L&T Proposes Fully Indigenous 110kN Engine Development for Tejas Mk2 and AMCA, Seeks Merit-based Approach Over 'L1 Syndrome' for Success

Leading Indian engineering and defence conglomerate Larsen & Toubro (L&T) has outlined a significant proposal for the domestic development of a powerful 110 kilonewton (kN) thrust jet engine.

Jayant Damodar Patil, the head of L&T's aerospace and defence division, stated that L&T, potentially in collaboration with other private Indian firms, has the capability to create this engine, crucial for powering India's future fighter aircraft like the Tejas Mk2 and the Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Mr. Patil emphasised that success hinges on the government adopting a procurement strategy that values technical capability and innovation above simply selecting the lowest bidder – a practice often referred to as the "L1 syndrome".

He suggested that lessons learned from the earlier Kaveri engine project could provide a valuable foundation for this new initiative.

The Kaveri engine, initiated in the 1980s by the Defence Research and Development Organisation's (DRDO) Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), aimed to power the indigenous Tejas Light Combat Aircraft (LCA). However, after significant investment (estimated over ₹2,000 crore, or about $240 million) and decades of work, the project faced setbacks.

It achieved only 75-80kN of thrust, falling short of the 90kN needed for the Tejas Mk1, and encountered issues with afterburners and weight. Consequently, India chose General Electric's F404 engines for the Tejas Mk1 fleet.

Despite these challenges, Mr. Patil believes the Kaveri program built essential expertise in areas like metallurgy and compressor design. "The Kaveri has provided a base to develop a new engine entirely in the country," he remarked.

The proposed 110kN engine is specifically targeted for the upcoming Tejas Mk2, a more advanced version of the LCA, and the ambitious twin-engine AMCA stealth fighter program, both central to the Indian Air Force's future fleet structure.

Developing such an engine requires mastering advanced technologies like single-crystal turbine blades and sophisticated afterburners. India has gained some experience in these fields through the development of the Kaveri's non-afterburning ('dry') variant, which is now slated to power unmanned systems like the Ghatak UCAV (Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle).

To overcome the hurdles faced by the state-run GTRE working largely in isolation on the Kaveri, Mr. Patil advocates for a consortium model. This could involve major private players like Mahindra Aerospace, Tata Advanced Systems, and Godrej Aerospace pooling their respective expertise and resources.

He stressed that government backing focused on merit, rather than just the lowest cost, is essential to attract private sector talent and investment for such a complex undertaking. "If the government backs merit over L1... a pool of talent can be brought together," Patil stated, suggesting this approach could foster faster innovation compared to the previous state-led model.

However significant challenges remain. Industry experts estimate that developing a new 110kN engine could require investments between ₹15,000 to ₹20,000 crore ($1.8 to $2.4 billion) over a 10-15 year period. Furthermore, India needs to advance its capabilities in critical 'hot section' engine technologies and address a potential shortage of specialised engineers.

While a consortium could mitigate some risks, sustained government commitment and potentially strategic foreign partnerships for specific technologies – recalling past discussions like the potential Kaveri-Safran collaboration – might still be necessary.

The Indian government's response to L&T's specific proposal is awaited. However, the initiative aligns well with the national 'Atmanirbhar Bharat' (Self-Reliant India) policy, which strongly emphasizes indigenous manufacturing, particularly in the defence sector. The DRDO itself is reportedly pursuing advanced aero-engine development, indicating governmental focus in this area.

If supported, L&T believes its proposal, leveraging its existing facilities and experience, could potentially lead to an engine prototype around 2035, fitting the timeline for the AMCA program and marking a major step towards self-sufficiency in critical defence technology.

 

HAL Leverages 3D Scanned HF-24 Marut Structure with Tejas Mk1 Elements for New HLFT-42 Trainer, Avoiding HJT-36 Like Clean-sheet Design

India, Sri Lanka sign 5-year defence MoU during PM Modi’s Colombo visit

[RG]

A push for this model would be the best thing that could happen. A consortium approach with work share is needed to propel and achieve the critical technology required for engine development. The government must set a budget for private sector R&D, plus GTRE should be part of this consortium providing existing know-how and work closely with the private sector to achieve this objective.

 

[Akshat]

Why should Indian taxpayers fund Private Companies. They should fund themselves as they are keeping any profit.

