Blackstone
Brigadier
If China's scramjet engine advancement is anything like its glorious turbofan development, then we might see some good results on Mao's 150th Birthday.
Chinese Hypersonic Developments (HGVs/HCMs)
- Thread starter A.Man
- Start date
Blackstone
Brigadier
Talk is cheap, just like there were so much early talk about WS-10 "successes." When it comes to Chinese engine technology advancements, it's buyers beware.
Different technologies, different challenges.
Nitpicking on outdated information is even cheaper.
Blackstone
Brigadier
True, but the same SOEs. I mean what would you expect to see first, WS-15s on J-20s, or the Second Coming? I vote the latter.
Not the same SOEs. Chinese SOEs aren't one giant monolith, just like US corporations aren't. Some are very competent, others are not.
You're free to vote however you want, but I would not make bold declarations using those kinds of superlatives if I cared about sounding credible
Blackstone
Brigadier
While what happened in the past doesn't mean the same things will happen in the future, but demonstrated incompetence tends to color future prospects, until properly dispelled. Wouldn't you agree?
Engineer
Major
I agree. China actually has hypersonic wind tunnels that no one else, not even the US, has. These wind tunnels are what enable China to make huge progress in hypersonic researches. Whereas China can do most of the trial-and-error on the ground, other countries have to do most of those trials in the air.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Here's what we know about China's SOEs; they are generally so inefficient and/or corrupt that Xi Jinping himself rave against them. Yes, you're right there are SOEs and then there are SOEs, but is the scramjet SOE any better than the turbofan SOE? The faithful say "yes," and the gentiles say "we'll see."Not the same SOEs. Chinese SOEs aren't one giant monolith, just like US corporations aren't. Some are very competent, others are not.
You're free to vote however you want, but I would not make bold declarations using those kinds of superlatives if I cared about sounding credible
Engineer
Major
WS-10 has moving parts, whereas scramjet doesn't. This was mentioned in my post, the very one you quoted. So immediately, much of the China's technological short comings are eliminated from the equation.
WS-10's success is also not exaggerated. The well known problems mainly lied in the production side, not on technology side. Half a decade later, multiple regiments of J-11B, along with J-16 and new variant of J-15 all use WS-10. That's success. The lame stream media being lame, is still quoting itself half a decade later, which makes it seems like WS-10 is more problematic than reality.
Last edited:
That depends on what you qualify as "demonstrated incompetence". If we operate off the same framework but don't regard or qualify the same facts, we will reach different conclusions. If you qualify "demonstrated incompetence" with any instance of encountering problems and you set the bar to "dispel" that impression as flawless execution progress will seem intractable until it leaps in an instant.
That said, I disagree with the notion that "demonstrated incompetence" colours future prospects. Innovation doesn't come from flawless execution. It emerges from encountering problems and making mistakes, and persisting to overcome those challenges. What colours future prospects is the pace of improvement or its absence, not the presence of problems. Encountering problems through a developmental process tells us nothing. Where they get in that developmental process, how far they get overcoming those problems, tells us everything. If they didn't get anywhere with engines, they wouldn't be flying entire fleets of planes with their own design. Colouring that as "demonstrated incompetence" is either a misapplication of the term or grossly misrepresenting, dismissing, or overlooking facts to the contrary. (Can't openly trumpet information that fits your understanding and reject information that disagrees with it when they're coming from the same general set of sources).
Again, depends on the SOE and the sector. Not all SOEs are miserable in every sector. Has Xi struck at energy SOEs? Yes. Has he struck at aerospace SOEs? No.
There is no one single turbofan or gas turbine SOE. Saying SOEs generically are inefficient to draw specific conclusions is like saying capitalism is generically evil. It's at best an imprecise mode of analysis, and at worst just blind generalization. I agree with the "we'll see" mentality, but I do not feel like that's what you're pushing when you confidently declare that the second coming will happen before we see a J-20 with the WS-15.
Last edited: