Indo-France Aero Engine Co-Development Program

Rune said:
We can have our entire future fleet of mid weight fighters (around 500) based around the same engine.
Click to expand...
So basically this is one argument for diversifying the entire inventory on 2 different engine lines. Since the new jv engine would be a new-ish development even if from a proven core, it can still develop major snag either as a whole or in lru/part wise which would ground the entire fleet. In turn with one set of amca having an older but proven engine with local mfg, this can be bypassed somewhat.

This is considering a case for entire indigenous fleet for the inventory, no foreign jet anymore. I personally hope that would not be the case and at least one foreign jet should be available in strong enough numbers , be it Rafale or some Rus jet beyond the su-30, preferably Su-57 if they really want or even some su-35. All about how much money can they afford to put in the right choice.

One major reason why kaveri in its current form should still see continuous development to an acceptable standard for use in case.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: RationalGuy, jmaxwell_, Asterion Moloc and 3 others
Will India develop test facilities like an high altitude chamber and a flying test bed or will ( as I expect ) , France do all this testing in France which we will pay for and get basically an engine which we don't know how to test while development ?
 
Interested said:
Will India develop test facilities like an high altitude chamber and a flying test bed or will ( as I expect ) , France do all this testing in France which we will pay for and get basically an engine which we don't know how to test while development ?
Click to expand...
Should Build own facilities. Otherwise there would be no point. They can test in France in initial development phase while facilities are being built to fast track maybe.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: RationalGuy and jmaxwell_
Picdelamirand-oil said:
The core of the M-88 was designed almost 30 years ago to enable the development of a family of engines in the 7.5 to 11 tonne thrust range. However, technological advances over the past 30 years have enabled the M-88 to evolve into a T-REX version, which is the same size as the standard M-88 but with 20% more thrust. In addition, the M-88 is a small engine in terms of length and diameter, which leaves plenty of room for it to fit into the AMCA. The new range of 9 to 13.2 tonnes seems suitable for the AMCA, but of course it is not a new-generation engine, only an old-generation engine with new-generation technologies. This engine will be used to power the French NGF demonstrator, but the prototype will have a new-generation engine with variable bypass ratio, and I think this is the type of engine that has been proposed to India for develop
Click to expand...

Picdelamirand-oil said:
The core of the M-88 was designed almost 30 years ago to enable the development of a family of engines in the 7.5 to 11 tonne thrust range. However, technological advances over the past 30 years have enabled the M-88 to evolve into a T-REX version, which is the same size as the standard M-88 but with 20% more thrust. In addition, the M-88 is a small engine in terms of length and diameter, which leaves plenty of room for it to fit into the AMCA. The new range of 9 to 13.2 tonnes seems suitable for the AMCA, but of course it is not a new-generation engine, only an old-generation engine with new-generation technologies. This engine will be used to power the French NGF demonstrator, but the prototype will have a new-generation engine with variable bypass ratio, and I think this is the type of engine that has been proposed to India for development.
Click to expand...
When you say an old generation with new engine technologies with refrence to Trex, are you talking about 5th gen technologies or 6th gen?

Also are you saying the proposal for India is a variable cycle engine? Will the French really share so much? And on what basis are you saying that if you don't mind me asking? It would be so cool if it happened.
 
Fatalis said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1958852806510878899
Click to expand...
the R&D phase is not fully made, so is the industrial part so it can't be produced soon.
Even if it is a M88-4, this model unlike the M88-2 and -3 have never been built ant tested. It was a paperproject so far (but using the small brothers experiences, it's not too complicated).
And the indian engin will integrate indian technologies, probabbly as single crystal blades, so need to be matured a lot.
Picdelamirand-oil said:
The core of the M-88 was designed almost 30 years ago
Click to expand...
>35 years as first try on bench in 1989 and first flight on Rafale A in 1990
 
Donkeydon said:
Also are you saying the proposal for India is a variable cycle engine? Will the French really share so much?
Click to expand...
At a time it was said that the indian technology used in Kaveri for variable cycle may be interesting even for the french. true? untrue?
 
Bon Plan said:
At a time it was said that the indian technology used in Kaveri for variable cycle may be interesting even for the french. true? untrue?
Click to expand...
Interesting, i was not aware of that. If it's true that we are going for a 6th gen, thatd be incredible really.

I'd assume it's not a 100% India IP if it's variable cycle. I know French are working on one for FCAS but the future of that seems incredibly uncertain. Maybe shared IP on the engine and French go solo for 6th gen.
 
Donkeydon said:
Interesting, i was not aware of that. If it's true that we are going for a 6th gen, thatd be incredible really.

I'd assume it's not a 100% India IP if it's variable cycle. I know French are working on one for FCAS but the future of that seems incredibly uncertain. Maybe shared IP on the engine and French go solo for 6th gen.
Click to expand...
SAFRAN work on a M88 derivative to power the SCAF demontrator. Will this demonstrator be a 1:1 scale one or a smaller one just to validate the overall frame ?
 
Bon Plan said:
SAFRAN work on a M88 derivative to power the SCAF demontrator. Will this demonstrator be a 1:1 scale one or a smaller one just to validate the overall frame ?
Click to expand...
No idea tbh.

But I did read about the Kaveri variable cycle stuff you mentioned. It's true, tf. Kaveri is basically a more primitive variable cycle engine.

God please let us go for a VCE
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kiduva21, Shan, BoredBear and 1 other person
Donkeydon said:
No idea tbh.

But I did read about the Kaveri variable cycle stuff you mentioned. It's true, tf. Kaveri is basically a more primitive variable cycle engine.

God please let us go for a VCE
Click to expand...
I tried to look up for any details regarding it. Couldn't find it though.

Where can I find reading material for this? Kaveri being primitive vce n all
 
Donkeydon said:
variable cycle.
Click to expand...

on the 120kN engine being a VCE i have my doubts simply because

a. Neither France nor India has claimed any research in the area- let alone even a lab experiment. Generally these aren't secret.
b. We can achieve fuel savings by super cruising - VCE is one step up from there and has not been mentioned by IAF as a requirement.
c. We dont have the time to develop a VCE- if AMCA-II has to join IAF in the 2035-40 window.

Here's a sneak peek at US' VCE program..
ADVENT (2007) → AETD (2012) → AETP (2016) → NGAP (current)

infact going back even further to 80s..

YF120 Variable-Cycle Engine: General Electric developed the YF120 VCE for the Advanced Tactical Fighter (which evolved into the F-22 Raptor). Despite its high performance, the USAF selected the fixed-cycle Pratt & Whitney YF119 due to perceived risks with the YF120’s variable-cycle design .

Believe IAF is where USAF was in the 80s. They will not risk AMCA for pie in the sky tech.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom