Isn’t the only difference between early production J-20A and current J-20A the engines? With early ones using AL-31FM2 and current ones using WS-10C? That’s why I consider it to be the closest to an apples to apples comparison. At least aerodynamically and in terms of intakes I don’t see any other differences.
Chinese Engine Development
- Thread starter jackbh
- Start date
no need to watch.
WS-10C is far superior engine. manufacture in 2010's decade with latest components and better material ..
i can't force people to accept this fact.
by78
General
All this seems to jibe broadly with the recent revelation in the J-10C thread that the WS-10B may have in excess of 14tf thrust while the -C could be at 15tf. Perhaps with the exception of tphuang's assertion that they have better life/TBO than the 117S, since that does not seem to follow from any of the new information released, so the argument I laid out earlier on that point continues to hold.
All in all, the WS-10 family would then mirror the 117/117S even more closely, where the Su-57 variant of the engine has also been bumped up slightly to 15tf, probably at the expense of durability. Turbomachinery in the Russian engines is stated to be common, with differences only in the ignition system (plasma in Su-57), ECU and starter (shared APU in Su-57, individual jet fuel starters in Su-35S). So the engine is just being run harder, and somebody indicated BPR in the WS-10C is actually lower than in the -B: better for supersonic dry thrust, but to still get the increase to 15tf *static* the engine then has to be run even harder. Another point that argues life/TBO won't be winning any prizes in the WS-10C at least.
The point about dynamic thrust is an interesting one, as alluded to earlier differences in BPR may make themselves felt here, but also the fact that the AL-31F family has a sophisticated con/di nozzle with independent throat/exit area control. That should tend to give it an additional edge in supersonic flight due to better expansion control, but then the WS-10B on the J-16 has recently gained a con/di nozzle as well - though we don't know about throat/exit area scheduling. What surprises me most is that this nozzle (in LO form, of course) didn't go on the WS-10C, if (given the BPR reduction and thrust increase) supersonic performance was apparently a major consideration. Perhaps there were problems with getting its signature down sufficiently (possibly not even RCS but IR, since an ejector nozzle with a cool secondary stream definitely has certain advantages there)?
All in all, the WS-10 family would then mirror the 117/117S even more closely, where the Su-57 variant of the engine has also been bumped up slightly to 15tf, probably at the expense of durability. Turbomachinery in the Russian engines is stated to be common, with differences only in the ignition system (plasma in Su-57), ECU and starter (shared APU in Su-57, individual jet fuel starters in Su-35S). So the engine is just being run harder, and somebody indicated BPR in the WS-10C is actually lower than in the -B: better for supersonic dry thrust, but to still get the increase to 15tf *static* the engine then has to be run even harder. Another point that argues life/TBO won't be winning any prizes in the WS-10C at least.
The point about dynamic thrust is an interesting one, as alluded to earlier differences in BPR may make themselves felt here, but also the fact that the AL-31F family has a sophisticated con/di nozzle with independent throat/exit area control. That should tend to give it an additional edge in supersonic flight due to better expansion control, but then the WS-10B on the J-16 has recently gained a con/di nozzle as well - though we don't know about throat/exit area scheduling. What surprises me most is that this nozzle (in LO form, of course) didn't go on the WS-10C, if (given the BPR reduction and thrust increase) supersonic performance was apparently a major consideration. Perhaps there were problems with getting its signature down sufficiently (possibly not even RCS but IR, since an ejector nozzle with a cool secondary stream definitely has certain advantages there)?
So you cite lack of new information as reason to uphold your claim, and then you proceed to cite random forum posters' claims about ws-10c running harder in the expense of MTBO which was not official.
This whole things about ws-10c compromised badly on MTBO for increased thrust seems to be a product of confirmation bias than anything else.
Also the WS-10c serrated nozzle with cooling vents indicated the design was meant to be VLO.
Sounds like what GE did to the F404-GE-400 improving it to the -402 (EPE) which improved the flight performance of the Hornet:
One other thing to keep in mind is that the AL-31 series weren’t designed with the J-20 in mind. They had to make some modifications and compromises to get it working on the aircraft, which also hampered performance. WS-10C was designed from the ground up to integrate with Chinese aircraft.
this is another biggest misconception regarding WS-10C. just to increase thrust Shenyang compromised on MTBO. LMAOOOO
In-fact WS-10C incorporated latest components, supposed to used in early WS-15 engine. 3rd generation single crystal alloy have been using in this engine since 2020. Shenyang liming institute digitalized entire assembling just to increase efficiency of the product. far superior manufacturing process have implement in component production.
WS-10 engine continuously in upgrading phase. don't be surprised if they put 4th generation single crystal alloy DD15 in machine.
PLAAF is very happy with the performance of WS-10C. this is the main reason why Chengdu pumping 65-70 aircrafts with this engine per year.
We can always aim higher, or trying to compare but the most important fact is that the WS-10C meet requirements. They would not pumping these aircraft if not.
Sure that PLAAF is happy, using WS-10 in all new J-16, j-10 and j-20 airframes means that these engines deliver whatever the variant. It would not be used at large like that if it would not perform equal or better than engines replaced that Russia would be glad to sell at cheap prices.
We will see when a new engine family will carry the flag but right now it's the WS-10 family (WS-10A, WS-10B, WS-10C, WS-20), new variant that will fulfill naval requirements but also QD70 gas turbine in industrial and ship uses.
Last edited: