A engine the size of f414 and producing 120kn max thrust, is 5+ gen already.
If it just had "adaptive cycle" flow management it can quality for 6th gen, the thrust performance is already at 6th gen level.
With that Said, having adaptive cycle is also a case of having its need, adaptive cycle engines will be lot thicker, requiring a bigger airframe.
So even if you have the tech making adaptive cycle engine for medium weight fighter might not make sense.
Plus if your range and endurance requirements are already being fulfilled without adaptive cycle tech then again, it wouldn't make sense to go for it.
Wait what? Thrust to weight ratio will be 11 I think. Is that good enough for 6th gen? What is the qualification for a 5th gen then? F414 is 9 and a 6th gen level is 11, so is 5th gen just 10?
I do remember reading that GCAP won't have VCE, so I guess it should be possible. But how tho? Like where else is the performance boost coming from then?
TET of f135(f35's engine) is 1980°C.
F135 is considered the most advanced(also most power full) military jet engine in service yet.
Twr of 11.47.
US 6th gen Xa101/xa102 achieved max TET of 2127°C in tests, the production varient though is expected to have lower TET and lower thrust( actually lower thrust than f135) because two will be used instead of one engine in america's 6th gen jet, the main feature of xa102 is not its TET or twr, its the 3 stream adaptive cycle architecture.
I have no doubts that the scientist at the beginning of project were enthusiastic and mission driven. Even babus might have found some inspiration.
But after the lost decade 2000-2010 , I doubt GTRE is the same as back then.
No responsibility, No urgency, corruption, promotion politics renders even the best of workers lethargic.
It appears that the picture is of old burner which could not produce the required thrust. It is not fitted with Brahmos made burner.
All valid points. However, do have a look at the facilities and infrastructure that GTRE has been provided with by the government. Also, what kind of priority does the Kaveri engine take in the MoD ? Have a look at the financials in the past three odd decades. Now, compare that to the infrastructure and R&D facilities that certain other nations in that graph have built to support their industry.
Agreed. It was very unrealistic of Indian govt to give ambitious project like kavery without funds, infra for it.
Hence, my observation that in the beginning of project there would've been genuinely interested and mission focused.
But the current state leaves to doubt the readiness and sincerity of DRDO to justify the further sanctioning of the funds required. And that observation is based on what I posted above. Politics over innovation.
I mean, it says something if the so called premier research organisation of a nation is battling lack of talent in a population of 1.4B people.
It would be quite easy to state that the DRDO has a lack of talent. What has ended up hampering the development is poor project management, lack of interest, and lack of financing. It continues to this date.
This is not a case of a was or has been. It is visible today as well. Go through the tweet and check how many of those things have been acquired to bolster the efforts of the GTRE.
It is the very same GTRE that has taken you past the 70kN mark as a result of its effort. The MoD needs to do self reflection if it wants to be taken seriously. I can be harsh on the GTRE and lay onto it like no tomorrow. However, a deeper look reveals a whole lot more than just GTRE being lacking.
Last edited:
| Phase/Year Range | Key Milestones/Activities | Estimated Expenditure (INR Crore) | Cumulative Expenditure (INR Crore) | Notes/Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1986–1989 | Project sanction and initial design phase. Approved by Cabinet Committee on Security with GTRE as lead. | 382 | 382 | Original sanctioned budget; focused on feasibility studies. (DRDO reports) |
| 1990–1999 | Core engine development, component testing, and early prototypes. Delays due to sanctions post-1998 nuclear tests. | 500 | 882 | Incremental funding; included high-altitude testing. (Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence, 2000) |
| 2000–2009 | Full-scale engine prototypes (9 built), ground testing, and integration attempts with Tejas. Major thrust shortfalls identified. | 1,200 | 2,082 | Cost overruns due to tech imports and redesigns. Expenditure reported at ~₹1,300 crore by 2004. (CAG Audit, 2011) |
| 2010–2014 | Flight testing (e.g., on IL-76 aircraft in Russia), de-linking from Tejas LCA, and project review. | 800 | 2,882 | Total spend reached ~₹2,839 crore by 2011; further delays led to seeking foreign tech. (DRDO Annual Report, 2014) |
| 2015–2019 | Project slowdown, revival discussions, and initial collaboration with Safran for tech transfer. Limited testing continued. | 600 | 3,482 | Focus on dry engine variant for UAVs; costs included offset deals from Rafale purchase. (Ministry of Defence, 2018) |
| 2020–2023 | Revived program with Safran joint venture; development of marine/industrial variants and thrust upgrades. COVID-19 delays. | 500 | 3,982 | Budget allocations under Atmanirbhar Bharat; ~₹300 crore for tech transfer. (DRDO updates, 2022) |
| 2024–2025 (up to Sep 2025) | Ongoing certification, ground runs, and potential flight tests. Focus on achieving full thrust and integration. | 518 | 4,500 | Estimated based on 2024-25 defence budget allocations (~₹250 crore annually); includes Safran collaboration costs. Project still in development phase. (Union Budget 2024-25; DRDO press releases) |
A. It's not me who is saying it but DRDOs own report. Vacancies, not enough staff. And never did i say that GTRE is bad. All of my above points were indirectly related to govts apathy towards maintaining a financially robust, safe from political interference, science oriented research environment which is the basics for fostering scientific culture in an organisation. But neither did they have control of finances, nor the freedom to embark on research w/o a babus approval.
