TR Propulsion Systems

[Quasar]

as layman person i can conclude, ukraina bad, ge good, ditch the ukrainians. as nothing happened before with usa supply chain...

bro the issue is this

''Within the scope of the memorandum of understanding, GE and TEI will continue localization negotiations regarding the production, assembly, testing, maintenance, inspection, repair and revision of the LM2500 and LM500 gas turbine families, both within the scope of export programs and programs in Turkey. The memorandum also includes opportunities to involve TEI in various design processes for potential naval programs.''

 

[mulj]

bro the issue is this

''Within the scope of the memorandum of understanding, GE and TEI will continue localization negotiations regarding the production, assembly, testing, maintenance, inspection, repair and revision of the LM2500 and LM500 gas turbine families, both within the scope of export programs and programs in Turkey. The memorandum also includes opportunities to involve TEI in various design processes for potential naval programs.''

i see this as good thing with no issues, even most welcomed development. by information provided your shipping industry matured enough to have cooperation with ukrainians to, more external partners better for you, there are plenty of projects for participation, by scope of needs and future projections i think you need even more partners beside those two which are willing to work with you now. so, i see no reason to ditch ukraine partners even with this signed memorandum Daersan shipyard comes on mind firstly for example.

edit.
i would like to add, not everybody wants top niche product like GE provides, there are plenty of customers who would like less sofisticated products but with good performance/economy ratio, so i would keep open cooperation with ukraina to, anyway todays ships are like lego cubes, highly customized products.

 

[Quasar]

TEI is providing parts to the main engine manufacturers for 50 different types of military and commercial engine programs. So yes there is nothing preventing us from cooperating with Ukraine. All I am telling is, the negotiations with GE marine has changed the structure of potanial cooperation with Ukraine.

 

[Yasar_TR]

TEI is providing parts to the main engine manufacturers for 50 different types of military and commercial engine programs. So yes there is nothing preventing us from cooperating with Ukraine. All I am telling is, the negotiations with GE marine has changed the structure of potanial cooperation with Ukraine.

Exactly,
GE realised that Turkey is going to use Zorya gas turbines, if push comes to shove. They don’t want to lose a customer like Turkey. Especially now we have a lot of say in naval platforms and supplying a number of countries with it.
Now Ukraine knows that they can’t be too comfortable with Zorya either. They need to provide something else to counter GE‘s offer and their established dominance in the field.

 

[Anmdt]

Exactly,
GE realised that Turkey is going to use Zorya gas turbines, if push comes to shove. They don’t want to lose a customer like Turkey. Especially now we have a lot of say in naval platforms and supplying a number of countries with it.
Now Ukraine knows that they can’t be too comfortable with Zorya either. They need to provide something else to counter GE‘s offer and their established dominance in the field.

Told it before, Ukraine's offer has never been that serious from their side in fact it was more Turkey who pushed them to do something on Zorya engines, collaboratively to make it on par (at least slightly) with GE engines by easing integration and maintenance with the reasons i have mentioned above. Their choice in partner is the sole proof of their intentions i think.

 

[Lonewolf]

Gentlemen, I meant to manufacture power turbine blade by the method of used old eastern block countries using forged super alloys with a special method excluding single crystal blade. And we achieved single crystal turbine blade increasing heat and creep resistance wrt Super alloys esp. in TS1400 engine by TUBITAK MAM till to aprox. 1400 °C that is not best but good enough for begining.

And when we come to subject of driving car uphill is only simile for begining of difficult projects with less knowledge and experience has small accelereration maybe zero or minus.
Then after getting basic experience rest is not frightining and generaly fluidy.

Anyway way of speaking is important. I respect all friends opinions and have right the expectance from the dear counterparts.

I think you are writing super alloy in place of directional solidification , as DS is forging product like single crystal , meanwhile super alloy is too general term , single crystal blade is also made from super alloys , it's a common term used for a composition of few elements to reach a specific property can't be achieved through pure metals

 

[TheInsider]

Maintenance is not a big issue for ships "compared to" fighters. TN ships undergo routine maintenance activities every year. 30000 hours for overhauls is adequate. As I said in normal conditions those ships rarely turn on gas turbines. They will use diesel engines and a travel speed of 15-16 knots. How many hours will those turbines run a year? Let's assume for every 10 days at sea turbines work for 1 day. Let's assume ships gets a 6-month deployment per year(which is a lot). Turbines will be working for 18 days. Let's round it up to 20 which will translate into 480 hours per year. And after six months at sea, it will go under maintenance at the dock.

In the end, GE is the best but Zorya is not so far away from GE that it is useless. It is a viable option.

 

[Anmdt]

Maintenance is not a big issue for ships "compared to" fighters. TN ships undergo routine maintenance activities every year. 30000 hours for overhauls is adequate. As I said in normal conditions those ships rarely turn on gas turbines. They will use diesel engines and a travel speed of 15-16 knots. How many hours will those turbines run a year? Let's assume for every 10 days at sea turbines work for 1 day. Let's assume ships gets a 6-month deployment per year(which is a lot). Turbines will be working for 18 days. Let's round it up to 20 which will translate into 480 hours per year. And after six months at sea, it will go under maintenance at the dock.

In the end, GE is the best but Zorya is not so far away from GE that it is useless. It is a viable option

1st, it is really better if you stop talking on stuff you don't really know about. For God's sake.
2nd, there is no warship going through major overhaul every 6 months, yet alone a year. It is once in 2 years for major, sometimes 3 and 1 year for minor that extends to inspection,sometimes carried out without docking. In most times the ships are maintained-repaired en-route during voyage and GE offers good maintenance plans that can be done in tight spaces, Zorya does not.
3rd, if you carefully read the sources you have scanned in an hour before making your "expert statements", you would see interval of maintenance and reliability is highly important for a warship, i am not elaborating this for once
4th, Gas turbines are deployed up to 20% in wartime, 15% in peacetime so your numbers are entirely wrong (you underestimate stuff to prove your point), moreover if the ship has single gas turbine the percentage increases to 30 and 20. Finally, you can not overrule a commander and restrict him by that,if he desires and finds it necessary he runs on gas turbine all the time.
5th, a fighter jet in most flies for 1 day, that is at most, moreover a gas turbine if deployed on a warship runs for days interrupted. Even your 1 day in 10 day does not happen like " Sir, we have filled our quote for gas turbine for this period of 10 days we are going to turn it off for 9 days" or " Sir our quota to use gas turbine is full", there are times it runs for a week non-stop, if not in full power it idles.
6th that is the reason why "marinization term" is made for adaptation of the engines, if you look at the GE's website you will see a note: "this engine is based on this core (aero-derivative) and optimized for naval deployment that requires longer endurance and reliability"
7th Check out MTU's website or any other marine engine producer "maintenance and reliability" is their first attribute to offer. This even proves how important is this.

Yes it is much easier to replace gas turbines on a warship design compared to the fighter jets, even after it is built and installed, but this does not mean maintenance interval and reliability is not important. Don't confuse these two matters.

Check out the graph below and conclude how much utilization is required in speeds beyond 20 knots in sum, for war and peacetime operations (this graph also discloses speed regime selection of the commander). I will not disclose the numbers for Milgem's requirement here, or will not further elaborate the informations.

Beyond 20 knots gas turbine utilization: wartime requirement beyond 50%
Beyond 20 knots gas turbine utilization: peacetime requirement beyond 40%
Beyond 20 knots gas turbine utilization: actual usage for an unknown role nearing 20%.

 

[Quasar]

From C4Defence's interview with TEI General Manager Prof. Dr. Mahmut Faruk Akşit

''The biggest export obstacle for the T129 is its engine.
Our TS1400 engine for Gökbey is a civilian engine. That's how the project is set up. There are differences between a civilian engine and a military engine. The power classes are the same, the footprint is almost the same. Our engine is actually – we call it form fit – in a form than can fit inside the Atak helicopter and power it, but it does not have military features. This conversion needs to be done i.e a military engine derived from the TS1400. We submitted our project proposal regarding this. We haven't signed it yet, but as soon as our government gives us this task, we will quickly create a military derivative of this engine."

 

[TNAHN]

From C4Defence's interview with TEI General Manager Prof. Dr. Mahmut Faruk Akşit

''The biggest export obstacle for the T129 is its engine.
Our TS1400 engine for Gökbey is a civilian engine. That's how the project is set up. There are differences between a civilian engine and a military engine. The power classes are the same, the footprint is almost the same. Our engine is actually – we call it form fit – in a form than can fit inside the Atak helicopter and power it, but it does not have military features. This conversion needs to be done i.e a military engine derived from the TS1400. We submitted our project proposal regarding this. We haven't signed it yet, but as soon as our government gives us this task, we will quickly create a military derivative of this engine."

We can't export the t129 because of the engine.
and we still haven't booted to the military version of the ts1400?
I'm really curious what the government is waiting for.

 

[Quasar]

We can't export the t129 because of the engine.
and we still haven't booted to the military version of the ts1400?
I'm really curious what the government is waiting for.

ı will not act as if have some thecnical knowledge on the issue but still guess it is safe to assume that once you have the engine it should not be that hard to convert it to millitary one. but ı agree we should make haste and ASAP start testing millitary version of ts1400 on t129 which re-assures the potentail customers that t 129 is a viable alternative to whatever is offered in the market but still we should also accept the fact that this testing processs may take quite a long time.

