China has there own advance turbine research program,report of WS-17 was mention,probably in early stage of development.
Chinese Engine Development
- Thread starter jackbh
- Start date
China has there own advance turbine research program,report of WS-17 was mention,probably in early stage of development.
this is kind of interesting.
Basically shows that the requirement of the engine to be used on a future Chinese civilian transport is that it must have better fuel consumption rate, full life cycle cost, service life than the current engines like CFM56-7
Basically shows that the requirement of the engine to be used on a future Chinese civilian transport is that it must have better fuel consumption rate, full life cycle cost, service life than the current engines like CFM56-7
dh19440113
New Member
Its too large for conventional aircraft, it can't possibly fit in a engine pod of a civilian aircraft. There is no point in designing a civilian aircraft just for this engine either. Its high thrust high consumption engine, civilian aircraft require low consumption and low maintainance, not ws-10 cup of tea.
If china is building a concorde than this engine will work.
Say, does ws-10a have Solid State Full Authority Digital Engine Control?
I read that previous WS-10 only had electronic engine control with manual overide.
For a engine to be installed on a stealth bomber, it needs 4 (20,000 lb thrust) nonafterburning engines. Afterburners compromise stealth. A engine with less performance will suffer from less ordanance capacity.
If china is building a concorde than this engine will work.
Say, does ws-10a have Solid State Full Authority Digital Engine Control?
I read that previous WS-10 only had electronic engine control with manual overide.
For a engine to be installed on a stealth bomber, it needs 4 (20,000 lb thrust) nonafterburning engines. Afterburners compromise stealth. A engine with less performance will suffer from less ordanance capacity.
Last edited by a moderator:
I have no idea what you are talking about. I didn't say anywhere in the last post that the civilian engine is WS-10, but rather they are trying to develop something with better specs than CFM-56-7. Actually, work on it has already started a while back.
who told you they were working on a stealth bomber?
not at the current time.
dh19440113
New Member
"I have no idea what you are talking about. I didn't say anywhere in the last post that the civilian engine is WS-10, but rather they are trying to develop something with better specs than CFM-56-7. Actually, work on it has already started a while back."
My bad, you see my chinese is rusty. I simply misunderstood.
"who told you they were working on a stealth bomber?"
I was addressing to jackbh's post. Since you never talked about bombers, I couldn't have been adressing you about this topic.
My bad, you see my chinese is rusty. I simply misunderstood.
"who told you they were working on a stealth bomber?"
I was addressing to jackbh's post. Since you never talked about bombers, I couldn't have been adressing you about this topic.
For your information, the B-2 stealth bomber has four engines with each producing 77 kN of thrust. That is a lot less than 20,000 lb thrust. The ws10a has at least 129 kN of thrust, and if they are using three of them in the proposed H-8, it will have a total of 387 kN of thrust vs. 231 kN for the B-2 bomber.
Skywatcher
Captain
I think China would be better served by developing something similar to the Tu 160 or B-1B. It's more immediately available than a stealth bomber (and if why three engines, then why not mount on four?)
Anyway, on the other matter, more engines would compromise stealth too. When you're already behind, why spend a decade and half developing an obsolete plane? Military development should focus on the long-term and there's a significantly larger need for a stealth bomber that'll also serve to develop most of the avionics and engineering for a strategic bomber. If you can build a B-2, you can build a B-1.