B. And hence, distinction has been made. Because continuous lack of above conditions leads to a rot in organisation. And when a order is set in such large organisation, it's not easy to reform it even if majority within the org wants it. Years of this have led to scientist losing the zeal and developed a sense of chalta hai attitude or leave the org for better oppurtunities where they are valued. And this compounds over generations, with the current generation being not too keen on even joining DRDO for science. For many this will be just one of the govt jobs. And the sheer interference of Beauracracy in scientific endeavours hampering DRDO. This only reinforces the colonial way of direct control of state. Which also leads to lethargy drdo finds itself in today. This observation is from a pov of human psychology, not any inherent criticism of scientists
Last edited:
Mate, I am not questioning the points that you made from the perspective of babudom or from the pov of organisational effectiveness. In fact, if I had stated that the points that you had listed might hold validity and should be addressed. Nor did I say that you had unfairly portrayed the employees in a grim or a dreadful way.
However, I cannot just whip the GTRE or the DRDO for basic faults that have less to do with them and more to do with their political overseers ie., the MoD. There are few things that have gone wrong right from the beginning. These must be corrected before we start taking out pitchforks and start running the DRDO folks out of town.
I understand that you are approaching this from an organisational perspective and looking at reforms as well. I am merely saying the entire thing is mismanaged and an aspect to be explored is the support that was extended.
I am yet to come across any private consortium that is willing to lead the charge. A lot of talk and chatter. However, when it comes to putting money where the mouth is, I see less being put in action.
The French have shown more awareness by investing here when they had the chance. In spite of certain risks, they still played their cards and ended up with JVs.
Yup. Govts and Beauracracy's role in not just DRDO but most of the DPSUs, PSUs can't be ignored. One after other PSUs went into loss. Only now do we see some recovering but that too is due to change in ecosystem not the reforms in structural flaws.
When I run after current drdo folks.. it's due to them being increasingly complicit in pushback towards reforms led by govt. Still, there have been some welcome moves like DcPP, MM etc but it still haven't been able to solve the rotten system drdo management has become. Vested interests have already formed a network across DPSUs which lessons the effect of dpcc overall.
But there are other issues that results in this.. and that is the flawed use of DRDO by MoD.
i.e. Making DRDO a shopkeeper. See, drdo is supposed to be R&D org. But they have been tasked with producing a complete product for armed forces.
And that's the biggest roadblock I see. There should be a delink of armed forces and DRDO. Let me explain:
Right now armed forces gives very specific inputs, requirements to drdo. Then drdo has to negotiate , work on technical details with them etc.
That's diverts both human and material resources from R&D to non research related things. And it only increases the interference of a mammoth institution a.k.a. armed forces as if Beauracracy alone wasn't enough. Gives unnecessary pressure from two giants which doesn't produce any good results.
What i believe is DRDO should be transformed into a core R&D org. Should be politically and legally shielded from interference. What they should do is research frontiers in technologies and develop them for application in defense. And that shouldn't be decided by forces. Instead with little interference from MoD, MoD should just post a list of suggestions for research direction. DRDO should research, develop and patent technology and make them available for licensing. They should focus on tech like coming up with autonomous applications, softwares, on photonics itself.. quantum, material science: RCS composites, propulsion techniques, fuels etc. and even merge biotech research organisation into DRDO framework.
What forces need to do is go demand systems from corporates. Both pvt and public. It should be their responsibility to provide armed forces with systems tailored for their requirements. The corporate then can license Tech needed and available from DRDO and do their own R&D in systems integration, tailoring that tech for specific variant or uses.
But that required a consensual move by drdo giving up on some tasks that it does now. Like designing of whole systems, prototyping them, integration. This will create a space for industry to building it's foundation in. And increase responsibility on manufactures too. And reduce the logistical burden from DRDO. Giving it ample space to focus on science, not politics.
For example, IAF can demand ASTRA from Adani, TATA, BHEL, forge etc by specifying need of BVR of so and so range...
The DRDO role is to research not astra but advancing seeker techniques, composites for durability and weight reduction, propulsion techniques along other things w/o limitations arising from them being sandboxed by a specific system.
It's corporates job now to invest in designing the concept and specs of Astra. Get approved from forces. To get the required tech licensed, develop in house R&D for modifying it for integration in ASTRA that they negotiated with Forces and deliver it.
This leaves business to businessman and not a scientist organisation. And it will also be a reality check to armed forces. Where they demand over the top from DRDO, slowing down DRDO and then opting for imported system with lesser demanding specs.
The biggest change it brings in is how is DRDO evaluated. Right now it's evaluated on basis of developing weapon for forces. But ideally it should be evaluated on the output of research they generate . Which they can excel at. Only then will it truly become an organisation for scientist, not babus or businessman.
Will also utilise huge engineering workforce available by sidestepping govt constraints on recruitment with lengthy cycles. And evaluate diff PSUs on delivery. It's not a short term reform but a generational one.
Note: Regarding investment from private industry.. I believe it will come from startups or govt might come up with a different research organisation altogether with different structure and consolidating some fragmented and inefficient govt controlled orgs (not DRDO, hal etc). They can also shift it under less bureaucratic PMO.
Just look at pitiful research in automobile sector. Even I am disappointed, but that too isn't without it's caveats especially in defense. Given history of MoD boss towards awarding contracts to PSUs
Last edited:
US on mission to destroy India's military aviation industry and program...
We need to make aero engines national priority program & pump money to make it a success...
Neither Defence Ministry nor DRDO+GTRE+HAL are interested to have an indigenous engine. GTRE has already mastered the technology and if they make serious effort they can certainly achieve the desired results. Public anguish did not make any dent for government support with the decision makers. There is no zeal and pride with the GTRE scientist.
US on mission to destroy India's military aviation industry and program...
We need to make aero engines national priority program & pump money to make it a success...