AMCA - Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft

[Bhartiya Sainik]

View: https://x.com/Kuntal__biswas/status/1833872971284595000

If we went also for boom-tanker system then AMCA could have spine-receptacle system with lower RCS from front & right side.

 

[Wolfie]

If we went also for boom-tanker system then AMCA could have spine-receptacle system with lower RCS from front & right side.

Compatibility with the fleet

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

Compatibility with the fleet

There are tankers with mixed options also : boom + drogue, we should consider. some countries operate both types separately also. F-18 uses drogue while others use boom.
War means fight, so Fighter which are in more numbers should be given 1st priority & auxilliary items should be made or purchased accordingly.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

SENSOR FUSION
It came with 5gen jets helping pilot to focus on 1 picture of battle space, coming from multiple sensors as part of the jet or from wingman, other friendly jets, AWACS, satellite, ground asset, etc.

RWR was a standard among 4gen jets, but with analog wide sector indicators. I guess no jet had spherical sensor coverage & narrow direction indicator of incoming missile or enemy jet locked on to us.
Thereafter moresensors were added - RF/EW/ESM/IFF, IR/MAWS, LWR.
It became important even for MLUed 4.5gen jets to have spherical coverage & some degree of sensor fusion with digital display.



Demo cockpit of AMCA has been shown at Aero-India expo. The static model has 1 wide primary MFD & 2nd MFD below it b/w legs.


The actual inducted jet will have a sensor fused view.
But this demo cockpit may not be showing it yet. In lower right coner we see RWR & stores display.
The main 4 bigger sections, from left to right -
- Digital gyroscope/attitude indicator
- Navigation display with map
- Radar/Attack display
- Multiple systems - Fuel, Hydraulics, Electrical, Nozzle position, Anti-ice, Engine RPM % bar,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another pic:

The RWR has been enlarged on the right.
Navigation display remains at 2nd from left.
Radar/Attack display has been moved below to bottom row.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Navigation & RWR displays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2nd from left is navigation+map display.
Below it are RWR & Radar/Attack displays.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFAIK the 5gen jets F-22, F-35 & others too, do not care anymore about individual displays like RWR, IRST sweeping, radar sweeps & AESA beams, passive ESM finds, etc. All those things become processing overhead for pilot & for display GPU, hence fused into 1 situation display.

As the AMCA project progresses, we hope to see better version of demo cockpits, more precise, showing sensor fused display.

 

[loveindiafrom]

Don't compare the Turkish and Korean programs to AMCA. They are nowhere near indigenous.

You can say that about Koreans, but you can't use the Kaan program as an excuse. US has even placed embargoes on the simplest, least critical things like electrical cables, actuators, landing gears and cockpit glass for the Kaan project.

You need to reform your defense bureaucracy for AMCA and other advanced projects.

 

[Neil (नील/Нил)]

An old infographic depicting the Stealth & Non-Stealth configuration of the AMCA.



Non-Stealth configuration refers to the configuration of a stealth aircraft wherein it carries it's stores such as missiles, bombs, sensors, fuel tanks etc on external hard points, in other words, more commonly referred to as "Beast-Mode" by military enthusiasts like us.

Point to be noted: Beast mode actually not only involves carrying stores externally but rather it's a combination of the maximum amount of payload in terms of bombs, missiles, Fuel Tanks (FT), sensors that can be fielded by any fighter jet, especially stealth aircraft such as the F-22, F-35, J-20, J-31/J-35, Su-57 etc.

Here is Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II's in Beast Mode. Same will be seen with AMCA when it enters service.




In the Infographic I shared, the design of the AMCA is different from the most recent & updated configuration which is more akin to the F-35. The design I showed shows the AMCA to be more similar to the F-22 Raptor in terms of design, with the clipped diamond-like delta wings, all-moving horizontal tails (stabilators), fixed rhombohedral shaped jet intakes, which all look almost identical to the ones seen on the F-22. Only the Vertical Stabilisers and the cockpit (somewhat) resembles the F-35.

Scale model of the same AMCA configuration showcased during a def-expo held in India many years ago.


We have come a long way since the first design of the AMCA till the latest one. Extensive wind tunnel testing and CAD modeling has helped our scientists a lot during the course of the AMCA's R&D.

 

[Bhartiya Sainik]

It is very difficult to decipher some elements in the demo cockpit display. Those who play DCS, MSFS & other simulators might be able to guess better.

