Wonder if the report is major mistake. Can’t believe a Indian defence supplier could make an fundamental mistake of getting encryption codes from China. Maybe they are just buying CPU from China which may not mean compromise of India secrets. Mind you if it is true and accurate its prob down to sanctions or someone else’s fault.

That’s a more understandable answer then blaming sanctions each time something did not meet targets! Which is what we keep hearing from the experts who know the “domain”

Which raises a question for an outsider to Indian aerospace like me. Why has GTRE’s comparatively bad performance been tolerated rather than being addressed and fixed?

Very good question!
No requirement for accountability as at one point or another it is always the fault of embargos on India

I agree and disagree with Teer on some issues, which I would say is basically Funding- Whether Govt or Pvt, nobody can achieve the desired objectives for peanut sized budget. Kaveri engine type of project required something like US$3-5 billion dollars while the real budget is 1/5th -1/10th of the required amount. Hence the testing Labs are abroad, multiple designs cannot be pursued and most of the components of indigenous Kaveri are still imported. As for Experience L&T was involved in ATV rather then MDL. guess why? Pvt sector is/was intelligent to reject the offer for LCA as the funding was ridiculously low. The initial estimated amount was US$ 100 million for aircraft, radar and engine totalling US$ 300 million to produce a 4th gen aircraft from scratch including building Labs in 10 years. Even now, UAV engine project was allotted US$ 100,000 only. Note-No typo. Compare it with Thales which has spend around US$ 1.5 Billion for AESA radar still under testing. M-88 funding was US$ 2 Billion. Again AMCA is allotted only US$ 1 Billion while India is ready to shell US$ 5 billion for half baked PAKFA. The R&D budget for JSF & F-22 is already being discussed here. Now the minimum funds required for AMCA which should (in my estimate) be:-

Engine, Gearbox & fuel injection system & labs US$ 2-4Billion
Airframe design including internal weapon carriage,
hydraulics, landing gear, intakes and labs US$ 500-1000 million
FBW hardware and software US$ 1-2 Billion
Radar + manufacturing line US$ 1-2 Billion
EW, data links equipment US$ 1 Billion
IRST + manufacturing line for sensor US$ 1 Billion
Actuators US$ 500-1000 million
Ejection seat and environment control systems US$ 200-500 million
Avionics like RLG, HUD, HOTAS, cockpit display systems US$ 200-500 million
Seed money for weapon systems US$ 1 billion
Seed money for LGP, Recce pod, Jammer pods, Towed decoys US$ 1 Billion

But the actual funding is again 1/10th of the required amounts. Just One Billion dollars to be released in tranches. The Pvt sector will keep away while the Govt department will waste 20 years and then give up

Very detailed but not detailed enough, need project cost breakdown between capex, labour, materials etc

Although it seems like a lot of hard work without the details above your data can not be said to support your point, however it also does not contradict your point.

I once assembled a RC plane with a micro engine and other off the shelf parts in it, with a friend.

Given the wisdom in this thread, I wonder why Boeing didnt contact me around integration of the 787 and Airbus for the A400M and even the A380.

Dont they know how easy it is? Same thing really!

Well was it you or some one else that claimed to have knowledge of the domain? Well if you have that, combined with your expertise with RC planes you should be principle engineer for Boeing!

Back to being serious; I can tell you have not read my post and have jumped in with the correct intentions. We all do this its not all that embarrassing, honestly. Anyway read through the post and comment when you understand the points you challenged.

on serious side it does not look that big how will it carry cruise missiles? or do they mean laser guide bombs?

It looks like a converted target drone.. not a bad idea for a long range v1 type weapon.. always wondered why more countries have this arrangement..

if nothing else it would occupy radar systems..

Would you think that they took some of the BQM 74C fired in Iraq and reverse engineered them?

Pot calling kettle are you receiving me over?

1) But Since Shri Matt is dissatisfied with this indigenous effort, he wants to further his proposal of indigenisation by asking the French/Americans/Russians or the British to come and teach GTRE Gas turbine engine core technology so that we can then churn out “indigenous” engines ! :rolleyes:

2) For the time being, since the Kaveri program is delinked form the LCA, there IS no impact on the LCA-Tejas or on National security as the Tejas is flying and proceeding with the GE F404 interim measure ….

3) And regarding a “JV” with a foreign partner, and the proposed GTRE-Snecma tie up, the IAF was quick to notice that the GTRE wont be absorbing CORE technology in that tie up as the French are proposing to use the M88 core.
It may come up with a useable engine for the LCA-mkII and/or the AMCA, however, the core will still be FOREIGN !

4) The IAFs requirement for the AMCA was that it should be FULLY Indian. That parameter can then be safely be forgotten for good.

5) Once the Kaveri is done with matching LCAs specs, I say, only GTRE should be tasked with coming up with an Engine for Tejas MKII and AMCA.
Even if they take time and cannot meet the requirement for Tejas MKII, its okay since that can be fulfilled by the GE or Eurojet engine…

6) However, that will ensure that once its ready, India would have achieved true indigenisation in Gas turbine tech and then suitably equip its fighters …

My mistake does make me giggle and I like how you have used it! Good work!

1) Wait hold on aren’t the Indian government doing this anyway?

2) How can you even justify the current situation? The GTRE have had 30 years developing jet engine technology they have been provided funds well over the original estimate/budget.. on top of the extra funding India now is in a position of having to source a new engine as a replacement to the kaveri. This has had significant effect on a aircraft project which was intended to replace a majority of the IAF fleet. The IAF is now looking at a squadron strength well below that which is required to safely protect India.

3) Who cares? It means LCA gets an engine which it desperately needs and India do not repeat the mistakes of Marut..This whole argument is oxymoron the GTRE guys are hiding behind sanctions as an excuse for the failings in the kaveri and at the same time you are saying working in a JV means India will not get a fully Indian engine.. What do you think GTRE meant when they said that sanctions/IP issues meant that it could not source all the parts it needed to make an engine?

4) AMCA will never be fully Indian, not if it wants the AMCA to be something competitive…India is still ways away from making a “fully” Indian aircraft if you include the raw materials used.. And there is no need for it to do so either. If you want something with a tag of Indian get HAL and ADA to design a canvas covered wooden framed bi-plane using a petrol engine…

5) I do not understand this point at all… there is no logic.. LCA and AMCA are real world projects required to protect the country… carrying on trying to do what has not been done in the last 30 years does not make any sense at all.

Actually the best point in your post was your joke on my mistake, the rest seems contradictory or oxymoron…

I repeat : GTRE claim they have underperformed because they were unable to get the Foreign parts or help so this brouhaha about being “fully Indian” makes no sense..

P.s. I would check spelling mistakes in your post before you have a go at others again

Pot calling kettle are you receiving me over?

😉 :rolleyes: :p

p.p.s If i have a mobile phone back in 2000 which had a video capture facility I would have put up a video of a gas turbine a friend had made in a month powered by Oxyacetylene … I would never claim it would be good to power an aircraft though! Oh wait I found something similar

Unfortunately friends gas turbine was not as clever and someone had to stand at the hot end with a welding torch striker resulting in me nearly burning my eyebrows off… but was good to hear it run…

2. What we are looking at is two different points in the chain from development to production. The production team could definitely contribute to improvements and suggestions in design but expecting them to do design and develop at a time where everything is getting specialized, I must say I have my doubts.

Dont really see a problem with that, what is needed is a really good carrot and stick incentivies, unfortunately from the outside looking in most public places seem to have more carrots then sticks..