Chinese Engine Development

Dizasta1

Senior Member
So if I understand this correctly, then it seems as though China has resolved the WS-10 performance and is going to ramp up the serial production of these engines. Which in other words means two things, that China would discontinue the production of J-10A's and begin production of J-10B's, powered by WS-10 Taihangs. Or, that provisions have been made for a modified J-10A which accommodates the WS-10 engines and China would continue to produce J-10As.

As far as the J-10 variant destined for Pakistan is concerned, for anyone who knows about the historical background between Pakistan Air Force and Chinese Combat Aircraft Manufacturing Corporations. It is clear that Pakistan Air Force has always specified and requested modifications to the given aircraft they were procuring from China. Whether it be the ZDK-03 Karakoram Eagles, F-7PG Air Guards or K-8 Karakoram jet-trainers. All of them underwent modification under Pakistan Air Force's specifications. Which leads us to believe that when the then Pakistan President Pervaiz Musharraf visited China in 2006-7 and was shown the J-10As, Pakistan Air Force decidedly did request certain design and performance specifications.

Since Pakistan Air Force did not go for J-10A, which were permitted by China for sale to Pakistan. It is only logical to recognize that Pakistan Air Force did request and specify modifications, in-line with what China had already earmarked as future upgrades. Hence the reason why Pakistan Air Force decided to wait and not rush into the J-10A's procurement. Also, if one looks at the design similarities between J-10Bs and JF-17s, both have DSI, IRST and both are provisioned to be powered by Chinese engines such as the WS-10 Taihang and the WS-13 Taishan.

In conclusion, it seems more likely that J-10B is the variant that Pakistan Air Force will be going for or is waiting for. Also that Pakistan Air Force is leaning more toward the concept of operating fighters made by China, that are powered by Chinese engines. And although China has a very good relationship with Russia, it is quite likely that China does want to develop and produce its own jet-engines which would not only power its fighter-jets like J-20s, J-10s, J-11s and JH-7s, but also put China in an enviable position, where it is not dependent on anyone or any nation's manufacturers for engines.
 

escobar

Brigadier
Quote hmmwv@CDF

From 624th Institute, developing cores ranging from 5 to 35kg/s, engine thrust from 200 to 20000kgf. With more than 10 domestic engines under development including: Qingcheng (WS500 for cruise missile/UAV), Huanglong (turbojet also for missile/UAV), Minjiang, Minshan (Low thrust w/AB for L15), Jiuzhai, E'mei (WS15), Yellow Mountain, Yellow River, Everest, Chiyan.

Minjiang (medium thrust high B/P ratio, domestic CF34) and Yellow River (high thrust high B/P ratio for Y20) are named after rivers there are high by pass ratio engines. But what engine deserves the Everest code name?

092611qjrar59c7a75qje4_zps2916e8b6.jpg

092621duhad7vtvhx9cdvs_zpsf3c72a7e.jpg


Apparently development of these engines started in or before 2008.

xfoy1222228925_zps4799aada.jpg
 

LesAdieux

Junior Member
Reuters "Insight: Unable to copy it, China tries building own jet engine"

reuters tabloid report to please its fanboys?


By David Lague and Charlie Zhu

HONG KONG (Reuters) - China has designed nuclear missiles and blasted astronauts into space, but one vital technology remains out of reach. Despite decades of research and development, China has so far failed to build a reliable, high performance jet engine.

This may be about to change. China's aviation sector is striving for a breakthrough that would end its dependence on Russian and Western power plants for military and commercial aircraft.

Beijing is evaluating a 100 billion yuan ($16 billion) plan to galvanize a disjointed and under-funded engine research effort, aviation industry officials say. The giant, state-owned Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), China's dominant military and commercial aviation contractor, has been lobbying hard for the extra money, officials familiar with the details say.

AVIC, with more than 400,000 employees and 200 subsidiaries including 20 listed companies, has already set aside about 10 billion yuan of its own funds for jet engine development over the next three years.

The engine financing plan is under high-level discussion in Beijing, said Zhao Yuxing, an official at the securities office of Shanghai-listed Xi'an Aero-Engine Plc, a key military engine-making unit of AVIC. "What we know is our company has been included in the strategic program, which is designed to greatly develop and support the engine industry," he said by phone from his company's headquarters in the northwestern city of Xi'an.

China's military industry as a whole has suffered from Tiananmen-era bans on the sale of military equipment from the United States and Europe. Moreover, foreign engine-makers have been loath to transfer technology. That has prevented China from taking its usual route to closing a technology gap: copying it.

Some Chinese aviation industry specialists forecast that Beijing will eventually spend up to 300 billion yuan ($49 billion) on jet engine development over the next two decades.

