China is clearing going to rely on domestic engine and engine markers, so it should be obvious they need to be doing continuous R&D of new engines. There is no other way around it.
Chinese Engine Development
- Thread starter jackbh
- Start date
Equation
Lieutenant General
True but my point is how many country has the capability to maintain continuous R&D of new engines all on their own for many years to come? Only a hand full and possibly even less down the road as the cost of to maintain such a program are getting more expensive.
Time for some updates on the engine R&D insider thread as he replied to many questions, as well as sharing information in another thread.
He elaborated on the aforementioned :
This is consistent with recent statements from Y-20's chief designer.
The is what the initial WS-10 was supposed to be; reliable, 13.2 tonne thrust, and with FADEC. The WS-10 that entered service had 12.5 tonne thrust and no FADEC, instead relying on an . It was also based on the core of the CFM56-2, whereas the WS-10B adopted features of the CFM-56-7 to rectify issues of the WS-10. J-10B prototype mounted a WS-10B and was going to conduct a design verification flight when a broken blade was discovered during pre-flight checks. An AL-31FN was mounted instead and the J-10B's design verification was done while flying with that.
Since then, the testing of the has gone well, with multiple aircraft having flown with it. However, he is not sure of production numbers, only that design certification hasn't been granted yet. When the WS-10B enters full-scale production, China will have gotten her F100-PW-229 equivalent, some 25 years after the US. Here's hoping the WS-15 doesn't take as long.
The WS-10IPE is the "14 tonne" WS-10 that was confirmed by AVIC at Zhuhai. The development of the IPE actually started quite a while ago. When 606th Institute asked for funds to develop the IPE, the PLAAF said "get a proper 13.2 tonne WS-10 ready first before we entertain any notion of a 14 tonne WS-10". However, they still gave 606th a bit of funding to sustain some R&D on the IPE. Currently, the IPE has been but problems remain as the design philosophy for the IPE was literally "let's use better materials and squeeze more thrust from the same design" which sort of worked but squeezing 14 tonnes of thrust from a 13.2 tonne design poses problems of its own.
Development of WS-15 or next-gen turbofan program, as known back then, was initiated no later than 1990. Owing to 624th's R&D limitations, Soviet engineers were employed in the design of the WS-15 engine core. This is mentioned in the link to the WS-10B. The insider also claims that 606th is saying the WS-15 engine-core design has problems but 624th is saying that they conducted many, many tests before handing the project over to 606th and never found a problem, so 606th needs to show some evidence. At the same time, 606th has initiated a F119-class project based on the WS-10B engine core enlarged by a factor of 1.4, probably as a backup to the WS-15.
The way I see it, if SAC's 606th can't or won't identify the issue soon, AVIC - under pressure from the PLA - will probably give the WS-15 project back to 624th and let 606th continue with the enlarged WS-10B project.
In other news, the WS-13, which got cancelled some time ago, got reinstated. This design does not have FADEC. The non-afterburning version of WS-13 has been retrofitted with FADEC as the original design did not have it; this non-afterburning variant is also the type Liyang, or 460th Plant, is going to deliver to the PLAAF/PLANAF this year for UAVs. Development of the , or WS-13E, never stopped. This design also has FADEC.
is now quite familiar with FADEC technology and it's now strange to not have FADEC on new Chinese engines. The WJ-6 turboprop and "18" engines (WS-18?) are both getting FADEC integration.
He elaborated on the aforementioned :
- F Stage: Conceptual Design
- C Stage: Preliminary Design
- S Stage: Prototyping Stage
- D Stage: Design Finalisation; LRIP
- P Stage: Full-Scale Production
This is consistent with recent statements from Y-20's chief designer.
The is what the initial WS-10 was supposed to be; reliable, 13.2 tonne thrust, and with FADEC. The WS-10 that entered service had 12.5 tonne thrust and no FADEC, instead relying on an . It was also based on the core of the CFM56-2, whereas the WS-10B adopted features of the CFM-56-7 to rectify issues of the WS-10. J-10B prototype mounted a WS-10B and was going to conduct a design verification flight when a broken blade was discovered during pre-flight checks. An AL-31FN was mounted instead and the J-10B's design verification was done while flying with that.
