Chinese Engine Development

W

weig2000

Captain
BoraTas said:
Bad interview

There are a few red flag behaviors that cause me to instantly develop a suspicion about the writer or speaker. Just an instinct that grew over my 20 years of following the defense industry. Excessive focus on single crystal blades during jet engine discussion is among those red flags. That tech is neither new nor that important. It went through numerous iterations itself. It has been in widespread use for 45 years so the guy contradicted himself by saying "China is trying to learn single crystal blades" and "China is 20-25 years behind". WS series being unreliable is outdated info. There are no ways China putting WS-10s on a single-engine jet otherwise. I would be extremely surprised if WS-10B doesn't have a 1000+ hour MTBO and 3000+ hour lifespan. And interview snippets we have indeed suggest they have.

"xx years behind" is not a useful benchmark method either. Especially since "backward" engines are powering most of USAF.

The part about Chinese innovation is totalitarianism trope. Doesn't even need discussion.
Click to expand...

I know people can get subjective when debating these kinds of issues. Different angles and not knowing the specs with certainty and all that.

But here is a simple smell test: Assume that you have a decent understanding of the military aircraft engine and the related technologies and the industry, but don't know much about the status of Chinese military aircraft engine. What would be your takeaways of the status of Chinese engines and gaps between that of China and those countries presumably with advanced military engines and technologies such as the US, Russia, UK, France, Germany and Sweden after watching the video?

Compare those takeaways with what you actually know about the status of Chinese engine and the gaps based on your years of following the industry. You can then draw the conclusion about the guests and the video.
 
Z

zszczhyx

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

寿命​

寿命是衡量民用发动机先进性和经济性的重要指标。目前AES100单台整机已完成了超过3000h首翻期寿命科研试验，验证了发动机结构完整性和耐久性，为掌握长寿命发动机的运行规律和材料工艺稳定性积累了宝贵经验。
Click to expand...
Life is an important index to measure the advancement and economy of civil engine. At present, AES100 single machine has completed the scientific research test of the first renovation interval of over 3000h, verified the structural integrity and durability of the engine, and accumulated valuable experience for mastering the operation law of the long-life engine and the material process stability.

Now they are moving toward the goal of 4,000 hours.
 
M

minusone

Junior Member
Registered Member
Deino said:
Well ... as much as I'm impressed by the most recent progress, it must be admitted that by all accounts we know, most of the mentioned points are valid, both that Chinese engines "are not as reliable like US or Western ones" and also "that they are years behind"! To what extent they are less reliable and how many years behind is beyond my understanding, but even you must admit, the F119 and F135 are decades old and surely still the benchmark for any modern fighter engine.

As such as much as I disagree with these general's typical statements, I disagree to a similar extent with your "HAHAHAHAHAH and Lols!"
In fact this is the same - sorry to sound rude - believe in stupid propaganda like you accuse the US statements being stupid or "usual baseless argument" from US generals.

Again, I do not want to downrate the latest achievements and also the steps towards catching up, but we must admit, the US is also not sleeping, and also has new technologies in development, the new engine for the 6th generation fighter will surely push that bar up to the next level and if China can not only catch up the F135's level within a few years - you mention 10 - but even completely be on par with the then latest technology is IMO far from sure.

At least I won't bet.
Click to expand...
lmao, US engines are reliable...yea right.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
M

minusone

Junior Member
Registered Member
ChongqingHotPot92 said:
WS series engines are unreliable with short life

I wouldn't surprised if this were true relatively. However, maybe Chinese engines do have inferior lifespan and reliability compared to F-110 and F-119/135 because the US has been making aero engines for decades, but as long as Chinese engines satisfies the the PLAAF and PLAN's needs, that's what matters. It is like Mig-21s fighting against the F-4s during Vietnam. Sure, the F-4s were superior in quality, but the Mig-21s were just good enough to threaten the F-4s survivability. That worked in Vietnam.

Engines are 20-25 years behind U.S tech

Absolutely true, if not 30 years. However, it is about what works. China only needs WS-10, WS-15, and WS-20 (all are 1980s era US technology) to put an end to US dominance in the air for the next 10-15 years.

Chinese can innovate but their system prevents it.. (A lot of this rhetoric)

The CCP prioritizes certain critical technologies over others. For the ones that the Party prioritizes (like those stated under MIC 2025 Industrial Policy), Beijing would try to make them successful regardless of costs. It is not about market economy or economic efficiency, but national security and survival.

U.S military engine sector benefits from civilian engine sector.

This is why Beijing now has an industrial policy called Civil-Military Fusion, which the US is cracking down REAL hard but to a limited effect thus far.
Click to expand...
This forum has long demanded substances for far too long to withstand these kind of rhetorical-raced based BS.

PLA would not have used ws-series if it's not reliable, that would mean they spent too much on crap and needed to spend more to maintain it, which results in lesser funding allocations for the PLA wellfares.

And nope, civilian engine sector does not rely on the government funding to operate, they should've been able to sustain operation based on profit alone. Corps like GE, PW are just government-linked corporation in disguise of private corporations.
 
M

minusone

Junior Member
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
I know people can get subjective when debating these kinds of issues. Different angles and not knowing the specs with certainty and all that.

But here is a simple smell test: Assume that you have a decent understanding of the military aircraft engine and the related technologies and the industry, but don't know much about the status of Chinese military aircraft engine. What would be your takeaways of the status of Chinese engines and gaps between that of China and those countries presumably with advanced military engines and technologies such as the US, Russia, UK, France, Germany and Sweden after watching the video?

Compare those takeaways with what you actually know about the status of Chinese engine and the gaps based on your years of following the industry. You can then draw the conclusion about the guests and the video.
Click to expand...
If the western takeaway of China ever hit 30% accuracy, China would've been economically doomed as they predicted like in all their assessment of China. So, try harder.

What you are advocating here is that truth = what the other folks in general believe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top