+FormationLiaoning+escort+group+4+incl.+subs+Type+052D+Guided+Missile+Destroyer,+Type+052C+,+Peoples+Liberation+Army+Navy+5+Type+052C+Type+052D+destroyers+(7).jpg)
After the Indian Air force almost wrote off the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), christened Tejas, due to its low power engine, the LCA is all set to make a comeback with the defence ministry ready to float a global tender, valued over Rs 3,300 crore, to purchase more powerful engines for the Aircrafts. The current engine, General Electric F-404, fitted on the LCA restricts the aircraft’s ability to carry out combat maneouvres with optimal weapons payload, as it does not deliver the required thrust. European military aerospace engine consortium Eurojet Turbo and American company General Electric will be competing to supply 100 engines for the LCA. The Eurojet EJ200 and the GE F-414 engines generate a thrust of 95-100 Kilo Newton, which meets the IAF’s requirements.The air force intends to induct some 140 (seven squadrons) light combat aircraft manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited over the next decade. The first LCA squadron, however, will come with the underpowered American GE-404 engines that deliver a thrust of only 80-85 KN. IAF sources said fitting the heavier engines would require design changes in the airframe, which could take up to three to four years. Initial operational clearance for the LCA has is now expected in 2010.
10 comments:
When the tender will be float?after set up of new gov.? When PV-5 & LSP-3 will be publicly displayed?
Most likely after when new govt takes office. I just hope that this tender just don’t get delayed by the fact that GOI might like some commonalty between engine for LCA MKII and MMRCA ‘s engine.
f414 vs ej2000
diameter ej2000 27 inches
f414 35 inches
lenght ej2000 157 inches
f414 154 inches
weight ej2000 2180 lbs
f414 2400lbs
but main thing is dry thrust not reheat 60kn in ej2000 vs 62kn in f414 and engine diameter
so f414 being heavier than ej2000 has only 2kn advantage but this isn't worth because f414 will weight around 1100kg
so when comparing engine dia,weight ,dry thrust ej2000 beats f414 for tejas
moreover weight of ej2000 is less than a ton
Its EJ-200 not EJ-2000
When you are comparing the F414 and EJ-200 you also need to take into account the fact that with USA future developments and improvements are almost assured to happen when compare to the EJ-200 and F-414’s figures are the same as those of F404 already in use
F414
In 2006, GE has tested an Enhanced Durability Engine (EDE) with an advanced core which can provide a 15% thrust increase or longer life without the thrust increase. It has a six-stage, high-pressure compressor and an advanced high-pressure turbine. GE has tested the new high-pressure compressor and a two-stage advanced fan. These components with the advanced core could yield 20% increase in thrust over the current F414 and final growth step would produce an engine with 30% more thrust than the F414 - just under 29,000 lbf (130 kN).
At the same time EJ-200 does have a very well planned growth path, only question is if it will be realized or not considering that attitude of the partner nation towords EF-2000 T3
Overall the EJ200 employs a very low By-Pass Ratio (the ratio of air which bypasses the core engine or compressor stages) of 0.4:1 which gives it a near turbo-jet cycle. Such a low BPR has the benefit of producing a cycle where the maximum attainable non-afterburning thrust makes up a greater percentage of total achievable output. At its maximum dry thrust of 60kN (or 13,500lbf) the EJ200's SFC is in the order of 23g/kN.s. With reheat the engine delivers around 90-100kN (or 20,250-22,500lbf) of thrust with an SFC of some 49g/kN.s. Compared to other engines these figures may actually seem relatively high, however such data must be used with caution and evaluated with all other performance data to be of any use. With reheat the engine weighs just 2286lb giving a Thrust to Weight Ratio of around 9:1. An interesting point to note is that the baseline production engine is also capable of generating a further 15% dry thrust (69kN or 15525lbf) and 5% reheat output (95kN or 21263lbf) in a so called war setting. However utilising this capability will result in a reduced life expectancy.
The EuroJet consortium were required to build an engine (often referred to as EJ2x0) which had at least a 20% growth potential. There are already plans to carry out the necessary modifications to reach this higher (Stage-1) output in the 2000 to 2005 timeframe. Such an improvement will require a new Low Pressure Compressor (raising the pressure ratio to around 4.6) and an upgraded fan (increasing flow by around 10%). This would result in the dry thrust increasing to some 72kN (or 16,200lbf ) with a reheated output of around 103kN (or 23,100lbf). Given recent increases in the weight of the Typhoon it may not be unexpected to find this upgrade performed in the near future.
More interestingly perhaps is Rolls-Royce and EuroJet's plan to increase the output 30% above the baseline specification as a Stage-2 modification. Such an upgrade will require more substantial plantwide changes including a new LP compressor and turbine and an improvement in the total pressure ratio. These upgrades would yield a new dry thrust of around 78kN (or 17,500lbf) with a reheated output of around 120kN (or 27,000lbf). The indications are that these improvements will come on stream between 2005 and 2010, in time for the Typhoon's Mid Life Upgrade expected around 2016.
engine thrust is irrelvent
main thing typhoon has much better thrust to weight ratio with ej2000 compared to f18e/f
and same for rafale also has better thrust to weight ratio than f18e/f with m88 which produces only 75kn
all the tech beign developed is good but main thing is price and operationality
for exmaple jf17 ,here main thing for an engine
which is rd33 and it serves all its purposes and gives good speed
one can also fit f404,ej200,m88 to jf17 ,so if all these western engines have better tech so what they are costly and if rd33 has lower tech so what,it serves its purpose as good as western engines and it is also very cheap costing 2.1 billion each and m88,ej2000,f414 cost around 8 million each
Is this the plane that too 30 years to build ???
Engine thrust is the most relevant thing and that’s the main reason IAF is waiting for the LCA MK-II to come up with high thrust engine, it becomes even more relevant in countries like india where weather is hot.
As far as PAF is concerned it is more complex problem than that of India which is already using F404 on LCA. JF-17 is using the RD-93 because at start no one was ready to export engine for project to china other than Russia and even now that will be a serious issue. PAF is not happy with the maximum time between overhalls that is very low compared to the western solutions but problem is both financial and political (as china is partner )
You are right that in the end it I thrust to weight ratio that matters, but engine thrust is one of the basic two ways to achieve
Increase engine thrust
Decrease weight of aircraft
So in LCA’s case IAF is choosing first option as weight reduction measures are effective only up to certain extent and LCA has already used lot of composite materials for this purposes
Post a Comment