Those are definitely other reasons, in addition to my certainty that I've seen that image before
. The most glaring sign for me though was the copious green Chengdu seems to have in late January. BTW Welcome Back.
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread IV (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Those are definitely other reasons, in addition to my certainty that I've seen that image before
. The most glaring sign for me though was the copious green Chengdu seems to have in late January. BTW Welcome Back.
Those are definitely other reasons, in addition to my certainty that I've seen that image before
BTW Welcome Back.
Pretty obvious that it is a PS
by78
General
Excelllent point and good advise, xiabonana.I would love to discuss more with you guys regarding Chinese engines and aircraft engines in general, but let's continue the discussion in the engine thread okay.
Please take general Chinese Engine Comments/Discussion to the Chinese Engine Development Thread
Chinese Engine Development Threadhttp://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/chinese-engine-development-252.htmlhttp://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/chinese-engine-development-252.html
There are actually several very good comments on this thread that really belong there, so I intend to move them there. If you had a comment like that here, and find it missing...look for it over there.
----- 10 minutes later -----
I moved 25 comments about general engine development to the Chinese Engine development thread. Specific J-20 Engine comments I have and will leave here. But if it drifts into a general discussion of Chinese engine development, please take it to that thread. That is what it is what it is there for. Thanks.
Last edited:
A bit of a deviation from previous discussions, but I wonder if when the ws-15 is ready for installation testing we might not see it on a J-11 first, but rather either 2001 and 2002. Might even be possible that the production prototype gets the engine a little earlier than we think because the J-20 being twin engined mitigates risk.
we might never see ws15 on j11, j15 nor j16. we dont know if the engine is compatible with those airframes. the fact a few prototypes of j20 use engines compatible with flankers doesnt mean a thing for the long run as serial j20 might be different. we might, for example, see a serial j20 with ws15, and see the engines are simply too big for flanker family.
If WS-15 is indeed intended from the start to be a substantially higher thrust, supercrusing engine, then it is likely WS-15 would be significantly fatter than the WS-10 or AL-31 to accommodate larger mass flow through the engine. Also advancements in blade design and blade material, as well as practical 3-D flow modeling, should allow WS-15 to make do with fewer stages in both its compressors and its turbines, this should result in a shorter engine with significantly reduced part count compare to either WS-10 or AL-31.
This means engine bay of a plane designed for WS-15 would be able to accommodating WS-10 with room to spare in diameter. And a thrust adaptor could allow WS-10 use the mounting points inside the engine bay, while an insert at the end of the fuselage would allow the engine bay to accommodate a the longer WS-10
But the engine bay of a plane designed for the WS-10 would likely to very tight or too tight in diameter to accept the fatter WS-15. Such a plane would not be able to use WS-15 unless major forged structure members were heavily modified. If this is attempted in production it means very large up front investment in new tooling for new forgings and new jigs. If this is attempted in a test aircraft it means the manufacture of a one off, essentially hand built airframe.
This means engine bay of a plane designed for WS-15 would be able to accommodating WS-10 with room to spare in diameter. And a thrust adaptor could allow WS-10 use the mounting points inside the engine bay, while an insert at the end of the fuselage would allow the engine bay to accommodate a the longer WS-10
But the engine bay of a plane designed for the WS-10 would likely to very tight or too tight in diameter to accept the fatter WS-15. Such a plane would not be able to use WS-15 unless major forged structure members were heavily modified. If this is attempted in production it means very large up front investment in new tooling for new forgings and new jigs. If this is attempted in a test aircraft it means the manufacture of a one off, essentially hand built airframe.
- Status