Since then, the testing of the has gone well, with multiple aircraft having flown with it. However, he is not sure of production numbers, only that design certification hasn't been granted yet. When the WS-10B enters full-scale production, China will have gotten her F100-PW-229 equivalent, some 25 years after the US. Here's hoping the WS-15 doesn't take as long.
The WS-10IPE is the "14 tonne" WS-10 that was confirmed by AVIC at Zhuhai. The development of the IPE actually started quite a while ago. When 606th Institute asked for funds to develop the IPE, the PLAAF said "get a proper 13.2 tonne WS-10 ready first before we entertain any notion of a 14 tonne WS-10". However, they still gave 606th a bit of funding to sustain some R&D on the IPE. Currently, the IPE has been but problems remain as the design philosophy for the IPE was literally "let's use better materials and squeeze more thrust from the same design" which sort of worked but squeezing 14 tonnes of thrust from a 13.2 tonne design poses problems of its own.
Development of WS-15 or next-gen turbofan program, as known back then, was initiated no later than 1990. Owing to 624th's R&D limitations, Soviet engineers were employed in the design of the WS-15 engine core. This is mentioned in the link to the WS-10B. The insider also claims that 606th is saying the WS-15 engine-core design has problems but 624th is saying that they conducted many, many tests before handing the project over to 606th and never found a problem, so 606th needs to show some evidence. At the same time, 606th has initiated a F119-class project based on the WS-10B engine core enlarged by a factor of 1.4, probably as a backup to the WS-15.
The way I see it, if SAC's 606th can't or won't identify the issue soon, AVIC - under pressure from the PLA - will probably give the WS-15 project back to 624th and let 606th continue with the enlarged WS-10B project.
In other news, the WS-13, which got cancelled some time ago, got reinstated. This design does not have FADEC. The non-afterburning version of WS-13 has been retrofitted with FADEC as the original design did not have it; this non-afterburning variant is also the type Liyang, or 460th Plant, is going to deliver to the PLAAF/PLANAF this year for UAVs. Development of the , or WS-13E, never stopped. This design also has FADEC.
is now quite familiar with FADEC technology and it's now strange to not have FADEC on new Chinese engines. The WJ-6 turboprop and "18" engines (WS-18?) are both getting FADEC integration.
Last edited:
Blackstone
Brigadier
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
You got it wrong He meant it won't be installed in 2017 But the Chief engineer Tang definitely said 2018 !
Blackstone
Brigadier
And given the lackluster history of PRC turbofan development (not copy but innovation & development), can you honestly tell me you don't have some doubts in your own mind about a Y-20 flying with LRIP WS-20s in 2017 or even 2018?
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Lackluster compare to what? On average it take 15 years to develop Turbo fan engine in the size of WS20. Check my posting on the other thread of Transportation it is comparable to development time of C17 engine.
Not to mention that it their first time developing high bypass engine the size of 12 ton or about the size of CFM56
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
He didn't say it would be an LRIP WS-20 in 2018; they said it could be mounted on Y-20 in 2018, which may mean for testing, first as 1 of 4 engines, then as all 4 engine, and if it goes smoothly, it WS-20 could enter LRIP at a timeline not yet given. You have to read the English and not add things from your imagination in there.
Some of this stuff is inconsistent with other information we've deemed to be reliable for years now. The two that stood out most was the bit about FADEC in the WS-10 and the J-10B design certification. The latter might need some clarification, since we saw the J-10B undergoing testing years before we saw 1035, and when we did see 1035 it was being flown concurrently other J-10Bs installed with the AL-31.
I'm not sure where the notion that WS-10A entered service with FADEC originated. It could be one of those things that got repeated so many times that it was assumed to be true; like claims that ZTZ-96A used a 1000hp engine when it was actually using 800hp, or ZTZ-99 used 1500hp when it was 1200hp.
About J-10B No.1035, he didn't say they were giving it design certification, I expressed it poorly in my original statement. He just said the 1035 was going to validate or verify certain technologies or designs while using the WS-10B. When the WS-10B's damage was discovered, they switched it out and continued with the tests using an AL-31FN. The switching-out process seems to have taken less time than expected because the insider said there were official statements that praised the work of the team that switched the engines. I'm assuming their expediency prevented major delays to J-10B's testing schedule.