Finally after a long delay they took their engine to Germany and then only found out the problem , which was rectified later.

But issues like these are never reported in TOI like DDMs. instead what we get is "CRIPPLING DELAYS BY DRDO" and REFUSAL by GTRE with no connection to real issues involved.

stuff like this is never reported in TOi,

Saurav Jha: But in some areas such as drive trains, the Indian automobile sector is not really at par with the rest of the world. So that suggests that some technology gaps may yet require public investment to be bridged. Again, the latest budget has seen a substantial increase in the outlay for DRDO, but is it enough? Does DRDO today have enough manpower and enough resources?

Avinash Chander: With the enhanced budget we are comfortable for the time being. Secondly, for many of the future developments there will be partnership from the armed forces, from industry and so on. All the money need not come from DRDO, should not come from DRDO in fact, because we want commitment from all segments.

Another important part that you referred to is of course manpower. That is a serious area of concern. We have been carrying on, but we are finding serious difficulties because today we are saturated at about 7500 scientists, which basically means that there are a very small number of scientists per program.

We are finding different means for outsourcing some of the more routine activities, but what for all the major programs on the anvil we need around 300-350 fresh young minds to be inducted every year who would bring new ideas, new dynamism. Today we are inducting hardly seventy people to offset retirements. So we have put up a case to government for enhancement of manpower and are looking to induct some 2700 scientists in phases over the next decade, so that our base can become strong. That base will create the dynamism for the future.


Saurav Jha: Dr Chander doesn't this lead to that old chicken and egg situation, where the private sector doesn't come in without assured demand, but to create the demand itself you have to make upfront investments?

Avinash Chander: I think the scenario is changing. Because there has been an unnecessary hesitation in conveying the numbers. Fact is we need numbers. Everybody knows we need numbers. And if we need numbers, we can convey the numbers to whichever industry whether public or private, subject to that industry meeting the specified requirements. If it doesn't meet requirements, we don't accept, just like any other thing which we go and buy. If something doesn't meet my specifications, I go and return the item or I don't accept it at all.

So there shouldn't be a worry, that if it doesn't meet (specifications), as to what one should do. I think a realization has dawned that if time cycles have to be cut down, if capacity has to be created, if people have to be drawn in to invest in the creation of knowledge, it is essential that an integrated planning approach be adopted. Wherein all stages from development to product support during the life cycle be treated as an integrated activity. Then only can we be cost effective, time effective, and can create state of the art products.
For the past ten years these issues were never addressed by UPA govt. DDMs like TOI never cared to report about it.

only after the new govt takes over we are finding more sound and fury, lets hope something useful comes out of all the pretty impressive sound bites so far.

if IAf orders just 40 tejas mk1s and 126 arjun mk1s which private industry will sink in its capital and see it vanish into thin air?
 
Last edited:

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top