Chinese Engine Development

Kalec said:

Anyone get any idea what the engine is? Comment section claims it is a CJ-1000A tested on Y-20 because it is in COMAC paint. Or photoshopped as usual?
View attachment 109714

Click to expand...

latenlazy said:

Doesn’t look like a PS but someone should post the original video to be sure. The engine looks like it’s got an AECC livery potentially. If that’s what it is it confirms the CJ-1000 flying on a Y-20.

Click to expand...

tphuang said:

I don't see why this couple of guys would know what they are talking about. Do you think pilots would know operational economics better than people who actual operate a fleet?

It's a commonly held belief by many around the industry that 2 engines is better than 4. As I said, Leeham news, which imo is the most professional of all aerospace sources, did a real study into it and found that the operating cost (and for airlines, that would include all aspect of engine cost) for 2 vs 4 engine aircraft is about the same. It actually makes no sense why Leap-1A would be harder to maintain than GE9X. Now, in the case of A380, there weren't many of them around, so there weren't many A380 engines compared to 77W engines. Sure, when there are fewer engines around to maintain and fewer fleets operate them, then it's costs go up.

Notice, I didn't mention GTF here. That's a new technology that Pratt spent 30 years and still couldn't get right until many years after service entrance.

Click to expand...

zszczhyx said:

There is another possibility that this is aef1300, the civilian version of ws-20.

Click to expand...

latenlazy said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Assuming that the linked Leeham report is the one you're referring to. The Quora response I've linked makes a different set of comparisons between the A330 and A340, which both used same generation engines for the duration of their product runs. While I think the Leeham analysis is fine, based on the reference comparisons they're making I don't know if it's that comprehensive. Either way I don't feel very strongly about this contention. I'm just going to assume that airplane designers and airline executives have looked at the relevant cost and performance factors and are making informed decisions about what designs requirements they're looking for. Don't really have more to say about it than that. If we see quad engine designs coming back that should say enough on its own terms.

Click to expand...

latenlazy said:

I can see AEF-1300 being used for a military use C919 design if the CJ-1000 isn't sanction proofed or if there's no desire to siphon some production capacity for non-commercial use.

That said, if there was any critical foreign component in the CJ-1000 before it's very unlikely there will be now.

EDIT: Another reason for using AEF-1300 for a military use C919 over CJ-1000 would be to simplify engine sustainment logistics.

Click to expand...

minusone said:

You got it right, C919 is not sanction proof (imported parts used), AEF-1300 was meant as backup, but may not as efficient FC wise.

Click to expand...

siegecrossbow said:

whxl子涵 from Kuaizhou app has the original video.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It is complete and utterly legit. In fact testing has started as early as January as per the following report:
View attachment 109719

It is almost as if Chinese turbofan development, after 30 years of slow methodical boning, has finally climaxed and is now blowing its load every where.

Click to expand...

zszczhyx said:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639085083499040769

Click to expand...

latenlazy said:

Very unlikely that this remains the case before it's completed development. AEF1300 is not really a meaningful backstop since it won't take that long for the CJ-1000 to be sanction proofed if that's absolutely necessary (if it's not the case already).

Click to expand...