What's new

China defense industry faces homemade engine troubles

No wonder india facing hyge challenge with kaveri engine.

There is a reason why it took decades to come out with a completely flight capable KAveri for GTRE. If they did have followed the normal approach of designing a GT just like any starters,the Kaveri story would have been different by now. But the over ambitious GTRE laid the requirements on moon and mars like right away designing a Flat rated KAveri from scratch with no prior experience in designing of GTs.
Thanks to Indian adverse climate conditions which varry from -60 to +60 on any given day from north to south.This put tremendous requirement of having a flat rated instead of normal one.And late supply of materials required is another reason,else Kaveri would have been powering the Tejas by now with atleast 2 more varriants out and flying.

Well, GTRE learned it the hard way, now that KAveri though less powered will certainly be a tech booster.Either with Snecma or not, next Kaveri will certainly be a killer one in the range of 95-110KN.
We shouldnt get ourself blind by only looking at one color just like we are looking at KAveri. GTRE has achieved so many feathers while developing KAveri. A 12MW MArine GT,4KN UAV GT and with 25MW Naval GT under development to power capital ships like destroyers I will still put my bets on them to comeup with 95-110KN Kaveri before 2017.
Technologically they are more matured now.Even in metalury we are getting there with metal silicides completed thier development,it will further bring down the weight of GT. Infact there is lots that I wish to spell out here, but........ :(
 
.
There are 2 planes in China's inventory that uses foreign engines.

The J 10, and the SU 27/SU 30s China bought from Russia. The J 11B has WS 10As since 2009 and the J 15 also has a naval variant of the WS 10. The J 20 uses a WS series engine for the flight prototype.

The 117S with its 142 Kn of thrust is barely more than the WS 10A with 132 Kn. The WS 15 is what will power the J 20 and its prototype already achieves 165 KN with a goal of 180Kn

The Type 30 engine will be the most powerful
 
.
Of all the issues, the designing of an efficient and compatible engine is the most difficult part of designing a military platform.
 
.
Making Engines are not easy as to how it looks to be, Needs complicated testing , Metallurgy, and High end R&D in the metallic sciences. Containing heat by researching and amalgamating different metals forming a considerable alloy is an even bigger challenge which countries like China and India are yet to master in. Technology and Production facility we might have, but high end products, alloys , administration certainly I doubt.

I think China and India are well on their way to compete with the west in engine design and production. Remember their researchers are mostly comprise of Asian and South Asian grad students that does all the grunt work for those western companies in the last four decades.
 
. .
Maximum thrust have no meaning in itself.
The weight of the engine is equally important.

Perhaps you should look for thrust to weight.

The engine's TWR is independent of how much power it will provide to the plane. A 155 kN engine with thrust to weight ratio of 7 will still propel a fighter jet better than a 80 kN engine with thrust to weight ratio of 10.
 
.
The engine's TWR is independent of how much power it will provide to the plane. A 155 kN engine with thrust to weight ratio of 7 will still propel a fighter jet better than a 80 kN engine with thrust to weight ratio of 10.

power is important.

but so it weight .... if TWR is 0.7, the engine won't lift above the ground, irrespective of the total power.

anyway, i understand what you mean.... and trust you understand what i mean.

not worth building an argument over this.
 
.
power is important.

but so it weight .... if TWR is 0.7, the engine won't lift above the ground, irrespective of the total power.

anyway, i understand what you mean.... and trust you understand what i mean.

not worth building an argument over this.

An engine won't have a TWR of 0.7 because that's ridiculous.

The Kaveri has a T/W ratio or 7.8, which is decent, but again, that is not reflective of the engine's performance until we know its maximum thrust.
 
.
China Struggles

July 20, 2011: Last year, China revealed that it was replacing the engines in its J-10 fighter, installing Chinese made WS-10A in place of the Russian made AL-31FN. Despite that, China just ordered another 123 AL-31FNs, to be delivered over the next two years.

The Chinese claim the WS-10A is superior to the AL-31 series (AL-31, AL-31F, AL-31FN etc), even though the WS-10A copied a lot of the Russian technology. But the Chinese say they have improved on that. For example, as delivered from Russia, the AL-31 is good for 900 hours of operation. Chinese engineers figured out how to tweak the design of the engine so that it would last for 1,500 hours. This may be true, and it may also be the case that the Chinese cannot produce enough WS-10As for all the new airframes they are building.

China believes it will be free from dependence on Russia for military jet engines within the next five years, which implies that Chinese engine manufacturers still have a way to go. For years, China has imported two Russian engines, the $3.5 million AL-31, and the $2.5 million RD-93 (a version of the MiG-29's RD-33) for the JF-17 (a F-16 type aircraft developed in cooperation with Pakistan.) But in the meantime, Chinese engineers have managed to master the manufacturing techniques needed to make a Chinese copy of the Russian AL-31 engine. This Chinese copy, the WS-10A, is part of a program that has also developed the WS-13, to replace the RD-93 as well. While the Chinese have been able to build engines that are durable, they are still having problems with reliability. That's probably another reason for the new AL-31FN order.

China has long copied foreign technology, not always successfully. But in the last decade, China has poured much money into developing a jet engine manufacturing capability. The Chinese encountered many of the same problems the Russians did in the beginning, Developing the necessary engine design and construction skills is difficult. But China has several advantages. First, they knew of the mistakes the Russians had made, and so were able to avoid many of them. Then there was the fact that China had better access to Western manufacturing technology (both legally and illegally). Finally, China was, unlike the Soviets, able to develop their engine manufacturing capabilities in a market economy. This was much more efficient than the command economy that the Soviets were saddled with for seven decades.

An example of this in action occurred with the J-10 fighter, which began development in 1988 and first flew in 1996. The J-10 is based on the abandoned Israeli Lavi (an improved F-16) project. The J-10 initially used a Russian engine (the AL-31F, the same one used in the Su-27), and was to have used Israeli electronics. But the United States leaned on the Israelis to back off making the Chinese air force too lethal, given the probability of American pilots possibly having to fight the Chinese air force some day. The Chinese developed their own avionics, based on Russian equipment. But this did not work out well. Some J-10s, using the Chinese copy of the Russian AL-31F engine, suffered from poor engine reliability. This appears to have been the cause of several accidents. At least three J-10 crashes are known, and there may be more. These accidents are rarely reported in state-controlled media.

The Chinese consider the J-10 and WS-10A part of the learning process, and they do learn from their mistakes.
 
.
China Struggles

July 20, 2011: Last year, China revealed that it was replacing the engines in its J-10 fighter, installing Chinese made WS-10A in place of the Russian made AL-31FN. Despite that, China just ordered another 123 AL-31FNs, to be delivered over the next two years.

The Chinese claim the WS-10A is superior to the AL-31 series (AL-31, AL-31F, AL-31FN etc), even though the WS-10A copied a lot of the Russian technology. But the Chinese say they have improved on that. For example, as delivered from Russia, the AL-31 is good for 900 hours of operation. Chinese engineers figured out how to tweak the design of the engine so that it would last for 1,500 hours. This may be true, and it may also be the case that the Chinese cannot produce enough WS-10As for all the new airframes they are building.

China believes it will be free from dependence on Russia for military jet engines within the next five years, which implies that Chinese engine manufacturers still have a way to go. For years, China has imported two Russian engines, the $3.5 million AL-31, and the $2.5 million RD-93 (a version of the MiG-29's RD-33) for the JF-17 (a F-16 type aircraft developed in cooperation with Pakistan.) But in the meantime, Chinese engineers have managed to master the manufacturing techniques needed to make a Chinese copy of the Russian AL-31 engine. This Chinese copy, the WS-10A, is part of a program that has also developed the WS-13, to replace the RD-93 as well. While the Chinese have been able to build engines that are durable, they are still having problems with reliability. That's probably another reason for the new AL-31FN order.

China has long copied foreign technology, not always successfully. But in the last decade, China has poured much money into developing a jet engine manufacturing capability. The Chinese encountered many of the same problems the Russians did in the beginning, Developing the necessary engine design and construction skills is difficult. But China has several advantages. First, they knew of the mistakes the Russians had made, and so were able to avoid many of them. Then there was the fact that China had better access to Western manufacturing technology (both legally and illegally). Finally, China was, unlike the Soviets, able to develop their engine manufacturing capabilities in a market economy. This was much more efficient than the command economy that the Soviets were saddled with for seven decades.

An example of this in action occurred with the J-10 fighter, which began development in 1988 and first flew in 1996. The J-10 is based on the abandoned Israeli Lavi (an improved F-16) project. The J-10 initially used a Russian engine (the AL-31F, the same one used in the Su-27), and was to have used Israeli electronics. But the United States leaned on the Israelis to back off making the Chinese air force too lethal, given the probability of American pilots possibly having to fight the Chinese air force some day. The Chinese developed their own avionics, based on Russian equipment. But this did not work out well. Some J-10s, using the Chinese copy of the Russian AL-31F engine, suffered from poor engine reliability. This appears to have been the cause of several accidents. At least three J-10 crashes are known, and there may be more. These accidents are rarely reported in state-controlled media.

The Chinese consider the J-10 and WS-10A part of the learning process, and they do learn from their mistakes.
sir.thx your post

but there are some point are wrong in the article.

first,WS10A is anything but AL31's copy.and the designs of WS10a come from USA's engine mainly.
second,j10 is not a Israeli Lavi's copy,and the designs of j10 come from the experience of CAC J9 canceled mainly.
 
.
All this is mere hearsay,all we know is that U.S did gifted a F404 to China for study in the 80's ,some U.S media like to sow discord between China and Russia,as houshanghai said ,there are many mistakes in this article,not worth reading
 
.
.
An engine won't have a TWR of 0.7 because that's ridiculous.

The Kaveri has a T/W ratio or 7.8, which is decent, but again, that is not reflective of the engine's performance until we know its maximum thrust.

Thats right. The TWR of an engine alone doesnt makeup any conclusion on its performance. Only some characteristics like specific fuel comsumption and MTBF,efficiency are considered important just for engine.
But the main dig comes when this engine gets on an a/c. Then the final Thrust to weight (including that of a/c) makes up for a decent analysis.

It wont make sense if I develop an engine with TWR of >30 and put it on to an a/c which grosses 100 tonner :D

Comeone guys lets wrap this up at take it even if its hard to digest that China and India are atleast decades behind the west in engine technology.

No one care if India intended to develope a flat rated on thier first shot, all they care is if that engine powering an a/c is in serive or not.
 
.
Thats right. The TWR of an engine alone doesnt makeup any conclusion on its performance. Only some characteristics like specific fuel comsumption and MTBF,efficiency are considered important just for engine.
But the main dig comes when this engine gets on an a/c. Then the final Thrust to weight (including that of a/c) makes up for a decent analysis.

It wont make sense if I develop an engine with TWR of >30 and put it on to an a/c which grosses 100 tonner :D

Comeone guys lets wrap this up at take it even if its hard to digest that China and India are atleast decades behind the west in engine technology.

No one care if India intended to develope a flat rated on thier first shot, all they care is if that engine powering an a/c is in serive or not.

One option if an engine doesn't produce enough thrust is to decrease the weight of the aircraft. That's where composites come in.
 
.
Or else put two engines to makeup for the lost thrust.
Leaving too much burden on composites alone isnt a good idea.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom