How long will it take from " design certification " to mass production?According to the Liyang employee, the WS-10 initial variant (12.5 tonne thrust) received recently, attaining development-termination status; that is, no more improvements can realistically be made on its design. Future production of that variant will be done according to the now-finalised specs and no modifications will need to be done to it thereafter. This entails the WS-10 variant that first flew in the early-2000s has now reached technological readiness level 9.
He knew this because Liming consulted with Liyang's experts on production certification. This is due to Liming's last production certification's being granted over forty years ago so that cohort has since retired, meaning the current Liming cohort has no experience with production certification. This contrasts to Liyang, which had concluded production certification in 2015 for the JL-9's engine so they have plenty of experience with production certification.
In answering further questions, he divulged additional info:
- J-10 family will not transition to this production-certified variant because of its higher bypass ratio compared to the AL-31 family which entails its having less consistent power output during flight at high altitudes or during vigorous manoeuvres. The J-10 series is increasing the electronics content of every successive iteration from the J-10 to 10A to 10B to 10C, so it's imperative that the engine does suffer unpredictable drops in power output as the electronics cannot function without a consistent power supply. The WS-10B, on the other hand, does have decent prospects of future wide-scale adoption on the J-10 series. The Sino-Flanker series can mount the production-certified WS-10 just fine because of their twin-engine design which means both engines supply power to the electronics basically guaranteeing that, even if the WS-10s suffer power output drops during high-G manoeuvres, there would still be enough power from the two engines for the electronics.
- The 2004 J-10 mounted with a WS-10A never reached design certification before being cancelled. However, valuable lessons were learnt from that experience.
- The WS-10B has received or is in the process of receiving design certification.
- The WS-15's nozzles are short and stubby, and comes with serrated edges. It'll be pretty obvious when a J-20 mounts them.
From another thread about the AL-222-25 copy, there were these tidbits:
- The Minshan project was a technology demonstration project from the very start. Only 3-5 examples were made and underwent testing.
- One such example, when undergoing testing, had its turbine disk shatter which flung out debris in all directions, puncturing the casing and severing hydraulic tubes. This resulted in a fire which got put out by the automatic fire extinguisher. The example thus met its end like so.
- Chongqing Tianjiao Aerospace Propulsion Corporation, in cooperation with Ukraine's Motor Sich, competed with 624th Institute's AL-222-25 copy using the OG design. They ended up winning due to Motor Sich's willingness to contribute all its prior knowledge of the AL-222-25 series to the joint venture with Tianjiao as well as a prevailing expectation among industry and the PLAAF towards 624th that it should be conducting next-gen R&D - as it has the more talented aviation powerplant researchers - instead of spending their time reverse-engineering a low-thrust previous-gen design.
A few miscellaneous points from other threads that weren't as juicy:
- The WS-13E is intended for use on the FC-31 in lieu of a 4th-gen medium-thrust engine. The original WS-13 (RD-33) is already sufficient for use on the FC-31 but 624th wanted a practice project before beginning a full-scale next-gen medium-thrust project, so they went ahead with the WS-13E.
- The WS-13E has ~9 tonnes of thrust, with a TWR slightly lower than 8.
- It is at a similar level of readiness as the WS-10B; so almost received or have already received design certification.
- The WS-12 is the non-afterburning version of WS-13.
- 624th currently has two projects under its wings; the WS-500 500kg-thrust engine and the WS-13E. After completing development of these two, which is close, they will be progressing onto the next-gen medium-thrust engine (WS-19?), whose target thrust is slightly higher than the EJ200's.
- 青城 is project codeword for the WS-500, 黄龙 is the turbojet version of WS-500.
- The WZ-10 turboshaft has been flight-tested and initial deliveries are to begin this year for further evaluation. Looking forward to seeing this on the Z-20.
- The naval WS-10 is simply the WS-10 with additional anti-corrosion treatment.
Chinese Engine Development
- Thread starter jackbh
- Start date
How long will it take from " design certification " to mass production?
Given the number of times CCTV-7 has chased dead end rumours and gotten things wrong, and given the number of times we see what they're reporting on military forums first, I highly doubt that they have special access to the PLA.
Are you referring to this channel, because it seems pretty reputable given that it is the official military outlet of CCTV ... And kindly point out where CCTV-7 "chased dead end rumors and gotten things wrong). Thanks.
vesicles
Colonel
I do remember one time CCTV showed a news segment about the J-10, using footage from the movie Top Gun...
Yeah. I remember that too
! But that was way back in 2010/11; I've seen their usage of foreign archives gradually decrease as the Chinese felt more confident of their own military. The PLA has come so far in the last 7 years ... and so has the quality of CCTV-7 reportingI am. I remember them parroting internet sourced claims like they were using the WS-10 with special stealth nozzles on the J-20 or that there would be a J-10C with conformal fuel tanks that would be installed with the WS-10 or that the J-11B had an AESA. Anyways, you don't have to take my word for it. I'm not going to go through years of archives to point out all the mistakes they've made. I'm just sharing my thoughts.
Also the original contention was the reliability of the Global Times. Even if we're to concede that CCTV-7 has some special access to information from the PLA, that does not mean we should assume that the GT does. Seeing as I've had friends who've worked for the GT before, I would not. They're not known for their journalistic rigour.
Only their reporting is authoritative, and even then, it's their frontline embedded-with-troops reporting that's the most authoritative. The 今日点击 segments at the end of their daily broadcasts are no more authoritative than CCTV-4 and interviews with pundits.
Yep. And their direct reporting is mostly about the human interest angle of the PLA. Where we do get tidbits of information that aren't sourced from the internet, it's often more about filling some gaps in our understanding than about planning details and breaking developments.
antiterror13
Brigadier
forever, just toooo looong
On the plus side, it is stable now.
Do we know which version is used on the J-16?