Chinese Engine Development

Daniel707 said:

Thanks for the info, sir.
Happy to hear this Good news.

Click to expand...

A good news indeed I have been telling it for a while and debate it with "our resident expert" who is convince that accident must occur because at one time they grounded the fleet, early in the J 11B program.
Look it up in this thread few pages back

But now we have proof from none other than China science communication, that indeed NO ACCIDENT! involving WS 10 engine has occur. China science is under arm of China academy a credible institution

All they have to do now is keep improving the engine and get more mileage out of it !.

All those doubter and nay sayer have been wrong all this time!. It is 5 years now since WS 10 was inducted . Long enough time to say that China turbo fan industry has matured.It must be hard on the skeptic in the west who keep saying China can't built reliable engine

Hendrik_2000 said:

A good news indeed I have been telling it for a while and debate it with "our resident expert" who is convince that accident must occur because at one time they grounded the fleet, early in the J 11B program.
Look it up in this thread few pages back

But now we have proof from none other than China science communication, that indeed NO ACCIDENT! involving WS 10 engine has occur. China science is under arm of China academy a credible institution

All they have to do now is keep improving the engine and get more mileage out of it !.

All those doubter and nay sayer have been wrong all this time!. It is 5 years now since WS 10 was inducted . Long enough time to say that China turbo fan industry has matured.It must be hard on the skeptic in the west who keep saying China can't built reliable engine

Click to expand...

But, what makes you so certain if there were WS-10 failures and accidents, CCP elites would allow their state-controlled media to inform the public, if they don't wish it?

Let's recycle that, Stoney:

"But, what makes you so certain if there were PW-F119 failures (F-22 engine) and accidents, Pentagon elites would allow their state-controlled media to inform the public, if they don't wish it?"

"But, what makes you so certain if there were Snecma M-88 (Rafale) failures and accidents, French elites would allow their state-controlled media to inform the public, if they don't wish it?"

"But, what makes you so certain if there were AL-41 (Su-35) failures and accidents, Kremlin elites would allow their state-controlled media to inform the public, if they don't wish it?"

And don't say something like there is greater freedom of press. Without a crash, that is irrelevant. Unless a jet crashed, the press wouldn't know about it without the military proactively informing them to come and discuss it. So any assumptions you make on the WS-10A would carry over to all those other countries and their fighters/engines as well.

Blackstone said:

But, what makes you so certain if there were WS-10 failures and accidents, CCP elites would allow their state-controlled media to inform the public, if they don't wish it?

Click to expand...

Well, the logical way of thinking would be that we should assume no accidents until there is creditable report. Innocent until proven guilty, right?

If you keep insisting China's state media could/would/should hide such accidents, what would be your conclusion on the status of WS-10, based on existing info?

Those UFO enthusiasts also claim that the US govn't is collaborating with aliens to come up with new alien weapons. Why do they say that even though there is zero evidence to support that? Well, they say the govn't hides it. thus it must be true.

Don't fall in that trap. We are educated people and must do things in logical manner. thus, we make conclusions based on existing evidence. We then modify our theories / hypotheses when there is more evidence.

Blackstone said:

But, what makes you so certain if there were WS-10 failures and accidents, CCP elites would allow their state-controlled media to inform the public, if they don't wish it?

Click to expand...

Listen bud nowadays every adult Chinese have cellphone with camera. 650 million last count. Even the most remote village has cellphone . And Internet penetration is very high. You can access internet in larger village or township. Then we have Weibo. Sina We chat app for online discussion. Then there are million of military enthusiast who will scan and re posting any wreck photo in the web

Any accident will draw large crowd. We seen the photos of J10 accident with large crowd surrounding the jet and sometime we even have photo of the engine.

Even if the government want to hide they can't because sooner or latter the news will leak out.
Sofar, I haven't seen smouldering WS 10 in tatter due to accident

J-10 is the proud first born of China's fighter program. China would be much more inclined to maintain a pristine image of J-10 than any plane derived from a foreign design... Yet, we see J-10 accidents mere hours after it happened. So what would be the motivation to keep such tight seal on a J-11B accident? What makes Chinese officials so sensitive about the J-11B, yet don't care at all about leaking J-10 accidents?

vesicles said:

Well, the logical way of thinking would be that we should assume no accidents until there is creditable report. Innocent until proven guilty, right?