Why should taxpayers fund them? Because these companies can deliver the product on time and in budget for our forces unlike the DPSUs who not only overcharge, but also refuse to deliver anything on time and then charge extra for their own delays?

 

[Akshat]

Don't compare the US's $800B budget to India's $70B budget. India needs new weapons where most of the money is spent. Also, if large private companies need to operate in this field, they need to invest their money in R&D just like SSS defence did for its rifles or any other major consumable goods manufacturers did for their products.

Money ain't the issue. Lets assume private companies are ready to do that as well (though it will be GoI who will be the ultimate loser by not funding private companies upfront as the cost of capital is the lowest for GoI). But GoI should at least open the sector up for them. Say Adani is ready to invest in jet engine manufacturing and R&D tomorrow. But he doesn't know what is the thrust required, what are the dimensions of the jet which will have this engine, what is the desired fuel consumption, what sort of maintenance facilities will be available etc. All these things can only be decided by the IAF and only then can anyone make the equipment for the defense sector. So unless and until explicit tenders are issued which are open to the private sector, nothing can be expected from the private companies.

 

[Akshat]

Right... expect the government to invest billions in unproven Pvt sector companies.

Well they are already wasting billions in proven failure DPSUs.

 

[Akshat]

Arre bhai... They invest in companies which have a history of in delivering world class products... where is the history of Indian large Pvt companies in developing even a small to moderate indigenous product? Even WhAP and ATAGS was designed by govt entities.... the private entities are just manufacturing partners.

Well private companies are delivering made in India drones, for example. Or BPJs. Or scopes. Or armored vehicles. Given the fact that till about a decade back they were not even allowed to deliver anything and they have no funding from GoI, they are doing rather great.

And coming to your claim of delivering world class products, it has been proven indeed that DPSUs definitely can't deliver anything on time, forget being world class or not. But GoI is still funding them. So at the least stop doing that, open the tenders to private sector and use the money saved in buying more stuff from those private companies.

 

[Akshat]

So long as the mindset of L1 in government procurement procedure, enshrined in GFR, is adhered to, quality is bound to suffer. There is no need to elaborate the reason for the acceptance of compromised quality at the L-1 price in order to avoid CAG and other agencies' scrutiny and subsequent harassment. But the casualty is robust quality. Unfortunately, no one is bothered from the procurement agency, supplying agency and user department.

In his early days as PM, he showed his intention to tweak the tendering process but dropped the idea.

I think you need to brush up your concepts first buddy. Quality ain't compromised for L1 concept. The point is, first the military gives it's requirements. Any participant who comes forward is then measured against the requirements of the military. Only once someone clears the qualitative requirements does the L1 comes in. L1 is only applied among the people who clear the requirements.

In fact, in case of R&D, L1 isn't even the issue. Problem is the nomination concept. GoI doesn't even apply L1 in case of DRDO/DPSUs. It just gives the project to them. There is no L1, no L2, nothing. Not even a tender. Military asks for something, and GoI just calls DRDO and asks them to quote the amount and take the project. So where is the L1 in this process?

 

[Akshat]

L&T is supposed to request a research fund with the govt getting proprietary rights with some percentage retaining with L&T for proposed engine and don't depend this development related to purchase of any aircraft.

This fund, being govt based, in future once it is developed, if used anywhere, then its cost computation will be based on total cost and some percentage L&T will get out of it.

Instead, the companies expect Govt to pay higher money even for R&D and still wants to retain proprietary with itself and always next time asking higher funds. This is not fair.

Firstly, that is how it works. Ever worked in a product development based company (not product based)? If a client asks for a product, he has to pay upfront the cost of the development. Some margin is kept, of course, till the end. But bulk of the money comes up front. So if GoI wants the private companies to make something, then GoI has to pay. That's what happens in any capitalist society, from US to EU to Israel to Japan. Governments pay.

But even more importantly, first the government should allow the companies to participate. Right now even if L&T wants to make an engine and invest it's own money, it can't. Because GoI has not issued any tender and hence L&T doesn't know what kind of engine (with exact specs) GoI needs. So it simply can't make anything.

 

[Akshat]

The MOD is damn confused about what it wants... The government wants a world-class product but does not want to spend money... It's understandable because of PSUs not delivering but over-promising, plus the red tape of babus... What we need is out-of-the-box thinking and proper execution and vision... Rajnath Singh is a good DM, but he is old and his process of working is old school... We need another Manohar Parikar who can envision and find solutions and not get lost in problems like Rajnath Singh...

