Chinese Engine Development

Xizor

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
1.
China is probably going to go for Adaptive Cycle Technology as the next evolution for its military turbofans to equip next Gen Air supremacy platform.

Isn't Adaptive Cycle a low hanging fruit compared to increasing MTBO, reliability and Military thrust?

2.

Has the WS-10 solved the spool up issue for good ? What was the root cause of the issue? Issue with FADEC in handling thrust demand? Or was it the compressor design /stall characteristics? Are there any information regarding the progress in solving this issue.
Can we assume that it has been solved. I'm of the assumption that it was a FADEC issue.
 
S

stannislas

Junior Member
Registered Member
Xsizor said:
1.
China is probably going to go for Adaptive Cycle Technology as the next evolution for its military turbofans to equip next Gen Air supremacy platform.

Isn't Adaptive Cycle a low hanging fruit compared to increasing MTBO, reliability and Military thrust?

2.

Has the WS-10 solved the spool up issue for good ? What was the root cause of the issue? Issue with FADEC in handling thrust demand? Or was it the compressor design /stall characteristics? Are there any information regarding the progress in solving this issue.
Can we assume that it has been solved. I'm of the assumption that it was a FADEC issue.
Click to expand...
Engineering point of view low hanging fruit is always a good solution, so why not until price otherwise?

Ppl generally believe ws-10 is reliable due to it has equip on j-10 for more than 100. Based on how conservatives PLAAF used to be on this issue before, it’s very likely to be the case. In terms of more concrete proof? Well wo didn’t realize this issue from a concert channel at beginning, so I won’t expect to know it’s closure through an official channel at the end, at least for now.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Xsizor said:
1.
China is probably going to go for Adaptive Cycle Technology as the next evolution for its military turbofans to equip next Gen Air supremacy platform.

Isn't Adaptive Cycle a low hanging fruit compared to increasing MTBO, reliability and Military thrust?

2.

Has the WS-10 solved the spool up issue for good ? What was the root cause of the issue? Issue with FADEC in handling thrust demand? Or was it the compressor design /stall characteristics? Are there any information regarding the progress in solving this issue.
Can we assume that it has been solved. I'm of the assumption that it was a FADEC issue.
Click to expand...
It’s been over a decade and the engine has had like 3-4 iterations by now
 
N

Nutrient

Junior Member
Registered Member
gadgetcool5 said:
Of course if China had better foreign relations then it would not need all this.
Click to expand...

The only way for China to have significantly better foreign relations is to be poor. If 1.4 billion people get rich, or they become even moderately well-off, that would automatically scare a lot of countries. So China would have to stay poor. Is that what you want?
 
Xizor

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
latenlazy said:
It’s been over a decade and the engine has had like 3-4 iterations by now
Click to expand...
Doesn't answer the question why and what exactly. All I was asking about the nature of the problem and how they tackled it. It seems like we only know that they used to have a spool up issue and judging by the fact that multiple iterations are there, they'd come up with a solution.

The solution itself needs to be known. If they are suffering from a FADEC related issue and if they've solved it, then that mean all is well (kind of).
If it isn't FADEC but the design of the engine itself (compressor stage) then that'd mean they are solving the issue by seeking to tolerate certain operational shortcomings. If the compressor can't handle the sudden increased thrust demand and takes time to generate thrust, it is obviously going to affect the flight performance of the aircraft. A pilot may seek for increased throttle but the FADEC won't translate that request fluently, instead gradually increasing it owing to the limitations with the compressor design. Also, other factors like air density (altitude) etc would come into consideration.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Xsizor said:
Doesn't answer the question why and what exactly. All I was asking about the nature of the problem and how they tackled it. It seems like we only know that they used to have a spool up issue and judging by the fact that multiple iterations are there, they'd come up with a solution.

The solution itself needs to be known. If they are suffering from a FADEC related issue and if they've solved it, then that mean all is well (kind of).
If it isn't FADEC but the design of the engine itself (compressor stage) then that'd mean they are solving the issue by seeking to tolerate certain operational shortcomings. If the compressor can't handle the sudden increased thrust demand and takes time to generate thrust, it is obviously going to affect the flight performance of the aircraft. A pilot may seek for increased throttle but the FADEC won't translate that request fluently, instead gradually increasing it owing to the limitations with the compressor design. Also, other factors like air density (altitude) etc would come into consideration.
Click to expand...
There is also such a thing as redesign of components...again it’s been 10 years.
 
I

Inst

Captain
I'll also point out that there's a CCTV report claiming what are likely WS-10Ds on the J-11 have hit 147 kN. I can repost it if you'd like; weasel on CDF posted it.

It's very promising because 147 kN is better than all competing 4th gen engines to my knowledge; the Su-35, for instance, only has 142 kN worth of thrust, and the F110 on the F-16 Block 60 (not sure about 70) is around 144 kN.
 
The Observer

The Observer

Junior Member
Registered Member
Inst said:
Sorry.

Asked Weasel about it, and got this link:


接近30吨.

Almost 30 tons, so if we use 143 kN, we'd get about 29.1 tons with two engines. So it's not a confirmation that they've hit 147 kN yet.
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand where your calculation comes from.

From my understanding, The guy was talking about the reliability problem with WS-10. Something about the compressor blade breaking (I think it's the first stage HP compressor), and then he gave an offhand estimate that the force would be like almost 30 tons hitting the engine casing.

Note: The guy is Li Hongxin (李宏新). According to the documentary, at that time he's Deputy Director of Shenyang Engine Design Institute (Google translate FTW!).
 
I

Inst

Captain
dankris said:
I don't quite understand where your calculation comes from.

From my understanding, The guy was talking about the reliability problem with WS-10. Something about the compressor blade breaking (I think it's the first stage HP compressor), and then he gave an offhand estimate that the force would be like almost 30 tons hitting the engine casing.

Note: The guy is Li Hongxin (李宏新). According to the documentary, at that time he's Deputy Director of Shenyang Engine Design Institute (Google translate FTW!).
Click to expand...

The very same correction you made was posted on CDF.

Sigh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top