That’s how some of the posters interpreted Gongke’s comment, but I don’t think he says this explicitly himself. That said, we should be careful about taking these figures wholesale. It sounds like he saw them some time ago, which could mean there’s a small chance that the actual production design may have ended up with a different weight.
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
Well, I definitely hope I misinterpreted 'cos that would mean WS-10-equipped J-20s also weigh less than Su-27s. In other words, if I'm right, the J-20 is around 17t, if I'm a wrong, it's <17t.
If this is right, that means the J-20 with a 14 tonne engine should have a comparable T:W ratio as the F-22 with a 16 tonne engine.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
I dunno about that. When he specified AL-31 J-20, I think he meant specifically to exclude WS-15 J-20, not WS-10 J-20. It also doesn't make much sense either that WS-10 J-20 would experience a significant weight gain over the AL-31 J-20 because they have very similar thrust. Su-27 is just under 16.4 tonnes empty, and the report we got earlier suggests that J-20's weight was controlled to sub 16 tonnes so for WS-10 J-20 to be at 17 tonnes, that's roughly a 1 tonne gain. Even if WS-10X is slightly heavier, it would be nowhere near 1 tonne heavier for 2 engines over AL-31X.
The only way I could see the WS-10 J-20 gaining significant weight over AL-31 J-20 is if the WS-10X variant is actually significantly more powerful than the AL-31X and they decided to add things to the WS-10 J-20 because of that.
I didn't actually check how heavy the empty weight of the Su-27 was so pretend I said 16.4t in my original post and not 17t.
The WS-15 is considerably lighter than the WS-10 due to fewer compressor stages, use of newer and lighter materials, and greater use of digital control system to replace mechanical components. Although the WS-10B has FADEC, it's not a very advanced FADEC owing to its early design date (it was meant to go on the WS-10A) so there is potential to further reduce the number of mechanical components. The WS-10 itself is 10% heavier than the AL-31F according to gongke which is why its original thrust target was ~10% higher than the AL-31F to maintain similar TWR. It wasn't until the success of the WS-10B that Taihang's original target thrust was met.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Oh, I didn't mean that replacing the engine with WS-15 would cause significant weight gains; I meant that because of the increased thrust of WS-15, they could add more weight-increasing features onto the J-20 that it might have omitted to get to its current extremely light 16 tonnes weight (if that theory is true). And by the time WS-15 is ready, there could (and should) be even more upgrades available.I didn't actually check how heavy the empty weight of the Su-27 was so pretend I said 16.4t in my original post and not 17t.
The WS-15 is considerably lighter than the WS-10 due to fewer compressor stages, use of newer and lighter materials, and greater use of digital control system to replace mechanical components. Although the WS-10B has FADEC, it's not a very advanced FADEC owing to its early design date (it was meant to go on the WS-10A) so there is potential to further reduce the number of mechanical components. The WS-10 itself is 10% heavier than the AL-31F according to gongke which is why its original thrust target was ~10% higher than the AL-31F to maintain similar TWR. It wasn't until the success of the WS-10B that Taihang's original target thrust was met.
If you said 16.4 instead of 17, then it's a lot more likely. AL-31F is 1.57 tonnes and 10% of 2 makes 0.314 tonnes. If you add that to the purported 16 tonnes of AL-31 J-20, you get 16.31 tonnes, which is very very close to Su-27's actual 16.38 tonnes. A small 2-3kN thrust increase in each WS-10X over AL-31X can cover that.
Last edited:
It would be safe to say that everyone is following this same model in their 5Gen aircraft,,, whether or not we are successful remains to be seen..
Jura The idiot
General
now I watched
Nice! Can u translate that for us ok
- Status