Chinese Engine Development

tphuang said:

We explained to you many times our view, I don't see why I need to keep repeating myself. If you think you know more about PLAAF and Chinese turbofan engine than Pupu, we just have to accept your greatness.

What bugs me is that you keep bringing this up at every opportunity despite how sick of this argument the rest of us are. And I've explained this to you.

Click to expand...

Sorry for asking but i have a question, i can not read Chinese, so my sources of information about chinese aviation are usually english, Spanish, portuguese or Russian.

So i am ignorant about some historical aspects about chinese engine design.


However i have a question based first upon my latin-american background and my knowledge of Russian and western aviation.


In the west, the so called democracies have private aircraft companies in theory independent of the government to do business, which is in many ways not true.

And the Russian and latinamerican experience have a mixed results.

let me elaborate.

When Embraer was a brazilian government company it depended upon government approval and contracts, so Emb-120 was mostly a military program, when the Banderiante was sold to foreign companies the Brazilian company was privatized and the ERJ-145 and E-jets emerged this led to the creation of the only really success in latin american aviation because latin american governments hardly spend in military aircraft.
all the companies in latin american that build aircraft for the government by exception of Embraer and Sicare ended up bankrupt
Boeing from the begining has been private, so they have moved from making military and civilian aircraft at will and they build from B-1Bs, fighters like F-15s and airliners like B-787.

In Russia Sukhoi`s sucess is similar.

However Lion`s claim it makes a little bit sense, i am not saying that is the situation, but for what i know about Soviet aviation.
MiG`s rise was product of politics in great part, let me recall that Mikoyan`s brother worked for the stalin`s government and its fall was due in great part of lack of vision as a capitalist enterprise and lack of political clout in the modern post Soviet times.
Many competitors of MiG did not have the political clout of MiG among them Polikarpov or the LaGG design bureaux led by Lavochkin.

In few words MiG was more dependant on government`s aid to succeed and when Sukhoi got it and Sukhoi sold more jets abroad and diversified its capitalist production, Sukhoi took the lead.

My question is

how do you know in China politics does not play a role in the WS-10 development?

The reason i say this, is in the Chinese system, which basicly is similar to modern Russian/Soviet system, government contracts and political assignments for programs are based upon the goverment will, so how do you know corruption does not play a part of the WS-10 development?


Usually private companies in the west, are supposedly to be independent in government contracts and aircraft programs.

For example E-170 is a program based upon the needs of airliners and not even brazilian ones but foreign firms (i mean for the brazilian context)

Boeing has succeeded because if they lose a government contract they still have civil contracts for example B-787 and the choice of engines for their aircraft is dependant upon the customer, many engines in Boeing aircraft are not even american.

To me is possible as Lion says corruption does play a role, i am not saying that is the case, but it sounds possible to me that could be the case since the case of MiG shows it in the Russian case

vesicles said:

My guess is that, since WS-10 is not as mature as AL-31, they want to minimize as many variables as possible while testing all the new techs on J-20.

Click to expand...

This theory has prove wrong so many times because WS-10A has used on the initial flight test of J-16 and J-15S. Do you know what does it means? WS-10A has already achieved maturity and reliability from the top level of PLAAF and the maker of the engine. Flying it on a single engine plane has absolutely no problem at all. This show J-10b is fit to equip with higher thrust WS-10A.

Engineer said:

There are plenty of stories on how SAC uses dirty tactics to further its own interests using its influence in AVIC. A great example told how CAC won J-20's project fair and square, then SAC used its influence in AVIC to get the rights to design J-20's aft fuselage section. Another story explained how SAC took revenues from CAC, XAC, and others through AVIC to fund the research of 31001. We also have plenty of stories related to bad attitude of SAC, such as how SAC isn't concerned about what PLAAF thinks, how SAC never fixes design issues, and how SAC blames PLAAF and pilots whenever there is an incident with SAC's products.

I wouldn't be surprise at all if SAC drag its feet in providing WS-10A engines to power the J-10B.

Click to expand...

Precisely, we have a highly knowledgeable members from Shanghai who knows all the history of SAC in China. How powerful SAC in China aviation plays.. In China, having CONNECTION is very important. SAC is founded by those who rub shoulders with Mao and Peng Dehui. While Chengdu aviation corps is relative young compare to SAC.

Remember the chairman of China locomotive who was previously immune to all criticism and accusation of corruption of high speed train ticket distribution system. All due to his close relationship with Jiang Zeming. Even chariman Hu cant do anything to him until the deadly train crashed which killed 14 people which gives him the opportunity to rid of this evil. High speed train during the last few years is a high priority public infrastructure project which China prides itself as a demonstration to the whole world the abilities of China. To think that such an important project will be run by a corrupted man is unthinkable but as long as you have connection in China, it can happen.

