Money can't make up for deficits in technical knowledge and experience.
Chinese Engine Development
- Thread starter jackbh
- Start date
Money can't make up for deficits in technical knowledge and experience.
No, but you certainly can't do it without money.
Just saying that money isn't the problem for China. There's a reason we suspect a certain amount of time for the WS-15 to mature despite China's money advantage.
Experience? From development of WS-10A, mistake learns and development of advance alloy will be passed on to WS-15.
Knowleadge? Money is used by nurturing the next generation bright scientist. Reward and retaining the potential one and keep them away from civil sector. Multiple experiment will carried out to speed up the process. Expensive and useful equipment are procured to also speed up the experiment process. More prototype can be build to facilitate more experiment.
From the few words you suggest, it seems like you are thinking China pour money into it without purpose.
I have a few example that previous project helps to speed up future one once the first time ' Do it' thing is go thru. JF-17 project is so fast becos of previous project experience gain from J-10. Yes, JF-17 might be less ambitions but alot of new technology also introduced and proceed quite fast and smoothly. Example DSI/ Large multi-color glass cockpit.
WS-10A is first China advance turbofan. Of cos, it will take longer and more hurdles to cross. I have strong faith and example to to correctly assume WS-15 journey will be much smoother and faster after WS-10.
I'm merely saying that pouring money into a project when there are things money can't fix wouldn't make any sense, not that they are necessarily doing so. Again, China's problem isn't money but technical knowledge and experience. Of course the process involved in the development of the WS-10A will help, but the Chinese only have succeeded on one advanced turbofan design right now. They are still untested in how well they can use what they've learned from one project to benefit their progress on a more advanced one. New projects meant to push technological envelopes will require as much generation of new thinking as application of old thinking, and that can't be bridged with how much money you can spend or how many young ones you can teach. Time is the only factor. Rewards spur effort, they don't breed innovation and creativity, but innovation and creative thinking is what you need to keep pushing the fringe of what your technology is capable of. Experiments can be enabled by money, but they aren't created by them. They are created by having new ideas, and again, that's a matter of time, and not money.
To put it in brief, money is important but it's only one of many factors, and in China's case it's not the limiting factor (nor has it been for the last decade or so). There's a limit to what money can do, and if we assume that funds for the WS-15 are as available as they've been for the WS-10 (and this comes with its own assumption that China hasn't been pinching its wallets here), then even if China had all the money in the world it still wouldn't be able to overcome the bottleneck of technical knowledge and experience, which solely depend on time to build.
On a side note, China's progress on turbofans is incomparable to its other progresses within the aerospace industry. You can point out how they've been able to take experience and technical knowledge from one project and innovate in another, but obviously that rate of progress is much slower for turbofans. Even the JF-17, while ready on all other fronts, has experienced and is experiencing problems with its indigenous turbofan development.
Either way, I don't expect the WS-15 to necessarily progress more quickly than the WS-10. A portion of the problems in China's turbofan production lies not in the design process but the production process, and those may not necessarily be fleshed out by the time the WS-15 is ready for production. Production quality is after all a much broader issue that's plagued China's high tech development sector.
but the engine nozzles of a J-20 look like different from the WS-10A's showed in Zhuhai. The petals of the nozzle of J-20 is narrower than a WS-10A's noozle' and it looks like that the diameter of a J-20's nozzle is larger than a AL-31FN's nozzle's.
I incline to think it is a variant of WS-10 series but not a WS-10A. A WS-10A is a engine whitch is supposed to be in service with J-10 and J-11, so the desginers have to compromise the lifespan and the thrust of the engine. But if they build a variant engine only for J-20's test flight, they will be able to increase the thrust by choosing a higher turbine inlet temperature at the cost of the lifespan.
I would agree with you if China did have some 117S.
But from where has Chinese got these 117S? Why do Russians keep silence if they have provided the 117S for J-20. Why have they become so modest this time?
Dizasta1
Senior Member
I have read through many pages of the thread WS-10 and do not understand three important issues:
1. Has the FWS-10 engine been certified for full scale production?
2. Is the FWS-10 engine intended for J-10?
3. Is FWS-10A intended for the J-10B/FC-20?
There have been reports that I have read (unsure about their authenticity) which state that China is having difficulties with the engine overhaul time-cycle. They state that the Chinese engines only reach 80hrs worth of flying before they require an overhaul. Is there any truth to this? Plus, if the FWS-10 Taihang engines are intended for the J-10/J-10B, then what sort of production batches is the PLAAF looking at to equip its Air Force Squadrons and Regiments?
Being Pakistani, my primary concern is the success of the Chinese in their drive to develop and mass produce domestically designed and produced fighter-jet engines. A Chinese success translates into further non-dependency of Pakistan on non-allied foreign countries (Russia, America & etc). Currently PAC (Pakistan Aeronautical Complex) is assembling the JF-17 Thunder fighter-jets, outfitted with Russian RD-93 engines. Ideally, we would like to rid ourselves of any dependency on Russia and would want increase the Joint Venture development on JF-17 Thunder, with China.
Also, J-10B of China, plays a very important role for Pakistan Air Force when trying to counter the enemy Su-30Mki Flanker. So it is of equal importance for us Pakistanis to follow keenly on the development of the FWS-10 engines, as we are on the WS-13 engines, that China is developing.
1. Has the FWS-10 engine been certified for full scale production?
2. Is the FWS-10 engine intended for J-10?
3. Is FWS-10A intended for the J-10B/FC-20?
There have been reports that I have read (unsure about their authenticity) which state that China is having difficulties with the engine overhaul time-cycle. They state that the Chinese engines only reach 80hrs worth of flying before they require an overhaul. Is there any truth to this? Plus, if the FWS-10 Taihang engines are intended for the J-10/J-10B, then what sort of production batches is the PLAAF looking at to equip its Air Force Squadrons and Regiments?
Being Pakistani, my primary concern is the success of the Chinese in their drive to develop and mass produce domestically designed and produced fighter-jet engines. A Chinese success translates into further non-dependency of Pakistan on non-allied foreign countries (Russia, America & etc). Currently PAC (Pakistan Aeronautical Complex) is assembling the JF-17 Thunder fighter-jets, outfitted with Russian RD-93 engines. Ideally, we would like to rid ourselves of any dependency on Russia and would want increase the Joint Venture development on JF-17 Thunder, with China.
Also, J-10B of China, plays a very important role for Pakistan Air Force when trying to counter the enemy Su-30Mki Flanker. So it is of equal importance for us Pakistanis to follow keenly on the development of the FWS-10 engines, as we are on the WS-13 engines, that China is developing.
I think this post answerr your question and from this pictures. I am also convinced FWS-10 have install on J-20. Andrei Chang is usally quite negative about PLAAF development. But when things is true, you got to tell the truth.
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/j-20-new-generation-fighter-141-4260.html#post134560
Actually, from the picture. You can see the petal is much bigger compare to AL-31F one which matches WS-10 description.
Attachments
-
J-20.jpg
Last edited: