Chinese Engine Development

MwRYum said:

So it's yet another round of consolidating the manufacturers, but can they finally deliver a serial production model that can meet the goals?

Click to expand...

It's not another round of consolidation; on the contrary, they're separating the aero engine related units and assets from AVIC, in recognition of the importance of development of aero engines as an independent track with their own development cycle and focus from the development of aircraft themselves.

China historically had developed aero engines as part of aircraft projects. This practice has been proven unsuccessful due to the much longer development cycle of engines - an aircraft could be developed without its engine being ready in time or an engine under development could not find its use if the target aircraft project was canceled. China also realizes, based on its own experiences and the successful experiences of other countries, that a successful engine should be start with an appropriate engine core which then can be evolved into different derivatives. Furthermore, to support the development of various kinds of aircraft, you need a broad spectrum of engine cores that spans different thrust classes.

Of course, all these are easier said than done - you would still need the resources and talent base, even with the right development strategy. China clearly is in a position to do so now, with all kinds of aircraft under development, both military and civilian, the resources it now has, and considerable talents/experiences it has garnered over the last few decades.

Thus the establishment of Aero Engine Corp. of China.

Air Force Brat said:

but if you read the specs 16% greater fuel efficiency, 75% noise reduction, and 50% fewer emissions, you have to admit the Pratt Engine is a technological marvel, don't you???

I certainly do, the problem is that they are slow at cranking them out, because quality control is so tight on this engine, it is as promised, and if you look at 16% greater range for your aircraft, with the same fuel in your tank, I would not use this as an example of a Pratt failure, in fact they are a victim of their incredible success, and not being able to keep up with demand?? that's not a bad problem to have.

Click to expand...

Hey I didn't disparage Pratt and Whitney in any way.I Just want to highlight the difficulty developing a new engine.

So all those China bashing can appreciate the extent of financial resource and technical expertise needed to developed aero engine. And yes time needed to do it This particular engine take 3 decades an ton of money

Both the US and private contractor pour infinite amount of money and technical resource.
Yet even they have some hiccup and snafu a long the way.

Let alone China who developed aero engine on shoe string budget and fragmented by different design office attached to the plane designer or manufacturer. A left over from Soviet vertical integration
Not to mention the much weaker industrial base and research institute, skill,heritage etc
Let face it Pratt & Whitney built thousands of aero engine in WWII

That is the reason why they have problem. Typically western engine was developed independently from the Fighter contractor
And they developed over longer period of time and in stages. First as technical demonstrator normally funded by the government then as prototype done by the contractor itself

The bottom line is that China has a program of aero engineering researchers to continue to progress and later on surpass not just Pratt & Whitney but all other leading aero engine makers. That's what bothering the China haters, doubters, mockers, and naysayers the most, because deep down they know China has the most extensive numbers of smart people, consistently driven, discipline, and capable of surpassing anyone with the strong economy and money to sustain a program for a very long time. And I had said it many times in regards to anything: It's all about the program.

Equation said:

The bottom line is that China has a program of aero engineering researchers to continue to progress and later on surpass not just Pratt & Whitney but all other leading aero engine makers. That's what bothering the China haters, doubters, mockers, and naysayers the most, because deep down they know China has the most extensive numbers of smart people, consistently driven, discipline, and capable of surpassing anyone with the strong economy and money to sustain a program for a very long time. And I had said it many times in regards to anything: It's all about the program.

Click to expand...

It doesn't "bother" them, but rather vindicated them time and again, due to China's lackluster performance in engine R&D. Fact can't lie, China keep announcing they make "keypoint breakthrough" in this and that, but to this day they just couldn't put forward even one series-production engine model that's at least just a generation behind the Western's latest. Look, we've heard that same "it'll be ready soon" for the last 30 years already. Even if we draw that line at 1999, there's still a whole lot of nothing.

It's almost 4 decades now and China still at most could only produce CG model and mockup, not real deal that survived torture tests and certified.

MwRYum said:

It doesn't "bother" them, but rather vindicated them time and again, due to China's lackluster performance in engine R&D. Fact can't lie, China keep announcing they make "keypoint breakthrough" in this and that, but to this day they just couldn't put forward even one series-production engine model that's at least just a generation behind the Western's latest. Look, we've heard that same "it'll be ready soon" for the last 30 years already. Even if we draw that line at 1999, there's still a whole lot of nothing.

It's almost 4 decades now and China still at most could only produce CG model and mockup, not real deal that survived torture tests and certified.

Click to expand...

you can not be super optimistic and super pessimistic.China is already a jet engine power, but it has to still catch up with the best the west has, and the west also advances, so if China does three steps, the west does three too. so is not like China is catching up, everyone is moving ahead, and everyone has a program, so is not that easy.
Russia has the PD-14 and is moving ahead too, same is in Latin america, India, Japan etc etc, so is a highly competitive business where alliances count as much as the technology you have, and in that the West is still ahead, China, Russia and Japan are more or less at the same level, but Russia still is slightly ahead by probably a decade, India is very likely behind China, and in Latin America we are also behind China by probably 10 or 15 years perhaps 20 but we have some technology but our best domestic engines are jet engines that still are in the 1000 kg thrust range so we are far behind China, but we have some tech, so if you look that you can see, every one is moving ahead.

b787 said:

you can not be super optimistic and super pessimistic.China is already a jet engine power, but it has to still catch up with the best the west has, and the west also advances, so if China does three steps, the west does three too. so is not like China is catching up, everyone is moving ahead, and everyone has a program, so is not that easy.
Russia has the PD-14 and is moving ahead too, same is in Latin america, India, Japan etc etc, so is a highly competitive business where alliances count as much as the technology you have, and in that the West is still ahead, China, Russia and Japan are more or less at the same level, but Russia still is slightly ahead by probably a decade, India is very likely behind China, and in Latin America we are also behind China by probably 10 or 15 years perhaps 20 but we have some technology but our best domestic engines are jet engines that still are in the 1000 kg thrust range so we are far behind China, but we have some tech, so if you look that you can see, every one is moving ahead.

Click to expand...

It's more like China made 2 or 1.5 steps while the rest of the world made 3 if not 4 - those models that flaunt "will be the mainstay models" have been working on for almost 40 years yet still not reach full-scale production. Any reliance on Russian engine is a clear indication that China still couldn't crack that bottleneck.

I admit I'm pessimistic by nature, but like I said, fact doesn't lie. Perhaps they need to hang a few engineers and project managers for non-performance and squandering state's money. Hate to be a Stalinist but...(sigh) Tough love is a necessity.

MwRYum said:

It's more like China made 2 or 1.5 steps while the rest of the world made 3 if not 4 - those models that flaunt "will be the mainstay models" have been working on for almost 40 years yet still not reach full-scale production. Any reliance on Russian engine is a clear indication that China still couldn't crack that bottleneck.

I admit I'm pessimistic by nature, but like I said, fact doesn't lie. Perhaps they need to hang a few engineers and project managers for non-performance and squandering state's money. Hate to be a Stalinist but...(sigh) Tough love is a necessity.

Click to expand...

Given the enormous strides Chinese industry in general has made across the spectrum, I for one would not be pessimistic about Chinese aviation engine development especially given how much lag time it takes to make a complex device into a mass production item. The lag time of development for the mass production of VLS equipped naval vessels for the PLAN is a very good example of this in particular.

MwRYum said:

It's more like China made 2 or 1.5 steps while the rest of the world made 3 if not 4 - those models that flaunt "will be the mainstay models" have been working on for almost 40 years yet still not reach full-scale production. Any reliance on Russian engine is a clear indication that China still couldn't crack that bottleneck.

I admit I'm pessimistic by nature, but like I said, fact doesn't lie. Perhaps they need to hang a few engineers and project managers for non-performance and squandering state's money. Hate to be a Stalinist but...(sigh) Tough love is a necessity.

Click to expand...

What are you talking . They did mass produced WS10A and 400 copies are flying right now with not a single crash reported.
I haven't heard they sign contract for new AL31 batches sofar .
Yes the new J10 C use AL31 F engine that is because they have large inventory of AL31 Engine
I think it is the case of you have deep and sever prejudice and close your eyes and ears
The west and Russia has 80 to 90 years lead of course they are ahead But China did catch up fast and they are now closing the gap to no more than 10 years. It take a long time to developed aero engine 20 to 30 years. It take China 20 years to developed WS10A and production start in 2010 So it is about the right time line But thing get improve all the time and doesn't stay static

It could be the case of economy that AL31 is cheaper than WS 10A and They are gunning for better engine like WS 10B so that need time to mature That is what they are doing now with J 10C. In mean time they could use AL31 mk3 which is improve version of AL31
Thing doesn't stay static and J 10 get improve all the time with better engine, sensor and missiles. So it is pointless to keep producing J10A with WS 10A engine.
But we keep seeing new J16 and J11B with new Taihang engine proof that the production of WS10 is still going


China’s Taihang engines have become a significant, large-scale presence in the military, making China the third country in the world that has mass deployment of domestically-produced high-thrust engines for military use, according to the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) annual report.

AVIC's social responsibility report showed that the company is capable of independently conducting research and development on the next generation of high-thrust aerial engines, along with advanced drones such as Wing Loong, which have also been deployed in the military.

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force has deployed no less than 400 Taihang engines in five air force regiments. Various types of fighter jets are equipped with the engine, including the J-11B and J-15 carrier-based fighter jets, reported China Science Communication, a news site under the Chinese Academy of Sciences. So far there have been no crashes due to engine failure among Taihang engine-equipped fighter jets, the news site also noted.

Some doubts have been voiced about the originality of the Taihang engine, as there are people who believe the Chinese-made engine is a copy of its Western counterparts. However, according to China Science Communication, the development of the Taihang engine was based on accumulated experience and technological advances gathered since 1978. The engine was also based partially on its predecessor, WS-6, which spent some 20 years in development.

Meanwhile, the engine also took inspiration from the control system of Russia's AL-31F aircraft turbofan engine, China Science Communication admitted, calling the Taihang engine a result of “independent development combined with technology from the Soviet Union and the U.S.”

“China has become the fourth country in the world to independently design and produce large transportation aircraft, as well as the third country to independently develop stealth fighter jets,” the AVIC report said, adding that China has advanced its air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles to the fourth generation.

MwRYum said:

It doesn't "bother" them, but rather vindicated them time and again, due to China's lackluster performance in engine R&D. Fact can't lie, China keep announcing they make "keypoint breakthrough" in this and that, but to this day they just couldn't put forward even one series-production engine model that's at least just a generation behind the Western's latest. Look, we've heard that same "it'll be ready soon" for the last 30 years already. Even if we draw that line at 1999, there's still a whole lot of nothing.

It's almost 4 decades now and China still at most could only produce CG model and mockup, not real deal that survived torture tests and certified.

Click to expand...

Is WS-10 a serie produced engine that is equal to current operational engine in the West? If you replace West with USA, WS-10 is one generation behind, still qualifies per your standard? Or when you said West, you forgot Europe?

Strange that you overlooked it after 6 years in this forum.

MwRYum said:

It doesn't "bother" them, but rather vindicated them time and again, due to China's lackluster performance in engine R&D. Fact can't lie, China keep announcing they make "keypoint breakthrough" in this and that, but to this day they just couldn't put forward even one series-production engine model that's at least just a generation behind the Western's latest. Look, we've heard that same "it'll be ready soon" for the last 30 years already. Even if we draw that line at 1999, there's still a whole lot of nothing.

It's almost 4 decades now and China still at most could only produce CG model and mockup, not real deal that survived torture tests and certified.

Click to expand...

Pessimism isn’t the word I’d use, but skepticism is. I’m optimistic, huge resource, political will, hard work and Sino ingenuity will get the job done, but skeptical of speedy progress without major SOE reforms.

Consider the latest *solution* to produce superior aero engines by merging two underperforming and inadequate SOEs into a giant SOE. Are we to believe somehow the mixing of two big state owned enterprises, each with its own corporate cultures, different methodologies, deeply entrenched vested interests, and the omnipresent “not invented here” crowd would somehow cooperate, coordinate, innovate, and manufacture world-class engines? PULLEEASSSE!

The mere mixing of two barrels of good and bad apples into an even bigger barrel, without rooting out the bad from the good, would only spoil the bigger barrel. So, until we see big changes in the latest and greatest SOE, count me skeptical.