Top row:


> AP - Auto Pilot
> AHLD - Altitude Hold?
> ASEL - Altitude Select?
> FD - Flight Director?
> L | G ?
> AT - Auto Thrust?
-------------------------
> NAV - Navigation map/mode active?
> 0.35 206, 0.25 151 ?
> FUEL 2931, 2350 - remaining fuel.
> 027 degree ?
> 6090, 5080 - Altitude?
-------------------------
> SPOO1?
> RT1, RT2?
> VOR - VHF Omni-directional Range?
> TAC - Tactical air navigation?
> IFF M3 - Interogate Friend or Foe frequency select?
> M?
> DISP - Display options?
> 50X TR?
--------------------------
> 02 PKTS BULLS?
> 068 / 102 NM, 273 / X88 NM - may be navigation beacons bearing, distance.
> AMCA TAKE EASTERN PKT ??

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple systems status



> 2 circles at top corners with 52, 17 - could be nozzle position open %.
> A/ICE - Engine Anti-ice heating OFF / AUTO.
> Vertical white scale & green bar, range 1-10, AB (After Burner), value 82%, 88% - Engine RPM %.
> Vertical yellow scale & greenbar, range 2-10, value 610, 671 - could be engine temperature.
> Small vertical white scale & green bar, range 0-200, FF value 31, 83 - could be Fuel Flow.
> REMN 2931 - Remaining Fuel?
> INT 2350 - Internal Fuel?
> BINGO 400 - Bingo Fuel mark.
But INT should be total & REMN should be less than that, right?
> HYD1, HYD2 280 BAR - Hydraulic pressure.
> DC 28.0 V, AC 114 V - Electricity.
> OIL 6.6, 6.9 BAR - Engine oil pressure.
> LPL, LPR ON - LP no idea, but on Left & right are ON.
> BPL, BPR - BP no idea, but on left & right.
May be LP, BP are pumps.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Navigation, Map display


> LOC - Localizer?
> DCN? - Display Contrast?
> DCL? - Display Color?
> SCL? - Symbols Color?
> DAN?
> FD?
> FPI?
> OVR? - Overlay?
> OBL?
> Lower left corner, blue color : ETA 11:30:55 - Estimated Time of Arrival at waypoint?
> Lower center, blue color : EF with some number - no idea
> Lower right corner, 096/3.42 NM, 058/2.4 NM - Waypoint bearing/distance?
> Top right corner, 6100, 4550 - Altitude?

 

[Spitfire IX]

Unreliable idrw.com claims that Safran has offered 100% TOT on the proposed 110kN engine plus no limits on exports. That would make it very easy to negotiate TOT - nothing to discuss. If true, I would expect a considerable price hike as a result, possibly killing a deal. I guess the same would happen with a 100% TOT deal with RR or GE.

 

[SlayingHell]

Unreliable idrw.com claims that Safran has offered 100% TOT on the proposed 110kN engine plus no limits on exports. That would make it very easy to negotiate TOT - nothing to discuss. If true, I would expect a considerable price hike as a result, possibly killing a deal. I guess the same would happen with a 100% TOT deal with RR or GE..

Everyone with a 2-Bit Braincell knows what's gonna happen.

At best, they will use the funds of billions of dollars from GoI to develop a more cutting edge engine for their sixth generation planes while giving us Know-How of some 80s or 90s level Jet Engine. It means we still have to do R&D again for Know-Why unless gormint is content with just that.

At worst, they will use the funds of billions of dollars from GoI to develop a more cutting edge engine for their sixth generation plane while dragging AMCA engine long enough until GoI frustrates. Then they will cite some obscure reasons and propose incorporating some safran core into AMCA engine. Then they will gonna be manufacturing Hot Section exclusively in France and India will be manufacturing Cold Section. This will ensure that even after the billions of dollars, India will now be milked again to death.

The chance of first scenario happening is very very less likely than second.

So, gormint's either has to go with 2 vendors simultaneously and fund 2 in parallel releasing funds according to milestones of program or just develop inhouse. Funding only 1 vendor will 100% be a trap.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Unreliable idrw.com claims that Safran has offered 100% TOT on the proposed 110kN engine plus no limits on exports. That would make it very easy to negotiate TOT - nothing to discuss. If true, I would expect a considerable price hike as a result, possibly killing a deal. I guess the same would happen with a 100% TOT deal with RR or GE.

If IDRW reports it, it won't happen.

 

[Spitfire IX]

Everyone with a 2-Bit Braincell knows what's gonna happen.