Oh come on. Truth is that Manohar ji was just overhyped while it is Rajnath who is the true master here. Think hard...can you name even one achievement of Mr. Manohar in his ~3 years? One achievement which actually changed anything on the ground in a big way? You will be hard pressed and will come up with nothing. On the other hand, Mr. Singh has increased our indigenous procurement from some 40% to nearly 70% now. 25% of our R&D budget now goes to private entities. We are now inducting more from them then ever before, and the big ticket items have in fact just been awarded to them (C295, ATAGS, UAVs etc.) so their actual share will now go up. Trust me, Rajnath is a class apart from Mr. Parikar.

 

[sujith sudhakaran]

Rather than blindly investing in the private sector, the government should create a grant that would enable private companies to get tech and money which the government could monitor and partially own the tech developed through this grant. You can't expect public taxpayer money to be used to fund private R&D with no return.

 

[hector1001]

Why should taxpayers fund them? Because these companies can deliver the product on time and in budget for our forces unlike the DPSUs who not only overcharge, but also refuse to deliver anything on time and then charge extra for their own delays?

So not only do Indian taxpayers fund these private companies - we also let them keep all profits.
It's win win situation for these companies. They have nothing to lose.
There has to be a better way.

 

[lee]

I appreciate the L&T Chief confidently assuring that the Pvt sector is fully capable of producing the Jet Engine with the relevant power. However, I would not like to belittle the efforts of the Kaveri team till now. They have struggled & built a strong foundation or a base on which further refinement is possible which will result in success. The other aspect is, the Government's approach in following L1. The guideline to follow L1 is a guideline for prudence whilst handling Public Cash. That cannot be faulted. However, that is a guideline, does not mean, it is sacrosanct & should not be broken. At the Government level, it can be waived off.
I am sure, we will get the Engine for AMCA & TEDBF also. Jai Hind.

 

[Rarnsor]

L1 syndrome is a very big problem in tech institutes like ISRO and DRDO. Apart from this, there is a problem with the typical mentality that people in these organisations have towards development and innovation. They don't want to steer away to something new because the available technology works just fine. Further, bureaucracy makes it very difficult to put forth ideas and to get clearance to proceed with them. Because of this, many new talented scientists and engineers leave these organisations after just two or three years of working. Only privatization will pave the way towards innovation in the aerospace and defence sector. Relying on already established government organisations will not help in fast development activities.

 

[P.K Senapati]

Nobody stops improving Kaveri derivative or Kaveri based 110 or 120kN engine development for future application.

AMCA is very important for defence. Let us not do any experiment and take another 30 years to deliver an engine for it.

Better go ahead with GE for 110kN joint development for AMCA.

Kaveri based 110kN if and when it comes can be used for TEDBF.

 

[Amol Tope]

Close down inefficient government departments like DRDO, PSUs like HAL and use those funds for this research. Taxpayers will bless the government if done so!

 

[Bhishma]

Buddy, that logic is true when it comes to exceptions. Of course, there will be one or 2 bright students in every class. There will also be a few very bad students even in IITs. But on an average, the people who got into the IITs are there because they worked hard and had the IQ as a teenager. Some will obviously slip and some will obviously rise. But your chances of finding the best talent are always high in IITs, and the best talent always will be in IITs.

Now coming to the 'great feats' in missile tech. What so called great feats? We have no ATGMs, no Manpads, no cruise missiles, no ALBMs, no AShMs etc. Our SAMs and BVRAAMs are similar to 90s era tech (at least in terms of range). Pakistan had MIRVs before we did, and North Korea has higher range ballistic missiles than we do.

So what exactly is the great feat in missile tech? Can you name even one single missile of DRDO (no foreign assistance) which is a world leader in it's category and has earned any foreign orders while facing competition from Russia or West or Israel? Even a single one?

But on an average, the people who got into the IITs are there because they worked hard and had the IQ as a teenager. Some will obviously slip and some will obviously rise. But your chances of finding the best talent are always high in IITs, and the best talent always will be in IITs.

aggregation is applicable when you are talking at the macro level. For example if you want to compare 1000 companies with IITs and 1000 without. At the micro level ie we are talking very specific to DRDO, this argument is not applicable.