"China's aircraft engines have obviously been under-invested," said Wang Tianyi, a defense sector analyst with Shanghai's Orient Securities. "One hundred billion yuan is not a huge amount of money in the engine world."

JEALOUSLY GUARDED SECRETS

While AVIC's long term priority is to develop high performance engines for military aircraft, it is also trying to design power plants for passenger aircraft in the world's fastest growing civil aviation market. Based on projected demand from Western aircraft manufacturers, engines for new passenger aircraft delivered in China could be worth more than $100 billion over the next 20 years.

"Historically, all major players in aerospace have possessed both airframe and engine design capabilities," said Carlo Kopp, the Melbourne, Australia-based founder of Air Power Australia, an independent military aviation think tank. "Until China can design and produce competitive engines, the performance and capabilities of Chinese aircraft designs will be seriously limited by what technology they are permitted to import."

For China's aviation engineers, the traditional short cuts of extracting intellectual property from foreign joint venture partners or simply copying technology from abroad have so far delivered minimal results.

Foreign engine manufacturers including General Electric, Snecma, a subsidiary of French aerospace group Safran, Rolls Royce Plc and Pratt & Whitney - a unit of United Technology Corp, jealously guard their industrial secrets, limiting the transfer of know-how and opportunities for intellectual property theft.

However, China may be poised to win access to technology from an expanding range of commercial aviation joint ventures with these companies. China's ability to develop engines for passenger aircraft could have considerable potential for technology transfer to the military, experts say.

THE BOTTLENECK IN ENGINES

Under AVIC's plan, fragmented engine research and development would be consolidated to minimize competition and duplication of effort.

A legacy of Maoist-era dispersal of defense industries, engine research institutes and aerospace manufacturing companies are scattered about the country in cities including Shenyang, Xi'an, Shanghai, Chengdu and Anshun.

AVIC plans to inject its major engine related businesses into Xi'an Aero- Engine as part of this consolidation, the listed company said in its 2011 annual report. "There is widespread consensus that engines have become a bottleneck constraining the development of China's aviation industry," the report said.

China faces a daunting challenge. Only a handful of companies in the United States, Europe and Russia have mastered this expertise.

"Modern jet engine technology is like an industrial revolution in power," said Andrei Chang, a Hong Kong-based analyst of the Chinese military and editor of Kanwa Asian Defence Magazine. "Europe, the U.S. and Russia have hundreds of years of combined experience, but China has only been working on this for 30 years."

Established manufacturers have labored on research and development since the 1950s to build safe and reliable engines with thousands of components that function under extremes of temperature and pressure. This involves state-of-the-art technologies in design, machining, casting, composite materials, exotic alloys, electronic performance monitoring and quality control.

Since then, the big players have collected vast stores of performance and operational data from existing engines that gives them a head start in designing new versions with improved fuel efficiency and reliability that airlines now demand. And, for commercial engines, all of the design and manufacturing processes must be carefully coordinated and exhaustively documented to satisfy aviation certification authorities.

"The reason so few can do it is because it is really, really difficult," says Richard Margolis, a former regional director of Rolls Royce in northeast Asia.

High performance military jet engines are crucial to Beijing's long term plan to increase the number of frontline fighters and strike aircraft in its air force and naval aviation units. These aircraft are a key element of a long term military build-up aimed primarily at securing military dominance over Taiwan and a vast swathe of disputed maritime territory off China's east and southern coasts.

Due to the export bans on military equipment to China, Beijing has been forced to rely on imported fighters from Russia, reverse engineered copies of these Russian aircraft, and some home-grown designs. This strategy has delivered rapid results. Since 2000, China has added more than 500 advanced fighters and strike aircraft with capabilities thought to equal all but the most advanced U.S. stealth aircraft. At the same time, it has also sharply reduced the number of obsolete aircraft based on Soviet-era designs, military experts say.

MANUFACTURING PROCESS

A clear example of this progress was on display recently when a Chinese-made J-15 jet fighter practiced "touch and go" circuits on China's first aircraft carrier, the newly commissioned Liaoning. These maneuvers suggest that J-15 pilots and crews will soon master take-offs and landings from the carrier at sea.

Foreign and Chinese military experts were quick to point out that the J-15, one of China's newest military aircraft, was powered by a pair of Russian Al-31 turbofans - they power almost all of China's frontline aircraft. Reports in the Russian media say Moscow has sold more than 1,000 engines from the A1-31 family to China with further, substantial orders in the pipeline.

While Chinese engineers have been able to reverse-engineer Russian airframes, the engines have been much more difficult to copy without access to the complex manufacturing processes. AVIC subsidiary and China's lead military jet engine maker, Shenyang Liming Aero-Engine Group Corporation, has been working on a homegrown equivalent, the WS-10 Taihang, but this power plant has so far failed to meet performance targets after testing on the J-15 and other fighters, Chinese and Western military experts say.