At best, they will use the funds of billions of dollars from GoI to develop a more cutting edge engine for their sixth generation planes while giving us Know-How of some 80s or 90s level Jet Engine. It means we still have to do R&D again for Know-Why unless gormint is content with just that.

At worst, they will use the funds of billions of dollars from GoI to develop a more cutting edge engine for their sixth generation plane while dragging AMCA engine long enough until GoI frustrates. Then they will cite some obscure reasons and propose incorporating some safran core into AMCA engine. Then they will gonna be manufacturing Hot Section exclusively in France and India will be manufacturing Cold Section. This will ensure that even after the billions of dollars, India will now be milked again to death.

The chance of first scenario happening is very very less likely than second.

So, gormint's either has to go with 2 vendors simultaneously and fund 2 in parallel releasing funds according to milestones of program or just develop inhouse. Funding only 1 vendor will 100% be a trap.

I don't think that SAFRAN needs funds from India to develop a 6G engine. France, Germany and Spain are funding that.

Does any of the 3 major OEM's need to put its newer technologies into a new 110kN engine to make a viable engine? I don't see why when GTRE/Indian technology is so far behind that India cannot even make a 1980's technology engine. India has no choice but to call in a company that does know how to make fast jet engines. I think the 3 majors are in a position to take India to the cleaners.

About SAFRAN taking charge of hot section development: India cannot do it. To get a decent engine, SAFRAN have to design it or base it one of their existing designs, don't they?

I don't know how far India could have advanced since deciding to pursue Kaveri but I'm confident it could have got much further with fast jet technology with much higher investment, better project management, proper accountability all round. It seems to me that India is in a very weak position in terms of joint development of an engine with a major.

I like the idea of having 2 majors working in competition. US government did that with F-16 engines and is supposed to have saved hundreds of millions or even billions through better prices but that was for production engines. How does India monitor development requirements and development performance of 2 OEM's when Indian fast jet designers may have no experience or understanding of what the developers are doing or why they are doing it? It's a bit like asking a 10 year old to assess how well 2 mathematics undergraduates are progressing at individually solving a mathematical problem.

 

[Azaad]

Unreliable idrw.com claims that Safran has offered 100% TOT on the proposed 110kN engine plus no limits on exports. That would make it very easy to negotiate TOT - nothing to discuss. If true, I would expect a considerable price hike as a result, possibly killing a deal. I guess the same would happen with a 100% TOT deal with RR or GE.

It's not just IDRW but a lot of other publications are reporting the same & have been doing so for the past 2 years.

What's more a senior DRDO official has been seconded to the Indian embassy in Paris for more than a year & counting . Why ? I've no clue but it's anyone's guess.

It's my hunch that India's bargaining not just for the technology of the 120 KN TF with full IPR but for what's going into the SCAF namely an variable / alternate cycle engine.

That's tomorrow's technology & that's also the reason RR , SAFRAN & GE are in such a generous mood because they're moving on to the next gen which renders whatever they have today obsolete within the next 1-2 decades.

With generous here describing their willingness to share the know how & the know why not in terms of the cost which will still be a pretty packet. Having said that GE is still sticking to its guns of limited ToT with no IPR which sort of rules them out but which doesn't bother them a bit.

Left to ourselves we can develop a F-404 equivalent or something marginally better without outside help except perhaps in consultancy within a decade.

That also seems to be the aim of GTRE which is to get the Kaveri upto the F-404 standard in order for it to be eligible to go into the Mk-1a during the MLU , 15 years from now .

 

[SlayingHell]

I don't think that SAFRAN needs funds from India to develop a 6G engine. France, Germany and Spain are funding that.

Does any of the 3 major OEM's need to put its newer technologies into a new 110kN engine to make a viable engine? I don't see why when GTRE/Indian technology is so far behind that India cannot even make a 1980's technology engine. India has no choice but to call in a company that does know how to make fast jet engines. I think the 3 majors are in a position to take India to the cleaners.

About SAFRAN taking charge of hot section development: India cannot do it. To get a decent engine, SAFRAN have to design it or base it one of their existing designs, don't they?

I don't know how far India could have advanced since deciding to pursue Kaveri but I'm confident it could have got much further with fast jet technology with much higher investment, better project management, proper accountability all round. It seems to me that India is in a very weak position in terms of joint development of an engine with a major.

I like the idea of having 2 majors working in competition. US government did that with F-16 engines and is supposed to have saved hundreds of millions or even billions through better prices but that was for production engines. How does India monitor development requirements and development performance of 2 OEM's when Indian fast jet designers may have no experience or understanding of what the developers are doing or why they are doing it? It's a bit like asking a 10 year old to assess how well 2 mathematics undergraduates are progressing at individually solving a mathematical problem.

1. Its not Fast Jet but Low Bypass Turbofan.
2. Design is not the Problem but Manufacturing is.
3. There are atmost 5 countries with the capability of those very same 1980s-level Engine Manufacturing capability. You sound as if dozens of countries have it. Chinese didn't had it even recently despite larger economy and advanced manufacturing capabilities.
4. DRDO wouldn't come until this far with Dry Kaveri running if they don't even know some advanced level of LBTF understanding. You sound as if Top Brass including DRDO GTRE are dumb as rocks on the level of Saudi and other Middle East countries and the Dry Kaveri on the Test Bed is some Computer Graphics.

 

[Spitfire IX]

It's not just IDRW but a lot of other publications are reporting the same & have been doing so for the past 2 years.

What's more a senior DRDO official has been seconded to the Indian embassy in Paris for more than a year & counting . Why ? I've no clue but it's anyone's guess.

It's my hunch that India's bargaining not just for the technology of the 120 KN TF with full IPR but for what's going into the SCAF namely an variable / alternate cycle engine.

That's tomorrow's technology & that's also the reason RR , SAFRAN & GE are in such a generous mood because they're moving on to the next gen which renders whatever they have today obsolete within the next 1-2 decades.

With generous here describing their willingness to share the know how & the know why not in terms of the cost which will still be a pretty packet. Having said that GE is still sticking to its guns of limited ToT with no IPR which sort of rules them out but which doesn't bother them a bit.

Left to ourselves we can develop a F-404 equivalent or something marginally better without outside help except perhaps in consultancy within a decade.

That also seems to be the aim of GTRE which is to get the Kaveri upto the F-404 standard in order for it to be eligible to go into the Mk-1a during the MLU , 15 years from now .

I get your point that the majors may be keen to cash in on 'selling' technology that should soon be superceded by variable cycle engines.

Another 10 years to get Kaveri working reliably? I sense that there are too many people involved who like having a job rather than doing a job. If they delay for a year in admitting that they are stuck and need outside help, they will have their job for a year longer. No chance of losing their job for causing a year's delay to the project, is there?

Has anyone in GTRE ever thought of paying bonuses for getting things done reasonably quickly rather than at a snail's pace?

 

[Spitfire IX]

1. Its not Fast Jet but Low Bypass Turbofan.
2. Design is not the Problem but Manufacturing is.
3. There are atmost 5 countries with the capability of those very same 1980s-level Engine Manufacturing capability. You sound as if dozens of countries have it. Chinese didn't had it even recently despite larger economy and advanced manufacturing capabilities.
4. DRDO wouldn't come until this far with Dry Kaveri running if they don't even know some advanced level of LBTF understanding. You sound as if Top Brass including DRDO GTRE are dumb as rocks on the level of Saudi and other Middle East countries and the Dry Kaveri on the Test Bed is some Computer Graphics.

1 Agreed
2 If it is just materials and manufacturing know how that are lacking, there is no need for a foreign OEM to design/help design a 110kN engine. India can design the engine itself and buy in consultancy to set up manufacturing
Materials: I don't know. Who is responsible for materials development? What are they supposed to have developed and by when? Did they succeed or fail? If they failed, what steps were taken to rectify the problem?
3 I think there are 3 countries able to make high quality low bypass turbofans. I do not include Russia and China among them
4 I don't think GTRE are dumb. I think they know less than they should and turnout a low performance - I think partly due to poor management, not having had access to the materials they should, lack of proper test equipment, probably sub-optimal work ethics and practices etc.

 

[Azaad]

I get your point that the majors may be keen to cash in on 'selling' technology that should soon be superceded by variable cycle engines.

Another 10 years to get Kaveri working reliably? I sense that there are too many people involved who like having a job rather than doing a job. If they delay for a year in admitting that they are stuck and need outside help, they will have their job for a year longer. No chance of losing their job for causing a year's delay to the project, is there?

Has anyone in GTRE ever thought of paying bonuses for getting things done reasonably quickly rather than at a snail's pace?

DRDO / GTRE have recently sought funds from the MoD to set up a 120 KN capacity high altitude engine test bed . The Kaveri Dry version will be ready by next year which will go into the UCAV Ghatak which is expected to be flight ready in the next 4-5 years post which it'd take another 5 years to be certified .

Now GTRE has the option of going in for development of the AFB version & begin testing it a year or two after the flight trails off the Ghatak. Alternatively & this seems to be the path GTRE is taking they will try to develop the AFB within the next 2-3 years post which they'd flight test on a Flight Test Bed .

As per reports in the public domain they're asking for an LCA to function as the FTB but as of now nothing's confirmed nor do we have an FTB. This is a severely under funded program & the reason it's under funded is coz GTRE didn't deliver as per what they'd committed & the reason GTRE didn't deliver is because they're under funded among other reasons.

Hence as long as we don't resolve this Catch 22 situation , we'd be running around in circles. This has little or nothing to do with your suppositions. There seem to be strong reports suggesting either later this year or early next year we should be seeing an announcement towards the revival of the Kaveri program. Fingers crossed.

 

[AGNI 6 ICBM]

It's not just IDRW but a lot of other publications are reporting the same & have been doing so for the past 2 years.

What's more a senior DRDO official has been seconded to the Indian embassy in Paris for more than a year & counting . Why ? I've no clue but it's anyone's guess.

It's my hunch that India's bargaining not just for the technology of the 120 KN TF with full IPR but for what's going into the SCAF namely an variable / alternate cycle engine.

That's tomorrow's technology & that's also the reason RR , SAFRAN & GE are in such a generous mood because they're moving on to the next gen which renders whatever they have today obsolete within the next 1-2 decades.

With generous here describing their willingness to share the know how & the know why not in terms of the cost which will still be a pretty packet. Having said that GE is still sticking to its guns of limited ToT with no IPR which sort of rules them out but which doesn't bother them a bit.

Left to ourselves we can develop a F-404 equivalent or something marginally better without outside help except perhaps in consultancy within a decade.

That also seems to be the aim of GTRE which is to get the Kaveri upto the F-404 standard in order for it to be eligible to go into the Mk-1a during the MLU , 15 years from now .

DRDO definition of 5 th gen & 6 th gen engines....
Isn't single crystal blade tech achieved by DRDO ? Are they eyeing CMC blades ?



DRDO is working on TVC nozzle & Fluid thrust vectoring nozzle !


View: https://x.com/Varun55484761/status/1813503242426347884

So 110-120 KN engine is almost "5.5 OR Sixth gen engine"



FAN PRESSURE RATIO is 5 -> Indicates AMCA engine will be in between 5th & 6th gen engines



FCAS engine workshare is already disturbuted

IMO DRDO is trying to get tech of Combuster,HP Turbine & Afterburner from france and will add locally developed TVC nozzle to it .....




And might develop VARIABLE cycle engine in future by taking 120 kn engine as base


Is DRDO really pushing for TOT of VARIABLE cycle engine ?

 

[Spitfire IX]

DRDO / GTRE have recently sought funds from the MoD to set up a 120 KN capacity high altitude engine test bed . The Kaveri Dry version will be ready by next year which will go into the UCAV Ghatak which is expected to be flight ready in the next 4-5 years post which it'd take another 5 years to be certified .

Now GTRE has the option of going in for development of the AFB version & begin testing it a year or two after the flight trails off the Ghatak. Alternatively & this seems to be the path GTRE is taking they will try to develop the AFB within the next 2-3 years post which they'd flight test on a Flight Test Bed .

As per reports in the public domain they're asking for an LCA to function as the FTB but as of now nothing's confirmed nor do we have an FTB. This is a severely under funded program & the reason it's under funded is coz GTRE didn't deliver as per what they'd committed & the reason GTRE didn't deliver is because they're under funded among other reasons.

Hence as long as we don't resolve this Catch 22 situation , we'd be running around in circles. This has little or nothing to do with your suppositions. There seem to be strong reports suggesting either later this year or early next year we should be seeing an announcement towards the revival of the Kaveri program. Fingers crossed.

Good to hear that funds have been sought for a high altitude test bed. It puzzles me that, knowing the dry Kaveri would need testing, it was not done earlier.

I see no reason not to test dry and wet thrust versions of Kaveri at the same time if the wet version is ready for testing before testing the dry version is finished.

FTB: A few years ago I suggested India should get a couple of A340 (around 170kN thrust engines), convert one of them into an FTB and keep the other for spares. They were more or less being given away @ $25 million a pop. Now Mk2 is many years late, testing a new engine on a single-engined aircraft seems less than desirable to me. Opportunity missed?

Funding problem: in GTRE's shoes I would have said I could not be sure to deliver at the funding level offered, so would need a higher funding level guaranteed before I took the job on. I would also look for efficiencies to try to reduce internal costs/increase productivity so that if GOI/MOD would not increase funding it might be possible to take the job on at the lower funding level and make a reasonable profit.

Catch 22 situation- there may be 2 components

1 Insufficient funding leading to failure to deliver, leading to reluctance to fund
2 Inefficiency leading to failure to deliver, leading to reluctance to fund
3 Mixture of above leading to failure to deliver, leading to reluctance to fund

It will be good to hear of Kaveri AFB version being revived. I thought it already was!

 

[SlayingHell]

View attachment 10325
DRDO definition of 5 th gen & 6 th gen engines....
Isn't single crystal blade tech achieved by DRDO ? Are they eyeing CMC blades ?



DRDO is working on TVC nozzle & Fluid thrust vectoring nozzle !


View: https://x.com/Varun55484761/status/1813503242426347884

So 110-120 KN engine is almost "5.5 OR Sixth gen engine"



FAN PRESSURE RATIO is 5 -> Indicates AMCA engine will be in between 5th & 6th gen enginesView attachment 10328



FCAS engine workshare is already disturbuted
View attachment 10330
IMO DRDO is trying to get tech of Combuster,HP Turbine & Afterburner from france and will add locally developed TVC nozzle to it .....



View attachment 10331
And might develop VARIABLE cycle engine in future by taking 120 kn engine as base


Is DRDO really pushing for TOT of VARIABLE cycle engine ?
View attachment 10332

A Fifth Generation Engine's design philosophy is also rooted in stealth. One that minimized Radar Return even after implementation of S-Ducts.
If we take a Hypothetical F414 Engine Design and manufacture it with the same manufacturing technologies of F-135, even if it supposedly reaches the Turbine Inlet Temperature, it can't be considered a true stealth fighter jet engine.
There are only 2 true stealth fighter jet engines they are F119 and F135. There are designed from ground up structurally different to minimize the radar returns.
So, I think in addition to Manufacturing Technologies like CMC, physical design of such is also important to be considered as true stealth engine.
This doesn't refer to Nozzles, but rather the core internal layouts.

 

[Azaad]

Good to hear that funds have been sought for a high altitude test bed. It puzzles me that, knowing the dry Kaveri would need testing, it was not done earlier.

The Kaveri dry version is meant to go into the UCAV Ghatak which is still to receive the go ahead from the CCS post which funds will be allocated to build the prototypes. There's no other aerial vehicle it can power.

I see no reason not to test dry and wet thrust versions of Kaveri at the same time if the wet version is ready for testing before testing the dry version is finished.

That's the plan or so is our assumption. Let's see what lies in store.

FTB: A few years ago I suggested India should get a couple of A340 (around 170kN thrust engines), convert one of them into an FTB and keep the other for spares. They were more or less being given away @ $25 million a pop. Now Mk2 is many years late, testing a new engine on a single-engined aircraft seems less than desirable to me. Opportunity missed?

If I were to keep tabs of opportunities missed I can fill up this entire page & there would be others who could fill up a dozen more pages.

Funding problem: in GTRE's shoes I would have said I could not be sure to deliver at the funding level offered, so would need a higher funding level guaranteed before I took the job on. I would also look for efficiencies to try to reduce internal costs/increase productivity so that if GOI/MOD would not increase funding it might be possible to take the job on at the lower funding level and make a reasonable profit.

The total amount spent of the Kaveri project is < hang on > an eye watering ~ INR 2100 crores as on Mar 2020 which comes to less than 250 million USD at today's exchange rates.

Now , I do realise there's plenty of scope to cut wasteful expenditure & improve efficiencies . Hopefully GTRE can take note of your remonstrations & exhibit more responsible behaviour in future.

Catch 22 situation- there may be 2 components

1 Insufficient funding leading to failure to deliver, leading to reluctance to fund
2 Inefficiency leading to failure to deliver, leading to reluctance to fund
3 Mixture of above leading to failure to deliver, leading to reluctance to fund

It will be good to hear of Kaveri AFB version being revived. I thought it already was!

₹11,096 cr. spent on LCA and Kaveri engine projects so far, says govt.

Both face complex technological challenges like advanced avionics, it says

www.thehindu.com