Chinese Engine Development

by78

by78

General
minusone said:
Great, the most "substantial" mod of this forum has emerged. First thing he did was not taking down the rhetorical post but aiming at the person questioning the substance behind such claim.

Gold
Click to expand...

Did you even read the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
you had quoted? Do you even understand what "under-spec" means?

Your prickly sensitivity reveals an inferiority complex vis-a-vis the United States rather than confidence in China's capabilities in aerospace propulsion.

Interestingly, when contradicted and challenged on your claptrap, you instinctively resort to base insults befitting a five-year-old feral child. How old are you, seriously? Surely you're old enough to exercise a modicum of operational control over your mouth. Or is that too much to ask due to your special needs?

P.S. You're the real comedic gold, village genius.
 
by78

by78

General
sunnymaxi said:
with due respect brother.

WS series engines are highly reliable when it comes to service life and easier to maintain. but yet to touch Western counterparts. fine coz China started very late in this field. still made unprecedented progress. in fact WS series is still under progress. and continue to evolve.

WS-15/WS-19 are not 1980's technology. WS-15 is very advance and equipped with 21st century tech. can compete with Latest US military turbofan engines.

engine industry in mainland has now exploded. they can go anywhere.

***********************************************************************************************
lets talk about innovations.

2022 rankings. top25 institutes in NATURE index in science and technology, 12 are from China. USA still sit on top in innovation but China also enjoy solid second place in science and technology. and this is just the beginning.

the most reputed science journal in the world. NATURE index.
View attachment 111250

i have said many times. West is so outdated when it comes to Chinese progress and development.
Click to expand...

We should bestow upon you a title befitting your enthusiasm and optimism. I propose "
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
", or "First Class Professional Bringer of Good News". :D
 
H

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
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.
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean that someone is necessarily wrong.

BoraTas said:
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 agree. The XX years metric is fundamentally a flawed one. A much better assessment would be to specifically state which performance metrics U.S. engine technology is ahead in (and by how much) and which technologies Chinese engines lack. Lack of specifics is usually indicative of poor analysis. Though this is probably just a political interview, rather than a technocratic one.

That said, I think it would be useful for this thread to address what specifically China needs to catch up on. I've followed this thread for a while, and many useful things were said. It'd be nice to collate them and for someone to approach this subject in a holistic manner. I might have to go back and try to collate this stuff together for myself.
 
M

minusone

Junior Member
Registered Member
by78 said:
Did you even read the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
you had quoted? Do you even understand what "under-spec" means?

Your prickly sensitivity reveals an inferiority complex vis-a-vis the United States rather than confidence in China's capabilities in aerospace propulsion.

Interestingly, when contradicted and challenged on your claptrap, you instinctively resort to base insults befitting a five-year-old feral child. How old are you, seriously? Surely you're old enough to exercise a modicum of operational control over your mouth. Or is that too much to ask due to your special needs?

P.S. You're the real comedic gold, village genius.
Click to expand...

Since when is ECU not part of the equation when it comes to engine? Let alone the problem is clearly not just ECU itself. It's so convenient for US to wash off these serious hiccups with a term like "under-spec". Jeez, maybe PLA should learn a thing or two from them when their fan blade broke, "damn, we under-spec and ended up running hotter and at higher pressure." By the way, if this is just a minor problem, a slight tweak in ECU should've sorted it, instead they are asking for engine upgrades which involved the multiple engine components to support the cooling and power requirement??? ( i thought the engine was just capped by ECU??) to fully getting rid of it. How can a simple programming glitch remains unresolved for decade? How are these not a sign of faulty engine that led to less than 60% sorting rate of the current F35 fleet is beyond any sane person's understanding.

1681984432967.png

Finally, did you sprout all these nonsenses while looking at mirror? Because you hit all the brackets and get a perfect score. I still kept the screenshot of you throwing insults at member of this forums, but you managed to even insult others while lecturing them about insult is a sign of losing an argument, comedy genius you are. But now i forgive you since you are, as you said, a poor fella suffering from inferiority complex.

Your arrogance knows no bound.
 
D

Derpy

Junior Member
Registered Member
minusone said:
Since when is ECU not part of the equation when it comes to engine? Let alone the problem is clearly not just ECU itself. It's so convenient for US to wash off these serious hiccups with a term like "under-spec". Jeez, maybe PLA should learn a thing or two from them when their fan blade broke, "damn, we under-spec and ended up running hotter and at higher pressure." By the way, if this is just a minor problem, a slight tweak in ECU should've sorted it, instead they are asking for engine upgrades which involved the multiple engine components to support the cooling and power requirement??? ( i thought the engine was just capped by ECU??) to fully getting rid of it. How can a simple programming glitch remains unresolved for decade? How are these not a sign of faulty engine that led to less than 60% sorting rate of the current F35 fleet is beyond any sane person's understanding.

View attachment 111259

Finally, did you sprout all these nonsenses while looking at mirror? Because you hit all the brackets and get a perfect score. I still kept the screenshot of you throwing insults at member of this forums, but you managed to even insult others while lecturing them about insult is a sign of losing an argument, comedy genius you are. But now i forgive you since you are, as you said, a poor fella suffering from inferiority complex.

Your arrogance knows no bound.
Click to expand...
"The original program engine specification allocated 15 kW [kilowatts] of bleed air extraction to support system cooling requirements, and the F135 engine was designed, tested, and qualified to this specification with a level of margin available for future growth," Schmidt wrote. "During the final stages of initial aircraft development, air vehicle cooling requirements grew to exceed planned bleed air extraction."
"To provide the necessary bleed air, the engine is required to run hotter, and the program is realizing the effects of this through an increase in operating temperature, and a decrease in engine life, which is driving earlier depot inductions and an increase in lifecycle cost,"
It is the amount of bleed air that is underspeced not the engines thrust/performance
 
M

minusone

Junior Member
Registered Member
Derpy said:
"The original program engine specification allocated 15 kW [kilowatts] of bleed air extraction to support system cooling requirements, and the F135 engine was designed, tested, and qualified to this specification with a level of margin available for future growth," Schmidt wrote. "During the final stages of initial aircraft development, air vehicle cooling requirements grew to exceed planned bleed air extraction."
"To provide the necessary bleed air, the engine is required to run hotter, and the program is realizing the effects of this through an increase in operating temperature, and a decrease in engine life, which is driving earlier depot inductions and an increase in lifecycle cost,"
It is the amount of bleed air that is underspeced not the engines thrust/performance
Click to expand...

Ok, rev up the compressor, how hard can it be? Or could it be that the compressor was faulty?
 
by78

by78

General
minusone said:
Since when is ECU not part of the equation when it comes to engine? Let alone the problem is clearly not just ECU itself. By the way, if this is just a minor problem, a slight tweak in ECU should've sorted it, instead they are asking for engine upgrades which involved the multiple engine components to support the cooling and power requirement??? ( i thought the engine was just capped by ECU??) to fully getting rid of it.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? Do you even know what ECU refers to?

minusone said:
... instead they are asking for engine upgrades which involved the multiple engine components to support the cooling and power requirement??? ( i thought the engine was just capped by ECU??) to fully getting rid of it.
Click to expand...
Do you even know what the thermal management and power requirements refer to and what they are for? I can't read the article for you.

minusone said:
Finally, did you sprout all these nonsenses while looking at mirror? Because you hit all the brackets and get a perfect score. I still kept the screenshot of you throwing insults at member of this forums, but you managed to even insult others while lecturing them about insult is a sign of losing an argument, comedy genius you are. But now i forgive you since you are, as you said, a poor fella suffering from inferiority complex.

Your arrogance knows no bound.
Click to expand...
Do you even know what arrogance is? An example of arrogance would be when someone quotes an article to support his position when he himself hasn't read the article or doesn't possess the mental capacity to understand it, but he pretends otherwise in a pathetic attempt to bluster his way through a discussion.

Congratulations, genius, you've just scored a perfect 10/10 on the Minusone Arrogance and Stupidity Scale.
 
Last edited:
by78

by78

General
56860 said:
He's not optimistic. He's realistic. You are insufferable to be honest.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he thinks he's being realistic. Everything should naturally be rosy and perfect. Expecting anything less than smooth sailing is insufferable.
 
M

minusone

Junior Member
Registered Member
@by78

I have laid out all the points in there, and all you did was again asking dumb question thinking it was smart.

Im asking you again, how did a simple ECU glitch that require major components upgrade to solve is not considered as an engine issue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top