The attempt was to power the Light Combat Aircrafts (LCAs) with indigenously developed engines.
Although as much as Rs 1,892 crores and two decades were spent on the project, the country has ended up buying General Electric (GE) engines at a cost of Rs 883 crore to power the LCAs, points out the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), deploring that the cost of the project has overshot its budget by 642 per cent without any perceptible results.
The CAG comes down hard on the Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE) in its 2010-11 report, for failing to develop the Kaveri engine to the LCA’s specifications despite almost two decades of research at a cost of several crores and then finally opting for a joint venture (JV) with a foreign partner, when the purpose was indigenisation.
It recalls that the Kaveri Engine Development Project (KEDP) was sanctioned in March 1989 at a cost of `382.81 crore, and the probable date of completion (PDC) was December 1996.
The GTRE, it says, later secured an extension till March 2000, but when it could not meet this deadline as well, it was given time till December 2004.
This was again extended to December 2009. When this target too was not achieved the company opted for a JV with a foreign firm, CAG observes. Over the years it has only met two out of the six milestones prescribed even after delaying the project for 12 years, it regrets.
The project underwent five revisions of cost, and saw a 1,013 per cent rise in its foreign exchange element since inception.
Pointing out several deficiencies in the prototype of the Kaveri engine developed by the GTRE, CAG says that although it should not weigh over 1100 kgs, the first assembled Kaveri K1 engine weighed around 1423.78 kgs and the GTRE has not been able to bring it below 1235 kgs.
There has also not been much progress in developing the compressor, turbine and engine control systems, it adds.
CAG has made its displeasure clear with the monitoring agencies , the Aero-Engine Development Board (AEDB) , the Programme Management Board (PMB) and the Project Management Board (PJMB), noting that AEDB meetings were not held once in six months as required, but were delayed for between three to 12 months.