To think that some sort of politics is absent from China military industries like SAC and Chengdu is laughable.

Christ, not again, the whole conspiracy theory is nonsense. CAC and SAC maybe called corporations but they are still tightly controlled by AVIC, which had its activities dictated by China's overall national defense objectives. The notion that SAC can somehow influence Liming so CAC doesn't get WS10A is board line insanity.

hmmwv said:

Christ, not again, the whole conspiracy theory is nonsense. CAC and SAC maybe called corporations but they are still tightly controlled by AVIC, which had its activities dictated by China's overall national defense objectives. The notion that SAC can somehow influence Liming so CAC doesn't get WS10A is board line insanity.

Click to expand...

How do you prove its tightly controlled by AVIC? Liming parent company is SAC. If SAC like you say is tightly controlled by AVIC, I doubt project like 31001 of J-31 is able to materialise. We don't get big shrimp to air the bitching behind scene of SAC and Chengdu. They dare not risk themselves getting arrested. They are something can be said and some are totally not disclosed to public.

But from those small trait, it is easy to figure out something is going on. Tell me which latest build J-11B, J-11BS or J-16 or J-15 are running with AL-31F and not WS-10A and I will rest my case.

hmmwv said:

Christ, not again, the whole conspiracy theory is nonsense. CAC and SAC maybe called corporations but they are still tightly controlled by AVIC, which had its activities dictated by China's overall national defense objectives. The notion that SAC can somehow influence Liming so CAC doesn't get WS10A is board line insanity.

Click to expand...

In the perfect world things do run smooth,but in real life they do not, i am of the belief WS-10 is not ready, however politics do play a role.

For example Tu-160 was originally a Myasishchev design, but due to Tupolev`s political clout it was trasfered to Tupolev.
let us remember both design bureaux designed bombers for the VVS.

Sukhoi and many other Soviet designers fell of grace and even spent time in jail.

The Soviet aircraft industry in part could not compete with Western rivals sometimes due to burocratic incompetence.

In fact Aeroflot during the late 1990s to up to now has bought more western aircraft than russian designs.


I mean burocracy and corruption do affect, as well as if you design bureaux has political clout or not.

Most aircraft products made in China are bought by the Chinese government, specially the military ones, so having a good conection sometimes plays more a role that the quality of the product it self
Private customers sometimes have more demands for a product than a government due to the lack of political connections and private aircraft companies requiere sometimes more quality for a product they want to sell specially if the customer is a private entity such as American Airlines and Airbus or Boeing and the brazilian government.

So to be honest i do not think is not possible SAC could try to move some strings in order to win government contracts even at the expense of Chengdu

Lion said:

How do you prove its tightly controlled by AVIC? Liming parent company is SAC. If SAC like you say is tightly controlled by AVIC, I doubt project like 31001 of J-31 is able to materialise. We don't get big shrimp to air the bitching behind scene of SAC and Chengdu. They dare not risk themselves getting arrested. They are something can be said and some are totally not disclosed to public.

But from those small trait, it is easy to figure out something is going on. Tell me which latest build J-11B, J-11BS or J-16 or J-15 are running with AL-31F and not WS-10A and I will rest my case.

Click to expand...

Do you realize that Russia is not allowing the export of AL-31F for new flanker builds in China, but they do allow the export of AL-31FN for J-10? SAC has no choice but to use WS-10A on the new flankers. Thankfully, j-10 is not burdened by that and can choose to install WS-10A when it's ready. But you won't listen to anyone here, because you are dead set on believing that WS-10A is already perfect and SAC is hijacking CAC operations.

btw, I will let you have your last piece here, but this is clearly a debate that is going nowhere. Since I've Mig-29 to stop his TVC debates everywhere, I'm going to ask you to do the same with this theory of yours. Until we get fresh piece of news on this, anything you post on this topic to incite annoyance will be deleted. So feel free to get all of your view point out in this reply and let's move on with other more important issues.

Engineer said:

There are plenty of stories on how SAC uses dirty tactics to further its own interests using its influence in AVIC. A great example told how CAC won J-20's project fair and square, then SAC used its influence in AVIC to get the rights to design J-20's aft fuselage section. Another story explained how SAC took revenues from CAC, XAC, and others through AVIC to fund the research of 31001. We also have plenty of stories related to bad attitude of SAC, such as how SAC isn't concerned about what PLAAF thinks, how SAC never fixes design issues, and how SAC blames PLAAF and pilots whenever there is an incident with SAC's products.

I wouldn't be surprise at all if SAC drag its feet in providing WS-10A engines to power the J-10B.

Click to expand...

That is just rumours. SAC is actually helping CAC in the J-20 project. CAC never had any experience with heavy fighter jet before this, whereas SAC has experience from flanker project. You want your two biggest design bureaus to cooperate on something as big as this.