 

[Pilatino]

ı will not act as if have some thecnical knowledge on the issue but still guess it is safe to assume that once you have the engine it should not be that hard to convert it to millitary one. but ı agree we should make haste and ASAP start testing millitary version of ts1400 on t129 which re-assures the potentail customers that t 129 is a viable alternative to whatever is offered in the market but still we should also accept the fact that this testing processs may take quite a long time.

I think there won't be a new engine version for T129 cuz we make it under licence. I'm expecting to see a bigger and better engine for our next projects like TS3000 for T929 (for us) and maybe TS2000 for T629 (export)

 

[Abdelaziz]

Ts1400 will be qualified by 2024 ... T129 licence will expire by 2028 ..what is the point of making an engine specially for licensed product that will end after 4 years

 

[RadarGudumluMuhimmat]

Ts1400 will be qualified by 2024 ... T129 licence will expire by 2028 ..what is the point of making an engine specially for licensed product that will end after 4 years

You are not building an engine for a licensed product helicopter that will expire in 4 years, you are building a turboshaft engine, 2 of which can lift a 6-ton millitary helicopter.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Anmdt you have made some excellent detailed points, and you have expanded well in the domain I just left as "MTBO threshold".

There is lot that fills beneath it in a relatively more mundane but still important way....especially accounting for operation intensity and system size/power at large compared to say aviation (AF in military).

I would like to add one more thing that may be of help to audience to understand overhaul number of 30,000 hours might sound really good....but one must consider what overlaps with a 50,000 hour one....and that they are both driven by Sigma (failure/issue rate) below them (that you also want to have as few as possible...and who's prevalence accounts for the largest number i.e MTBO given the nature of overhaul).

i.e there are things hidden when treating numbers like 30,000 and 50,000 in purely linear way...since time is linear. But one most consider the other factors of issues they "blanket".

If we take it as a normal distribution for example (and for illustrative purpose only, since the bound, distr, standard deviation etc are longer topics to get into):

One can consider what each respective average gas turbine has "faced" negatively (especially past just overhaul binary, one can conceptualise the distribution areas to rougly represent the underlying factors like failures and anomalies).

Especially relative to each other (red shaded area) at the 30,000 hour stage (pic 1 when half the zoryas have now already needed overhauling) and 50,000 hour stage ( pic 2 when the same thing can now be said of the GE turbines).

===========================

I would like to clarify that I hold the zorya gas turbines in good repute. They are not "bad" or even "average" by any stretch of the imagination....given the discipline of gas turbines to begin with and the contexts governing these.

Almost any country would be lucky to have zorya level realised and integrated in their defence industry...it would be very capable sound floorboard to develop further.

They have achieved quite a lot relative to cards they got dealt during Soviet era and then post-Soviet ukraine.

 

[TheInsider]

Ts1400 will be qualified by 2024 ... T129 licence will expire by 2028 ..what is the point of making an engine specially for licensed product that will end after 4 years

T-629 will replace T-129. TS-1400 can power T-629 after 2028. Military derivative of the TS-1400 doesn't need to get the civilian EASA certification so it won't be certified it will be qualified.

 

[Abdelaziz]

T-629 will replace T-129. TS-1400 can power T-629 after 2028. Military derivative of the TS-1400 doesn't need to get the civilian EASA certification so it won't be certified it will be qualified.

I didnt say it needs to be certified

 

[TheInsider]

I mean things will be faster. We don't need to wait again for 5 years. T-629 will use the T-625s transmission so this is also another bonus.

 

[Abdelaziz]

U r right .. studies should be done for a military version for t629

I mean things will be faster. We don't need to wait again for 5 years. T-629 will use the T-625s transmission so this is also another bonus.

 

[Anmdt]

Almost any country would be lucky to have zorya level realised and integrated in their defence industry...it would be very capable sound floorboard to develop further.

When it comes to these terms i am totally agreeing with you. Nothing can replace an engine you can manufacture and maintain independently. Moreover the door was open for cooperation with Ukranians at greater extends, but they have treated Turkey as if a customer who can directly buy and use, but not as partner when it comes to negotiations. Typically Turkish Navy who had a culture, set their own rules/criteria ( i can detail these further) which has required involvement of Turkish side at greater extends and those negotiations have not propelled further. Let's see whether they will reconsider it on 2nd batch of corvettes or simply struggle to integrate the engine on their own.

And we have come to a situation which GE has made an offer (both seeing demand of Turkish Navy and possible exports) that Ukranians couldn't make.