Chinese Engine Development

latenlazy said:

I'll agree with you there, but it takes just one or two production problems to hinder an entire assembly line. I have no doubt Liming is ready to make commercial turbofans. It's the question of whether they can make reliable military grade turbofans that's the question.

Click to expand...

I think it may need decades to prove the reliability of an aeroengine, and that's why a new engine will never be allowed on Air Force One. I think the Chinese uses AL-31s on their precious prototypes of J-15 and J-20 just for the same reason.

As for the reliability of Taihang, I'm under the impression from these fanboys' forums that the mass produced J-11Bs with WS-10As have been received by PLAAF since 2009 and there hasn't had any new problems reported so far.

ReneDad said:

I think it may need decades to prove the reliability of an aeroengine, and that's why a new engine will never be allowed on Air Force One. I think the Chinese uses AL-31s on their precious prototypes of J-15 and J-20 just for the same reason.

As for the reliability of Taihang, I'm under the impression from these fanboys' forums that the mass produced J-11Bs with WS-10As have been received by PLAAF since 2009 and there hasn't had any new problems reported so far.

Click to expand...

News goes back and forth, and no one has a really good handle of what's going on. I'm a bit bothered by the lack of new pictures showing continued adoption of Taihang though.

China has been produce parts of ... engines for western manufacturers like...

RR PW & GE since 1980's, remember the 1970's 0.5b pound RR deal of spey MK202?

latenlazy said:

News goes back and forth, and no one has a really good handle of what's going on. I'm a bit bothered by the lack of new pictures showing continued adoption of Taihang though.

Click to expand...

Most probably taihang has encountered problems again. I wonder how is ws-15 going. Its the new hope for chinese turbofan industry (since ws-10 appears to be getting nowhere).

Guys, give us a break! Lack of new pictures of J-11B with taihang means WS-10A got into problem again?

You think those fanboy really that free to take photos for you? Yes, they may do occasionally but J-11B is not some star or new jet that stir enough interest to make them continuous post news of it.

I believe PLA really control most of the leak. They will decide what to leak and some not. From how the J-20 is handled, I strongly believe PLA like us to see what they want us to see and no more.

Deleted

Centrist said:

Well, the fact of the matter is that the 3 latest PLAAF projects, the J-10B, J-15, and J-20 have all reverted back to AL-31. Maybe it will make sense if we put it into a timeline.

2005-WS-10 completes endurance testing.
2006-WS-10 receives design certification and a small batch are built for evaluation by PLAAF.
2007-First batch of WS-10s rejected due to performance/quality issues.
2008-Second batch of 'improved' WS-10s begin production.
2009-We start seeing WS-10 used on J-11Bs and J-11BSs. Design still not satisfying enough for use on J-15 or reliable enough for J-10.
2010-Third batch of further improved WS-10s produced (We should see them in a few months, used on J-10s and J-15s.

Click to expand...

Again:

J-20 design started many years ago before WS-10a was usable. So AL-31F.
J-10B would require the WS-10a to be modified. Gearbox position needs to be changed. That was what happened when J-10A used AL-31. The rear body may need to be redesigned too.
There is no chance that WS-10a will be on J-15 in the next few years. Designing and testing against salt water erosion is something Chinese has zero experience with.

You need to realize that those "projects" have multi-year timelines. You don't get a new fighter design in a few days, few weeks, or even a few months. Even "small" modifications like J-10B take 2 to 3 years at least. JF-17 was an exception, not a norm (and it still took many years to go from first flight to IOC).

Deleted

Centrist said:

What I am trying to say is that the engine clearly is still not reliable. I know that it would require a redesigned gearbox for the J-10. The redesigned version was shown at the Zhuhai 2008 airshow. That was 3 years ago...we haven't even seen it tested on a J-10 yet. Clearly they are not confident enough to put it on a single engine fighter.

Additionally, so what if the J-15 requires a modified WS-10 (for corrosion resistance), that is not an excuse to not put it on the first prototype. The first prototype isn't going to be taking off from an aircraft carrier, but rather just the inland ski-jump facility. Why is AL-31F used??? Because they don't trust WS-10.

Even with the J-20, you can clearly see that Chengdu slapped SAC in the face. They refused to put SACs engine on it, again, because they don't trust its reliability.

Click to expand...

That's faulty logic there. Not trusting a new engine's reliability doesn't mean it's unreliable.

Centrist said:

What I am trying to say is that the engine clearly is still not reliable. I know that it would require a redesigned gearbox for the J-10. The redesigned version was shown at the Zhuhai 2008 airshow. That was 3 years ago...we haven't even seen it tested on a J-10 yet. Clearly they are not confident enough to put it on a single engine fighter.

Additionally, so what if the J-15 requires a modified WS-10 (for corrosion resistance), that is not an excuse to not put it on the first prototype. The first prototype isn't going to be taking off from an aircraft carrier, but rather just the inland ski-jump facility. Why is AL-31F used??? Because they don't trust WS-10.

Even with the J-20, you can clearly see that Chengdu slapped SAC in the face. They refused to put SACs engine on it, again, because they don't trust its reliability.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? Please have some logic.

Do you think anyone would design a navy aircraft just to test on land? Do you even understand when I say it is multi-year process to design an aircraft? J-15 WILL BE used on the carrier when it goes into the production.

And it takes time to ramp up the production. For the first couple of years, you will be lucky to get the production rate of 2 to 3 WS-10A per month, and J-11B needs as many as they can produce. When you don't have the production ability, why would you want to test it in another aircraft? So you can design it and then wait for 5 years for the production rate to catch up?

And stop trying to make it sound like CAC and SAC are enemies. SAC is involved in J-20 project, mainly for the internal structure. CAC has no experience in designing heavy fighters.

BTW, most of the weapon technologies in China were integrated and tested on J-8 testbed first, also the refueling technology. CAC and SAC certainly have different cultures. However, it is not win-lose relationship as you claim it to be.

By the way, J-10 was obviously designed with WS-10 in mind. Take a look at the rear body's awkward integration with AL-31F and you would know that aerodynamically it was designed for a shorter engine (WS-10 is shorter).