I haven't read any story of SAC siphoning revenues off other AVIC for J-31. What I heard is that even though SAC did not get the 4th generation project, it got funding (although no PLAAF designation) for its own project. If you any links where you get these rumours, please post them. Otherwise, you are just making up stuff.

tphuang said:

Do you realize that Russia is not allowing the export of AL-31F for new flanker builds in China, but they do allow the export of AL-31FN for J-10? SAC has no choice but to use WS-10A on the new flankers. Thankfully, j-10 is not burdened by that and can choose to install WS-10A when it's ready. But you won't listen to anyone here, because you are dead set on believing that WS-10A is already perfect and SAC is hijacking CAC operations.

btw, I will let you have your last piece here, but this is clearly a debate that is going nowhere. Since I've Mig-29 to stop his TVC debates everywhere, I'm going to ask you to do the same with this theory of yours. Until we get fresh piece of news on this, anything you post on this topic to incite annoyance will be deleted. So feel free to get all of your view point out in this reply and let's move on with other more important issues.

Click to expand...

could you give a link about Russia stop exporting Al-31s for new Flankers?

Sukhoi`s claims the license is till going on, quiet confusing, specially it is supposedly it stopped, what does sukhoi mean by the license is still going on, second i do not understand why Saturn will be upset by selling more Al-31s?

To be honest you do not make sense unless of course you can prove it.

Cooperation with China in the field of military aviation develops successfully. The implementation of the program of Su-type licensed aircraft production is going on, as well as the delivery of spare parts for previously delivered aircraft.

i do not understand your point since they say they also=as well delivere spare parts, the news seem to imply China can still build new Sukhois and further more will deliver parts.

Could you please elaborate?


VSUE GTERPC Salut concluded a contract with Chinese Air Force for supply of spare parts for aircraft engines.
In the course of the International Airshow China-2012 talks on mutually beneficial cooperation between VSUE GTERPC Salut and representatives of Chinese Air Force, foreign trade companies and plants repairing aircraft engines of type АL-31F have been held.

As a result VSUE GTERPC Salut concluded a contract for supply of spare parts for aircraft engine repair in 2013 with Chinese foreign trade company Tianli.

During the show mockups of AL-31FN-М1afterburning turbofan vectored-thrust engine, AI-222-25 engine for trainer aircraft Yak-130, small-scale engine MD-120 and models of low pressure compressor 1-st stage for АI-222-25 engine were exhibited.


Since Saturn is the one delivering the spare parts and engines what does it mean sukhoi?

tphuang said:

Do you realize that Russia is not allowing the export of AL-31F for new flanker builds in China, but they do allow the export of AL-31FN for J-10? SAC has no choice but to use WS-10A on the new flankers. Thankfully, j-10 is not burdened by that and can choose to install WS-10A when it's ready. But you won't listen to anyone here, because you are dead set on believing that WS-10A is already perfect and SAC is hijacking CAC operations.

btw, I will let you have your last piece here, but this is clearly a debate that is going nowhere. Since I've Mig-29 to stop his TVC debates everywhere, I'm going to ask you to do the same with this theory of yours. Until we get fresh piece of news on this, anything you post on this topic to incite annoyance will be deleted. So feel free to get all of your view point out in this reply and let's move on with other more important issues.

Click to expand...

That is just your assumption! Russian still export AL-31F engine to China for flanker series. Clearly its China who not choose to fit their new build J-11B, J-11BS , J-15S and J-16 with AL-31F but WS-10A. How do Russian ensure the AL-31F engine export to China only goes to old Su-27 frame or J-11A and not J-11B, J-11BS, J-15? The fact, old Su-27SK or J-11A uses newly bought russian AL-31F is because to rid of the unnecessary cost of modifying it to fit WS-10A. While new J-11 series are using domestic engine because they have their own supply and WS-10A offer higher thrust.

WS-10A is perfect. I have strong backing of the facts it uses on initial flight test of J-16 and J-15S. PLAAF are ultra conservative people that they will not risk such risky test with even an engine of 0.0001% imperfect. WS-10A clearly is fit for even a single engine plane as demonstrate on 1034 prototype of J-10b.

Clearly you are abusing your power as you are the one making assumption and not rebunking my points wiith fact. What are you going to do? Ban or delete my theory backing with clear analysis while all your points is make up? Prove my point wrong instead of giving nonsense threat.

Russian never implement ban on engine export to J-11B. If you don't agree. Prove it.
WS-10A is fit to fly on J-10B as demonstrated of 1034 pt. If you don't agree. Prove it
WS-10A is mature engine as demonstrated on initial flight test of J-16 and J-15S using it instead of usual AL-31F. If you don't agree . Prove it.