Chinese Engine Development

Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
I think starting from low rate production of the then new WS-10 jet engine, and then now moving on to medium rate production is the correct thing to do if it's just to minimize the various risks that come with a new jet engine. IMO this should be the way to go rather than going into full rate production in just a few years just to impress somebody and ending up taking on unnecessary risks for something as critical as jet engines.
 
P

paintgun

Senior Member
personally i can't justify the use of word 'new' to the WS-10/A anymore, this is an engine already under long development cycle and surely has clocked many hours with the J-11s

admittedly or not (by the officials) there must be some hurdles along the mass production of WS-10/A, not problems in the technicality or design of the engine itself, which should be satisfactory for the PLAAF to induct it for operations

if one look into to the roadmap and plans for future c919 engines, there would be little or perhaps none trickle down result benefited from the WS-10/A, and they decide to start a clean slate, but it is of course a pure conjecture

turbofans remains a challenge for China and PLA
 
T

TyroneG

Banned Idiot
paintgun said:
personally i can't justify the use of word 'new' to the WS-10/A anymore, this is an engine already under long development cycle and surely has clocked many hours with the J-11s

admittedly or not (by the officials) there must be some hurdles along the mass production of WS-10/A, not problems in the technicality or design of the engine itself, which should be satisfactory for the PLAAF to induct it for operations

if one look into to the roadmap and plans for future c919 engines, there would be little or perhaps none trickle down result benefited from the WS-10/A, and they decide to start a clean slate, but it is of course a pure conjecture

turbofans remains a challenge for China and PLA
Click to expand...

exactly, it should be a mature product by now within normal time frame. The fact that they still have production issue means alot. I am not sure if given another few years will solve it.

I mean design and manufacturing process go hand in hand, if the design is very robust and has alot of margins then it can withstand deficiency in the manufacturing process.

If they can't solve the production rate issue, Hey, they might have to go back to the drawing board to the design to increase the robustness of the design so it can better absorb deficiency in other areas.
 
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Sorry, but where do You read in recent reports that they "still have production issue" and that they "can't solve the production rate issue" ???

PLEASE sources (and please not RIAN, LENTA or any other Russian ones) ... or is this simply Your own assumption ?

I agree with You that the production rate is surely lower - probably much lower - than the Russian rate for AL-31F and FN but You can only say You have a "production rate issue" if You have a lower rate than expected (... since I have never read the expeted one this is quite difficult to say).

Deino
 
T

TyroneG

Banned Idiot
Deino said:
Sorry, but where do You read in recent reports that they "still have production issue" and that they "can't solve the production rate issue" ???

PLEASE sources (and please not RIAN, LENTA or any other Russian ones) ... or is this simply Your own assumption ?

I agree with You that the production rate is surely lower - probably much lower - than the Russian rate for AL-31F and FN but You can only say You have a "production rate issue" if You have a lower rate than expected (... since I have never read the expeted one this is quite difficult to say).

Deino
Click to expand...

Both Dunnigan and Erickson's articles pointed to the late 2011 or in 2012 the production rate is below what's needed and they are frustrated and had to ordered additional AL-31 engines.

China has alot more manpower and resources than Russia, and if their production rate is far lower than Russian's , then I would say that kind of production probably is not acceptable for nation of that size.
 
Quickie

Quickie

Colonel
Deino said:
Sorry, but where do You read in recent reports that they "still have production issue" and that they "can't solve the production rate issue" ???

PLEASE sources (and please not RIAN, LENTA or any other Russian ones) ... or is this simply Your own assumption ?

I agree with You that the production rate is surely lower - probably much lower - than the Russian rate for AL-31F and FN but You can only say You have a "production rate issue" if You have a lower rate than expected (... since I have never read the expeted one this is quite difficult to say).

Deino
Click to expand...

Agree. The WS-10A production rate is ultimately tied to the production rate of the J-11B. There never was a production rate issue for the WS-10A engine because of the relatively small number of engines that are required per year. Producing 60 to 100 WS-10A engines (for 30 to 50 J-11B per year, for example) shouldn't be a problem and this has been proven by the number of J-11B regiments coming out the last few years. The engine production capacity would only be tested if PLAAF starts retrofitting the older flankers with WS-10A, something which I've explained earlier is unlikely for a number of reasons.
 
Last edited:
H

hmmwv

Junior Member
TyroneG said:
Both Dunnigan and Erickson's articles pointed to the late 2011 or in 2012 the production rate is below what's needed and they are frustrated and had to ordered additional AL-31 engines.

China has alot more manpower and resources than Russia, and if their production rate is far lower than Russian's , then I would say that kind of production probably is not acceptable for nation of that size.
Click to expand...

They've only solved the production problem in early 2011 so there is a lot of catch up to do. The production rate will always be lower than needed because SAC and CAC are pumping out air frames like there is no tomorrow. The Russians have been building those engines before PLAAF even adopted turbofans, building engine is not like growing rice, manpower doesn't matter that much. Also have you also taken into account that Russia is not ordering as many planes for its own air force, so there are spare capacity at Saturn?
 
Dizasta1

Dizasta1

Senior Member
Given the current discussion going on, on this topic, would it be safe to say that the WS-10's full-rate production is in-line with J-10B's production commencement? Also, which WS-10 engine variant is earmarked for the J-10B? Is it the WS-10G or something else?
 
L

Lion

Senior Member
Dizasta1 said:
Given the current discussion going on, on this topic, would it be safe to say that the WS-10's full-rate production is in-line with J-10B's production commencement? Also, which WS-10 engine variant is earmarked for the J-10B? Is it the WS-10G or something else?
Click to expand...
J-10b mIght not enter service after all. But quite likely the J-10A sold to PAF might be using domestic engine if ever materialise.
 
P

Preux

Junior Member
Any article on the WS-10 that includes 'cloning' and 'AL-31' in the same sentence can more or less be dismissed out of hand. The WS-10 is based on the CFM56 core. It studied and referred to some of the AL-31 stages but is in no way a clone.

Anyway, production issues remain for obvious reasons, they've only started mass production for a year or so, ramping up takes time, these sort of high tech assembly lines simply can't be done quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top