Can you name even one single missile of DRDO (no foreign assistance)

Two interesting points emerge from your "no foreign assistance" - By this logic we can safely disregard American aerospace/nuclear because of assistance from German Jews & ex-Nazis, China's because of assistance from Russians & stealing from others. Second point is, if we can achieve something with foreign assistance, why do we really need IITs? Does the enemy care if our missile if coming 100% ingenuously or with foreign assistance or with IIT development?

Pakistan had MIRVs before we did

News to me. Last time I saw that, their claims were debunked

North Korea has higher range ballistic missiles than we do.

Problem is our immediate threat is Pak,Ch for which we have the range to cover. To match NoKo's range, we will have to antagonise the West. So are you actually advocating that we should develop capability that would prevent us from importing from the West? I like this idea.

We have no ATGMs, no Manpads, no cruise missiles, no ALBMs, no AShMs etc. Our SAMs and BVRAAMs are similar to 90s era tech (at least in terms of range).

Nag, vshorad, nirbhay, rudram2, LRAshM, Brahmos. Astra mk3 with 350km range - is it 90s tech to you? Akash can track 4 targets simultaneously, which 90s tech can track like that?

 

[Bhishma]

ISRO is one of a kind with a very focussed and specalised field and truth be told rockets and their accessories are relatively simpler to design and fabricate unlike the different products and other weapon systems which are more complex. So it's kind of daft to use this argument to buttress your pov.

Your rebuttal makes zero sense. Your original point is only IITians can achieve and the rest cannot. If they are able to achieve it in ISRO then no reason they cant achieve in other organizations.

 

[Wonder Boy]

Want to hear a funny point? India can fund total R&D for an engine by just stopping 3 central freebies schemes, and 3 state funded freebies schemes - 1 in Bengal, 1 in UP and 1 in Karnataka. And by whole R&D I mean the amount Pratt & Whitney spend to make the engine for F21, but alas in a democracy of stupid freebies based population it's a dream only.

 

[JaiBharat]

Hire best brains in the world(Germany, France, USA etc)-aerospace Engineering, material sciences, mechanicaleng, combustioneng, control system engineering, CFD, and importantly government support and also align top Indian universities

 

[Rational Guy]

ISRO is one of a kind with a very focussed and specalised field and truth be told rockets and their accessories are relatively simpler to design and fabricate unlike the different products and other weapon systems which are more complex. So it's kind of daft to use this argument to buttress your pov.

Even then rockets aren't easy especially those which can carry thousands of tonnes of payload and before you give example of private companies remember those private companies were built on a base and engineers from gov organizations of their respective countries.

 

[Pankajrai]

In today's era engine making is one of the toughest technology and hence India must consider merit over L1 bidder. The fear of L& T can easily be understood as they are investing a Gigantic amount in the project. GOI must acknowledge the criticallity of the project and must ensure L&T .The success would be guranteed if the whole project comes under PMO as PPP model .

 

[Ssshadri]

It is foolish to say “why should public/ tax payers money be given to private sector, Proposal of L&T is admirable. Source of funds is unimportant. End result matters most. This is how China progressed. Once successful colllection of taxes will be the ROI .

 

[K V Krishna Rao]

Before talking big, companies should first inform Indian public about their own contributions in the area of aero engines. Many small private companies have worked with GTRE to make the Kaveri. Some large companies now want to muscle into this and other areas using their size ignoring the efforts of many small companies. IAF and the Government should not disproportionately benefit big players.

 

[Yogi]

Please read this book - FREEDOM’s FORGE by Arthur Herman. During World War ll - 1939 to 1934 - USA manufactured all of the weapons required during war. This book tells the complete story.
“”— Tanks - 86000, Trucks - 2500000, Jeeps- 500000, Fighter Planes - 286000, Naval Vessels - 8800, Merchant Ships - 3600, Machine Guns - 2600000, Arsenals for Armaments - 41 Billion.
If America can do all these with very few people, India has all capabilities and man power. We can do much better.

 

[aeroindia]

A private sector consortium is the way to go. Please invite grads of NITs and other instituting like IIM-B. Let IITians be busy with Zepto, Zomato, Blinkit etc as they are most needed yo timely feed the consortium in their mission.

 

[vvnandi]

If engine will take 10 to 15 for 5th gen world would have reached 7th gen or who know a war would have started and keeping hope for long time in airforce .rather if you tune Kaveri for getting sucess and side by can try new engine and take help of isro drdo and hal involved in engine creation