The Chinese military is expected to introduce another 1,000 advanced fighters over the next two decades, according to Chinese defense sector analysts. However, anger over reverse engineering and wariness of China's growing military power has made Moscow reluctant to supply engines more advanced than the Al-31. Without imported or locally built versions of these engines, China will be unable to build aircraft that could compete with the latest U.S. or Russian stealth fighters, experts say.

While military jets are strategically important, the commercial market is potentially much bigger. Boeing forecasts China will need an extra 5,260 large passenger aircraft by 2031. Bombardier Inc. projects demand for business jets will reach 2,400 aircraft over the same period. With each aircraft requiring at least two engines plus spares, total demand could reach 16,000 engines with an estimated average cost of $10 million each at current prices.

China plans to compete for some of these aircraft orders with two locally built passenger aircraft, the 90-seat ARJ21 regional jet and the 150-seat C919. GE will supply engines for the ARJ21. CFM International, a joint venture between GE and France's Snecma, won the contract to develop new engines for the C919. Some of these engines will be assembled at joint ventures in China.

Despite the intensified research effort and potential for technology transfer from these ventures, some experts say foreign engines will continue to rule the skies in China. "This won't change for 10 or 15 years," says Chang from Kanwa Asian Defence Magazine.
 

hardware

Banned Idiot
AVIC spokeman during a brief interview, claim that they are currently developing Variable Cycle jet engine.no detail are available.
 

jackliu

Banned Idiot
Re: Reuters "Insight: Unable to copy it, China tries building own jet engine"

reuters tabloid report to please its fanboys?

Old article, fully of errors and prejudices. The whole article basally want to reinforce the point that "China only knows how to copy, and they can't even copy 50 year old engines"

And notice that it still think WS-10 have problems, which is false, it have been in service with J-11B for a while now,

It also says in fear of Chinese copy, Russia is not willing to sell China anything more advanced than AL-31, instead it should said that AL-31 is the ONLY thing that Russia have lol. Their next engine the 117 and 117S are still based on AL-31 and are in development.
 

kyanges

Junior Member
Why don't you guys send some emails to Reuters with this information instead of talking on these forums about how wrong they are? Give some links, images, translated texts, etc. Some of you might think they won't listen, and maybe they won't, but I think it's worth a shot. (Or as many attempts as it takes.)
 

jackliu

Banned Idiot
Why don't you guys send some emails to Reuters with this information instead of talking on these forums about how wrong they are? Give some links, images, translated texts, etc. Some of you might think they won't listen, and maybe they won't, but I think it's worth a shot. (Or as many attempts as it takes.)

You must be naive, the media tells people what they want to hear, not providing them real facts and evidence so that people know what is real or not.

Right now the viral thing is "Chinese only know how to copy". Anyone else that says anything that break that perception will not get any audience.

This is how "free media" works in this country, just like how the "free media" convinced over 90% of the American Iraq was an IMMINENT danger to USA.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
Why don't you guys send some emails to Reuters with this information instead of talking on these forums about how wrong they are? Give some links, images, translated texts, etc. Some of you might think they won't listen, and maybe they won't, but I think it's worth a shot. (Or as many attempts as it takes.)

Because there are limits to what journalists can officially publish, primarily source verification, which is pretty hard to do until pictures pop up.
You must be naive, the media tells people what they want to hear, not providing them real facts and evidence so that people know what is real or not.

Right now the viral thing is "Chinese only know how to copy". Anyone else that says anything that break that perception will not get any audience.

This is how "free media" works in this country, just like how the "free media" convinced over 90% of the American Iraq was an IMMINENT danger to USA.

Well....technically the media was tilted against going to Iraq. But that's OT.
 

jackliu

Banned Idiot
Well....technically the media was tilted against going to Iraq. But that's OT.

Which media are you talking about? I am talking about on the eve of invasion, all of the major medias of ABC, NBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, FOX etc... all competing with each other who can monger it more.

Yes sure, you get the blogs on the internet of some guy who putting out all the argument with logic and reason of why this is a bad idea.... but trust me, he didn't make a damn difference because they have 0% share of the media audience.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
Which media are you talking about? I am talking about on the eve of invasion, all of the major medias of ABC, NBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, FOX etc... all competing with each other who can monger it more.

Yes sure, you get the blogs on the internet of some guy who putting out all the argument with logic and reason of why this is a bad idea.... but trust me, he didn't make a damn difference because they have 0% share of the media audience.
I'm talking about before, during, and after the invasion, where there were a billion editorials and opeds written about how wrong the war was.
 
Top