If you keep insisting China's state media could/would/should hide such accidents, what would be your conclusion on the status of WS-10, based on existing info?

Click to expand...

We've heard mishaps in China engine development ranging from materials issues to manufacturing processes and quality control, so my conclusion is an accident or two might have happened. But, do you trust the state-controlled news media to publish them, if the party bosses don't want it?

Those UFO enthusiasts also claim that the US govn't is collaborating with aliens to come up with new alien weapons. Why do they say that even though there is zero evidence to support that? Well, they say the govn't hides it. thus it must be true.

Don't fall in that trap. We are educated people and must do things in logical manner. thus, we make conclusions based on existing evidence. We then modify our theories / hypotheses when there is more evidence.

Click to expand...

We agree conclusions must be evidence-based, and there are documented problems in the WS engine development process. What's left to be answered is if those problems actually led to accidents or crashes.

Hendrik_2000 said:

Listen bud nowadays every adult Chinese have cellphone with camera. 650 million last count. Even the most remote village has cellphone . And Internet penetration is very high. You can access internet in larger village or township. Then we have Weibo. Sina We chat app for online discussion. Then there are million of military enthusiast who will scan and re posting any wreck photo in the web

Any accident will draw large crowd. We seen the photos of J10 accident with large crowd surrounding the jet and sometime we even have photo of the engine.

Even if the government want to hide they can't because sooner or latter the news will leak out.
Sofar, I haven't seen smouldering WS 10 in tatter due to accident

Click to expand...

Listen bud, smart phones could document events, but not necessarily reasons for them. Ergo, WS-10 accidents are entirely possible, and the causes blamed on something else... like pilot error.

Blackstone said:

We've heard mishaps in China engine development ranging from materials issues to manufacturing processes and quality control, so my conclusion is an accident or two might have happened. But, do you trust the state-controlled news media to publish them, if the party bosses don't want it?


We agree conclusions must be evidence-based, and there are documented problems in the WS engine development process. What's left to be answered is if those problems actually led to accidents or crashes.

Click to expand...

So what is your logic? Do you believe what the Chinese news say or do you not believe what they say? If you believe them, then you should think that there were early problems with WS-10 but they were figured out and now, it's a high standard engine being mass-produced. If you don't believe them, then you should think that there is not enough reliable information to discern anything. But you seem to be stuck in the "I believe them when they say there were problems but they are dishonest and opaque when they are reporting that everything is fine now." Basically, no matter what you hear, your conclusion is gonna be the same; it's what you want it to be. If the evidence supports it, you cite the evidence. If the evidence contradicts it, you say the evidence is probably lies and cover ups. What's the deal with your logic?

I really don't understand why you insist there might be crashes and that the reasons were covered up and attributed to pilot error. That makes no sense at all. There were no crashes involving WS-10A so there are no reasons to explain/cover up! You're asking questions as if you think that there were J-11B's that crashed with WS-10A and the reasons were given as non-engine related, but there have been no such incidents. Even you said that crashes in China should be detected by the public, and then now you say that there could be crashes we don't know about and nobody ever saw? Do you apply this logic to all nations? How many F-35s do you think crashed without people knowing? F-22? Typhoon? Rafale?

Honestly, I think you're just poorly-informed about engines and you're at the level where you should just be reading and absorbing instead of trying to contribute input, even at a devil's advocate level.

Fighters using WS-10 e.i. the J-11B, J-16, are twin engined. So unless some kind of catastrophic failure in both engines occur, crashes are unlikely due to engine failure. Crashes are likely pilot error or some other systems failure. The key test for the WS-10 will be when it starts powering J-10B & J-10C. The AL-31FN has a decent track record with the PLAAF/PLAN.Will see whether the WS-10B can match-up to the AL-31FN.