Chinese Engine Development
- Thread starter jackbh
- Start date
Thats not a good sign. When do you think j-20 will use domestic engine?
Hyperwarp
Captain
Which version? The standard version on the Su-27SK has only 12,500 kgf. Are they using the AL-31FNx-Mx series?
terrorhunter
Banned Idiot
whats your source and evidence?
Roger604
Senior Member
That's disappointing. I wonder why did Andrei Chang say that he recognizes AL-31F sound but doesn't think J-20 has AL-31F?
That's not the right way to analyze it. If you are a poor country, how do you prioritize your defense spending?
Obviously first would be nuclear weapons. That's why China had thermonuclear bomb by 1967, effective nuclear deterrence against USSR by early 80's and against USA by 2006.
Next would be SAMs and infantry equipment. That's why China had relatively advanced SAMs and infantry equipment in the 80's and 90's.
Next would be anti-access weapons. That's why China had relatively advanced diesel submarines in early 2000's like Song.
Only very last would be power projection like turbofans, large transports and carriers. That time is now.
So, we can expect development speed of turbofans, transports and carriers to be similar to thermonuclear weapons in the 60's. Not like how slow they were prior to ~2007. Because this is now the focus of scarce resources.
The problem with that argument is that it assumes the turbofan is an individual and unique target of military investment when in fact it is a subset of the broader military aviation sector. Aviation has been one of the primary focuses of military development for China since at least the last two decades, so it's telling when all other aspects of Chinese aviation technology have met or surpassed the 4++ generation threshold and the turbofan is still struggling. This informs us that at least within this section of development, money doesn't seem to be the problem, especially since you'd think that if everything else about Chinese aviation has caught up they'd be able to divert more of their limited resources to the turbofan to keep progress symmetrical.That's disappointing. I wonder why did Andrei Chang say that he recognizes AL-31F sound but doesn't think J-20 has AL-31F?
That's not the right way to analyze it. If you are a poor country, how do you prioritize your defense spending?
Obviously first would be nuclear weapons. That's why China had thermonuclear bomb by 1967, effective nuclear deterrence against USSR by early 80's and against USA by 2006.
Next would be SAMs and infantry equipment. That's why China had relatively advanced SAMs and infantry equipment in the 80's and 90's.
Next would be anti-access weapons. That's why China had relatively advanced diesel submarines in early 2000's like Song.
Only very last would be power projection like turbofans, large transports and carriers. That time is now.
So, we can expect development speed of turbofans, transports and carriers to be similar to thermonuclear weapons in the 60's. Not like how slow they were prior to ~2007. Because this is now the focus of scarce resources.
On a separate note, it would also be faulty to categorize turbofan development as primarily for the purpose of power projection. It is not, especially since any air force must first have the capability to defend its own air space, which would elevate the need for an indigenous turbofan.
Things have been getting more and more interesting since the so-called J-20 showed up. I'm under the impression that almost all Chinese fanboys have misinterpreted the terminology of Chinese official and semi-official press's articles on WS-10. When they read from these articles which told that 606 institute was "working over day and night testing and solving "a certain" engine's problems", they though the "certain" engine was the old version of WS-10 which passed its design authentification in 2005. They never asked themself why the designers would play the technologists' rules in factory to solve the manufactural problem if there were problems. Doesn't China have technologists in factories to settle manufatural and technological problems? Or some one may say the problems are design prolems but I can't imagine how on earth could the engine pass its design authentifacation, which usually takes place after years of test bed and filght tests, if it still had so many design problems without being identified and fixed?
A reasonable explaination is:
Once the pristine version WS-10 passed its design authentification, the 606 had turned to develope one or more derivatives of WS-10 and the problems of these articles mentioned were the problems of new engines, not the old one. The old one may have manufactural problems, but it is Liming, the manufacturer, responsible to solve them.
I incline to believe that the Chinese press's article which A.Man refered was telling the truth: the main problem of Taihang was China could not mass produce monocrystalline turbo blades. But such technological or manufactural problems could not stop Zhang En-he's team developing a few variant engines with higher thrust to power J-20.
A reasonable explaination is:
Once the pristine version WS-10 passed its design authentification, the 606 had turned to develope one or more derivatives of WS-10 and the problems of these articles mentioned were the problems of new engines, not the old one. The old one may have manufactural problems, but it is Liming, the manufacturer, responsible to solve them.
I incline to believe that the Chinese press's article which A.Man refered was telling the truth: the main problem of Taihang was China could not mass produce monocrystalline turbo blades. But such technological or manufactural problems could not stop Zhang En-he's team developing a few variant engines with higher thrust to power J-20.
Last edited:
The problem doesn't seem to be with the design of the engine, but the manufacturing of the engine. The engineering involved in machining parts for mass production and assembling a product is very different from the engineering involved in designing, testing, and making that product. From what I gathered, it seems the problem isn't that they can't reproduce the WS-10A, but that they're having quality control issues in the production line, either due to bad quality of the parts or faulty assembly (knowing China's weaker points in high-tech assembly I'm willing to bet it's the former). The figure we've been hearing about the engine needing maintenance every 20 hours may be because of failing or broken parts, which only highlights China's continual struggle with manufacturing quality.
You are half wrong and half correct, One prototype is powered by AL-31F. Another one is powered by WS-10
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/j-20-new-generation-fighter-154-4260.html#post134876
whoa. The engine needs maintenance every 20 hours? china needs to sort out its manufacturing problems fast...