# The J-20-engine discussion is over and other speculative topics ... to separate from the J-20-news !



## Deino

*Guys ... this discussion is useless, senseless ... and IMO already off-topic in the J-20 tread.

Therefore I created this new thread in order to separate the on-going and already so often discussed question on the J-20's powerplant from the other J-20 news but also from the engine's thread I opened this new special thread.

Please continue here.

Deino*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> *"i told you jet fighter, is designed around the jet engine, instead, jet engine is designed around the jet fighter"
> *
> Are you saying develop the airframe first, then the engine, later?
> 
> Tell that to the Indians. The Indians are developing their HAL Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA), a fifth-generation fighter aircraft.
> 
> Tell them don't do it like the American, Russian and Chinese, like the way they did F-15, F-16, F-22, F-35, Su-27, Su-30, Su-57 and J-20.
> 
> Tell them don't bother to start the engine, years ahead, first. Tell them they could start the engine and air-frame, at the same time. Or after the air-frame was developed.
> 
> And see how far they will get, and see if they will keep their schedule.
> 
> Thats's what China did with J-9. It was a total disaster that ended in cancellation. J-10 was, saved only, because the Russians, was willing to supply, the excellent AL-31 engine to China.


in simple words parallel but not before can you put MIG-31's jet engine (Soloviev D-30) in Su-27 air-frame AL-31F and Soloviev D-30 which were almost same development period Mr @Asok

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

*"can you put MIG-31's jet engine (Soloviev D-30) in Su-27 air-frame, AL-31F and Soloviev D-30, which were almost same development period"*

What are you talking about? You Don't make any sense to me.

*'"in simple words, parallel, but not before""*

What I have said about the importance of early preliminary researches, don't mean anything to you.

Isn't that's how the American, Europeans and Russians, and now the Chinese are doing?

*"Then why you compare J-20 to an nonexistent jet ... you're giving legitimacy to an non-existent fighter"*

Just to alert the pakistanipower, this is what the Indians are doing with AMCA. Start AMCA without an engine. It will end in disaster.

China made a wise decision to start the TWR 10 engine's preliminary researches, very early. And that's why J-20 is flying with it's intended engine now. Some far sighted planning paid off big time. It could have ended in disaster. 

This time, the Russians might not sell its advanced engine, so China could copy and rip-off its technologies, like they did with AL-31.

"*you're giving legitimacy to an non-existent fighter"
*
They do have a very nice model, to be fair.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> *"can you put MIG-31's jet engine (Soloviev D-30) in Su-27 air-frame, AL-31F and Soloviev D-30, which were almost same development period"*
> 
> What are you talking about? You Don't make any sense to me.
> 
> *'"in simple words, parallel, but not before""*
> 
> What I have said about the importance of early preliminary researches, don't mean anything to you.
> 
> Isn't that's how the American, Europeans and Russians, and now the Chinese are doing?
> 
> *"Then why you compare J-20 to an nonexistent jet ... you're giving legitimacy to an non-existent fighter"*
> 
> Just to alert the pakistanipower, this is what the Indians are doing with AMCA. Start AMCA without an engine. It will end in disaster.
> 
> China made a wise decision to start the TWR 10 engine's preliminary researches, very early. And that's why J-20 is flying with it's intended engine now. Some far sighted planning paid off big time. It could have ended in disaster.
> 
> This time, the Russians might not sell its advanced engine, so China could copy and rip-off its technologies, like they did with AL-31.
> 
> "*you're giving legitimacy to an non-existent fighter"
> *
> They do have a very nice model, to be fair.



Dude, we all know that the J-20 was designed with a powerful turbofan as an end goal (WS-15). No one is disputing that. And as I've mentioned before, there is not going to be an AMCA (I even have my doubts on the FGFA). A model is just a model ... period.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> What are you talking about? You Don't make any sense to me.
> 
> *"Then why you compare J-20 to an nonexistent jet ... you're giving legitimacy to an non-existent fighter"*
> 
> Just to alert the pakistanipower, this is what the Indians are doing with AMCA. Start AMCA without an engine. It will end in disaster.
> 
> China made a wise decision to start the TWR 10 engine's preliminary researches, very early. And that's why J-20 is flying with it's intended engine now. Some far sighted planning paid off big time. It could have ended in disaster. This time, the Russians might not sell its advanced engine.
> 
> "*you're giving legitimacy to an non-existent fighter"
> *
> They do have a very nice model, to be fair.


T/W Ratio 9 engine and that was WS-10 not WS-15 forget AMCA which is a paper project currently lets talk about J-20 engine which either a version of WS-10X or version of Al-31 but surely not WS-15, WS-15 in its advanced development stages as per various senior members on PDF, so why you insisting your crap false assertions and wishful thinking



Figaro said:


> Dude, we all know that the J-20 was designed with a powerful turbofan as an end goal (WS-15). No one is disputing that. And as I've mentioned before, there is not going to be an AMCA (I even have my doubts on the FGFA). A model is just a model ... period.


@Figaro , and @Asok PAK-FA example is front of you, if PAK-FA can fly with a Interim engine so why not J-20


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> T/W Ratio 9 engine and that was WS-10 not WS-15 forget AMCA which is a paper project currently lets talk about J-20 engine which either a version of WS-10X or version of Al-31 but surely not WS-15, WS-15 in its advanced development stages as per various senior members on PDF, so why you insisting your crap false assertions and wishful thinking


The WS-15 is gonna be incorporated into the J-20 before 2019-2020. Its almost ready for transfer to IL-76 testbed.


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> The WS-15 is gonna be incorporated into the J-20 before 2019-2020. Its almost ready for transfer to IL-76 testbed.



And what engine is J-20 flying right now?

*"PAK-FA example is front of you, if PAK-FA can fly with a Interim engine, so why not J-20?"*

J-20 certainly could fly with an interim engine first. I have already suggested J-20 *was flying with a prototype engine*, with a WS-15 engine core, and other technologies from WS-10 and AL-31, since 2011. 

Now it is flying with a production WS-15, since around 2014-2015.

What is the name of this prototype engine, I am not certain, it could be designated as WS-10b or WS-10X, I really don't know. 

What I am certain is that if this engine was designated as WS-10b, I am certain it's *NOT* made of WS-10a's core. 

Because, this does not further WS-15 core testing, in any way.

What the WS-15 designers needs are, first hand data, from flying the engine core, in a real plane, not just simulated data. 

So they could compare the actual data, with the simulated data, to see if they fit. 

If not they must find out why, and make modifications.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

pakistanipower said:


> What nonsense you have first you post WS-15 was installed on J-20 from the day one and then you have a this CRAPY false assertions and wishful thinking again with no prove, how can you directly put high risk extremely new engine to your sensitive stealth jet, to reduce the risk WS-15 will be air testing on other plate form instead directly putting WS-15 on J-20, even USA and russia can't put their new engines on there new airframes without extensive air testing on other aircrafts, I am reporting you for your baseless and clueless debates



*"can't put their new engines, on there new airframes, without extensive air testing, on other aircrafts."*

Yes, first, bench tests, then third party platforms test, are the usual american and Russian testing procedures, but according to the development plan, I posted earlier, testing on third party platforms *was to be skipped,* if bench testing was successful, and put WS-15 onto J-20, directly, for further testing. This is more risky, for sure, but there are no laws against that.

"Specifically, this says, . . . during the 7th 5 years plan (1986-1990) (planning, preliminary researches), 8th 5 years plan 1991-1995 (planning, preliminary researches) 9th 5 years plan 1996-2000(planning, preliminary researches and engine core researches), 10th 5 years plan 2000-2005(planning, focus on engine core), 11th 5 years plan 2005-2010 ( engine core pass bench test), *12th 5 years plan (2010-2015), if bench tests were successful, skip testing on third party platforms, and directly install on J-20 for testing , , ,"*

It is more risking, I am sure, but J-20 was an extremely urgent project, they have to take more risks, to meet the tight schedule.

*"I am reporting you for your baseless and clueless debates."*

Be a little more mature, Bro.

Some people keep claiming WS-15 began bench testing on 2015, but according to this article, *ground bench testing of the engine core was completed on 2005*.

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5387c42f0102xjuz.html

1.) 2000年, WS-15核心机开始研制。 *"2000, WS-15 engine core start to develop."*

2.) 2005年：WS-15核心机完成地面台架测试。*"2005: WS-15 engine core completed ground bench testings"*

3.) 2006年: WS-15发动机立项。*"2006: WS-15 engine project was formally established."*

4.) 2009年12月：WS-15核心机完成高空台测试。*"December 2009: WS-15 engine core completed high altitude platform tests."*

5.) 2011年：中航黎明完成WS-15验证机, 并提前交付。*"2011: Liming Factory completed the WS-15 prototype, and was delivered ahead of schedule."*

6.) 2012年底--2013年初：WS-15工程验证机通过高空台测试*。"early 2013: WS-15 engineering prototype passed high altitude testings."
*
7.) 2014年：歼20第2011号进行WS-15单发试飞。*"2014: J-20, number 2011, started testing with one WS-15 engine." (the other engine was probably the older version of WS-15)
*
8.) 2015年：歼20第2016号进行WS-15双发考核试飞；*"2015: J-20, number 2016, with two WS-15 engines verification testings.
*
9.) 2016年：歼20第2101号生产型完成定型。*"2016: J-20, number 2101, completed production model testings."
*
10.) 2016年底：歼20第2101号量产服役型奔赴珠海航展。*"end of 2016: J-20, number 2101, production and service model, demonstrated at the Zhuhai China Airshow.
*
Notice, This article gave very specific dates and testing and develop timeline. The writer obviously got insider level informations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asok said:


> *..*Notice, This article gave very specific dates and testing and develop timeline. The writer obviously got insider level informations.




Or he smoked a lot of certain herbs  and mixed it with a very blooming imagination. 

Come one; there are countless of such "very exact and detailed" reports all over the net. But point is, how reliable is this certain poster in general. Is this just one post that looks good and otherwise there's nothing from him ??

Even more I really question these reports concerning the WS-15 being based on the R-79; in fact an unreliable and unsuccessful engine that was a failure even in Russia.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Or he smoked a lot of certain herbs  and mixed it with a very blooming imagination.
> 
> Come one; there are countless of such "very exact and detailed" reports all over the net. But point is, how reliable is this certain poster in general. Is this just one post that looks good and otherwise there's nothing from him ??
> 
> Even more I really question these reports concerning the WS-15 being based on the R-79; in fact an unreliable and unsuccessful engine that was a failure even in Russia.
> 
> Deino



*"Even more I really question these reports concerning the WS-15 being based on the R-79; in fact an unreliable and unsuccessful engine that was a failure even in Russia."*

I beg to differ, Bro.

Cancelling due to lack of funding, and cancelling due to technical failures, could be two entirely different things.

The YAK 141 was cancelled, *due to lack of further funding*, after USSR was collapsed. The R-79 engine continued development till 1996. The YAK 141 successfully demonstrated at Paris Airshow. It was the first VTOL aircraft with supersonic capability. Lockheed Martin even brought the tilting nozzle technology for its F-35.

Like other advanced formerUSSR technologies, the R-79 engine was put up for a fire sale, in the 1990s. It is not unconceivable, that China would be interested, in acquire such advanced technology, at a ridiculous fire sale price.

China brought the 70% finished Varyag Aircraft carrier at the incredible price of $20 millions. The Ukranians throws in all the technical documentations and blueprints for another 3 millions. China probably hired the same engineers, who worked on it, to help with refurbished the aircraft carrier.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Agreed; during these days no-one can be sure what was and what wasn't sold those years and given the close connection between Yakowlew and Hongdu for example it is not impossible that CHina also got hand on the Yak-141 and its engine.
> Anyway I highly doubt that even if the R-79 was surely a powerful "beast" it is unlikely that the PLAAF's future high-thrust powerplant for the J-20 and future generation engines is based on an engine that was bench tested for the first time in 1984 ??
> 
> Deino



Yes, China got a lot of advanced military technologies from the former USSR, particularly Ukraine, *at a fire sale prices*, and China hired a lot of their top rated scientists and engineers too. Prices are very important in sale. Some famous salesman said, you can sell anything, if the price is right.

I began to work for a US defense contractor in 1999, I have a lot of co-workers, who are Russian and Ukraine PH.Ds. They told me life was so hard, after the collapsed of the USSR, that daily surrival was constant struggle for everybody. Leaving the country, was one of their only choice. 

A lot of talented Russians and Ukanians arrived at the New York, and Washington DC, area. A closest software engineering co-worker of mine, was on the Russian Computer Programming Olympia Team. One of my first Tai Chi student was a Russian geology engineer. I even dated a beautiful Russian ph.d scientist, briefly.

*"Anyway I highly doubt that even if the R-79 was surely a powerful "beast" "*

Yes, R-79 was bench tested on 1984, but there are continuous development models well into 1990's, a version of R-79 was rated having over 200kN thrust. But remember, high thrust is not the only desirable requirements.

Engine life, fuel consumption rate, range of effective operating altitude, cost, complexity, size and weight or TWR are also very important. Fighter jet engines are generally classified with their TWR.

*"your can't skip, major engine development step, to increase your project safety risks, to become a failed project"*

Tell that to the Chinese engineers. But they are successful with WS-15. The risk taking paid off.

The US engineers took even more risks with F-35 project. They began production of F-35 even before design and testing was finished.

"Lockheed was allowed "*to design, test, and produce the F-35 all at the same time*, instead of… [identifying and fixing] defects before firing up its production line"."

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2013/09/joint-strike-fighter-lockheed-martin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Asok said:


> *"Even more I really question these reports concerning the WS-15 being based on the R-79; in fact an unreliable and unsuccessful engine that was a failure even in Russia."*
> 
> I beg to differ, Bro.
> 
> Cancelling due to lack of funding, and cancelling due to technical failures, could be two entirely different things.
> 
> The YAK 141 was cancelled, *due to lack of further funding*, after USSR was collapsed. The R-79 engine continued development till 1996. The YAK 141 successfully demonstrated at Paris Airshow. It was the first VTOL aircraft with supersonic capability. Lockheed Martin even brought the tilting nozzle technology for its F-35.
> 
> Like other advanced formerUSSR technologies, the R-79 engine was put up for a fire sale, in the 1990s. It is not unconceivable, that China would be interested, in acquire such advanced technology, at a ridiculous fire sale price.
> 
> China brought the 70% finished Varyag Aircraft carrier at the incredible price of $20 millions. The Ukranians throws in all the technical documentations and blueprints for another 3 millions. China probably hired the same engineers, who worked on it, to help with refurbished the aircraft carrier.


And I can add up here that the USSR at its dissolution stage was in [very] bad economic situation and *reaching its bottom low* [no more USSR but Russia then] under the drunken Boris Yeltsin... it's a period of brutal loot/rape of the Russian state wealth & natural resources (a very long reading indeed) by some individuals, mostly from certain tribe [that later on when Putin came into grip they ran away to the West like rats], they took over the state assets for pennies on dollar. Russia was so miserable at that time that this nation was treated under financial infuse of the IMF & World Bank back then, and rouble had a free fall. And this is the real history of that nation. Many who pay attention still wonder why the Empire didn't pull the kill-switch [the 2nd Balkanization after the USSR break-up] back then [Yelsin's era], it remains a mystery!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> *Guys ... STOP NOW !!
> 
> I agree with @Brainsucker: "Why don't both sides to agree to disagree?" ... non of us has proof, we all have only certain hints and evidences that we both weight differently and so come to different conclusions.
> 
> ... and now back to topic.*


Yes. Some individuals are intentionally derailing the thread. With thrust vectoring 210kn WS-15's


----------



## Han Patriot

Deino said:


> *Guys ... STOP NOW !!
> 
> I agree with @Brainsucker: "Why don't both sides to agree to disagree?" ... non of us has proof, we all have only certain hints and evidences that we both weight differently and so come to different conclusions.
> 
> ... and now back to topic.*


Deino,

latest documentary from CCTV showcasing the latest weapons in PLA. See 7:55 min for the quote saying J-20 is using domestic engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

Han Warrior said:


> Deino,
> 
> latest documentary from CCTV showcasing the latest weapons in PLA. See 7:55 min for the quote saying J-20 is using domestic engine.


OMG  you're right. WTH.



Figaro said:


> OMG  you're right. WTH.


 Maybe Asok's been right this whole time? I'm starting to believe his ridiculousness ... ppl attacking CCTV's credibility are just straw-mans. Could the J-20 actually be using WS-10X's?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> OMG  you're right. WTH.
> 
> Maybe Asok's been right this whole time? I'm starting to believe his ridiculousness ... ppl attacking CCTV's credibility are just straw-mans. Could the J-20 actually be using WS-10X's?



Are you being sarcastic, Figaro? I can't tell whether you are serious or not.

Here are the screenshots.













*"The J-20 was China's first fourth generation stealth fighter jet, with a Chinese-made engine"*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> Are you being sarcastic, Figaro? I can't you whether you are serious or not.


No. I think the WS-15 is impossible but the WS-10X variant seems more and more likely given that CCTV-4 references CCTV-7 (according to my knowledge). But I still won't accept your ridiculous WS-15/210kN/3D vectoring theory; the J-20 would be performing cobras if that were the case.


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> No. I think the WS-15 is impossible but the WS-10X variant seems more and more likely given that CCTV-4 references CCTV-7 (according to my knowledge). But I still won't accept your ridiculous WS-15/210kN/3D vectoring theory; the J-20 would be performing cobras if that were the case.



1.) The WS-10X variant theory, is even less likely, than the Russian AL-31, because the nozzles are totally dissimilar.

2.) No WS-10X supporters, have even bothered, to offer the engine nozzles similarity argument, as proofs.

3.) No evidences, for any variant of WS-10, other than this engine, below, exists.






4.) I can excuse AL-31 supporters for being mistaken, because the nozzles are indeed, highly similar. But I just can't imagine the picture above shows the current engine of J-20.


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> The WS-10X variant theory, is even less likely, than the Russian AL-31, because the nozzles are totally dissimilar. No need for any close comparisons.


Just because they can perform a vertical climb without afterburners does not mean a WS-15; a uprated WS-10 or AL-31F can do the exact same thing. Perhaps the uprated WS-10X has different nozzles than the WS-10A for stealth reduction?


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> Just because they can perform a vertical climb without afterburners does not mean a WS-15; a uprated WS-10 or AL-31F can do the exact same thing. Perhaps the uprated WS-10X has different nozzles than the WS-10A for stealth reduction?



*"a uprated WS-10 or AL-31F can do the exact same thing."*

This is called groundless speculation, if you don't offer any evidence to go with it.

Find me some evidences, (like pictures, or development time line) that the variant WS-10B or WS-10X, actually exists. I really can't find any. I tried.

No evidences of a WS-10 variant's existence. If it exists, this variant of WS-10 must be completed, before J-20's first public flight, on Jan 2011.


----------



## Han Patriot

Asok said:


> 1.) The WS-10X variant theory, is even less likely, than the Russian AL-31, because the nozzles are totally dissimilar.
> 
> 2.) No WS-10X supporters, have even bothered, to offer the engine nozzles similarity argument, as proofs.
> 
> 3.) No evidences, for any variant of WS-10, other than this engine, below, exists.
> 
> View attachment 420727
> 
> 
> 4.) I can excuse AL-31 supporters for being mistaken, because the nozzles are indeed, highly similar. But I just can't imagine the picture above shows the current engine of J-20.


Guys,

No point arguing what engine it is, as long as it's Chinese made. This is a pretty clear straight in your face fact. IT IS A CHINESE ENGINE.

Btw, the documentary was very recent, it was for the 1st August celebrations this year. It also mentioned Chinese EMALS as having passed all the test and comparable or ahead of US EMALS and the next 003 carrier will have EMALS.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

Han Warrior said:


> Guys,
> 
> No point arguing what engine it is, as long as it's Chinese made. This is a pretty clear straight in your face fact. IT IS A CHINESE ENGINE.
> 
> Btw, the documentary was very recent, it was for the 1st August celebrations this year. It also mentioned Chinese EMALS as having passed all the test and comparable or ahead of US EMALS and the next 003 carrier will have EMALS.


I'm still hesitant to make that conclusion given little auxiliary evid3nce but the chanc3e are rising!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Han Patriot

Figaro said:


> I'm still hesitant to make that conclusion given little auxiliary evid3nce but the chanc3e are rising!


Well how else can a Chinese prove himself? Even after an official documentary from CCTV saying it, this is already the second time CCTV mentioned the aircraft as having Chinese engine. This is not some talk show, it's a documentary for the PLA, big shots are watching this.

Straight from the horses mouth.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

Han Warrior said:


> Well how else can a Chinese prove himself? Even after an official documentary from CCTV saying it, this is already the second time CCTV mentioned the aircraft as having Chinese engine. This is not some talk show, it's a documentary for the PLA, big shots are watching this.
> 
> Straight from the horses mouth.


I concur. Especially since CCTV-4 gets its info of CCTV-7. The interviewee Is more credible than any big shrimp



Asok said:


> 1.) The WS-10X variant theory, is even less likely, than the Russian AL-31, because the nozzles are totally dissimilar.
> 
> 2.) No WS-10X supporters, have even bothered, to offer the engine nozzles similarity argument, as proofs.
> 
> 3.) No evidences, for any variant of WS-10, other than this engine, below, exists.
> 
> View attachment 420727
> 
> 
> 4.) I can excuse AL-31 supporters for being mistaken, because the nozzles are indeed, highly similar. But I just can't imagine the picture above shows the current engine of J-20.


The WS-10X might not have the same nozzle as the WS-10A. Have we seen any pictures of these WS-10 variants? No. But we've also only seen one picture of the WS-15 of extremely dubious credibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

Asok said:


> *"you're being racist against non-Chinese people ..."*
> 
> To claim that non-speaker of a foreign language, can not (at least, not easily) understand, what's written in that foreign language, *is not Racism*, my friend.
> 
> If someone said, Asok can not understand, what's written on this German, or French, or Russian, or Japanese . . . document, he is merely telling the truth, he is not being racist, because I really can't understand, any languages other Chinese and English.
> 
> Are you being offended by what I have said? I am sorry about that.  But being offended doesn't make you right. May be you shouldn't feel offended, in the first place.
> 
> Develop a thick skin like me. Figaro.
> 
> I got insulted here at PDF, all the time, for expressing my candid opinions regarding J-20 and WS-15.
> 
> I am beginning to develop an immunity to them.


Relax friend  drink a tea

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Brainsucker

Han Warrior said:


> Deino,
> 
> latest documentary from CCTV showcasing the latest weapons in PLA. See 7:55 min for the quote saying J-20 is using domestic engine.



I have an access to CCTV 4 and CCTV 7, and I know that there are many PLA documentary with English subs in CCTV 4. But I have skip a lot of these shows. Can you give me a link to CCTV 4 documentary in the internet? I mean CCTV 4 PLA documentary with English subs?


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> So do you agreed, Mr. Deino, the choice is now between Ws-15, and the supposed Ws-10b or WS-10X?
> 
> For the record, I do not think, there is any connection, whatsover, between what engine is installed in J-20 and being a good Moderator. And Mr. Deino is a good, able Mod. So I am perfectly willingly, to let go of, whatever bet, it was made on this issue, and let the bygone, be begone. And bury any hard feelings and passions, that was aroused by this issue.
> 
> It was unfortunate, that this bet was ever made, and I regretted that I raised it up, in the past. I hope Mr. Deino will continue be our Mod. , if the engine designation is unmistakably confirmed, once and for all.


You have not been vindicated yet ... the engine in question is still probably not the WS-15. In fact, since you're so sure, why don't you provide us an image of the WS-15's nozzles in depth? Maybe then we'll believe your 3D 210kn thrust vectoring engine theory ...



Deino said:


> Nope !
> To admit the guys I know are not the typical big shrimps and they are surely not bloating around what they know. They are calm, careful in the way they answer, respectful and so far they were never deliberately wrong with anything answer they gave me.
> 
> As such some might call this ignorant, arrogant or plain stubborn ... I call it careful.
> 
> If You and others agree, then it's fine but out of the three options on the table (AL-31-derivate, WS-10-variant, WS-15) they all rejected the WS-options and even if ball were quite undecided with my theory, they all prefer my option. But we will see.
> 
> 
> Deino


Pop3 said that the Chinese were building the 001a and 002 carriers simultaneously in early 2014. Did he turn out to be correct? I'm not saying that we shouldn't heed their arguments but we shouldn't treat their words like gospel either. They are not deliberately wrong; sometimes they have inaccurate information. But CCTV is a primary source which I bet has more access to Chinese military equipment than we do ... weren't they the first to announce that the J-20 entered service in March 2017?



Figaro said:


> You have not been vindicated yet ... the engine in question is still probably not the WS-15. In fact, since you're so sure, why don't you provide us an image of the WS-15's nozzles in depth? Maybe then we'll believe your 3D 210kn thrust vectoring engine theory ...
> 
> 
> Pop3 said that the Chinese were building the 001a and 002 carriers simultaneously in early 2014. Did he turn out to be correct? I'm not saying that we shouldn't heed their arguments but we shouldn't treat their words like gospel either. They are not deliberately wrong; sometimes they have inaccurate information. But CCTV is a primary source which I bet has more access to Chinese military equipment than we do ... weren't they the first to announce that the J-20 entered service in March 2017?


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> ... weren't they the first to announce that the J-20 entered service in March 2017?



And that alone is wrong. The first J-20s were handed over already in late 2016 and transferred to Dingxin.

So, as I and my friends say, these guys at CCTV usually rely on internet reports and rumours in the same way we do and even if CCTV-7 is de facto official, they would not reveal such sensitive information nor will they correct any BS another CCTV-channel reports.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

*"why don't you provide us an image of the WS-15's nozzles in depth? Maybe then we'll believe your 3D 210kn thrust vectoring engine theory ..."*




https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-439#post-8892490





These images show, the Chinese President tries out the TVC nozzle, around 2003.






The nozzles are obviously tilted.






https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-462#post-8986993
Differential tilting






https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-515#post-9142934





I admit the seeming tilting are moderate compared to what we have seen on the Russian Flankers with TVC.

Some one has suggested those seeming tilting of the nozzles are purely due to optical illusions, *but no one has provided some pictures of different aircrafts, that has this "optical illusions".*


----------



## j20blackdragon

So we now have at least two documentaries confirming a domestic, Chinese-made engine.

Documentary 1:





Documentary 2:






What evidence do the AL-31 supporters have?
Nozzle appearance?
Anything else?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Figaro

j20blackdragon said:


> So we now have at least two documentaries confirming a domestic, Chinese-made engine.
> 
> Documentary 1:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Documentary 2:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What evidence do the AL-31 supporters have?
> Nozzle appearance?
> Anything else?


There are both subtle and obvious appearance differences. Ppl were claiming that the original J-20 was using Al-31F's; it then changed its nozzles in later prototypes and LRIP models. Then, people claim that the J-20 changed to a later variant of AL-31F just by eyeballing it. I think we really ought to be more open about the prospects of domestics engines.



Deino said:


> And that alone is wrong. The first J-20s were handed over already in late 2016 and transferred to Dingxin.
> 
> So, as I and my friends say, these guys at CCTV usually rely on internet reports and rumours in the same way we do and even if CCTV-7 is de facto official, they would not reveal such sensitive information nor will they correct any BS another CCTV-channel reports.
> 
> Deino


But they "officially" were inducted into service in March 2017. Before that, they were used for testing and extensive evaluation until CCTV announced their induction. If you do not consider CCTV-7 to be credible, then we ought to dismiss any Chinese state media, including the official PLA daily.



Figaro said:


> There are both subtle and obvious appearance differences. Ppl were claiming that the original J-20 was using Al-31F's; it then changed its nozzles in later prototypes and LRIP models. Then, people claim that the J-20 changed to a later variant of AL-31F just by eyeballing it. I think we really ought to be more open about the prospects of domestics engines.
> 
> 
> But they "officially" were inducted into service in March 2017. Before that, they were used for testing and extensive evaluation until CCTV announced their induction. If you do not consider CCTV-7 to be credible, then we ought to dismiss any Chinese state media, including the official PLA daily. The fact that most of us get our pictures or video clips from CCTV-7 really explains a lot of its credibility. The same channel also aired the recent documentary of the Type 002 carrier ... should we also dismiss it as being fake?





Figaro said:


> There are both subtle and obvious appearance differences. Ppl were claiming that the original J-20 was using Al-31F's; it then changed its nozzles in later prototypes and LRIP models. Then, people claim that the J-20 changed to a later variant of AL-31F just by eyeballing it. I think we really ought to be more open about the prospects of domestics engines.
> 
> 
> But they "officially" were inducted into service in March 2017. Before that, they were used for testing and extensive evaluation until CCTV announced their induction. If you do not consider CCTV-7 to be credible, then we ought to dismiss any Chinese state media, including the official PLA daily.



The same CCTV channel released the recent documentary about the 001a carrier and showed us exclusive photos and official documentation ... should we also dismiss it as being incredible?



Deino said:


> Nope !
> To admit the guys I know are not the typical big shrimps and they are surely not bloating around what they know. They are calm, careful in the way they answer, respectful and so far they were never deliberately wrong with anything answer they gave me.
> 
> As such some might call this ignorant, arrogant or plain stubborn ... I call it careful.
> 
> If You and others agree, then it's fine but out of the three options on the table (AL-31-derivate, WS-10-variant, WS-15) they all rejected the WS-options and even if ball were quite undecided with my theory, they all prefer my option. But we will see.
> 
> 
> Deino


Deino, I still agree with your opinion to an extent: if the J-20's using a Russian engine, then more than likely it is using the powerful AL-31FM-2 (not the underpowered series 3). I'm not attacking the "Big Shrimps" here; I have been following them around for years and have relied substantially on their rumors. But I believe CCTV undoubtedly holds more credibility than any "Big Shrimp" because they are state backed and have access to confidential information. The recent and widely circulated documentary on the Type 001a carrier was produced by CCTV; it showed very exclusive photos and even provided its official designation, 002, which no shrimp managed to quote.



Asok said:


> *"why don't you provide us an image of the WS-15's nozzles in depth? Maybe then we'll believe your 3D 210kn thrust vectoring engine theory ..."*
> 
> 
> View attachment 420863
> View attachment 420861
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-439#post-8892490
> View attachment 420860
> 
> 
> These images show, the Chinese President tries out the TVC nozzle, around 2003.
> 
> View attachment 420865
> 
> 
> The nozzles are obviously tilted.
> 
> View attachment 420863
> 
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-462#post-8986993
> Differential tilting
> 
> View attachment 420864
> 
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-515#post-9142934
> View attachment 420866
> 
> 
> I admit the seeming tilting are moderate compared to what we have seen on the Russian Flankers with TVC.
> 
> Some one has suggested those seeming tilting of the nozzles are purely due to optical illusions, *but no one has provided some pictures of different aircrafts, that has this "optical illusions".*


Asok, if you want to provide better evidence, you should at least not use a ridiculous TVC demo when Jiang Zemin was around (the PLA in the 90's had no way to build thrust-vectoring engines). Please make it more believable.


----------



## Asoka

*"Asok, if you want to provide better evidence, .."*

I did provide solid photographic evidences, all the other pictures are showing the nozzles were moderately tilted, some even differentially.

TVC are not exceptionally difficulty to built, both US and Russia mastered it, in the 1990's. The Harriers and Yak VTOL aircrafts have them for decades.

*"the PLA in the 90's had no way to build thrust-vectoring engines. Please make it more believable."*

The TVC demo in front of the President were in the *2004 Zhuhai Airshow*. If you can read the Chinese caption below the picture, you would have know
.





You are just demonstrating typical western ignorance and arrogance. No wonder the CIA and Pentagon were *ONE WHOLE DECADE OFF *in their estimates of the initial appearance of J-20. By their estimates, China should not have J-20 flying for another 2.5 years.

Western Intelligences are full of people like you, who don't know Chinese, and are not well versed in the respective technologies, they want to analyze.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> *"Asok, if you want to provide better evidence, .."*
> 
> I did provide solid photographic evidences, all the other pictures are showing the nozzles were moderately tilted, some even differentially.
> 
> TVC are not exceptionally difficulty to built, both US and Russia mastered it, in the 1990's. The Harriers and Yak VTOL aircrafts have them for decades.
> 
> *"the PLA in the 90's had no way to build thrust-vectoring engines. Please make it more believable."*
> 
> The TVC demo in front of the President were in the *2004 Zhuhai Airshow*. If you can read the Chinese caption below the picture, you would have know
> .
> View attachment 420877
> 
> 
> You are just demonstrating typical western ignorance and arrogance. No wonder the CIA and Pentagon were *ONE WHOLE DECADE OFF *in their estimates of the initial appearance of J-20. By their estimates, China should not have J-20 flying for another 2.5 years.
> 
> Western Intelligences are full of people like you, who don't know Chinese, and are not well versed in the respective technologies, they want to analyze.



WHERE? There is no evidence , yet you keep insisting on so. In 1997, Western intelligence accurately predicted that the J-XX program would come online in 2 decades or 2017. While Robert Gates initially said 2025 as an induction date for the J-20, he later revised it down to 2018 because he realized he was wrong.


----------



## Figaro

Cybernetics said:


> Seems like you are not familiar with Chinese people. Do you feel moral superiority to paint the Chinese as ignorant and arrogant? Although I disagree with Asok's assessment of J-20, I find your perception of Chinese people grossly misguided and revealing. Your comment only reveals your own ignorance and arrogance on Chinese people. I would never judge an individual based their group and vice versa.


I wouldn't jump that far. Mr. @Pakistani Power does believe in Chinese ingenuity and how the J-20 has a domestic engine (WS-10 variant). Any experience Chinese forummer would criticize Asok's arguments from a mile away ... just because Pakistani Power does not agree with the WS-15 doesn't mean he's being "racist" towards Asok ..,.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cybernetics

Figaro said:


> I wouldn't jump that far. Mr. @Pakistani Power does believe in Chinese ingenuity and how the J-20 has a domestic engine (WS-10 variant). Any experience Chinese forummer would criticize Asok's arguments from a mile away ... just because Pakistani Power does not agree with the WS-15 doesn't mean he's being "racist" towards Asok ..,.


Totally agree with the notion of criticism on Asok's arguments. Don't "quote" words I didn't even say. I didn't mention it was ""racist"" or think Pakistani Power is a racist, but his statement was very disrespectful and and offensive to Chinese people.

Personally I think the WS-15 is yet to be seen on the J-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ultima Thule

Cybernetics said:


> Seems like you are not familiar with Chinese people. Do you feel moral superiority to paint the Chinese as ignorant and arrogant? Although I disagree with Asok's assessment of J-20, I find your perception of Chinese people grossly misguided and revealing. Your comment only reveals your own ignorance and arrogance on Chinese people. I would never judge an individual based their group and vice versa.
> 
> Dispite my disagreement with Asok's stubborn insistence on certain characteristics of J-20, I feel this is a forum for sharing opinions and ideas. There isn't any new content out on the J-20 so I understand members' frustrations. Please refrain from taking out your frustrations upon whole groups of people, its arrogant, ignorant, disrespectful, and people on this page do take offense. Attacking ideas is welcomed but attacks upon individuals and groups are not welcomed.


@Asok has too much false assertions rumors how can he prove that WS-15 has a TVC, 210kn thrust and based on R-79 jet engine and @Asok always contridic himself in past he was saying that j-20 using WS-15 from day one and on the few pages back he was saying that j-20 was using WS-15 from 2015



Cybernetics said:


> Totally agree with the notion of criticism on Asok's arguments. Don't "quote" words I didn't even say. I didn't mention it was ""racist"" or think Pakistani Power is a racist, but his statement was very disrespectful and and offensive to Chinese people.
> 
> Personally I think the WS-15 is yet to be seen on the J-20.


I don't point Chinese nation, Chinese our brothers i specifically point @Asok who acting like a insane

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sinait

pakistanipower said:


> @Asok has too much false assertions rumors how can he prove that WS-15 has a TVC, 210kn thrust and based on R-79 jet engine and @Asok always contridic himself in past he was saying that j-20 using WS-15 from day one and on the few pages back he was saying that j-20 was using WS-15 from 2015
> 
> I don't point Chinese nation, Chinese our brothers i specifically point @Asok who acting like a insane


Asok assertions about WS-15 is far fetched but not entirely disproved.
Asok also has made some valid points.
Let him have his say, no need for resort to insults.

On introspection, you will realize your post did refer to all Chinese, though I believe it is unintentional.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

sinait said:


> Asok assertions about WS-15 is far fetched but not entirely disproved.
> Asok also has made some valid points.
> Let him have his say, no need for resort to insults.
> 
> On introspection, you will realize your post did refer to all Chinese, though I believe it is unintentional.
> .


What valid points I'm asking that valid points from @Asok at least from 6 months can you give me those valid points


----------



## Figaro

sinait said:


> Asok assertions about WS-15 is far fetched but not entirely disproved.
> Asok also has made some valid points.
> Let him have his say, no need for resort to insults.
> 
> On introspection, you will realize your post did refer to all Chinese, though I believe it is unintentional.
> .





Cybernetics said:


> I disagree with Asok's perspective that "foreigners" will never be able to understand Chinese military matters because of the "language barrier". On the other hand understanding the language will give you a time and depth advantage on understanding key technologies of Chinese weapons systems and the dreaded rumours. It is true that Chinese military research is mainly or entirely published in Chinese because many Chinese researchers themselves suffer from the "language barrier". They publish in the language that is most usable to them, they feel Chinese is the easiest language for them to communicate complex ideas in and also the best language for their primary readers(Chinese military industrial complex) to understand. Same can be said of rumours, people who have personal access to rumours tend to be Chinese from China, who are generally not English speakers (not their fault). Over time some information will trickle down into English reports translated by people who understands both languages, but this takes time and not all information will be translated due to lack of translators and their time. English speaking experts get their understanding of Chinese weapons systems from reading Chinese reports too. Understanding Chinese does gives an advantage but its not absolute. Insisting that a "foreigner" can never understand is demeaning and dismisses human potential to adapt, a broad generalisation I do not condone.
> 
> 
> He can't prove anything *definitively*, I think some where back Asok said it was based off rumours from a Chinese language forum. New information trickling down should be welcomed, I would feel bad if any members feel unconfident in sharing new information they have discovered, its a treasure for all of us to enjoy, even if they are just rumours. Many members have already dismissed the rumour but no need to shoot the messenger. If anyone thinks another's opinion/assessment is not in line with your own then just stay strong and be confident with yours. I understand the process of disproving another person can be frustrating especially if they feel its the right idea, sometimes its best to let the time pass until more information is present and read another thread. Lets stay civil and not have a civil war.


You're completely missing the point here. Asok's claims are ridiculous; he says that the J-20 is using a 3D thrust vectoring WS-15 with a thrust of at least 210kN. He deduces these claims from Youtube videos, anecdotal evidence, and very unreliable articles. Ask yourself, has he ever found a decent picture of the WS-15's engine nozzles? No one is deliberately being rude or "racist" to Asok here; we are just asking him for proof and since he can't give any, he regurgitates the same *flawed* argument. If Asok provided a tiny bit more evidence, perhaps we would have supported his assertion. Regarding your first portion, Asok was bashing on how "foreigners" like Deino could not become "true" Chinese military enthusiasts simply because of the perceived language barrier. Instead of attacking us for critiquing Asok's argument, perhaps you could also attack him for his intransigent attitude about non-native Chinese speakers? You're really arguing against the wrong person here ...



sinait said:


> Asok assertions about WS-15 is far fetched but not entirely disproved.
> Asok also has made some valid points.
> Let him have his say, no need for resort to insults.
> 
> On introspection, you will realize your post did refer to all Chinese, though I believe it is unintentional.
> .


*Asok also has made some valid points.*
Kindly show where? The only valid point I see him making is that the J-20's did not engage afterburners during the Zhuhai demo (hence arriving to his conclusion that the J-20 is using a powerful engine, albeit not WS-15). The fact that Asok has not provided conclusive evidence really undermines his premise ...


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> Some years from now, I will remember Oct 2016 to Now, was one of my intellectually most active and interesting period.
> 
> To solve the mystery of J-20's engine, I was intensely pulled into understand how Jet Engine and how aircraft fly.
> 
> Sometimes, I spend more than 10 hrs a day on it. I must have downloaded and read over 100 technical papers and articles, on these subjects. Not very amusing for my wife and daughter to see me, constantly, glued to the monitor, reading those papers.
> 
> Before, I didn't even know how a jet engine works, how the airplane controls works, not even know how the wings of generates lift, despite a life long interest in airplane. I was just looking at pretty aircraft pictures. I am ashamed to admit.
> 
> Thank you for being my worthy debate "opponent"!
> 
> It takes another stubborn person, to get the best and worst, out of another stubborn man.
> 
> I have insisted that there is a *War of Deception* going on, being waged by the Chinese over J-20.
> 
> There is a chance, that the continuous public disclosures of J-20 is diversionary tactic, designed to divert attention, away from the even more secretive H-20, strategic stealth bomber project.
> 
> To admit being fooled is not easy. The Chinese have fooled the fanboys, the CIA and Pentagon, *big time*, over the J-20 project.
> 
> They have fooled Mr. Robert Gates into cancel the formidable F-22, and put their money on the lesser F-35, thus forfeited their Air Superiority and air dominance, that the US has enjoyed since WWII.
> 
> I really doubted US would have cancelled F-22 at 187 units, if they knew, what they knew now.
> 
> Now, they can either reopen the F-22 production line, which takes 5 years even with no major upgrades, or bet their money on the sixth-generation fighter, which may take another 15 years, like F-22 and F-35.
> 
> There is no guaranteed, that China won't beat US and Russia to it, and produce a better sixth-generation, at an earlier date.
> 
> Either case, US have forfeited its Air Superiority over China. There will be no more *generation gap* between US and China air forces.
> 
> Their air powers' quality and quantity will be at PARITY, in the near future.
> 
> If the US has kept their production goal of 800+ F-22, China will not have 800 J-20 for another 10-15 years, and US would still have their Air Superiority.
> 
> And since the F-22's production line is still open, if it weren't canceled, US could keep increase the production F-22, past 800 units, and keep making continuous upgrades, like the F-15 and F-16, at the expense of F-35, in order, to keep up with J-20's production.
> 
> There would be no danger of losing the Air Superiority to China.
> 
> Now, US faces the prospect of 184 F-22 against 500-1000 J-20, in the next 10-20 years.
> 
> And J-20 will keep improving, at a rapid rate, while F-22 will not.


*Sometimes, I spend more than 10 hrs a day on it. I must have downloaded and read over 100 technical papers and articles, on these subjects. *
Show us at least one of your documents? If there are hundreds of them, surely you would be generous enough to share them with us ... it would be more than appreciated! Please


----------



## Asoka

Han Warrior said:


> My personal opinion is it was not based on the previous documentary which had blurred images of machinery in the workshop producing the components. They deleted it because it was showing too much information on the production lines, anyway, this is the second confirmation of a domestic engine. I am not sure how else we can prove this point, CCTV is the official tv station of PRC. Even with new images, we can only deduce like always, now they are officially telling us it is CHINESE.




*"Now, they are officially telling us, it is a CHINESE [engine]. . ."*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> *"Now, they are officially telling us, it is a CHINESE [engine]. . ."*


Please post your reports ... I would love to glean off your documents


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> *"Now, they are officially telling us, it is a CHINESE [engine]. . ."*


*CHINESE engine doesn't mean that its WS-15 @Asok  its maybe higher thrust version of WS-10X*



Han Warrior said:


> My personal opinion is it was not based on the previous documentary which had blurred images of machinery in the workshop producing the components. They deleted it because it was showing too much information on the production lines, anyway, this is the second confirmation of a domestic engine. I am not sure how else we can prove this point, CCTV is the official tv station of PRC. Even with new images, we can only deduce like always, now they are officially telling us it is CHINESE.


domestic engine doesn't mean that surely its a *WS-15* but may be higher thrust version of *WS-10X *


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> *CHINESE engine doesn't mean that its WS-15 @Asok  its maybe higher thrust version of WS-10X*
> 
> 
> domestic engine doesn't mean that surely its a *WS-15* but may be higher thrust version of *WS-10X *


@PP, I really think you should cut down with the highlighted/bolded letters. You're making some members very agitated ... respond to Asok just like he does to you ... without the fanning fire. While Asok's premise is flawed, he responds courteously, as should you.


----------



## Asoka

Whenever, I mentioned that J-20's Engines, already has 3-D TVC (AVEN) Nozzles installed, I was met with howling laughers, ridicules, and outright disbeliefs, as if this is some exotic technology, that the Chinese will never able to crack, much less, it is already installed on the J-20.

A casual search on Google, with the right Chinese Keywords, for the AVEN technology, pull up numerous technical articles, written by Chinese researchers for their colleagues. Most of those technical articles, were published in Chinese Journals, in the 1990's and early 2000's.

The AVEN technology was first demonstrated in early 1990's by the *F-16 MATV. *And it was publicly demonstrated or presented, to the Chinese President, at the *2004* Zhuhai airshow.

This article here was first published, in *2002,* in China's Aviation Engine Journal. It described the development process and methodology of how China was able to crack the (*Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle, AVEN*) technology. The author was an insider, who worked directly with China's AVEN project.





This article was republished, *2008* in this website, http://ido.3mt.com.cn/Article/200806/show1006412c30p1.html, under the title "*China's F-22 will appear soon: Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle Experiments Exposed."
*
Somebody, @Figaro, has claimed that he can understand technical articles translated from Chinese to English by BING's machine translation service. Well, I am going to post the translation here. If he still claim he could understand it, I take my hat off to him.

*" F22 will launch in China : plane axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test exposure !"*

1 aircraft vector thrust technology is by changing the exhaust direction more steering torque technology for aircraft.Plane thrust vectoring fighter through application of the technology of ultra mobility, STOL, and low detectability, greatly increase the fighter's combat effectiveness and survivability. Developed countries such as the United States, Russia as an important priority.

Aircraft vector thrust technologyStudy, changing the exhaust direction, namely, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch is a key and decisive part, you must firstResearch and development. Axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle (AVEN) was developed from conventional mechanical-divergent nozzle of a thrust-vectoring nozzle through the diffuser nozzle deflection change the exhaust direction. The entire aircraft vector thrust technology, AVEN features with a simple, light weight, low-risk, small modifications to the aircraft, engine host requirements, is to implement the best nozzle for thrust vectoring technology programme. AVEN technologyResearch goal is the completion of the target platform development of turbofan AVEN test, and thermal testing

Transfer from; Sina air force Forum
2 Research objectives and approach

AVEN to in keep axisymmetric received spread nozzle area and area than regulation function of based Shang implementation diffusion paragraph of deflection, and other mechanical device of important difference is AVEN is a complex of space more freedom movement mechanical, people most care of is how makes such of mechanical device movement up, how achieved deflection, how guarantee deflection Hou many of, and mutual make stack of component coordination movement and not card delay, how determine right of movement law. SoResearch ideas from capturing movement mechanism of manpower, from computer simulations to model when the model succeeds, immediately decide on the unit converted to I: 1 prototype, thus overcoming the thrust-vectoring nozzleStudy of key technologies--motion mechanism.

As AVENStudy on technical difficulty, lack of domestic technical reserves, no similar mechanism for reference, it is impossible to ascertain the need to address the key. In view of this situation, through self-reliance, step by stepApproach from computer simulations to model, from the model to the physical, from cold to hot, and key technology of phased decomposition, by technical measures, and, if necessary, by computer simulation or test-test methods for authentication, andStudy on the next phase of decomposition technique, and so development, gradually capturing the key stages in the AVEN, finally accomplished the goal platform turbofan AVEN and the test of thermal test.

AⅥ is one of the test piece pneumatic, organization, structure, strength, control, materials and processes, and many other technologiesResearch topics, each have a large number of innovativeResearch, engineering and technical coordination of multiple projects in parallel across both research quality have made great gains.

3 computer simulation

AVEN is a complex mechanism with multiple degrees of freedom motion of space, typical of AVEN mechanism about 200 motion artifacts, more than 300 pairs these components in an annular space overlap movement only by artificial meansStudy of its mechanism and their relationship is impossible. Throughout the AVEN during the test part, using computer simulation technology, complete mechanismResearch, design and Assembly process of movement members checks, and many other technical work not only effectively reduce theResearch cycle, improve the accuracy of structure design.

3. 1 movement mechanism simulation

? AVEN Zi language dynamic simulation software of the main moving components,Study of AVEN mechanism, the main movement of the moving components, A9, diffuser and nozzle of the operating cylinder's position, so as to give position and control law of AVEN.

3 2 simulation

AVENDuring the study, especially full-scale development of cold and hot test, computer simulation technology, in accordance with the following procedure, complete closed-loop design of AVEN:

(1) according to the aerodynamic design and structural design of movement mechanism simulation results;

(2) press agency programme for the true size of the initial 3D computer solid modeling, computer Assembly simulation entities, and AVEN entities by computer simulation, check the reasonableness and accuracy of the movement of the structure;

(3) the principal bearer of strength design of 3D models available to strength and rigidity checking and preliminary structural strength;

(4) was given control, hydraulic system and controller of parallel program design;

(5) the design of closed-loop process, after more or less after a few repeated, structural design optimization, subsequent design after a few repeated, structural design optimization, design has a good foundation. After the completion of engineering design of the main components, according to the 3D simulation of the real structure of AVEN, verify the correctness reasonable structure design of XING and control and inspection of parts assembling technology of processing performance and test performance.

In accordance with the design process can be completed by the hardware processing virtual Assembly and virtual testing, effectively excluding most of the set 10 blind spots and blunders, which greatly improves the quality of the test pieces, shortening the development cycle, saving research funds.

In these simulations based on the preparation of AVEN mechanism design and motion simulation software, can be done quickly and accurately design and optimization of AVEN

4 motion mechanism and model test

Verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results, and furtherStudy on the AVE. N motion, starting a cold motion mechanism and model for test development and test.

First of all, AVEN diffuser scaled motion mechanism test is completed,Research on motion control performance and coordinating relations of the deflection movement of main members thereafter, Ling State of the actual engine size prototype has been developed,Study of AVEN mechanism, mechanism of structural feasibility and structure of each agency implementation approaches,Study and validation of control and control system. Based on the above two sets of test development and test and verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results obtained direct and clear understanding of AVEN mechanism; mastered the methods of AVEN; finding optimized vector angle of approach; completed a level, development of semi-automatic controller; determine the next step is to solve the key technical.

5 capturing key technologies and by hot testing-test

Cold testResearch based on L2 demands according to the aircraft sector and technical achievements of previous work, break down the key technology, completed the thermal test and control system design, construction and the apoptosis, realized in platform AB of turbojet engine test. Hot bench test, 8 main technical key is verified, namely aerodynamic performance, structural design, strength and rigidity analysis, automation, materials and processes, cooling and heat insulation, sealing and sealing, testing and commissioning, solutions are successful for AVEN technology demonstrator developed by China laid a solid technical foundation.

6 technical validation and improvement of thermal test

Thermal test has conquered the 8 key techniques on the basis of
To conquer 4 key technology, improved thermal test is developed, completed two phases of testing. 5,580 vector was completion of the first stage of the test cycle, testing showed that the test in complete inherits all the success of two batches at the same time, to capture the four key technology is designed, AVEN indicators have fully reached the Jets 12 requests from departments. Due to the restrictions of the test bench, the AVEN hot testing cannot be comprehensive test, for this reason, the test bed for the adaptation, added to the test of three-component force measuring system. In a three-component force measuring system test bench, to increase improved thermal test vector angles, increase the number of vector cycle testResearch on maximum AfterBurner vector angle of 21 degrees, thermal vector cycles 10,026. Trial run proves AVEN thermal test piece has a certain degree of reliability.

Meanwhile, gets the key components of the temperature and stress distribution and thrust characteristics of test data.

7 hot testing standards of the target platform after the above work has been carefully analyzed, based on three basic pneumatic scheme and optimization of two basic structural analysis identifies the target platform AVEN final programme and the need to overcome the difficulties

Two AVEN AVEN has inherited the former all the technical measures of success. Improved all shortcomings and finally accomplished the goal platform AVEN AB test. AVEN has maintained the target platform and the target platform similar to that of the nozzle aerodynamic characteristics, control and installation interface, good interchangeability. Test results show that target large adjusting range and high load conditions? long teach ˋVEN  Kan Chang campaign flexible and accurate, nozzle seal well and the system is reliable and effective and targeted platform
AVEN has brand new small integrated digital control systems, and the safety and reliability of emergency system.


Target platform AVEN meets the following specifications:

(1) deflecting azimuth: 360 degrees;
(2) vector angle: 17 degrees ~20 degrees;
(3) the deflection rate: Wx = 120 degrees ~180 degrees/sec, Wy=Wz=45-60 degrees/s;
(4) the incoming force structure, overall dimension aircraft requirements;
(5) set up emergency control system reset device.

AVEN's test results showed that the target platform:

(1) nozzle adjustment range full engine host requirements.
(2) the incoming force structure to withstand high thrust levels of load
(3) A8 is designed correctly. Using the digital electronic controller
3) A8 design. Original AVEN A8 digital electronic controller automatic control of fully compatible with the original control system, no need to change.
(4) The A8 and A9 can be controlled individually and according to the relationship between a given linkage, coordinate very well.
(5) A9 realizes miniaturization, digitalization, integration of control systems, stable and reliable.
(6) elements, such as seals, adjust work reliably.
(7) AVEN emergency reset functions is safe and reliable
(8) in the engine asked, part small AB, AB and AB, AVE n-deflection nozzle and aerodynamic parameters of hosting matches in the work is good, the mechanical system is stable,
(9) overall dimension and aerodynamic aircraft requirements.
(1O) test measured success in various State vector
Force, the main component of effectiveness of the temperature and stress distributions and engines.

Turbofan axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test indicates that the hot test measures to solve the 11 key technology is successful, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch up to a new level.

8 concluding remarks

AVEN to maintain the existing divergent nozzle of the engine all the features, and control the same way to finalize the axial symmetry of the AVEN will replace the existing divergent nozzle, 3 half-plane has a tactical advantage.

Similarly, the AVEN according to push more than 10, pushing more than 12, pushing more than 15 engine requirements for the design, as a push than 10, pushing more than 12 a standard nozzle, push the ratio of 15, our 4th-generation fighter with higher mobility, enhance our national defence air force. Aircraft vector thrust technology can be applied in the shipborne aircraft and are expected to be developed for shipboard dinner STOL aircraft and general layout of vertical take off and landing ship-borne aircraft (General layout of vertical take off and landing of aircraft taking off and landing in a similar way to launch vehicles, mobile landing platform helicopters taking off and landing on the platform or medium ships and landing).

Aero-Engine modified with a thrust-vectoring nozzle, as a new type of ground effect aircraft or ground-effect boat momentum will greatly improve its ability to surprise, mobility and living our?Study on application of new methods, such as computer simulation technology and new materials (Ni3AL)Research and new technologies (such as superplastic forming and diffusion bonding)Research, on the development of national defense technology and civilian technology will play a role in promoting.


First author: Jia Dong, senior engineer, graduated from Northwestern Polytechnical University was born in 1967 ***7 month Afterburner axisymmetric vectoring nozzle of adjustable nozzles, and the development of CADResearch work has received the 2001 Award for technology and innovation of the Communist Youth League and the China Aviation Group, first prize of the 2001 Commission of science and technology and other."

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> Whenever I mentioned that J-20 has 3-D TVC (AVEN)Engine Nozzle, already, I was met with howling laugher, ridicules, and outright disbeliefs.
> 
> The AVEN technology was first demonstrated in early 1990's by the *F-16 MATV.
> *
> This article here was first published in *2002* in China's Aviation Engine Journal, a technical publication for professionals in the field. It described how China cracked the (Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle, AVEN) technology. The author was an insider who worked directly with China's AVEN project.
> View attachment 421148
> 
> 
> This article was republished, *2008* in this website, http://ido.3mt.com.cn/Article/200806/show1006412c30p1.html, under the title "*China's F-22 will appear soon: Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle Experiments Exposed."
> *
> Somebody, @Figaro, has claimed that he can understand technical articles translated from Chinese to English by BING's machine translation service. Well, I am going to post the translation here. If he still claim he could understand it, I take my hat off to him.
> 
> " F22 will launch in China : plane axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test exposure !"
> 
> 1 aircraft vector thrust technology is by changing the exhaust direction more steering torque technology for aircraft.Plane thrust vectoring fighter through application of the technology of ultra mobility, STOL, and low detectability, greatly increase the fighter's combat effectiveness and survivability. Developed countries such as the United States, Russia as an important priority.
> Aircraft vector thrust technologyStudy, changing the exhaust direction, namely, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch is a key and decisive part, you must firstResearch and development. Axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle (AVEN) was developed from conventional mechanical-divergent nozzle of a thrust-vectoring nozzle through the diffuser nozzle deflection change the exhaust direction. The entire aircraft vector thrust technology, AVEN features with a simple, light weight, low-risk, small modifications to the aircraft, engine host requirements, is to implement the best nozzle for thrust vectoring technology programme. AVEN technologyResearch goal is the completion of the target platform development of turbofan AVEN test, and thermal testing
> 
> Transfer from; Sina air force Forum
> 2 Research objectives and approach
> 
> AVEN to in keep axisymmetric received spread nozzle area and area than regulation function of based Shang implementation diffusion paragraph of deflection, and other mechanical device of important difference is AVEN is a complex of space more freedom movement mechanical, people most care of is how makes such of mechanical device movement up, how achieved deflection, how guarantee deflection Hou many of, and mutual make stack of component coordination movement and not card delay, how determine right of movement law. SoResearch ideas from capturing movement mechanism of manpower, from computer simulations to model when the model succeeds, immediately decide on the unit converted to I: 1 prototype, thus overcoming the thrust-vectoring nozzleStudy of key technologies--motion mechanism.
> 
> As AVENStudy on technical difficulty, lack of domestic technical reserves, no similar mechanism for reference, it is impossible to ascertain the need to address the key. In view of this situation, through self-reliance, step by stepApproach from computer simulations to model, from the model to the physical, from cold to hot, and key technology of phased decomposition, by technical measures, and, if necessary, by computer simulation or test-test methods for authentication, andStudy on the next phase of decomposition technique, and so development, gradually capturing the key stages in the AVEN, finally accomplished the goal platform turbofan AVEN and the test of thermal test.
> 
> AⅥ is one of the test piece pneumatic, organization, structure, strength, control, materials and processes, and many other technologiesResearch topics, each have a large number of innovativeResearch, engineering and technical coordination of multiple projects in parallel across both research quality have made great gains.
> 
> 3 computer simulation
> 
> AVEN is a complex mechanism with multiple degrees of freedom motion of space, typical of AVEN mechanism about 200 motion artifacts, more than 300 pairs these components in an annular space overlap movement only by artificial meansStudy of its mechanism and their relationship is impossible. Throughout the AVEN during the test part, using computer simulation technology, complete mechanismResearch, design and Assembly process of movement members checks, and many other technical work not only effectively reduce theResearch cycle, improve the accuracy of structure design.
> 
> 3. 1 movement mechanism simulation
> 
> ? AVEN Zi language dynamic simulation software of the main moving components,Study of AVEN mechanism, the main movement of the moving components, A9, diffuser and nozzle of the operating cylinder's position, so as to give position and control law of AVEN.
> 
> 3 2 simulation
> 
> AVENDuring the study, especially full-scale development of cold and hot test, computer simulation technology, in accordance with the following procedure, complete closed-loop design of AVEN:
> 
> (1) according to the aerodynamic design and structural design of movement mechanism simulation results;
> 
> (2) press agency programme for the true size of the initial 3D computer solid modeling, computer Assembly simulation entities, and AVEN entities by computer simulation, check the reasonableness and accuracy of the movement of the structure;
> 
> (3) the principal bearer of strength design of 3D models available to strength and rigidity checking and preliminary structural strength;
> 
> (4) was given control, hydraulic system and controller of parallel program design;
> 
> (5) the design of closed-loop process, after more or less after a few repeated, structural design optimization, subsequent design after a few repeated, structural design optimization, design has a good foundation. After the completion of engineering design of the main components, according to the 3D simulation of the real structure of AVEN, verify the correctness reasonable structure design of XING and control and inspection of parts assembling technology of processing performance and test performance.
> 
> In accordance with the design process can be completed by the hardware processing virtual Assembly and virtual testing, effectively excluding most of the set 10 blind spots and blunders, which greatly improves the quality of the test pieces, shortening the development cycle, saving research funds.
> 
> In these simulations based on the preparation of AVEN mechanism design and motion simulation software, can be done quickly and accurately design and optimization of AVEN
> 
> 4 motion mechanism and model test
> 
> Verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results, and furtherStudy on the AVE. N motion, starting a cold motion mechanism and model for test development and test.
> 
> First of all, AVEN diffuser scaled motion mechanism test is completed,Research on motion control performance and coordinating relations of the deflection movement of main members thereafter, Ling State of the actual engine size prototype has been developed,Study of AVEN mechanism, mechanism of structural feasibility and structure of each agency implementation approaches,Study and validation of control and control system. Based on the above two sets of test development and test and verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results obtained direct and clear understanding of AVEN mechanism; mastered the methods of AVEN; finding optimized vector angle of approach; completed a level, development of semi-automatic controller; determine the next step is to solve the key technical.
> 
> 5 capturing key technologies and by hot testing-test
> 
> Cold testResearch based on L2 demands according to the aircraft sector and technical achievements of previous work, break down the key technology, completed the thermal test and control system design, construction and the apoptosis, realized in platform AB of turbojet engine test. Hot bench test, 8 main technical key is verified, namely aerodynamic performance, structural design, strength and rigidity analysis, automation, materials and processes, cooling and heat insulation, sealing and sealing, testing and commissioning, solutions are successful for AVEN technology demonstrator developed by China laid a solid technical foundation.
> 
> 6 technical validation and improvement of thermal test
> 
> Thermal test has conquered the 8 key techniques on the basis of
> To conquer 4 key technology, improved thermal test is developed, completed two phases of testing. 5,580 vector was completion of the first stage of the test cycle, testing showed that the test in complete inherits all the success of two batches at the same time, to capture the four key technology is designed, AVEN indicators have fully reached the Jets 12 requests from departments. Due to the restrictions of the test bench, the AVEN hot testing cannot be comprehensive test, for this reason, the test bed for the adaptation, added to the test of three-component force measuring system. In a three-component force measuring system test bench, to increase improved thermal test vector angles, increase the number of vector cycle testResearch on maximum AfterBurner vector angle of 21 degrees, thermal vector cycles 10,026. Trial run proves AVEN thermal test piece has a certain degree of reliability.
> 
> Meanwhile, gets the key components of the temperature and stress distribution and thrust characteristics of test data.
> 
> 7 hot testing standards of the target platform after the above work has been carefully analyzed, based on three basic pneumatic scheme and optimization of two basic structural analysis identifies the target platform AVEN final programme and the need to overcome the difficulties
> 
> Two AVEN AVEN has inherited the former all the technical measures of success. Improved all shortcomings and finally accomplished the goal platform AVEN AB test. AVEN has maintained the target platform and the target platform similar to that of the nozzle aerodynamic characteristics, control and installation interface, good interchangeability. Test results show that target large adjusting range and high load conditions? long teach ˋVEN  Kan Chang campaign flexible and accurate, nozzle seal well and the system is reliable and effective and targeted platform
> AVEN has brand new small integrated digital control systems, and the safety and reliability of emergency system.
> 
> 
> Target platform AVEN meets the following specifications:
> 
> (1) deflecting azimuth: 360 degrees;
> (2) vector angle: 17 degrees ~20 degrees;
> (3) the deflection rate: Wx = 120 degrees ~180 degrees/sec, Wy=Wz=45-60 degrees/s;
> (4) the incoming force structure, overall dimension aircraft requirements;
> (5) set up emergency control system reset device.
> 
> AVEN's test results showed that the target platform:
> 
> (1) nozzle adjustment range full engine host requirements.
> (2) the incoming force structure to withstand high thrust levels of load
> (3) A8 is designed correctly. Using the digital electronic controller
> 3) A8 design. Original AVEN A8 digital electronic controller automatic control of fully compatible with the original control system, no need to change.
> (4) The A8 and A9 can be controlled individually and according to the relationship between a given linkage, coordinate very well.
> (5) A9 realizes miniaturization, digitalization, integration of control systems, stable and reliable.
> (6) elements, such as seals, adjust work reliably.
> (7) AVEN emergency reset functions is safe and reliable
> (8) in the engine asked, part small AB, AB and AB, AVE n-deflection nozzle and aerodynamic parameters of hosting matches in the work is good, the mechanical system is stable,
> (9) overall dimension and aerodynamic aircraft requirements.
> (1O) test measured success in various State vector
> Force, the main component of effectiveness of the temperature and stress distributions and engines.
> 
> Turbofan axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test indicates that the hot test measures to solve the 11 key technology is successful, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch up to a new level.
> 
> 8 concluding remarks
> 
> AVEN to maintain the existing divergent nozzle of the engine all the features, and control the same way to finalize the axial symmetry of the AVEN will replace the existing divergent nozzle, 3 half-plane has a tactical advantage.
> 
> Similarly, the AVEN according to push more than 10, pushing more than 12, pushing more than 15 engine requirements for the design, as a push than 10, pushing more than 12 a standard nozzle, push the ratio of 15, our 4th-generation fighter with higher mobility, enhance our national defence air force. Aircraft vector thrust technology can be applied in the shipborne aircraft and are expected to be developed for shipboard dinner STOL aircraft and general layout of vertical take off and landing ship-borne aircraft (General layout of vertical take off and landing of aircraft taking off and landing in a similar way to launch vehicles, mobile landing platform helicopters taking off and landing on the platform or medium ships and landing).
> 
> Aero-Engine modified with a thrust-vectoring nozzle, as a new type of ground effect aircraft or ground-effect boat momentum will greatly improve its ability to surprise, mobility and living our?Study on application of new methods, such as computer simulation technology and new materials (Ni3AL)Research and new technologies (such as superplastic forming and diffusion bonding)Research, on the development of national defense technology and civilian technology will play a role in promoting.
> 
> 
> First author: Jia Dong, senior engineer, graduated from Northwestern Polytechnical University was born in 1967 ***7 month Afterburner axisymmetric vectoring nozzle of adjustable nozzles, and the development of CADResearch work has received the 2001 Award for technology and innovation of the Communist Youth League and the China Aviation Group, first prize of the 2001 Commission of science and technology and other."


Yes. More of these articles. Please


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> Whenever, I mentioned that J-20's Engines, already has 3-D TVC (AVEN) Nozzles installed, I was met with howling laughers, ridicules, and outright disbeliefs, as if this is some exotic technology, that the Chinese will never able to crack, much less, it is already installed on the J-20.
> 
> A casual search on Google, with the right Chinese Keywords, for the AVEN technology, pull up numerous technical articles, written by Chinese researchers for their colleagues. Most of those technical articles, were published in Chinese Journals, in the 1990's and early 2000's.
> 
> The AVEN technology was first demonstrated in early 1990's by the *F-16 MATV. *And it was publicly demonstrated or presented, to the Chinese President, at the *2004* Zhuhai airshow.
> 
> This article here was first published, in *2002,* in China's Aviation Engine Journal. It described the development process and methodology of how China was able to crack the (*Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle, AVEN*) technology. The author was an insider, who worked directly with China's AVEN project.
> View attachment 421148
> 
> 
> This article was republished, *2008* in this website, http://ido.3mt.com.cn/Article/200806/show1006412c30p1.html, under the title "*China's F-22 will appear soon: Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle Experiments Exposed."
> *
> Somebody, @Figaro, has claimed that he can understand technical articles translated from Chinese to English by BING's machine translation service. Well, I am going to post the translation here. If he still claim he could understand it, I take my hat off to him.
> 
> *" F22 will launch in China : plane axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test exposure !"*
> 
> 1 aircraft vector thrust technology is by changing the exhaust direction more steering torque technology for aircraft.Plane thrust vectoring fighter through application of the technology of ultra mobility, STOL, and low detectability, greatly increase the fighter's combat effectiveness and survivability. Developed countries such as the United States, Russia as an important priority.
> 
> Aircraft vector thrust technologyStudy, changing the exhaust direction, namely, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch is a key and decisive part, you must firstResearch and development. Axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle (AVEN) was developed from conventional mechanical-divergent nozzle of a thrust-vectoring nozzle through the diffuser nozzle deflection change the exhaust direction. The entire aircraft vector thrust technology, AVEN features with a simple, light weight, low-risk, small modifications to the aircraft, engine host requirements, is to implement the best nozzle for thrust vectoring technology programme. AVEN technologyResearch goal is the completion of the target platform development of turbofan AVEN test, and thermal testing
> 
> Transfer from; Sina air force Forum
> 2 Research objectives and approach
> 
> AVEN to in keep axisymmetric received spread nozzle area and area than regulation function of based Shang implementation diffusion paragraph of deflection, and other mechanical device of important difference is AVEN is a complex of space more freedom movement mechanical, people most care of is how makes such of mechanical device movement up, how achieved deflection, how guarantee deflection Hou many of, and mutual make stack of component coordination movement and not card delay, how determine right of movement law. SoResearch ideas from capturing movement mechanism of manpower, from computer simulations to model when the model succeeds, immediately decide on the unit converted to I: 1 prototype, thus overcoming the thrust-vectoring nozzleStudy of key technologies--motion mechanism.
> 
> As AVENStudy on technical difficulty, lack of domestic technical reserves, no similar mechanism for reference, it is impossible to ascertain the need to address the key. In view of this situation, through self-reliance, step by stepApproach from computer simulations to model, from the model to the physical, from cold to hot, and key technology of phased decomposition, by technical measures, and, if necessary, by computer simulation or test-test methods for authentication, andStudy on the next phase of decomposition technique, and so development, gradually capturing the key stages in the AVEN, finally accomplished the goal platform turbofan AVEN and the test of thermal test.
> 
> AⅥ is one of the test piece pneumatic, organization, structure, strength, control, materials and processes, and many other technologiesResearch topics, each have a large number of innovativeResearch, engineering and technical coordination of multiple projects in parallel across both research quality have made great gains.
> 
> 3 computer simulation
> 
> AVEN is a complex mechanism with multiple degrees of freedom motion of space, typical of AVEN mechanism about 200 motion artifacts, more than 300 pairs these components in an annular space overlap movement only by artificial meansStudy of its mechanism and their relationship is impossible. Throughout the AVEN during the test part, using computer simulation technology, complete mechanismResearch, design and Assembly process of movement members checks, and many other technical work not only effectively reduce theResearch cycle, improve the accuracy of structure design.
> 
> 3. 1 movement mechanism simulation
> 
> ? AVEN Zi language dynamic simulation software of the main moving components,Study of AVEN mechanism, the main movement of the moving components, A9, diffuser and nozzle of the operating cylinder's position, so as to give position and control law of AVEN.
> 
> 3 2 simulation
> 
> AVENDuring the study, especially full-scale development of cold and hot test, computer simulation technology, in accordance with the following procedure, complete closed-loop design of AVEN:
> 
> (1) according to the aerodynamic design and structural design of movement mechanism simulation results;
> 
> (2) press agency programme for the true size of the initial 3D computer solid modeling, computer Assembly simulation entities, and AVEN entities by computer simulation, check the reasonableness and accuracy of the movement of the structure;
> 
> (3) the principal bearer of strength design of 3D models available to strength and rigidity checking and preliminary structural strength;
> 
> (4) was given control, hydraulic system and controller of parallel program design;
> 
> (5) the design of closed-loop process, after more or less after a few repeated, structural design optimization, subsequent design after a few repeated, structural design optimization, design has a good foundation. After the completion of engineering design of the main components, according to the 3D simulation of the real structure of AVEN, verify the correctness reasonable structure design of XING and control and inspection of parts assembling technology of processing performance and test performance.
> 
> In accordance with the design process can be completed by the hardware processing virtual Assembly and virtual testing, effectively excluding most of the set 10 blind spots and blunders, which greatly improves the quality of the test pieces, shortening the development cycle, saving research funds.
> 
> In these simulations based on the preparation of AVEN mechanism design and motion simulation software, can be done quickly and accurately design and optimization of AVEN
> 
> 4 motion mechanism and model test
> 
> Verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results, and furtherStudy on the AVE. N motion, starting a cold motion mechanism and model for test development and test.
> 
> First of all, AVEN diffuser scaled motion mechanism test is completed,Research on motion control performance and coordinating relations of the deflection movement of main members thereafter, Ling State of the actual engine size prototype has been developed,Study of AVEN mechanism, mechanism of structural feasibility and structure of each agency implementation approaches,Study and validation of control and control system. Based on the above two sets of test development and test and verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results obtained direct and clear understanding of AVEN mechanism; mastered the methods of AVEN; finding optimized vector angle of approach; completed a level, development of semi-automatic controller; determine the next step is to solve the key technical.
> 
> 5 capturing key technologies and by hot testing-test
> 
> Cold testResearch based on L2 demands according to the aircraft sector and technical achievements of previous work, break down the key technology, completed the thermal test and control system design, construction and the apoptosis, realized in platform AB of turbojet engine test. Hot bench test, 8 main technical key is verified, namely aerodynamic performance, structural design, strength and rigidity analysis, automation, materials and processes, cooling and heat insulation, sealing and sealing, testing and commissioning, solutions are successful for AVEN technology demonstrator developed by China laid a solid technical foundation.
> 
> 6 technical validation and improvement of thermal test
> 
> Thermal test has conquered the 8 key techniques on the basis of
> To conquer 4 key technology, improved thermal test is developed, completed two phases of testing. 5,580 vector was completion of the first stage of the test cycle, testing showed that the test in complete inherits all the success of two batches at the same time, to capture the four key technology is designed, AVEN indicators have fully reached the Jets 12 requests from departments. Due to the restrictions of the test bench, the AVEN hot testing cannot be comprehensive test, for this reason, the test bed for the adaptation, added to the test of three-component force measuring system. In a three-component force measuring system test bench, to increase improved thermal test vector angles, increase the number of vector cycle testResearch on maximum AfterBurner vector angle of 21 degrees, thermal vector cycles 10,026. Trial run proves AVEN thermal test piece has a certain degree of reliability.
> 
> Meanwhile, gets the key components of the temperature and stress distribution and thrust characteristics of test data.
> 
> 7 hot testing standards of the target platform after the above work has been carefully analyzed, based on three basic pneumatic scheme and optimization of two basic structural analysis identifies the target platform AVEN final programme and the need to overcome the difficulties
> 
> Two AVEN AVEN has inherited the former all the technical measures of success. Improved all shortcomings and finally accomplished the goal platform AVEN AB test. AVEN has maintained the target platform and the target platform similar to that of the nozzle aerodynamic characteristics, control and installation interface, good interchangeability. Test results show that target large adjusting range and high load conditions? long teach ˋVEN  Kan Chang campaign flexible and accurate, nozzle seal well and the system is reliable and effective and targeted platform
> AVEN has brand new small integrated digital control systems, and the safety and reliability of emergency system.
> 
> 
> Target platform AVEN meets the following specifications:
> 
> (1) deflecting azimuth: 360 degrees;
> (2) vector angle: 17 degrees ~20 degrees;
> (3) the deflection rate: Wx = 120 degrees ~180 degrees/sec, Wy=Wz=45-60 degrees/s;
> (4) the incoming force structure, overall dimension aircraft requirements;
> (5) set up emergency control system reset device.
> 
> AVEN's test results showed that the target platform:
> 
> (1) nozzle adjustment range full engine host requirements.
> (2) the incoming force structure to withstand high thrust levels of load
> (3) A8 is designed correctly. Using the digital electronic controller
> 3) A8 design. Original AVEN A8 digital electronic controller automatic control of fully compatible with the original control system, no need to change.
> (4) The A8 and A9 can be controlled individually and according to the relationship between a given linkage, coordinate very well.
> (5) A9 realizes miniaturization, digitalization, integration of control systems, stable and reliable.
> (6) elements, such as seals, adjust work reliably.
> (7) AVEN emergency reset functions is safe and reliable
> (8) in the engine asked, part small AB, AB and AB, AVE n-deflection nozzle and aerodynamic parameters of hosting matches in the work is good, the mechanical system is stable,
> (9) overall dimension and aerodynamic aircraft requirements.
> (1O) test measured success in various State vector
> Force, the main component of effectiveness of the temperature and stress distributions and engines.
> 
> Turbofan axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test indicates that the hot test measures to solve the 11 key technology is successful, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch up to a new level.
> 
> 8 concluding remarks
> 
> AVEN to maintain the existing divergent nozzle of the engine all the features, and control the same way to finalize the axial symmetry of the AVEN will replace the existing divergent nozzle, 3 half-plane has a tactical advantage.
> 
> Similarly, the AVEN according to push more than 10, pushing more than 12, pushing more than 15 engine requirements for the design, as a push than 10, pushing more than 12 a standard nozzle, push the ratio of 15, our 4th-generation fighter with higher mobility, enhance our national defence air force. Aircraft vector thrust technology can be applied in the shipborne aircraft and are expected to be developed for shipboard dinner STOL aircraft and general layout of vertical take off and landing ship-borne aircraft (General layout of vertical take off and landing of aircraft taking off and landing in a similar way to launch vehicles, mobile landing platform helicopters taking off and landing on the platform or medium ships and landing).
> 
> Aero-Engine modified with a thrust-vectoring nozzle, as a new type of ground effect aircraft or ground-effect boat momentum will greatly improve its ability to surprise, mobility and living our?Study on application of new methods, such as computer simulation technology and new materials (Ni3AL)Research and new technologies (such as superplastic forming and diffusion bonding)Research, on the development of national defense technology and civilian technology will play a role in promoting.
> 
> 
> First author: Jia Dong, senior engineer, graduated from Northwestern Polytechnical University was born in 1967 ***7 month Afterburner axisymmetric vectoring nozzle of adjustable nozzles, and the development of CADResearch work has received the 2001 Award for technology and innovation of the Communist Youth League and the China Aviation Group, first prize of the 2001 Commission of science and technology and other."


 yes China has and tested TVC technology but This not prove that TVC tech is used in WS-15 nothing is confirmed i can shows you lots of these type images from China that not related to WS-15/TVC just a speculations nothing is concrete WS-15/TVC this just showing that China researching on TVC not telling WS-15/TVC combo @Asok 



Figaro said:


> Yes. More of these articles. Please


you found these type articles everywhere on the net this prove nothing about WS-15/TVC combo, this articles just showing that China is researching TVC and not related to J-20/WS-15/TVC combo


----------



## Asoka

Some Chinese people have insisted, that WS-15 has not yet flown, and it was only entered ground bench testing on 2015. But this is not true.

They are either Chinese Intelligence Agents playing a *game of deception* with the hapless westerners, or they are not very knowledgeable fanboys, who confused WS-15, with other high thrust engine core project, with *TWR 12-15*, which is nearing completion of ground bench testing, before high altitude platform testing, and then flight testing.

You heard that right. China has been working on a TWR 12-15 engine core, for a long time and is near completing its ground bench testing. And US's TWR 12-15 engine, has probably flown, many years ago, and will power the US's 6-Gen. fighter, soon.

The world did not stop at TWR 10 or TWR 12-15 engine, US, CHINA and Russia have already working on the *TWR 15-20* engine core, for over a decade and half, now.


The WS-15 engine began as the High Thrust To Weight Ratio (TWR 10) engine core research project in 1990. *Preliminary researches was actually began earlier, in 1986*, at the same time as the initiation of the WS-10 project.

After 15 years of intensive works. The TWR 10 engine core, began *ground bench testing* around 2004 and passed all performance parameters in *2005*, and the project to complete the *WHOLE ENGINE* for the new 5-Gen. Fighter, was officially established in *2006*, and given the designation *WS-15*. Hence forth, it was classified and taken over by the PLAAF.

Like other militaries, the PLA are secretive control freaks. Nothing much was heard about WS-15's progress, after that. Of course, WS-15 did make progress, from prototype to Production version, otherwise, J-20 would not have entered LRIP.

But some one has written a *highly detailed insider account *of the TWR 10 engine core research project, before, it was taken over by PLAAF.

It was first published in the *《兵工科技》2007年 第7期, *China's* "Ordnance Industry Science Technology*", 2007, Vol. 7.

*"For China's New Generation of Fighters - A Study on China's High Thrust to Weight Ratio TurboFan Engine Core's Development"*

*为了中国的新一代战机——记我国高推重比涡扇发动机核心机的研制*
作者薛云飞 出版源《兵工科技》 , 2007(7):38-41







This paper is rather a long one, I don't want to post the long machine translation here, and clutter up this page. If you want to read it. @Figaro

Here is the link, of the republished article, with a different title, for you to do your own the machine translation.

http://bbs.tiexue.net/post2_7040813_1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## samsara

Asok said:


> Whenever, I mentioned that J-20's Engines, already has 3-D TVC (AVEN) Nozzles installed, I was met with howling laughers, ridicules, and outright disbeliefs, as if this is some exotic technology, that the Chinese will never able to crack, much less, it is already installed on the J-20.
> 
> A casual search on Google, with the right Chinese Keywords, for the AVEN technology, pull up numerous technical articles, written by Chinese researchers for their colleagues. Most of those technical articles, were published in Chinese Journals, in the 1990's and early 2000's.
> 
> The AVEN technology was first demonstrated in early 1990's by the *F-16 MATV. *And it was publicly demonstrated or presented, to the Chinese President, at the *2004* Zhuhai airshow.
> 
> This article here was first published, in *2002,* in China's Aviation Engine Journal. It described the development process and methodology of how China was able to crack the (*Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle, AVEN*) technology. The author was an insider, who worked directly with China's AVEN project.
> View attachment 421148
> 
> 
> This article was republished, *2008* in this website, http://ido.3mt.com.cn/Article/200806/show1006412c30p1.html, under the title "*China's F-22 will appear soon: Axis-symmetric Vectoring Engine Nozzle Experiments Exposed."
> *
> Somebody, @Figaro, has claimed that he can understand technical articles translated from Chinese to English by BING's machine translation service. Well, I am going to post the translation here. If he still claim he could understand it, I take my hat off to him.
> 
> *" F22 will launch in China : plane axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test exposure !"*
> 
> 1 aircraft vector thrust technology is by changing the exhaust direction more steering torque technology for aircraft.Plane thrust vectoring fighter through application of the technology of ultra mobility, STOL, and low detectability, greatly increase the fighter's combat effectiveness and survivability. Developed countries such as the United States, Russia as an important priority.
> 
> Aircraft vector thrust technologyStudy, changing the exhaust direction, namely, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch is a key and decisive part, you must firstResearch and development. Axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle (AVEN) was developed from conventional mechanical-divergent nozzle of a thrust-vectoring nozzle through the diffuser nozzle deflection change the exhaust direction. The entire aircraft vector thrust technology, AVEN features with a simple, light weight, low-risk, small modifications to the aircraft, engine host requirements, is to implement the best nozzle for thrust vectoring technology programme. AVEN technologyResearch goal is the completion of the target platform development of turbofan AVEN test, and thermal testing
> 
> Transfer from; Sina air force Forum
> 2 Research objectives and approach
> 
> AVEN to in keep axisymmetric received spread nozzle area and area than regulation function of based Shang implementation diffusion paragraph of deflection, and other mechanical device of important difference is AVEN is a complex of space more freedom movement mechanical, people most care of is how makes such of mechanical device movement up, how achieved deflection, how guarantee deflection Hou many of, and mutual make stack of component coordination movement and not card delay, how determine right of movement law. SoResearch ideas from capturing movement mechanism of manpower, from computer simulations to model when the model succeeds, immediately decide on the unit converted to I: 1 prototype, thus overcoming the thrust-vectoring nozzleStudy of key technologies--motion mechanism.
> 
> As AVENStudy on technical difficulty, lack of domestic technical reserves, no similar mechanism for reference, it is impossible to ascertain the need to address the key. In view of this situation, through self-reliance, step by stepApproach from computer simulations to model, from the model to the physical, from cold to hot, and key technology of phased decomposition, by technical measures, and, if necessary, by computer simulation or test-test methods for authentication, andStudy on the next phase of decomposition technique, and so development, gradually capturing the key stages in the AVEN, finally accomplished the goal platform turbofan AVEN and the test of thermal test.
> 
> AⅥ is one of the test piece pneumatic, organization, structure, strength, control, materials and processes, and many other technologiesResearch topics, each have a large number of innovativeResearch, engineering and technical coordination of multiple projects in parallel across both research quality have made great gains.
> 
> 3 computer simulation
> 
> AVEN is a complex mechanism with multiple degrees of freedom motion of space, typical of AVEN mechanism about 200 motion artifacts, more than 300 pairs these components in an annular space overlap movement only by artificial meansStudy of its mechanism and their relationship is impossible. Throughout the AVEN during the test part, using computer simulation technology, complete mechanismResearch, design and Assembly process of movement members checks, and many other technical work not only effectively reduce theResearch cycle, improve the accuracy of structure design.
> 
> 3. 1 movement mechanism simulation
> 
> ? AVEN Zi language dynamic simulation software of the main moving components,Study of AVEN mechanism, the main movement of the moving components, A9, diffuser and nozzle of the operating cylinder's position, so as to give position and control law of AVEN.
> 
> 3 2 simulation
> 
> AVENDuring the study, especially full-scale development of cold and hot test, computer simulation technology, in accordance with the following procedure, complete closed-loop design of AVEN:
> 
> (1) according to the aerodynamic design and structural design of movement mechanism simulation results;
> 
> (2) press agency programme for the true size of the initial 3D computer solid modeling, computer Assembly simulation entities, and AVEN entities by computer simulation, check the reasonableness and accuracy of the movement of the structure;
> 
> (3) the principal bearer of strength design of 3D models available to strength and rigidity checking and preliminary structural strength;
> 
> (4) was given control, hydraulic system and controller of parallel program design;
> 
> (5) the design of closed-loop process, after more or less after a few repeated, structural design optimization, subsequent design after a few repeated, structural design optimization, design has a good foundation. After the completion of engineering design of the main components, according to the 3D simulation of the real structure of AVEN, verify the correctness reasonable structure design of XING and control and inspection of parts assembling technology of processing performance and test performance.
> 
> In accordance with the design process can be completed by the hardware processing virtual Assembly and virtual testing, effectively excluding most of the set 10 blind spots and blunders, which greatly improves the quality of the test pieces, shortening the development cycle, saving research funds.
> 
> In these simulations based on the preparation of AVEN mechanism design and motion simulation software, can be done quickly and accurately design and optimization of AVEN
> 
> 4 motion mechanism and model test
> 
> Verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results, and furtherStudy on the AVE. N motion, starting a cold motion mechanism and model for test development and test.
> 
> First of all, AVEN diffuser scaled motion mechanism test is completed,Research on motion control performance and coordinating relations of the deflection movement of main members thereafter, Ling State of the actual engine size prototype has been developed,Study of AVEN mechanism, mechanism of structural feasibility and structure of each agency implementation approaches,Study and validation of control and control system. Based on the above two sets of test development and test and verify the validity of movement mechanism simulation results obtained direct and clear understanding of AVEN mechanism; mastered the methods of AVEN; finding optimized vector angle of approach; completed a level, development of semi-automatic controller; determine the next step is to solve the key technical.
> 
> 5 capturing key technologies and by hot testing-test
> 
> Cold testResearch based on L2 demands according to the aircraft sector and technical achievements of previous work, break down the key technology, completed the thermal test and control system design, construction and the apoptosis, realized in platform AB of turbojet engine test. Hot bench test, 8 main technical key is verified, namely aerodynamic performance, structural design, strength and rigidity analysis, automation, materials and processes, cooling and heat insulation, sealing and sealing, testing and commissioning, solutions are successful for AVEN technology demonstrator developed by China laid a solid technical foundation.
> 
> 6 technical validation and improvement of thermal test
> 
> Thermal test has conquered the 8 key techniques on the basis of
> To conquer 4 key technology, improved thermal test is developed, completed two phases of testing. 5,580 vector was completion of the first stage of the test cycle, testing showed that the test in complete inherits all the success of two batches at the same time, to capture the four key technology is designed, AVEN indicators have fully reached the Jets 12 requests from departments. Due to the restrictions of the test bench, the AVEN hot testing cannot be comprehensive test, for this reason, the test bed for the adaptation, added to the test of three-component force measuring system. In a three-component force measuring system test bench, to increase improved thermal test vector angles, increase the number of vector cycle testResearch on maximum AfterBurner vector angle of 21 degrees, thermal vector cycles 10,026. Trial run proves AVEN thermal test piece has a certain degree of reliability.
> 
> Meanwhile, gets the key components of the temperature and stress distribution and thrust characteristics of test data.
> 
> 7 hot testing standards of the target platform after the above work has been carefully analyzed, based on three basic pneumatic scheme and optimization of two basic structural analysis identifies the target platform AVEN final programme and the need to overcome the difficulties
> 
> Two AVEN AVEN has inherited the former all the technical measures of success. Improved all shortcomings and finally accomplished the goal platform AVEN AB test. AVEN has maintained the target platform and the target platform similar to that of the nozzle aerodynamic characteristics, control and installation interface, good interchangeability. Test results show that target large adjusting range and high load conditions? long teach ˋVEN  Kan Chang campaign flexible and accurate, nozzle seal well and the system is reliable and effective and targeted platform
> AVEN has brand new small integrated digital control systems, and the safety and reliability of emergency system.
> 
> 
> Target platform AVEN meets the following specifications:
> 
> (1) deflecting azimuth: 360 degrees;
> (2) vector angle: 17 degrees ~20 degrees;
> (3) the deflection rate: Wx = 120 degrees ~180 degrees/sec, Wy=Wz=45-60 degrees/s;
> (4) the incoming force structure, overall dimension aircraft requirements;
> (5) set up emergency control system reset device.
> 
> AVEN's test results showed that the target platform:
> 
> (1) nozzle adjustment range full engine host requirements.
> (2) the incoming force structure to withstand high thrust levels of load
> (3) A8 is designed correctly. Using the digital electronic controller
> 3) A8 design. Original AVEN A8 digital electronic controller automatic control of fully compatible with the original control system, no need to change.
> (4) The A8 and A9 can be controlled individually and according to the relationship between a given linkage, coordinate very well.
> (5) A9 realizes miniaturization, digitalization, integration of control systems, stable and reliable.
> (6) elements, such as seals, adjust work reliably.
> (7) AVEN emergency reset functions is safe and reliable
> (8) in the engine asked, part small AB, AB and AB, AVE n-deflection nozzle and aerodynamic parameters of hosting matches in the work is good, the mechanical system is stable,
> (9) overall dimension and aerodynamic aircraft requirements.
> (1O) test measured success in various State vector
> Force, the main component of effectiveness of the temperature and stress distributions and engines.
> 
> Turbofan axisymmetric vectoring exhaust nozzle test indicates that the hot test measures to solve the 11 key technology is successful, thrust-vectoring nozzleResearch up to a new level.
> 
> 8 concluding remarks
> 
> AVEN to maintain the existing divergent nozzle of the engine all the features, and control the same way to finalize the axial symmetry of the AVEN will replace the existing divergent nozzle, 3 half-plane has a tactical advantage.
> 
> Similarly, the AVEN according to push more than 10, pushing more than 12, pushing more than 15 engine requirements for the design, as a push than 10, pushing more than 12 a standard nozzle, push the ratio of 15, our 4th-generation fighter with higher mobility, enhance our national defence air force. Aircraft vector thrust technology can be applied in the shipborne aircraft and are expected to be developed for shipboard dinner STOL aircraft and general layout of vertical take off and landing ship-borne aircraft (General layout of vertical take off and landing of aircraft taking off and landing in a similar way to launch vehicles, mobile landing platform helicopters taking off and landing on the platform or medium ships and landing).
> 
> Aero-Engine modified with a thrust-vectoring nozzle, as a new type of ground effect aircraft or ground-effect boat momentum will greatly improve its ability to surprise, mobility and living our?Study on application of new methods, such as computer simulation technology and new materials (Ni3AL)Research and new technologies (such as superplastic forming and diffusion bonding)Research, on the development of national defense technology and civilian technology will play a role in promoting.
> 
> 
> First author: Jia Dong, senior engineer, graduated from Northwestern Polytechnical University was born in 1967 ***7 month Afterburner axisymmetric vectoring nozzle of adjustable nozzles, and the development of CADResearch work has received the 2001 Award for technology and innovation of the Communist Youth League and the China Aviation Group, first prize of the 2001 Commission of science and technology and other."


_"...can understand technical articles translated from Chinese to English by BING's machine translation service..."_

Ha ha ha what a kind of joking  one should go on trying with the Alphabet tool, the google's translate service... 

let alone technical papers, just use the bot services to translate the Chinese song lyrics into English subtitles will have caused confusing output

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

*"Ha ha ha what a kind of joking. One should go on trying with the Alphabet tool, the google's translate service... "

Let alone technical papers, just use the bot services, to translate the Chinese song lyrics, into English subtitles, will have caused confusing output."*

That's why, I was laughing too, when someone said, he can understand machine translated technical article.

I think Chinese Military Technology secrets, are pretty safe, until the foreign intelligence service agents, know how to read Chinese, and interpret technical papers, by themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Asok said:


> That's why I was laughing too, when someone said he can understand machine translated technical article.
> 
> I think Chinese Military Technology secrets are pretty safe, until the foreign intelligence service agents, know how to read Chinese, and interpret technical papers, by themselves.


I negate your statement about this kind of illusionary safe... the foreign intels DO have the abundant money to employ the Chinese-fluent staffs (active fluency incl. read-write plus technical understanding). Just remember that since at least 200 to 300 years ago (prolly even about half a millennium ago as of the reign of Kangxi Emperor) the Western missionaries sent out by the Jesuit Order to the Middle Kingdom had eventually mastered the capabilities to decipher the Chinese characters and published lots of writings in the West based on that knowledge.

If those classified & highly classified mil docs are safe it's because of the various protective measures taken, not because of the factor of Chinese language itself!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

samsara said:


> I negate your statement about this kind of illusionary safe... the foreign intels DO have the abundant money to employ the Chinese-fluent staffs (active fluency incl. read-write plus technical understanding).
> 
> If those classified & highly classified docs are safe it's because of the various protective measures taken, not because of the factor of Chinese language itself!



That might be true. Learning the Chinese language is getting popular in other countries. Chinese is not that hard to learn, if you apply your mind to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

*Hi guys ... in order to separate the on-going and already so often discussed question on the J-20's powerplant from the other J-20 news but also from the engine's thread I opened this new special thread.

Please continue here.

Deino*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Dungeness

Han Warrior said:


> Deino,
> 
> latest documentary from CCTV showcasing the latest weapons in PLA. See 7:55 min for the quote saying J-20 is using domestic engine.




CCTV is notoriously for its inaccurate reporting on military equipment. I am not buying it until something much more concrete from AVIC. There is no point arguing about it at this moment. J-20 is in service, and it is good enough news for us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammed45

Deino said:


> Hi guys ... in order to separate the on-going and already so often discussed question on the J-20's powerplant from the other J-20 news but also from the engine's thread I opened this new special thread.
> 
> Please continue here.
> 
> Deino


Any news about WS-15? Is it operational?



Asok said:


> Some Chinese people have insisted, that WS-15 has not yet flown, and it was only entered ground bench testing on 2015. But this is not true.
> 
> They are either Chinese Intelligence Agents playing a *game of deception* with the hapless westerners, or they are not very knowledgeable fanboys, who confused WS-15, with other high thrust engine core project, with *TWR 12-15*, which is nearing completion of ground bench testing, before high altitude platform testing, and then flight testing.
> 
> You heard that right. China has been working on a TWR 12-15 engine core, for a long time and is near completing its ground bench testing. And US's TWR 12-15 engine, has probably flown, many years ago, and will power the US's 6-Gen. fighter, soon.
> 
> The world did not stop at TWR 10 or TWR 12-15 engine, US, CHINA and Russia have already working on the *TWR 15-20* engine core, for over a decade and half, now.
> 
> 
> The WS-15 engine began as the High Thrust To Weight Ratio (TWR 10) engine core research project in 1990. *Preliminary researches was actually began earlier, in 1986*, at the same time as the initiation of the WS-10 project.
> 
> After 15 years of intensive works. The TWR 10 engine core, began *ground bench testing* around 2004 and passed all performance parameters in *2005*, and the project to complete the *WHOLE ENGINE* for the new 5-Gen. Fighter, was officially established in *2006*, and given the designation *WS-15*. Hence forth, it was classified and taken over by the PLAAF.
> 
> Like other militaries, the PLA are secretive control freaks. Nothing much was heard about WS-15's progress, after that. Of course, WS-15 did make progress, from prototype to Production version, otherwise, J-20 would not have entered LRIP.
> 
> But some one has written a *highly detailed insider account *of the TWR 10 engine core research project, before, it was taken over by PLAAF.
> 
> It was first published in the *《兵工科技》2007年 第7期, *China's* "Ordnance Industry Science Technology*", 2007, Vol. 7.
> 
> *"For China's New Generation of Fighters - A Study on China's High Thrust to Weight Ratio TurboFan Engine Core's Development"*
> 
> *为了中国的新一代战机——记我国高推重比涡扇发动机核心机的研制*
> 作者薛云飞 出版源《兵工科技》 , 2007(7):38-41
> 
> View attachment 421180
> 
> 
> This paper is rather a long one, I don't want to post the long machine translation here, and clutter up this page. If you want to read it. @Figaro
> 
> Here is the link, of the republished article, with a different title, for you to do your own the machine translation.
> 
> http://bbs.tiexue.net/post2_7040813_1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Dungeness said:


> CCTV is notoriously for its inaccurate reporting on military equipment. I am not buying it until something much more concrete from AVIC. There is no point arguing about it at this moment. J-20 is in service, and it is good enough news for us.



I'd rather trust the CCTV over the AL-31 zealots from the CD forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Dungeness

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I'd rather trust the CCTV over the AL-31 zealots from the CD forum.



国发党？ I would only trust a solid news from AVIC.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Dungeness said:


> 国发党？ I would only trust a solid news from AVIC.



毛发党 now act like a bunch of retards, no sane people will take these guys seriously anymore.

The PLAAF section of the CD forum is literally a cesspool right now because of these 毛发党 who are the de facto 美分党 in disguise.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dungeness

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> 毛发党 now act like a bunch of retards, no sane people will take these guys seriously anymore.
> 
> The PLAAF section of the CD forum is literally a cesspool right now because of these 毛发党 *who are the de facto 美分党 in disguise.*



I wouldn't go that far, bro. I would prefer to wait for the new info.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Dungeness said:


> I wouldn't go that far, bro. I would prefer to wait for the new info.



Many of them openly admit that they want to become 带路党.

If these guys are not 美分党, then it is beyond me.

They are no Russian fans, but using the Russian engines to bash China on purpose.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

mohammad45 said:


> Any news about WS-15? Is it operational?




It is operational. It has been flown, since day one of J-20's testing. It's now entering LRIP, and preparing for mass production, which may still take 2-3 years to hammer out, the various production issues, so to avoid quality problems encountered by WS-10.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Asok said:


> It is operational. It has been flown, since day one of J-20's testing. It's now entering LRIP, and preparing for mass production, which may still take 2-3 years to hammer out, the various production issues, so to avoid quality problems encountered by WS-10.




But that's only the one opinion .. and to admit: a single person's opinion !


----------



## 帅的一匹

Good move

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Deino said:


> *Hi guys ... in order to separate the on-going and already so often discussed question on the J-20's powerplant from the other J-20 news but also from the engine's thread I opened this new special thread.
> 
> Please continue here.
> 
> Deino*


Well.... to not get confused by the schism of this thread...

*Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions | Page 608*
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chengdu-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-news-discussions.111471/page-608


*The endless J-20-engine saga ... to keep the J-20-thread clean ! | Page 4*
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...a-to-keep-the-j-20-thread-clean.514445/page-4



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Many of them openly admit that they want to become 带路党.
> 
> If these guys are not 美分党, then it is beyond me.
> 
> They are no Russian fans, but using the Russian engines to bash China on purpose.


Akin to *"Jingri" 精日* as mentioned in this article? 
https://baike.baidu.com/item/精日/22068470?fr=aladdin

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

I have to admit that I don't understand Your internal quarrels but it is beyond my understanding how much a more or less scientific or technical issue can be decided to which party or group You want to belong?

I for myself admire China and its achievements esp. in the aviation sector. In some (certain) Western forums I'm called the "China-fan-boy" and even in a certain German one "semi-official propaganda-man" since I try to defend their point of view and perception (esp. against India, the SCS and the USA) but why should I be a China-basher or why do some claim I wish any harm only due to my conclusion it uses a Russian originated engine?

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> I have to admit that I don't understand Your internal quarrels but it is beyond my understanding how much a more or less scientific or technical issue can be decided to which party or group You want to belong?
> 
> I for myself admire China and it's achievements esp. in the aviation sector. In Western forums I'm usually called the China-fan-boy and even in a certain German one "semi-official propaganda-man" since I try to defend their point of view and perception (esp. against India, the SCS and the USA) but why should I be a China-basher or why do some claim I wish any harm only due to my conclusion it uses a Russian originated engine?
> 
> Deino



Leave them be. They just people who love to force their own idea to the others.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Many of them openly admit that they want to become 带路党.
> 
> If these guys are not 美分党, then it is beyond me.
> 
> They are no Russian fans, but using the Russian engines to bash China on purpose.



Well, just think that they have different opinion, and let's learn to agree to disagree with somebody, sometime. Because their opinions won't effect the reality. If J-20 is really use a domestic engine, then it uses a domestic engine. Al-31F fans opinion won't change that. Plus, don't you think that it is better that way? If you read Sun Tzu, or other ancient China Strategy book, you'll know "that something that full appear empty, but something that empty appear full" (sorry for my bad English). Maybe those people are CIA (Chinese Intel Agency, I mean PRC spy) who don't want people to know about Chinese real capability, or maybe they are clueless. But just leave them alone. 

When both parties can't get a conclusion in a debate, just agree to disagree, and don't throw an accusation. And if they're troll, just leave them alone. You know "Don't feed the troll", It's not worth for you health.

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
4


----------



## Muhammed45

Asok said:


> It is operational. It has been flown, since day one of J-20's testing. It's now entering LRIP, and preparing for mass production, which may still take 2-3 years to hammer out, the various production issues, so to avoid quality problems encountered by WS-10.


Admirable achievement IMO.
This engine with mentioned thrust and it's thrust vectoring capability, is a great achievement for Chinese scientists.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

mohammad45 said:


> Admirable achievement IMO.
> This engine with mentioned thrust and it's thrust vectoring capability, is a great achievement for Chinese scientists.




Problem is only: *HE IS WRONG !!!*


----------



## Muhammed45

Deino said:


> Problem is only: *HE IS WRONG !!!*


Can you please elaborate? 

It's not operational or it doesn't exist?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

mohammad45 said:


> Can you please elaborate?
> 
> It's not operational or it doesn't exist?




Following nearly all others here at PDF the WS-15 has finished bench testing and is ready to enter flight testing "soon" ... soon however could mean late 2017/early 2018 or even later. When it will be spotted on an operational J-20 is therefore far, far too early to know. Before that happens surely one or more J-20s will be equipped with that new engine test-wise and IMO if we see any operational J-20B before 2022 it would be a miracle.

By the way following another report I found here, "the WS-15's nozzles are short and stubby, and comes with serrated edges. It'll be pretty obvious when a J-20 mounts them" (via: https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2403427-1-1.html)

I know concerning this engine discussion I also don't have many supporters (albeit on the other side of the possibilities) since most here believe these latest TV-reports, that claim the J-20 uses already an indigenous engine. IMO it is not and by my theory it uses a special custom-made - maybe China co-developed and financed - uprated version of the AL-31FN based on the M2 ... however others deny this and so it seems ...

Finally there are few who think it is a mystical hybrid or Frankenstein WS-10X based on the WS-10's core mated with an AL-31FN-nozzle + other certain modifications to fool us ... IMO the most unlikely option.

But as I said so often: let's agree to disagree until someone truly official either from the PLAAF, AVIC or CAC confirms the type of engine.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> Following nearly all others here at PDF the WS-15 has finished bench testing and is ready to enter flight testing "soon" ... soon however could mean late 2017/early 2018 or even later. When it will be spotted on an operational J-20 is therefore far, far too early to know. Before that happens surely one or more J-20s will be equipped with that new engine test-wise and IMO if we see any operational J-20B before 2022 it would be a miracle.
> 
> By the way following another report I found here, "the WS-15's nozzles are short and stubby, and comes with serrated edges. It'll be pretty obvious when a J-20 mounts them" (via: https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2403427-1-1.html)
> 
> I know concerning this engine discussion I also don't have many supporters (albeit on the other side of the possibilities) since most here believe these latest TV-reports, that claim the J-20 uses already an indigenous engine. IMO it is not and by my theory it uses a special custom-made - maybe China co-developed and financed - uprated version of the AL-31FN based on the M2 ... however others deny this and so it seems ...
> 
> Finally there are few who think it is a mystical hybrid or Frankenstein WS-10X based on the WS-10's core mated with an AL-31FN-nozzle + other certain modifications to fool us ... IMO the most unlikely option.
> 
> But as I said so often: let's agree to disagree until someone truly official either from the PLAAF, AVIC or CAC confirms the type of engine.
> 
> Deino



Well, I don't have any opinion about engine, because I still not understand about them. Heck, i still can't see the different between AL-31F and WS-10, even after you explain them to me many time in the past. And I don't even know WS-15 (I remember there was a photo about it, but I still can't see the different between those engines.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Brainsucker said:


> Leave them be. They just people who love to force their own idea to the others.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, just think that they have different opinion, and let's learn to agree to disagree with somebody, sometime. Because their opinions won't effect the reality. If J-20 is really use a domestic engine, then it uses a domestic engine. Al-31F fans opinion won't change that. Plus, don't you think that it is better that way? If you read Sun Tzu, or other ancient China Strategy book, you'll know "that something that full appear empty, but something that empty appear full" (sorry for my bad English). Maybe those people are CIA (Chinese Intel Agency, I mean PRC spy) who don't want people to know about Chinese real capability, or maybe they are clueless. But just leave them alone.
> 
> When both parties can't get a conclusion in a debate, just agree to disagree, and don't throw an accusation. And if they're troll, just leave them alone. You know "Don't feed the troll", It's not worth for you health.



These guys have already revealed their true color by openly admitting that they want to see China's downfall, and this is not the matter of the opinion anymore. It is becoming a cyber warfare in China's online community.

I also previously thought they were just conservative about China's jet engine development, but it turned out that I was wrong.

Again, Deino is attempting to portray me as paranoid by trying put the words into my mouth. I never suggested anyone who believed the J-20 using the AL-31F are China bashers, but I am specifically pointing out those trolls from the PLAAF section of the CD forum. Many of them are clearly on payroll to spread the malicious propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Deino

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> ...
> 
> Again, Deino is attempting to portray me as paranoid by trying put the words into my mouth. I never suggested anyone who believed the J-20 using the AL-31F are China bashers, but I am specifically pointing out those trolls from the PLAAF section of the CD forum. Many of them are clearly on payroll to spread the malicious propaganda.



@ChineseTiger1986 Sorry, Sorry and Sorry again ... 
I beg Your pardon if You took my reply as a personnel reply directed to or even against You, it was only meant to demonstrate that I don't understand how much a certain academic or technical answer can be related to a political meaning. It was therefore a statement in general - o.k. Beast always claimed I would only like to downplay or downrate anything from China - against these guys and never meant with the intention to put any words into Your mouth.

If blue is blue, then it remains blue regardless my political opinion and it does not become red if I follow another one. Consequently I do not admire the J-20 or its capabilities lesser even if it uses an AL-31.

That was my point.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

*" but why should I be a China-basher or why do some claim I wish any harm only due to my conclusion it uses a Russian originated engine?"*

You got misled, I am afraid. I don't detected a China bashing bone in you. I admit. I have read a few of your published articles. They are highly neutral in tones, and you tell only a little of what you actually knew. I won't call you a "China fanboy". They got this impression may be because you knew so much, while they knew so little.

*"Maybe those people are CIA (Chinese Intel Agency, I mean PRC spy) who don't want people to know about Chinese real capability, or maybe they are clueless. But just leave them alone. "*

That's what I have been suggesting. They were ordered to do so. But the phase of *Strategic Deception* is over, IMO. The war clouds are gathering over China and Russia and the rest of the world. *Strong deterrence*, should take the center stage, to prevent war.

Massive number of the highly capable J-20, will be at the forefront, of this conventional force deterrent.

*"Finally there are few who think it is a mystical hybrid or Frankenstein WS-10X based on the WS-10's core mated with an AL-31FN-nozzle + other certain modifications to fool us ..."*

I am one of those guys. But let's get this straight.

1.) I think the prototype WS-15, that first flew on J-20, in 2011, was an engine with a WS-15 engine core, *not WS-10 core.*

2.) It was not mated with AL-31FN-Nozzle. It was an original *3D TVC nozzle. *made in China. Its external appearance *happen* to look like the AL-31FN Nozzle.

3.) This similarity was not intentional, but incidental. It was not meant to fool anyone.

4.) The fact that many people *confused* J-20's engine with AL-31FN, is no fault of the designers.

*"Following nearly all others, here at PDF, the WS-15 has finished bench testing, and is ready to enter flight testing "soon""*

*Not "soon"*, but already done. The ground bench testing has already completed, over a decade ago. And took flight testing onboard of J-20 has taken place on *Jan. 2011*.

The fact that WS-15's engine core, has entered ground bench testing, and meet all design parameters specifications, in 2005, is not just my personal opinion.

As I have mentioned earlier, an insider has revealed this ground bench testing, in a long article in China's* "Ordnance Industry Science Technology*", 2007, Vol. 7.

*"For China's New Generation of Fighters - A Study on China's High Thrust to Weight Ratio TurboFan Engine Core's Development"
*
You can do a machine translation here, and read it, if you don't believe me.
*
http://bbs.tiexue.net/post2_7040813_1.html*

It's safe to say, all the people here at PDF added together, don't know WS-15's engine core more than this engineer, who wrote this article and worked in this project.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> @ChineseTiger1986 Sorry, Sorry and Sorry again ...
> I beg Your pardon if You took my reply as a personnel reply directed to or even against You, it was only meant to demonstrate that I don't understand how much a certain academic or technical answer can be related to a political meaning. It was therefore a statement in general - o.k. Beast always claimed I would only like to downplay or downrate anything from China - against these guys and never meant with the intention to put any words into Your mouth.
> 
> If blue is blue, then it remains blue regardless my political opinion and it does not become red if I follow another one. Consequently I do not admire the J-20 or its capabilities lesser even if it uses an AL-31.
> 
> That was my point.



It seems that @ChineseTiger1986 and @Deino problem is more about miss understanding. So let's us put down this matter from now on. I understand people like Deino, who is more about technical matter, doesn't understand about China political meaning. Because I don't know about it either. We are not China Citizen, although I'm a Chinese Descendant. So it is an alien matter for both of us. So let's us put down this matter and free our thought from suspicious feeling.

Discussing about J-20 is very exciting. So let's us discuss it with exciting mind

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Deino said:


> In Western forums I'm usually called the China-fan-boy



I can't believe that. 

Anyway, the official CCTV documentaries have said multiple times that the J-20 is using a domestic engine. Are there any official sources that contradict this information?



Deino said:


> But as I said so often: let's agree to disagree until someone truly official either from the PLAAF, AVIC or CAC confirms the type of engine.



Fair enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Han Patriot

pakistanipower said:


> *CHINESE engine doesn't mean that its WS-15 @Asok  its maybe higher thrust version of WS-10X*
> 
> 
> domestic engine doesn't mean that surely its a *WS-15* but may be higher thrust version of *WS-10X *


Agree bro, we dunno which engine is used.



Dungeness said:


> CCTV is notoriously for its inaccurate reporting on military equipment. I am not buying it until something much more concrete from AVIC. There is no point arguing about it at this moment. J-20 is in service, and it is good enough news for us.


I am buying the domestic engine part but we shall see.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Brainsucker

So, the only one who doesn't care about which engine that J-20 use is me????

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sinait

Brainsucker said:


> So, the only one who doesn't care about which engine that J-20 use is me????


I don't care which engine J-20 use as well. 
In fact, I don't care if all the parts are made in China, 
but would like China to have that capability eventually.
Only thing important for me is the J-20 beat the shit out of the F-35.
Why is there this requirement for China to have all parts made indigenous ?
It will happen, in its own time.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

sinait said:


> I don't care which engine J-20 use as well.
> In fact, I don't care if all the parts are made in China,
> but would like China to have that capability eventually.
> Only thing important for me is the J-20 beat the shit out of the F-35.
> Why is there this requirement for China to have all parts made indigenous ?
> It will happen, in its own time.
> .


The J-20 will definitely beat F-35 in WVR or dog-fighting with/without WS-15. The only part I'm worried about is BVR where avionics/sensors/air-air missiles and is where the F-35 becomes a very formidable foe. In BVR, the F-35 is miles ahead of the T-50 and probably even better than the F-22.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Brainsucker said:


> So, the only one who doesn't care about which engine that J-20 use is me????




No ... my wife doesn't care too !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mitho1980

Par asanoon ki lena. China ne export.


----------



## Figaro

Brainsucker said:


> So, the only one who doesn't care about which engine that J-20 use is me????


The engine the J-20 uses is very important. If it's indeed using an under-powered one, it would adversely affect the J-20's subsonic maneuverability, supersonic regime, and other flight parameters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> The engine the J-20 uses is very important. If it's indeed using an under-powered one, it would adversely affect the J-20's subsonic maneuverability, supersonic regime, and other flight parameters.



Indeed, but in the eyes of certain members here an imported or foreign-originated one is always equal to "underpowered" whereas an indigenous engine is equal to a mega-powerful monster engine. IMO there are no relation to thrust and origin.


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Indeed, but in the eyes of certain members here an imported or foreign-originated one is always equal to "underpowered" whereas an indigenous engine is equal to a mega-powerful monster engine. IMO there are no relation to thrust and origin.


But if it is using an AL-31F series 3, then the J-20 is indeed very underpowered. The ideal thrust would be over 160 kN for the J-20, which is what the WS-15 accomplishes



Deino said:


> No ... my wife doesn't care too !


Is your wife into Chinese military matters also 



sinait said:


> I don't care which engine J-20 use as well.
> In fact, I don't care if all the parts are made in China,
> but would like China to have that capability eventually.
> Only thing important for me is the J-20 beat the shit out of the F-35.
> Why is there this requirement for China to have all parts made indigenous ?
> It will happen, in its own time.
> .


You should care if all the parts are made in China ... otherwise it would be susceptible to embargoes or industrial delays just like India with its FGFA. If I were Chinese, I wouldn't mind sacrificing a bit of my J-20's capability in order to incorporate domestic technologies ... especially in the event of war.



Deino said:


> Following nearly all others here at PDF the WS-15 has finished bench testing and is ready to enter flight testing "soon" ... soon however could mean late 2017/early 2018 or even later. When it will be spotted on an operational J-20 is therefore far, far too early to know. Before that happens surely one or more J-20s will be equipped with that new engine test-wise and IMO if we see any operational J-20B before 2022 it would be a miracle.
> 
> By the way following another report I found here, "the WS-15's nozzles are short and stubby, and comes with serrated edges. It'll be pretty obvious when a J-20 mounts them" (via: https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2403427-1-1.html)
> 
> I know concerning this engine discussion I also don't have many supporters (albeit on the other side of the possibilities) since most here believe these latest TV-reports, that claim the J-20 uses already an indigenous engine. IMO it is not and by my theory it uses a special custom-made - maybe China co-developed and financed - uprated version of the AL-31FN based on the M2 ... however others deny this and so it seems ...
> 
> Finally there are few who think it is a mystical hybrid or Frankenstein WS-10X based on the WS-10's core mated with an AL-31FN-nozzle + other certain modifications to fool us ... IMO the most unlikely option.
> 
> But as I said so often: let's agree to disagree until someone truly official either from the PLAAF, AVIC or CAC confirms the type of engine.
> 
> Deino


The "gongke101" guy isn't credible; he claims to work at Liyang and has a large group of CJDBY fanbois. He says that the WS-15 hasn't even begun ground testing yet

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Brainsucker

Figaro said:


> The J-20 will definitely beat F-35 in WVR or dog-fighting with/without WS-15. The only part I'm worried about is BVR where avionics/sensors/air-air missiles and is where the F-35 becomes a very formidable foe. In BVR, the F-35 is miles ahead of the T-50 and probably even better than the F-22.



Well, F-35 can only become the worst nightmare when at the hand of USAF or USN. In an event of war between China and countries that possess F-35, if USA doesn't involve, F-35 can only give half of it's potential combat capability. That's because these countries don't have the support capability that F-35 needs. Like AWACS, AEGIS, Satellite, etc which the USA have. Even if they have, it doesn't guarantee that those systems are integrated with F-35. And even if they are, countries other than USA can only have limited number of F-35.

So I don't think that comparing J-20 and F-35 is necessary. J-20 is a tough combatant by it's own. But the most important thing is the China's military capability as a whole, how PLA doctrine can utilize the J-20 to it's fullest, and how good is the support that J-20 needs.

We are not talk about McGregor vs Mayweather in here.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Jlaw

sinait said:


> I don't care which engine J-20 use as well.
> In fact, I don't care if all the parts are made in China,
> but would like China to have that capability eventually.
> Only thing important for me is the J-20 beat the shit out of the F-35.
> Why is there this requirement for China to have all parts made indigenous ?
> It will happen, in its own time.
> .


In war time some of these countries may not be able to supply the parts. Always important to have the capability to make all parts

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

sinait said:


> I don't care which engine J-20 use as well.
> In fact, I don't care if all the parts are made in China,
> but would like China to have that capability eventually.
> Only thing important for me is the J-20 beat the shit out of the F-35.
> Why is there this requirement for China to have all parts made indigenous ?
> It will happen, in its own time.
> .


If the engine is domestic, it will proved the highest level of manufacturing level in China aviation industries. The number of fighter jet produces is not restricted by the number of engines imported. If the engines are home made, it will also mean the specification level and quality will be far better as China can only import Russian or Ukraine military engines. We all know the state of these 2 countries industries are very bad. Extremely lack of fund, under trained staff and many area of manufacturing have long been neglected and need complete overhaul. You will not get technology breaking stuff for 5th gen engine.

There are large number of foreigner trying to drive down China success and paint Chinese as failure becos if Chinese is united and determine to complete a task. It cannot be stopped. Not even Russia, Europe and North America combined can stopped it.

Most Chinese scientist work for state project not for money. In fact, many are underpaid compare to western scientist. Those Chinese scientist work for China only for the pride of Chinese, Chinese brilliant thousand years of civilization. In fact, Chinese civilization is the world oldest surviving civilization. That is something can be proud of. By working for China and being part of these continue process, they are contributing something. They have written their names as part of these history.

These are something, the money , the western civilization can never matched the Chinese.
This is a great motivation to drive these Chinese scientist and work force to work and improve themselves to highest level to do something for Chinese civilization.

This is also the thing the westerner fear the most. This is something you can never shaken. Money and other incentives can't stop these people. The only way is to destroy their pride, spread fake news of Chinese in-capabilities to diminish their will.

If China can produce LM2500 gas turbine equivalent or 1300/1500 HP with automatic transmission gearbox engine for tanks. There is no reason to believe a modern high thrust aero engine can't be made.

Beware of such people especially from western.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## sinait

Figaro said:


> But if it is using an AL-31F series 3, then the J-20 is indeed very underpowered. The ideal thrust would be over 160 kN for the J-20, which is what the WS-15 accomplishes
> 
> You should care if all the parts are made in China ... otherwise it would be susceptible to embargoes or industrial delays just like India with its FGFA. If I were Chinese, I wouldn't mind sacrificing a bit of my J-20's capability in order to incorporate domestic technologies ... especially in the event of war.


Why is there this demand that China need to be able to make all parts and surpass the US at that.
Its only recently that China was able to make all the parts in the ball point pen though China had been selling them for ages. 
Embargo on satellites and the Chinese still came up with their Beidou ahead of the EU's Galileo.
Ban on Intel chips and the Chinese still came up the the Fastest Supercomputer with their own chips.
Why this obsession that the Chinese need to be super human ?
China has already achieved the impossible by coming up with so much success despite restrain and embargo by the US and their allies.
All agree China is behind the US now, but is fast catching up with the US in all fields and even surpassing the US in some. No mean feat.

Of course it is best to be able to make their own engines which they have, just not all.
That will take time or not necessarily to make all, just the important ones.
If China didn't go ahead with the Z-10 attack helicopter because WZ-16 turboshaft engine was not yet available, China wouldn't have so many Z-10 available now that would contribute towards any confrontation with India.

A better engine for the J-20 can wait though it wouldn't be for long.
There are resistance to China's rise on many fronts, the J-20 need to be operational as soon as possible with or without the WS-15.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

sinait said:


> Why is there this demand that China need to be able to make all parts and surpass the US at that.
> Its only recently that China was able to make all the parts in the ball point pen though China had been selling them for ages.
> Embargo on satellites and the Chinese still came up with their Beidou ahead of the EU's Galileo.
> Ban on Intel chips and the Chinese still came up the the Fastest Supercomputer with their own chips.
> Why this obsession that the Chinese need to be super human ?
> China has already achieved the impossible by coming up with so much success despite restrain and embargo by the US and their allies.
> All agree China is behind the US now, but is fast catching up with the US in all fields and even surpassing the US in some. No mean feat.
> 
> Of course it is best to be able to make their own engines which they have, just not all.
> That will take time or not necessarily to make all, just the important ones.
> If China didn't go ahead with the Z-10 attack helicopter because WZ-16 turboshaft engine was not yet available, China wouldn't have so many Z-10 available now that would contribute towards any confrontation with India.
> 
> A better engine for the J-20 can wait though it wouldn't be for long.
> There are resistance to China's rise on many fronts, the J-20 need to be operational as soon as possible with or without the WS-15.
> .


*A better engine for the J-20 can wait though it wouldn't be for long.
There are resistance to China's rise on many fronts, the J-20 need to be operational as soon as possible with or without the WS-15.*
That's exactly my point : China cannot wait and must incorporate the WS-15 as soon as possible. Something as vital as an aircraft engine (the heart or core) should definitely not be imported ... especially considering Russia is your main supplier. That's exactly my point : China cannot wait and must incorporate the WS-15 as soon as possible. Something as vital as an aircraft engine (the heart or core) should definitely not be imported ... especially considering Russia is your main supplier. I agree with the last part, but under-powered engines really tax on the J-20's overall aerodynamic performance. You shouldn't just push out an incomplete product knowing that they'll be a lot of issues; look at the German "wunderwaffes" in WWII.



Jlaw said:


> In war time some of these countries may not be able to supply the parts. Always important to have the capability to make all parts


That's why domestically produced components are so important. Especially something as vital as a jet engine for a fifth generation fighter. And Russia is often times an unreliable partner too ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

*"There are resistance to China's rise on many fronts, the J-20 need to be operational as soon as possible with or without the WS-15."

"There are **resistance** to China's rise on many fronts" *

This is to put it mildly. The war clouds are gathering over China and Russia, US neocons and neolibs believe they can beat China, in a conventional war, because they have air superiority. And if the war goes nuclear, they still could "win", because they have anti-ballistic missiles defense, that is deployed right at China and Russia's door steps.

It is up to China and Russia, to display credible deterrences, to conventional and nuclear aggression from the US.

A massive number of J-20, with its amazingly powerful WS-15 engines, will be the forefront of China's air power, in the next two decades.

*"I agree with the last part, but under-powered engines really tax on the J-20's overall aerodynamic performance. You shouldn't just push out an incomplete product knowing that they'll be a lot of issues"*

That is true. I agreed.

There are absolutely no indication that J-20 is equipped with a weak or underpowered engines from day one.

A very powerful engine is vital for Supersonic Cruise w/o AB, and Superior Supersonic Maneuverability.

The pilot's testimony strongly indicates J-20 has Superior Supersonic Maneuverability, therefore, Supersonic Cruise, as well.

No planes equipped with WS-10 or AL-31-FN engines were known to have Supersonic Cruise ability, nor the ability to climb vertically, in a sustained manner, w/o AB.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> *"There are resistance to China's rise on many fronts, the J-20 need to be operational as soon as possible with or without the WS-15."
> 
> "There are **resistance** to China's rise on many fronts" *
> 
> This is to put it mildly. The war clouds are gathering over China and Russia, US neocons and neolibs believe they can beat China, in a conventional war, because they have air superiority. And if the war goes nuclear, they still could "win", because they have anti-ballistic missiles defense, that is deployed right at China and Russia's door steps.
> 
> It is up to China and Russia, to display credible deterrences, to conventional and nuclear aggression from the US.
> 
> A massive number of J-20, with its amazingly powerful WS-15 engines, will be the forefront of China's air power, in the next two decades.


You are right in that the J-20 desperately needs powerful engines, at least in the class of F-119. I don't know why Chengdu decided to field obviously under-powered Al-31F's if the rumors are true ... it would impact the J-20 on virtually every front. Couldn't they just delay the J-20 if that were the case ... the jet engine is the most important part of any aircraft ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> You are right in that the J-20 desperately needs powerful engines, at least in the class of F-119. I don't know why Chengdu decided to field obviously under-powered Al-31F's if the rumors are true ... it would impact the J-20 on virtually every front. Couldn't they just delay the J-20 if that were the case ... the jet engine is the most important part of any aircraft ...



Those AL-31F rumors are false, since none of the Russian news ever mention that they supply the jet engine for the J-20, but they did mention the engine supply for the J-31 though.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Those AL-31F rumors are false, since none of the Russian news ever mention that they supply the jet engine for the J-20, but they did mention the engine supply for the J-31 though.


I just can't comprehend why Chengdu would even contemplate putting under powered engines in their aircraft ... especially for a fighter focused on air superiority ... it just doesn't make sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Those AL-31F rumors are false, since none of the Russian news ever mention that they supply the jet engine for the J-20, but they did mention the engine supply for the J-31 though.




Absolutely, J-20 was first publicly flown in *Jan. 2011*, while AL-31-FN-M2 was just announced on *September 2012*, almost 2 years after the first flight. And then nothing was heard after that.

Any normal person would think, that is impossible for J-20, to have equipped, with AL-31-FN-M2, on its first public flight.

I don't know, why this point, is not getting through, with some people.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> I just can't comprehend why Chengdu would even contemplate putting under powered engines in their aircraft ... especially for a fighter focused on air superiority ... it just doesn't make sense.



According to the captain of the J-20 formation during the parade, he did emphasize that "the J-20 is outstanding in the supersonic mode". This literally means that the J-20 is outstanding in the supercruise mode.

If you don't see the J-20 engine in the next 2-3 years having a major difference, then it is definitely using the WS-15 since now.

If the engine of the coming J-20B doesn't look so much different from the current one, then this means the J-20B will use an upgrade version of the WS-15.

Since the WS-15 is China's top priority, and China doesn't even want to show any footage or pic of its ground testing, you can see how classified it is.



Asok said:


> Absolutely, J-20 was first publicly flown in *Jan. 2011*, while AL-31-FN-M2 was just announced on *September 2012*, almost 2 years after the first flight. And then nothing was heard after that.
> 
> Any normal person would think, that is impossible for J-20, to have equipped, with AL-31-FN-M2, on its first public flight.
> 
> I don't know, why this point, is not getting through, with some people.



If the coming J-20B engine looks radically different from the current J-20 engine, then we can assume that the current J-20 is definitely not using the WS-15.

Otherwise, it can imply that the J-20B will use the improved version of the WS-15, while the current J-20 is already equipped with the WS-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> You are right in that the J-20 desperately needs powerful engines, at least in the class of F-119. I don't know why Chengdu decided to field obviously under-powered Al-31F's if the rumors are true ... it would impact the J-20 on virtually every front. Couldn't they just delay the J-20 if that were the case ... the jet engine is the most important part of any aircraft ...



I absolutely agreed. There is no way for J-20 to have superior supersonic maneuverability if equipped with an underpowered engine. It must have an engine in the class of class of F-119.

Superior supersonic maneuverability and supersonic cruise, are two biggest reasons that 5-Gen. fighters will dominate the sky. 

Stealth can be countered with IRST, and anti-stealth radars that are distributed, with one transmitters and many receivers located in multiple areas.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asok said:


> I absolutely agreed. There is no way for J-20 to have superior supersonic maneuverability if equipped with an underpowered engine. It must have an engine in the class of class of F-119.
> 
> Superior supersonic maneuverability and supersonic cruise, are two biggest reasons that 5-Gen. fighters will dominate the sky.
> 
> Stealth can be countered with IRST, and anti-stealth radars that are distributed, with one transmitters and many receivers located in multiple areas.



The J-20 is heavier than the F-22, it will still be underpowered with a F119 class jet engine.

BTW, if the coming J-20B engine doesn't look radically different, then we can pretty much assume the current one is already the legendary WS-15, while the J-20B one is the improved version.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sinait

Figaro said:


> *A better engine for the J-20 can wait though it wouldn't be for long.
> There are resistance to China's rise on many fronts, the J-20 need to be operational as soon as possible with or without the WS-15.*
> That's exactly my point : China cannot wait and must incorporate the WS-15 as soon as possible. Something as vital as an aircraft engine (the heart or core) should definitely not be imported ... especially considering Russia is your main supplier. That's exactly my point : China cannot wait and must incorporate the WS-15 as soon as possible. Something as vital as an aircraft engine (the heart or core) should definitely not be imported ... especially considering Russia is your main supplier. I agree with the last part, but under-powered engines really tax on the J-20's overall aerodynamic performance. You shouldn't just push out an incomplete product knowing that they'll be a lot of issues; look at the German "wunderwaffes" in WWII.
> 
> That's why domestically produced components are so important. Especially something as vital as a jet engine for a fifth generation fighter. And Russia is often times an unreliable partner too ...


China had always made do with what they have and try to import what they lack, or else there wouldn't be any J-10 or J-11. Then they will try to indigenize all parts to reduce cost and secure against future embargoes, also to progress technologically.
I believe the emphasis should be on getting the J-20 combat capable and reliable instead of being the best that it can be, even if it means using an imported engine. From that video, it claims J-20 is already using a local made engine, and I think it is not likely to be the WS-15. 
For me, I think any super additions can wait until the next version.
This obsession for China to always achieve in a hurry is unhealthy.
It will come, but it needs time, time that is super fast when compared to its peers.
.


----------



## Figaro

sinait said:


> China had always made do with what they have and try to import what they lack, or else there wouldn't be any J-10 or J-11. Then they will try to indigenize all parts to reduce cost and secure against future embargoes, also to progress technologically.
> I believe the emphasis should be on getting the J-20 combat capable and reliable instead of being the best that it can be, even if it means using an imported engine. From that video, it claims J-20 is already using a local made engine, and I think it is not likely to be the WS-15.
> For me, I think any super additions can wait until the next version.
> This obsession for China to always achieve in a hurry is unhealthy.
> It will come, but it needs time, time that is super fast when compared to its peers.
> .


*I think any super additions can wait until the next version*
A powerful engine should not be a "super addition" but a pre-requisite to a fifth generation stealth fighter. I'd venture out to say that the engine of the J-20 makes or breaks the entire platform ... that's why many of us care about whether it is using a powerful domestic variant or an under-powered Russian import. To put it in simpler terms, lets describe the J-20 as a track runner and the engine as its heart. How can the athlete expect to win a 400m race when his/her heart is afflicted with Coronary Artery Disease? An under-powered Russian AL-31F is exactly a heart disease. Simple.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

sinait said:


> China had always made do with what they have and try to import what they lack, or else there wouldn't be any J-10 or J-11. Then they will try to indigenize all parts to reduce cost and secure against future embargoes, also to progress technologically.
> I believe the emphasis should be on getting the J-20 combat capable and reliable instead of being the best that it can be, even if it means using an imported engine. From that video, it claims J-20 is already using a local made engine, and I think it is not likely to be the WS-15.
> For me, I think any super additions can wait until the next version.
> This obsession for China to always achieve in a hurry is unhealthy.
> It will come, but it needs time, time that is super fast when compared to its peers.
> .



China prefers to do things smoothly underground.

For example, China has already accomplished the ground test for the nuclear reactor of the supercarrier, and it is 1.7 times more powerful than the A4W reactor used by the Nimitz class. Many things just come out from nowhere, and we can never predict.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## sinait

Asok said:


> *"There are resistance to China's rise on many fronts, the J-20 need to be operational as soon as possible with or without the WS-15."
> 
> "There are **resistance** to China's rise on many fronts" *
> This is to put it mildly. The war clouds are gathering over China and Russia, US neocons and neolibs believe they can beat China, in a conventional war, because they have air superiority. And if the war goes nuclear, they still could "win", because they have anti-ballistic missiles defense, that is deployed right at China and Russia's door steps.


I put it as mild as possible intentionally. 
I rewrote it from "There are now many threats to China".
Haha
.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

sinait said:


> I put it as mild as possible intentionally.
> I rewrote it from "There are now many threats to China".
> Haha
> .



*"From that video, it claims J-20 is already using a local made engine, and I think it is not likely to be the WS-15. "*

There aren't many options for China to choose, to put a jet engine on J-20, back in 2010.

It could either be

1.) a WS-10
2.) AL-31
3.) WS-15

If (2) AL-31 is out, because it is not domestic, then you got (1) and (3) to pick from.

Take your pick.



Figaro said:


> *I think any super additions can wait until the next version*
> A powerful engine should not be a "super addition" but a pre-requisite to a fifth generation stealth fighter. I'd venture out to say that the engine of the J-20 makes or breaks the entire platform ... that's why many of us care about whether it is using a powerful domestic variant or an under-powered Russian import. To put it in simpler terms, lets describe the J-20 as a track runner and the engine as its heart. How can the athlete expect to win a 400m race when his/her heart is afflicted with Coronary Artery Disease? An under-powered Russian AL-31F is exactly a heart disease. Simple.



*"An under-powered Russian AL-31F is exactly a heart disease. Simple."*

I agreed.

J-20 don't have a "heart disease" waiting to be fix. It got a strong heart right from the beginning.



sinait said:


> I put it as mild as possible intentionally.
> I rewrote it from "There are now many threats to China".
> Haha
> .



The security situation for China is far more dangerous than 10 years ago, when US is pre-occupied with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now, the war in Syria is going nowhere for the US. It's CIA trained and equipped ISIS terrorists are in danger of being wipe out. It is looking to start another war somewhere else, like Iran, N. Korea, and South China Sea, or East China Sea, or in the Taiwan Strait.

I am afraid those stupid neocons and neolibs will miscalculate and start a war with China AND Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> *"From that video, it claims J-20 is already using a local made engine, and I think it is not likely to be the WS-15. "*
> 
> There aren't many options for China to choose, to put a jet engine on J-20, back in 2010.
> 
> It could either be
> 
> 1.) a WS-10
> 2.) AL-31
> 3.) WS-15
> 
> If (2) AL-31 is out, because it is not domestic, then you got (1) and (3) to pick from.
> 
> Take your pick.
> 
> 
> 
> *"An under-powered Russian AL-31F is exactly a heart disease. Simple."*
> 
> I agreed.
> 
> J-20 don't have a "heart disease" waiting to be fix. It got a strong heart right from the beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> The security situation for China is far more dangerous than 10 years ago, when US is pre-occupied with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> 
> Now, the war in Syria is going nowhere for the US. It's CIA trained and equipped ISIS terrorists are in danger of being wipe out. It is looking to start another war somewhere else, like Iran, N. Korea, and South China Sea, or East China Sea, or in the Taiwan Strait.
> 
> I am afraid those stupid neocons and neolibs will miscalculate and start a war with China AND Russia.


I remember Steve Bannon predicting war between the US and China within the next 10 years. Thankfully, he was axed this month. Now the Trump administration knows that the only war it can wage on China is one involving *trade*, which the US isn't even guaranteed of winning.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> I remember Steve Bannon predicting war between the US and China within the next 10 years. Thankfully, he was axed this month. Now the Trump administration knows that the only war it can wage on China is one involving *trade*, which the US isn't even guaranteed of winning.




While not all trade wars (sanctions) ended up as shooting wars, all shooting wars started first with economic sanctions (not trading with you anymore).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> While not all trade wars (sanctions) ended up as shooting wars, all shooting wars started first with economic sanctions (not trading with you anymore).


Looks like Trump didn't get the memo ... I just checked
*Trump reportedly demands China action: 'I want tariffs. And I want someone to bring me some tariffs'*

Axios reported that President Donald Trump recently demanded someone on his staff draw up plans for tariffs that would impact China
The White House did not dispute the account, Axios said
Everett Rosenfeld | @Ev_Rosenfeld
Published 5 Hours AgoCNBC.com

Carlo Allegri | Reuters
Donald Trump
President Donald Trump recently dismissed some of his senior staff as globalists and demanded that someone draw up a plan for tariffs that would affect China, Axios reported Sunday evening.

Citing multiple sources with knowledge of the meeting — and noting that the White House had not disputed the accounts —the outlet reported that Trump had issued the demand during an Oval Office meeting with top advisors.

"So, John, I want you to know, this is my view. I want tariffs. And I want someone to bring me some tariffs," Axios quotes the president as saying to John Kelly, his chief of staff.


Trump then reportedly ended his meeting by saying: "I know there are some people in the room right now that are upset. I know there are some globalists in the room right now. And they don't want them, John, they don't want the tariffs. But I'm telling you, I want tariffs."

People in the meeting — which was set to be about plans to investigate China for intellectual property theft — included U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, trade advisor Peter Navarro, National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn and then-White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, according to Axios.

Here's the non-denial that the White House gave to Axios: "The president has been very clear about his agenda as it relates to trade. Discussions pertaining to specific tariffs and trade deals are ongoing and have already resulted in many positive developments."

And Donny expects Chinese help on North Korea

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

Asok said:


> *" but why should I be a China-basher or why do some claim I wish any harm only due to my conclusion it uses a Russian originated engine?"*
> 
> You got misled, I am afraid. I don't detected a China bashing bone in you. I admit. I have read a few of your published articles. They are highly neutral in tones, and you tell only a little of what you actually knew. I won't call you a "China fanboy". They got this impression may be because you knew so much, while they knew so little.
> 
> *"Maybe those people are CIA (Chinese Intel Agency, I mean PRC spy) who don't want people to know about Chinese real capability, or maybe they are clueless. But just leave them alone. "*
> 
> That's what I have been suggesting. They were ordered to do so. But the phase of *Strategic Deception* is over, IMO. The war clouds are gathering over China and Russia and the rest of the world. *Strong deterrence*, should take the center stage, to prevent war.
> 
> Massive number of the highly capable J-20, will be at the forefront, of this conventional force deterrent.
> 
> *"Finally there are few who think it is a mystical hybrid or Frankenstein WS-10X based on the WS-10's core mated with an AL-31FN-nozzle + other certain modifications to fool us ..."*
> 
> I am one of those guys. But let's get this straight.
> 
> 1.) I think the prototype WS-15, that first flew on J-20, in 2011, was an engine with a WS-15 engine core, *not WS-10 core.*
> 
> 2.) It was not mated with AL-31FN-Nozzle. It was an original *3D TVC nozzle. *made in China. Its external appearance *happen* to look like the AL-31FN Nozzle.
> 
> 3.) This similarity was not intentional, but incidental. It was not meant to fool anyone.
> 
> 4.) The fact that many people *confused* J-20's engine with AL-31FN, is no fault of the designers.
> 
> *"Following nearly all others, here at PDF, the WS-15 has finished bench testing, and is ready to enter flight testing "soon""*
> 
> *Not "soon"*, but already done. The ground bench testing has already completed, over a decade ago. And took flight testing onboard of J-20 has taken place on *Jan. 2011*.
> 
> The fact that WS-15's engine core, has entered ground bench testing, and meet all design parameters specifications, in 2005, is not just my personal opinion.
> 
> As I have mentioned earlier, an insider has revealed this ground bench testing, in a long article in China's* "Ordnance Industry Science Technology*", 2007, Vol. 7.
> 
> *"For China's New Generation of Fighters - A Study on China's High Thrust to Weight Ratio TurboFan Engine Core's Development"
> *
> You can do a machine translation here, and read it, if you don't believe me.
> *
> http://bbs.tiexue.net/post2_7040813_1.html*
> 
> It's safe to say, all the people here at PDF added together, don't know WS-15's engine core more than this engineer, who wrote this article and worked in this project.


Thanks @Asok for the link, it's a good yet "thick" read... moderately long article filled up with many technical stuffs... very tough for a layman like me, EVEN IF it's presented in plain English language...which is not the case. 

*Inside the Chinese high performance turbofan engine core machine*

Early 2014

*Introduction:* from the design and verification of a part, the high thrust weight ratio core engine high pressure compressor, the main combustion chamber, high pressure turbine three core components and the development of axisymmetric vectoring nozzle......

The secret of China's high thrust weight ratio turbofan engine core machine development

If the modern combat aircraft is a crown to high-tech, then the top aero engine is the crown jewel. *At present there are more than 10 countries in the world having the capabilities to design and manufacture aircraft, but only a handful of countries that are capable of conducting the independent research and development of aero engines.* Throughout the development of advanced turbojet and turbofan engines by the United States. Russia and Europe, they did not start the study from advanced stage, but first through the core engine development, and then through the verification of machine development. The so-called core machine, is the gas turbine engine by high pressure compressor, combustion chamber and turbine three main components and related accessories consisting of a core part of the engine. Based on the core machine with necessary modifications, with a fan, low pressure turbine, afterburner, control system and drive system and other corresponding components can be developed for military turbofan engine, civil turbofan engine, ship gas turbine engine and a series of. The world aviation has many engine models, *but there are only a few core engines*, and the core engine has the most important role. *Core engine technology is the highest technical secrets of a country - they are tightly guarded by the foreign countries.* So, under this situation, how did China develop its aero engine having the high performance turbofan core engine?

A prior study results achieved

From the last century since the late 50s, China has independently developed ways of aeroengine exploration, although hard, but did not go to the formation of equipment this step, keep on imports, imitation and modification to meet the new need of military aero engine research. But to get only three or four stream technology and products, even the second rate can not buy, not to mention the top class. Until today, China's aviation engine in service are more or less with foreign origin. *If Chinese are to build the advanced fighter aircraft of their own, then we must have its own aircraft engines, so as not to be under the heteronomy in the key areas, because the weapons are "sensitive" to any country, no country will selflessly "arm" other countries with their own key technology. Therefore, our country started the development of high thrust weight ratio turbofan engine in the development of a new generation fighter at the same time.*

High performance turbofan engine is the first program in China from the beginning of research in advance, and then become a model, and installed the background clear air power projects. It is opposite to our country in service and other in aero engine research, and is a comprehensive technology of aero engine across generations. Therefore, it has independently developed the whole process of aero engine for China to walk, to narrow the gap with western developed countries, to provide power equipment qualified for a new generation of fighters are loaded with huge trust and hope! "Ten years", the last century at the end of 90s, China's advance research of high thrust weight ratio turbofan engine, completed its basic components development, test and core machine design a series of technical support, to achieve the pre research stage of the development target. As the main development unit China Gas Turbine Research Institute of AVIC I intend to take breath, a new generation of fighter aircraft and high thrust weight ratio turbofan engine with matching together is listed as the national major scientific breakthrough project. The task is clear, development of high thrust weight ratio of core engine, test machine and the model for later research foundation. High performance turbofan engine core machine, air power is peak too never climb to the top of our country, and in front of the cross climber is composed of more than 160 key technical .... 160余项关键技术构成的雄关险隘。

[...]

In the turbo ground test platform, the core machine by high thrust weight ratio have a sense of rhythm, a tight like a fighter, as long as the whistle day sprint! The operation before the screen, technicians staring at a computer screen on the green curve of high thrust weight ratio of core engine, all eyes looked at all kinds of instruments, they held my breath. Visitors to visit the room, leader of the study, the use of military experts, some stand up, they leave the seat went to the big screen, close observation of the running state of high thrust weight ratio of core engine, concern is seen on the face. With the throttle slowly goes up, pushing high than the core machine issued a howling is more compact, smooth curves reflect the green thrust through the "resonance", all the way up, until the maximum state vertex. The success of the test! This is the core engine ground test of high thrust weight ratio of a history of China's aviation industry moment - China has independently developed technology, cross generation, with the international advanced level reached the maximum, Chinese marks the most advanced turbofan aeroengine is developed and crossed - heavy man! For this moment, a turbo and more than 50 research units in our country. Thousands of people have done for the full 15 years of struggle. Then the researchers and not because of "a little" victory and pleased with oneself, but also successfully completed all done in one vigorous effort, ground test bench. The high thrust weight ratio turbofan engine core machine in China was born

*Seven, the conclusion*

In 15 years, thousands of people participate in Research Institute and AVIC turbo units to tackle together from the exploration and breakthrough of a key technology, from the beginning of the design and verification of a part, step by step, the high pressure compressor, high thrust weight ratio of core engine main combustion chamber, high pressure turbine developed three core components and Aven, has gone through the design, preparation of documents until the core engine technology design core machine engineering drawing design and related technology and processing plant - core - core machine assembly machine in Turbo ground station on fire a successful and smooth push to idle state test to test all the maximum ground state on the ground. High performance machine core facing the wind and rain hard, along the way, has created more than 80 domestic aviation engine first developed. The success of high thrust weight ratio of core engine research, China in aero engine development history wrote a thick and heavy in colours.

The successful development of high performance core engine, for our country in the ascent of air power during the peak of high thrust weight ratio to set up "camp", the "base camp", our country will be able to schedule the conquest of high thrust weight ratio turbofan aeroengine peak, the new generation of war machine in China sent to the sky.

In twenty-first Century the engine requires a high thrust weight ratio to reduce the structural weight, development and manufacturing costs, which made more stringent requirements on the manufacturing technology, the engine structure process tougher. Therefore, foreign countries will study new manufacturing technology group.

[...]

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

samsara said:


> Thanks @Asok for the link, it's a good yet "thick" read... moderately long article filled up with many technical stuffs... very tough for a layman like me, even if it's presented in plain English language...



This is not plain english, but machine translated 'english'. It's hard for me to understand, even I have read the Chinese version of it.

Note, this article was originally published in 2007, in China's* Journal of Ordinance Technology*, and then republished at some websites years later. The date that the TWR 10 engine core *passed the all ground bench testing parameters was in 2005.*

"*In 15 years, thousands of people participate in Research Institute and AVIC turbo units, to tackle together from the exploration and breakthrough of a key technology, from the beginning of the design, and verification of a part, step by step, the high pressure compressor . . .* "

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

Figaro said:


> I don't understand what you're trying to compare here. The Chinese Mig-21 variants were *not *under-powered by any means. *If the J-20 is using an imported Russian engine, chances are it is highly underpowered.*


Why did you guy keep on rehearsing that the _*J-20 is using an imported Russian engine*,_ even though wrapped up under the euphemised IF Clause.

The Chinese official media already informed us at least on two occasions that the J-20 is using the domestic-made engine.

Or do you have any proof to counter the info from the official media?

On another read @Asok just provided a good link to read. I'll just quote the few lines here:



> The world aviation has many engine models, *but there are only a few core engines*, and the core engine has the most important role. *Core engine technology is the highest technical secrets of a country - they are tightly guarded by the foreign countries.* So, under this situation, how did China develop its aero engine having the high performance turbofan core engine?
> 
> From the last century since the late 50s, China has independently developed ways of aero engine exploration, although hard, but did not go to the formation of equipment this step, keep on imports, imitation and modification to meet the new need of military aero engine research. But by doing that only getting three or four streams of technology and products, even can not buy the second rate technology, not to mention the top class. Until today, China's aviation engine in service are more or less with foreign origin.
> *
> If Chinese are to build the advanced fighter aircraft of their own, then we must have its own aircraft engines, so as not to be under the heteronomy in the key areas, because the weapons are "sensitive" to any country, no country will selflessly "arm" other countries with their own key technology. Therefore, our country started the development of high thrust weight ratio turbofan engine in the development of a new generation fighter at the same time.*
> 
> This article was originally published in *2007*, in China's *Journal of Ordinance Technology*, and then republished at some websites years later.
> 
> _More in that related thread._

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LJQC

Asok said:


> There aren't many options for China to choose, to put a jet engine on J-20, back in 2010.
> 
> It could either be
> 
> 1.) a WS-10
> 2.) AL-31
> 3.) WS-15



One assumption is that according to the structure of flame holder, WS10 is very different from what J-20 has. At least for 2012/2013 batch.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

samsara said:


> Why did you guy keep on rehearsing that the _*J-20 is using an imported Russian engine*,_ even though wrapped up under the euphemised IF Clause.
> 
> The Chinese official media already informed us at least on two occasions that the J-20 is using the domestic-made engine.
> 
> Or do you have any proof to counter the info from the official media?
> 
> On another read @Asok just provided a good link to read. I'll just quote the few lines here:




"*If the J-20 is using an imported Russian engine, chances are it is highly underpowered."
*
I don't think Figaro still believes in the AL-31-FN-M2 theory.

He is merely remind us that, if that's the case, J-20 will be underpowered. But J-20 never showed any signs of being underpowered. Quite the opposite, it could lift itself vertically in a sustained manner, without AB.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

LJQC said:


> One assumption is that according to the structure of flame holder, WS10 is very different from what J-20 has. At least for 2012/2013 batch.
> View attachment 421601




That's right Ws-10 has no similarity with the current engine on J-20. It has even less chance of being on J-20 than AL-31, which at least has the similarity argument.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asok said:


> That's right Ws-10 has no similarity with the current engine on J-20. It has even less chance of being on J-20 than AL-31, which at least has the similarity argument.




Agreed, the WS-10X-theory was indeed never on the agenda for anyone with a common sense. For that the J-20's engine and all WS-10 we know so far are too much different. .... and too similar to an AL-31FN-offspring.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Agreed, the WS-10X-theory was indeed never on the agenda for anyone with a common sense. For that the J-20's engine and all WS-10 we know so far are too much different. .... and too similar to an AL-31FN-offspring.




Given the lack of information, regarding the identity of the engine, I can easily understand why people think the J-20 is flying with the AL-31FN. They are indeed highly similar in external appearance, but I am just very confused as why they think it is the WS-10 that is on J-20.

No one has ever given an explanation or justification.

In my opinion, the claim that J-20 is flying with a *Chinese made Russian engine,* is not that far from the truth, if WS-15's engine core, is indeed, based on a variant of the Russian R-79 engine. It's just not a Chinese made AL-31 variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asok said:


> Given the lack of information, regarding the identity of the engine, I can easily understand why people think the J-20 is flying with the AL-31FN. They are indeed highly similar in external appearance, but I am just very confused as why they think it is the WS-10 that is on J-20.
> 
> No one has ever given an explanation or justification.




Ohhh come on, I gave You so often !

Just remember: it looks like an apple, it smells like an apple, it even tastes like an apple... so it is surely a banana since I don't like apples!


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> Given the lack of information, regarding the identity of the engine, I can easily understand why people think the J-20 is flying with the AL-31FN. They are indeed highly similar in external appearance, but I am just very confused as why they think it is the WS-10 that is on J-20.
> 
> No one has ever given an explanation or justification.


And you no concrete facts that J-20 is using WS-15 since its first flight you mentality ill @Asok


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Ohhh come on, I gave You so often !
> 
> Just remember: it looks like an apple, it smells like an apple, it even tastes like an apple... so it is surely a banana since I don't like apples!


*
"Ohhh come on, I gave You so often !"*

What are you talking about, you are a fan of the AL-31 theory, not the WS-10 theory.

No one has ever given an explanation or justification that J-20 is using the WS-10 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asok said:


> *"Ohhh come on, I gave You so often !"*
> 
> What are you talking about, you are a fan of the AL-31 theory, not the WS-10 theory.
> 
> No one has ever given an explanation or justification that J-20 is using the WS-10 engine.



Oh You meant, why peoples follow the WS-10-theory? Then I got Your reply wrong.

IMO this is most of all related to the fact that they know and accept that the WS-15 is completely impossible and was never a realistic option of these three possibilities mentioned above, but since the WS-10 is China's most successful - and so far only - available high-thrust engine it is the only other explanation.

So it is almost the last straw to cling to, not to admit, it can be only an AL-31.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Deino said:


> Ohhh come on, I gave You so often !
> 
> Just remember: it looks like an apple, it smells like an apple, it even tastes like an apple... so it is surely a banana since I don't like apples!


Sir you are slamming your head on the wall @Asok insist in his crap


----------



## Deino

pakistanipower said:


> Sir you are slamming your head on the wall @Asok insist in his crap




No, as I just posted; I just misunderstood his question - sorry for that - but otherwise I stand firm on my theory.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

*" but since the WS-10 is China's most successful - and so far only - available high-thrust engine it is the only other explanation.

So it is almost the last straw to cling to, not to admit, it can be only an AL-31"*

As i said before, I would pick AL-31 over WS-10 any time. WS-10 simply doesn't make any sense. It has no similarity whatsoever. It couldn't even pass, the simple appearance test.

Unlike the AL-31 supporters, who loves to do nozzle comparisons, the WS-10 supporters have never bothered to do so. One can easily see why. No need to. Even a one-eyed man can see they have no similarities.

I can excuse the AL-31 supporters, for being mistaken, but those WS-10 theory supporters, really have lost their minds or eyes, for believing in, such ridiculous theory.

It makes no sense, whatsoever.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> *" but since the WS-10 is China's most successful - and so far only - available high-thrust engine it is the only other explanation.
> 
> So it is almost the last straw to cling to, not to admit, it can be only an AL-31"*
> 
> As i said before, I would pick AL-31 over WS-10 any time. WS-10 simply doesn't make any sense. It has no similarity whatsoever. I can excuse the AL-31 supporter for being mistaken, but those WS-10 theory supporters really have lost their minds or eyes.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> "*If the J-20 is using an imported Russian engine, chances are it is highly underpowered."
> *
> I don't think Figaro still believes in the AL-31-FN-M2 theory.
> 
> He is merely remind us that, if that's the case, J-20 will be underpowered. But J-20 never showed any signs of being underpowered. Quite the opposite, it could lift itself vertically in a sustained manner, without AB.


I can show you lots of video of 4 and 4.5 gen jets can do vertical w/o of use of afterburner even our JF-17 can easily do it w/o Afterburner Mr @Asok

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> "*If the J-20 is using an imported Russian engine, chances are it is highly underpowered."
> *
> I don't think Figaro still believes in the AL-31-FN-M2 theory.
> 
> He is merely remind us that, if that's the case, J-20 will be underpowered. But J-20 never showed any signs of being underpowered. Quite the opposite, it could lift itself vertically in a sustained manner, without AB.


here F-16 climbing without use of A/B




In this clip there is no shock diamond or flame coming out from the engine




In this clip there are clearly shows that shock diamonds or flame coming out from the engine
you don't know what is shock diamonds are so here its definations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> here F-16 climbing without use of A/B
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this clip there is no shock diamond or flame coming out from the engine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In this clip there are clearly shows that shock diamonds or flame coming out from the engine
> you don't know what is shock diamonds are so here its definations
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond


Asok is clearly right my friend. The J-20 did NOT need to use afterburners during its Zhuhai demonstration. Hence why all of us believe it has a powerful engine regardless of origin.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

↑
*"Asok is clearly right my friend. The J-20 did NOT need to use afterburners during its Zhuhai demonstration. Hence why all of us believe it has a powerful engine regardless of origin."*

This guy @pakistanipower don't even know, what is Afterburner or Vertical climb is. The videos he listed clearly showed the F-16 used the AfterBurner (the videos showed it has a *red hot flaming butt*) all the way, and there is NO vertical climb demonstrated.

And he clearly doesn't agreed, with the high school level physics, that to do a sustained vertical climb (not a loop or mere high angle climb), one needs to have a *TWR > 1, or F/W > 1*.

What a joke!

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/K-12/airplane/fwrat.html








Note the last line, I highlighted.
*
 F/W > 1.0 (TWR > 1.0 ) Can Accelerate Vertically.*

"There are four forces that act on an aircraft in flight: lift, weight, thrust, and drag. Forces are vector quantities having both a magnitude and a direction. The motion of the aircraft through the air depends on the relative magnitude and direction of the various forces. The weight of an airplane is determined by the size and materials used in the airplane's construction and on the payload and fuel that the airplane carries. The weight is always directed towards the center of the earth. The thrust is determined by the size and type of propulsion system used on the airplane and on the throttle setting selected by the pilot. Thrust is normally directed forward along the center-line of the aircraft. Lift and drag are aerodynamic forces that depend on the shape and size of the aircraft, air conditions, and the flight velocity. Lift is directed perpendicular to the flight path and drag is directed along the flight path.

Just as the lift to drag ratio is an efficiency parameter for total aircraft aerodynamics, the thrust to weight ratio is an efficiency factor for total aircraft propulsion. From Newton's second law of motion for constant mass, force F is equal to mass m times acceleration a:

F = m * a

If we consider a horizontal acceleration and neglect the drag the net external force is the thrust F. From the Newtonian weight equation:

W = m * g

where W is the weight and g is the gravitational constant equal to 32.2 ft/sec^s in English units and 9.8 m/sec^s in metric units. Solving for the mass:

m = W / g

and substituting in the force equation:

F = W * a / g

F / W = a / g

F/W is the thrust to weight ratio and it is directly proportional to the acceleration of the aircraft. An aircraft with a high thrust to weight ratio has high acceleration. For most flight conditions, an aircraft with a high thrust to weight ratio will also have a high value of excess thrust. High excess thrust results in a high rate of climb. If the thrust to weight ratio is greater than one and the drag is small, the aircraft can accelerate straight up like a rocket. Similarly, rockets must develop thrust greater than the weight of the rocket in order to lift off .

NOTE: _We must be very careful when using data concerning the thrust to weight ratio. Because airframes and engines are produced by different manufacturers and the same engine can go into different airframes, the thrust to weight ratio of the engine alone is often described in the literature. High thrust to weight is an indication of the thrust efficiency of the engine. But when determining aircraft performance, the important factor is the thrust to weight of the aircraft, not just the engine alone. Another problem occurs because the thrust of an engine decreases with altitude while the weight remains constant. Thrust to weight ratios for engines are often quoted at sea level static conditions, which give the maximum value that the engine will produce."_

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

I once read that @pakistanipower guy claimed as an engineer though I cannot recall in which field. 

However, what I don't see from him as an engineer is the systematic and methodical explanation to prop his arguments... instead he resorts to the terse, agitative remarks put *in the distinctive color and bold* like this example, repeatedly... very cool!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

He is an engineer? I really doubt, he has any technical background.

This @pakistanipower guy only knows, how to give one liner replies, that has no logic or informational content, whatsoever. SAD!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asok said:


> He is an engineer? I really doubt, he has any technical background.
> 
> This @pakistanipower guy only knows, how to give one liner replies, that has no logic or informational content, whatsoever. SAD!


Even a non-engineer could distinguish the appearance of an afterburner. I don't have an engineering profession but I'm still able to differentiate two obvious settings. I will repeat ... the J-20 did not engage afterburners at Zhuhai or in any of its high g maneuvers ... @PP needs to google image afterburner settings ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> ↑
> *"Asok is clearly right my friend. The J-20 did NOT need to use afterburners during its Zhuhai demonstration. Hence why all of us believe it has a powerful engine regardless of origin."*
> 
> This guy @pakistanipower don't even know, what is Afterburner or Vertical climb is. The videos he listed clearly showed the F-16 used the AfterBurner (the videos showed it has a *red hot flaming butt*) all the way, and there is NO vertical climb demonstrated.
> 
> And he clearly doesn't agreed, with the high school level physics, that to do a sustained vertical climb (not a loop or mere high angle climb), one needs to have a *TWR > 1, or F/W > 1*.
> 
> What a joke!
> 
> https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/K-12/airplane/fwrat.html
> 
> 
> View attachment 421720
> 
> 
> Note the last line, I highlighted.
> *
> F/W > 1.0 (TWR > 1.0 ) Can Accelerate Vertically.*
> 
> "There are four forces that act on an aircraft in flight: lift, weight, thrust, and drag. Forces are vector quantities having both a magnitude and a direction. The motion of the aircraft through the air depends on the relative magnitude and direction of the various forces. The weight of an airplane is determined by the size and materials used in the airplane's construction and on the payload and fuel that the airplane carries. The weight is always directed towards the center of the earth. The thrust is determined by the size and type of propulsion system used on the airplane and on the throttle setting selected by the pilot. Thrust is normally directed forward along the center-line of the aircraft. Lift and drag are aerodynamic forces that depend on the shape and size of the aircraft, air conditions, and the flight velocity. Lift is directed perpendicular to the flight path and drag is directed along the flight path.
> 
> Just as the lift to drag ratio is an efficiency parameter for total aircraft aerodynamics, the thrust to weight ratio is an efficiency factor for total aircraft propulsion. From Newton's second law of motion for constant mass, force F is equal to mass m times acceleration a:
> 
> F = m * a
> 
> If we consider a horizontal acceleration and neglect the drag the net external force is the thrust F. From the Newtonian weight equation:
> 
> W = m * g
> 
> where W is the weight and g is the gravitational constant equal to 32.2 ft/sec^s in English units and 9.8 m/sec^s in metric units. Solving for the mass:
> 
> m = W / g
> 
> and substituting in the force equation:
> 
> F = W * a / g
> 
> F / W = a / g
> 
> F/W is the thrust to weight ratio and it is directly proportional to the acceleration of the aircraft. An aircraft with a high thrust to weight ratio has high acceleration. For most flight conditions, an aircraft with a high thrust to weight ratio will also have a high value of excess thrust. High excess thrust results in a high rate of climb. If the thrust to weight ratio is greater than one and the drag is small, the aircraft can accelerate straight up like a rocket. Similarly, rockets must develop thrust greater than the weight of the rocket in order to lift off .
> 
> NOTE: _We must be very careful when using data concerning the thrust to weight ratio. Because airframes and engines are produced by different manufacturers and the same engine can go into different airframes, the thrust to weight ratio of the engine alone is often described in the literature. High thrust to weight is an indication of the thrust efficiency of the engine. But when determining aircraft performance, the important factor is the thrust to weight of the aircraft, not just the engine alone. Another problem occurs because the thrust of an engine decreases with altitude while the weight remains constant. Thrust to weight ratios for engines are often quoted at sea level static conditions, which give the maximum value that the engine will produce."_


And Mr @Asok F-16 don't have TWR of 1 in the clean configurations and can you show me where shock diamonds flames come out from engine on my first clip show me Mr @Asok and here are thrust to weight of F-16 
*F-16
General characteristics*


*Crew:* 1
*Length:* 49 ft 5 in (15.06 m)
*Wingspan:* 32 ft 8 in (9.96 m)
*Height:* 16 ft (4.88 m)
*Wing area:* 300 ft² (27.87 m²)
*Airfoil:* NACA 64A204 root and tip
*Empty weight:* 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)
*Loaded weight:* 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)
*Max. takeoff weight:* 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)
*Internal fuel:* 7,000 pounds (3,200 kg)[2]
*Powerplant:* 1 × General Electric F110-GE-129 (for F-16C/D Block 30-40-50) or Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220/220E afterburning turbofan
*Dry thrust:* 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN)
*Thrust with afterburner:* 28,600 lbf (127 kN)

*Performance*


*Maximum speed:*
*At sea level:* Mach 1.2 (915 mph, 1,470 km/h)[74]
*At altitude:* Mach 2[2] (1,320 mph; 2,120 km/h) clean configuration

*Combat radius:* 340 mi (295 nmi; 550 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with four 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs
*Ferry range:* 2,280 nmi (2,620 mi; 4,220 km) with drop tanks
*Service ceiling:* 50,000+ ft[2] (15,240+ m)
*Rate of climb:* 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
*Wing loading:* 88.3 lb/ft² (431 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 1.095 (1.24 with loaded weight & 50% internal fuel)[257]

*Maximum g-load:* +9.0 g
sorry to burst your bubbles mentally ill @Asok


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> And Mr @Asok F-16 don't have TWR of 1 in the clean configurations and can you show me where shock diamonds flames come out from engine on my first clip show me Mr @Asok and here are thrust to weight of F-16
> *F-16
> General characteristics*
> 
> 
> *Crew:* 1
> *Length:* 49 ft 5 in (15.06 m)
> *Wingspan:* 32 ft 8 in (9.96 m)
> *Height:* 16 ft (4.88 m)
> *Wing area:* 300 ft² (27.87 m²)
> *Airfoil:* NACA 64A204 root and tip
> *Empty weight:* 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)
> *Loaded weight:* 26,500 lb (12,000 kg)
> *Max. takeoff weight:* 42,300 lb (19,200 kg)
> *Internal fuel:* 7,000 pounds (3,200 kg)[2]
> *Powerplant:* 1 × General Electric F110-GE-129 (for F-16C/D Block 30-40-50) or Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220/220E afterburning turbofan
> *Dry thrust:* 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN)
> *Thrust with afterburner:* 28,600 lbf (127 kN)
> 
> *Performance*
> 
> 
> *Maximum speed:*
> *At sea level:* Mach 1.2 (915 mph, 1,470 km/h)[74]
> *At altitude:* Mach 2[2] (1,320 mph; 2,120 km/h) clean configuration
> 
> *Combat radius:* 340 mi (295 nmi; 550 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with four 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs
> *Ferry range:* 2,280 nmi (2,620 mi; 4,220 km) with drop tanks
> *Service ceiling:* 50,000+ ft[2] (15,240+ m)
> *Rate of climb:* 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s)
> *Wing loading:* 88.3 lb/ft² (431 kg/m²)
> Thrust/weight: 1.095 (1.24 with loaded weight & 50% internal fuel)[257]
> 
> *Maximum g-load:* +9.0 g
> sorry to burst your bubbles mentally ill @Asok


What are you trying to prove here? The J-20 did not engage afterburners in similar maneuvers where the F-22 would otherwise need to. This proves that the J-20 has a good combination of aerodynamic design and engine thrust to ensure excellent transonic maneuverability.



Asok said:


> He is an engineer? I really doubt, he has any technical background.
> 
> This @pakistanipower guy only knows, how to give one liner replies, that has no logic or informational content, whatsoever. SAD!


@pakistanipower really needs to stop using bolded any highlighted letters ... this practice is just flame bait. The users on the Chinese section of PDF should be much more civil than the others ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> What are you trying to prove here? The J-20 did not engage afterburners in similar maneuvers where the F-22 would otherwise need to. This proves that the J-20 has a good combination of aerodynamic design and engine thrust to ensure excellent transonic maneuverability.


i'm trying to correct jester Mr @Asok


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> i'm trying to correct jester Mr @Asok


Don't uses bolded letters. Asok has not used larger bolded and highlighted letters to argue against you. You should do the same ...


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> Don't uses bolded letters. Asok has not used larger bolded and highlighted letters to argue against you. You should do the same ...


ok Bro

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

pakistanipower don't really know what is *difference*, between Dry Thrust (w/o afterburner), and Wet thrust (w. afterburner).


*Powerplant:* 1 × General Electric F110-GE-129
*Dry thrust:* 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN)
*Thrust with afterburner:* 28,600 lbf (127 kN)


*Empty weight:* 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)
*Internal fuel:* 7,000 pounds (3,200 kg)
 Thrust/weight: 1.095 (1.24 with loaded weight & 50% internal fuel)

So, from the above, the empty weight of F-16, *plus,* 50% internal fuel is:

8,570 kg + (3,200kg * 0.50) = *10,170kg*

The Dry Thrust (w/o afterburner) = 76.3 kN or *7,780kg*
Wet Thrust (w. afterburner) = 127 kN = *12,950kg*

* Wet Thrust > Flying Weight > Dry Thrust*
12,950kg > 10,170kg > 7,780kg

Dry Thrust to Weight Ratio = *0.765 *
Wet thrust to Weight Ratio = *1.27
*
So, we can see, the TWR, w/o AB = *0.765*, which is less than 1.0. That means *the F-16 can not lift itself vertically, without the use of AB.*

And Wet thrust to Weight Ratio = 1.27,* so it must turn the AB on*, if the pilot wants to do a vertically climb, when carrying 50% internal fuel.

The shock diamond is only visible, when the AB is turned on *full blast*, not when its only just turned on moderately, which you see only the flaming red butt.

@pakistanipower said he has an engineering background. I wonder what engineering school, he went to. He doesn't seem to have an education, beyond the elementary school.

Otherwise, he would not have failed to do such elementary calculations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> The shock diamond is only visible, when the AB is turned on *full blast*, not when its only just turned on moderately, which you see only the flaming red butt.


An mentally ill Mr @Asok can you show me specially fighter jets taking off without hot Flaming hot red butt ok i am in elementary school but you're literally illiterate and at end Zuhai airshow 2016 J-20 was not didn't show any* Sustain* vertical climbs but J-20 did merely 5-6 second and this is not called *sustain* you retard head Mr @Asok 



Asok said:


> pakistanipower don't really know what is *difference*, between Dry Thrust (w/o afterburner), and Wet thrust (w. afterburner).
> 
> 
> *Powerplant:* 1 × General Electric F110-GE-129
> *Dry thrust:* 17,155 lbf (76.3 kN)
> *Thrust with afterburner:* 28,600 lbf (127 kN)
> 
> 
> *Empty weight:* 18,900 lb (8,570 kg)
> *Internal fuel:* 7,000 pounds (3,200 kg)
> Thrust/weight: 1.095 (1.24 with loaded weight & 50% internal fuel)
> 
> So, from the above, the empty weight of F-16, *plus,* 50% internal fuel is:
> 
> 8,570 kg + (3,200kg * 0.50) = *10,170kg*
> 
> The Dry Thrust (w/o afterburner) = 76.3 kN or *7,780kg*
> Wet Thrust (w. afterburner) = 127 kN = *12,950kg*
> 
> * Wet Thrust > Flying Weight > Dry Thrust*
> 12,950kg > 10,170kg > 7,780kg
> 
> Dry Thrust to Weight Ratio = *0.765 *
> Wet thrust to Weight Ratio = *1.27
> *
> So, we can see, the TWR, w/o AB = *0.765*, which is less than 1.0. That means *the F-16 can not lift itself vertically, without the use of AB.*
> 
> And Wet thrust to Weight Ratio = 1.27,* so it must turn the AB on*, if the pilot wants to do a vertically climb, when carrying 50% internal fuel.
> 
> The shock diamond is only visible, when the AB is turned on *full blast*, not when its only just turned on moderately, which you see only the flaming red butt.
> 
> @pakistanipower said he has an engineering background. I wonder what engineering school, he went to. He doesn't seem to have an education, beyond the elementary school.
> 
> Otherwise, he would not have failed to do such elementary calculations.


In *clean *configuration F-16 can easily do vertical climb without A/B have you a comprehension problem Mr @Asok or you are Blind which lives in their fairy tales and fantasy world don't you Mr @Asok

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

China could just buy licence production from Russia for 20 billion dollars sell US bonds and buy Russian Engine


----------



## Figaro

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> China could just buy licence production from Russia for 20 billion dollars sell US bonds and buy Russian Engine


That is not how the Russian or Chinese defense industries function. The US wasn't willing to sell the F-22 for whatever price ... even when Japan and Israel asked. And I don't think that engines are a military item that ought to be "license" produced.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

*"Can you show me, specially fighter jets, taking off, without, hot Flaming hot red butt"*







Fighters usually take off with full load of internal fuel plus their weapon, so they need to take off with a red hot AB, in full blast, so they can clear the run way. This is why you see that most often during take off.

However, they do could take off w/o AB. There is no reason that they shouldn't use their AB, during take off.

I am not surprised, that you find it, hard to believe, that a large and heavy plane, like the J-20 can climb vertically w/0 AB, while a light and small plane, like F-16, CAN'T.

It's simply too astounding to believe, unless it was captured by multiple video cameras, and witnessed by thousands of aviation professionals, from around the world. It will send shockwave around the world, when the truth gets out.

It all means J-20 has a *very very powerful engine,* not an underpowered engine like the WS-10 or AL-31.

This is got to be one of the *most astounding* feat of aeronautical engineering in recent memory.

Gee, why am I wasting my time and keep taking to an "engineer", who couldn't do elementary math?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Time to fast track cooperation

Sell 20-100 Billion in US bonds , get in a Licence production for Twin Engines used in Sukhoi-35 and use it in sealth shared platform

US bonds will go down in value anyways , might as well sell it now when it is bit normal price

Why waste time to rengineers just reuse what Russia already has working 100%


----------



## Figaro

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Time to fast track cooperation
> 
> Sell 20-100 Billion in US bonds , get in a Licence production for Twin Engines used in Sukhoi-35 and use it in sealth shared platform
> 
> US bonds will go down in value anyways , might as well sell it now when it is bit normal price
> 
> Why waste time to rengineers just reuse what Russia already has working 100%


That is not how the military-defense complex works in anyway whatsoever ... licensing sensitive engines is a very short-sighted idea ... and I seriously doubt China would be willing to pay Russia 20 billion when their engine development is going down fine (the Chinese aren't really interested in TVC anyways)



Asok said:


> *"Can you show me, specially fighter jets, taking off, without, hot Flaming hot red butt"*
> 
> View attachment 421806
> 
> 
> Fighters usually take off with full load of internal fuel plus their weapon, so they need to take off with a red hot AB, in full blast, so they can clear the run way. This is why you see that most often during take off.
> 
> However, they do could take off w/o AB. There is no reason that they shouldn't use their AB, during take off.
> 
> Gee, why am I keep taking to an "engineer", who couldn't do elementary math?


When you see an afterburner, you'll definitely notice that bright engine exhaust glow. Simple. Nothing more to say ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asok said:


> *"Can you show me, specially fighter jets, taking off, without, hot Flaming hot red butt"*
> 
> View attachment 421806
> 
> 
> Fighters usually take off with full load of internal fuel plus their weapon, so they need to take off with a red hot AB, in full blast, so they can clear the run way. This is why you see that most often during take off.
> 
> However, they do could take off w/o AB. There is no reason that they shouldn't use their AB, during take off.
> 
> Gee, why am I keep taking to an "engineer", who couldn't do elementary math?


*What insane you're Mr @Asok its a picture angle that can't shows the your flaming red hot butt, shows me picture that exactly behind the plane not from the side of the jet you intentionally showing a wrong picture to prove you points Mr @Asok every 4 and 4.5 gen jets could take off without use of afterburner because of TWR 1
i am talking about in clean configuration on airshow
Gee, why am i keep talking to literally "illiterate" who couldn't know even elementary math huh Mr @Asok *


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> *What insane you're Mr @Asok its a picture angle that can't shows the your flaming red hot butt, shows me picture that exactly behind the plane not from the side of the jet you intentionally showing a wrong picture to prove you points Mr @Asok every 4 and 4.5 gen jets could take off without use of afterburner because of TWR 1
> i am talking about in clean configuration on airshow
> Gee, why am i keep talking to literally "illiterate" who couldn't know even elementary math huh Mr @Asok *





Asok said:


> *"Can you show me, specially fighter jets, taking off, without, hot Flaming hot red butt"*
> 
> View attachment 421806
> 
> 
> Fighters usually take off with full load of internal fuel plus their weapon, so they need to take off with a red hot AB, in full blast, so they can clear the run way. This is why you see that most often during take off.
> 
> However, they do could take off w/o AB. There is no reason that they shouldn't use their AB, during take off.
> 
> I am not surprised that you find it hard to believe that a large and heavy plane like the J-20 can climb vertically w/0 AB, while a light and small plane like F-16.
> 
> It's simply too astounding to believe, unless it was captured by multiple video cameras and witnessed by thousands of aviation professionals from around the world. It will send shockwave around the world, when the truth gets out.
> 
> It all means J-20 has a *very very very very powerful engine,* not an underpowered engine like the WS-10 or AL-31.
> 
> Gee, why am I wasting my time and keep taking to an "engineer", who couldn't do elementary math?


Let's calm down this flame war here and take a breather ... both of you should use more civilized arguments against each other. No need to call some "illiterate" or saying "someone can't do elementary math".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

*" every 4 and 4.5 gen jets, could take off, without use of afterburner, because of TWR 1"
*
No need for TWR > 1, nor use of AB, for any plane to take off. Just enough thrust and a long enough runway.

Every commercial airliners (except the Concorde) could take off, without the use of AB, because they don't have one.

I don't know why a badly educated "engineer" like @pakistanipower is start talking about, taking off, with/without Afterburner, now. ''

Did he finally lost his mind, for good? I hope his family is not going to send him to a mental institution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DarX

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Time to fast track cooperation
> 
> Sell 20-100 Billion in US bonds , get in a Licence production for Twin Engines used in Sukhoi-35 and use it in sealth shared platform
> 
> US bonds will go down in value anyways , might as well sell it now when it is bit normal price
> 
> Why waste time to rengineers just reuse what Russia already has working 100%



The engines in the SU-35 still don't match the technology of the F-22 and F-35 engines. That is the main problem and even Russia is not able to fix that at the moment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *" every 4 and 4.5 gen jets could take off without use of afterburner because of TWR 1"
> *
> No need for TWR > 1, nor use of AB, for any plane to take off. Just enough thrust and a long enough runway.
> 
> Every commercial airliners (except the Concorde) could take off, without the use of AB, because they don't have one.
> 
> I don't know why a badly educated "engineer" like @pakistanipower is start talking about, taking off, with/without Afterburner, now. ''
> 
> Did he finally lost his mind, for good? I hope his family is not going to send him to a mental institution.


And you are already in mental hospital, I can shows you a clips of J-20 with a red hot butt but not using afterburner, red hot butt doesn't means afterburning engines you mentally ill Mr @Asoka


----------



## samsara

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Time to fast track cooperation
> 
> Sell 20-100 Billion in US bonds , get in a Licence production for Twin Engines used in Sukhoi-35 and use it in sealth shared platform
> 
> US bonds will go down in value anyways , might as well sell it now when it is bit normal price
> 
> Why waste time to rengineers just reuse what Russia already has working 100%


Article about the efforts in the early 1990s:

"If the modern combat aircraft is a crown to high-tech, then the top aero engine is the crown jewel. *At present there are more than 10 countries in the world having the capabilities to design and manufacture aircraft, but only a handful of countries that are capable of conducting the independent research and development of aero engines."*

"The world aviation has many engine models, *but there are only a few core engines*, and the core engine has the most important role. *Core engine technology is the highest technical secrets of a country - they are tightly guarded by the foreign countries."

"*From the last century since the late 50s, China has independently developed ways of aeroengine exploration, although hard, but did not go to the formation of equipment this step, keep on imports, imitation and modification to meet the new need of military aero engine research. But to get only three or four stream technology and products, even the second rate can not be bought, not to mention the top class. Until today, China's aviation engine in service are more or less with foreign origin. *If Chinese are to build the advanced fighter aircraft of their own, then we must have its own aircraft engines, so as not to be under the heteronomy in the key areas, because the weapons are "sensitive" to any country, no country will selflessly "arm" other countries with their own key technology. Therefore, our country started the development of high thrust weight ratio turbofan engine in the development of a new generation fighter at the same time."
*
If you do read just the recent posts in this thread before throwing in here you will notice above! China has been starting the independent research on the high thrust weight ratio (TWR) core engine since the early 1990s... the fruit should be on hand/soon/within pretty near future... they have not yet mastered the habits to make the explicit euphoric announcement to the world so we can only derive from various indirect revelations and signs. Along the tedious, long, costly efforts they should have learned and mastered a lot of things aside from the final products. Think also about those spin-off advantages incl. the intermediary processes gained to the many industries. If China just bought it, and *supposed some party was willing to sell the latest, the most advanced core engine technology,* then China might have skipped a lot of learning process in between... a learning curve that cannot be ignored indeed.... there are many pluses minuses between the two approaches: independent research and licensed purchase... but in reality there may not be such option as no party is willing to sell (to be licensed produced) its *most advanced* engine core technology... 2nd rate tech may be available though. One can see the other population giant that's spending a lot in conducting the shopping sprees (nope, not the ME oil rich spoils)... where is its position today in term of tech prowess? 


Note: while we're having fun here, please remember to keep oneself updated with the *dedicated thread* about China's aero-engine as well:
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-aero-engine-information-thread.300409/page-44

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LJQC

Another option is to look at the nozzle position to judge if it's in afterburner or not in case you cannot see the flame. Most aircraft will have the nozzle almost fully open at Max AB, and slightly or half open at MIL.

For example in F-16C Block50 (F110-GE129), the nozzle position do not exceed 15% at MIL power. At MIL and above, the DEEC schedules the nozzle to control engine pressure ratio as a function of fan speed. When the throttle is advanced in the AB range, the DEEC schedules the nozzle open to compensate for increasing AB fuel flow. (ref T.O.GR1-F-16CJ-1 manual)

For the following pictures, the nozzle of J20 is quite opened and AB is ignited:















It has a possibility that the J20 is using moderate AB when performing vertical climb at the airshow. If using MIL, the nozzle shouldn't be that open.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> China could just buy licence production from Russia for 20 billion dollars sell US bonds and buy Russian Engine


As if you can trust Russian when comes to critical technology? We wanted to buy 38 IL-76 transport plane to strengthen our transport capabilities. Guess what? These Russian has an appetite which can never be satisfy. Ask Indians too.

With USD 20 billion, China rather invest in its own talent and industries.

Do not believe the hype China cannot produced high end aero engine. If we can come up gas turbine for our destroyer , 1500hp auto transmission tank engine for our VT-4 tank. High performance Aero engine is highly possible as you see PLAAF has no problem equipping J-10B and J-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Asoka

Beast said:


> As if you can trust Russian when comes to critical technology? We wanted to buy 38 IL-76 transport plane to strengthen our transport capabilities. Guess what? These Russian has an appetite which can never be satisfy. Ask Indians too.
> 
> With USD 20 billion, China rather invest in its own talent and industries.
> 
> Do not believe the hype China cannot produced high end aero engine. If we can come up gas turbine for our destroyer , 1500hp auto transmission tank engine for our VT-4 tank. High performance Aero engine is highly possible as you see PLAAF has no problem equipping J-10B and J-20.



*
"High performance Aero engine is highly possible as you see PLAAF has no problem equipping J-10B and J-20."*

Yup, China has no problem producing high TWR engines now, to equip J-10B and J-20.

@LJQC I have made an animated gif file of the J-20's vertical climb at the Zhuhai Airshow. It's too big to upload to PDF. I am sharing this file at my Google Doc. 

Please download this file, and *take a close look, frame by frame*, to see, if the AB is used, *during the climb*, or not.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/...-Vtupz3j6PAVhOB8wsIkGhrVS6AScl15OuPqFsnY0/pub

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *"High performance Aero engine is highly possible as you see PLAAF has no problem equipping J-10B and J-20."*
> 
> Yup, China has no problem producing high TWR engines now, to equip J-10B and J-20.
> 
> @LJQC I have made an animated gif file of the J-20's vertical climb at the Zhuhai Airshow. It's too big to upload to PDF. I am sharing this file at my Google Doc.
> 
> Please download this file, and *take a close look, frame by frame*, to see, if the AB is used, *during the climb*, or not.
> 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/...-Vtupz3j6PAVhOB8wsIkGhrVS6AScl15OuPqFsnY0/pub


So what trying to show Mr mentally ill brain fart @Asoka its possibilities that J-20 using moderate afterburner which can't show shock diamonds or flaming red hot butt,you are contridic yourself Mr fcuking @Asoka

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## Hyperion

@pakistanipower stop ridiculing others who don't agree with your pov in one liners. Take a hike if you don't like what someone else has to say. I have been watching your posts for sometime now.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Figaro

Hyperion said:


> @pakistanipower stop ridiculing others who don't agree with your pov in one liners. Take a hike if you don't like what someone else has to say. I have been watching your posts for sometime now.


Yeah. I'm surprised how Asok has managed to maintain his civility towards PP. Had it been me, I probably wouldn't have responded that kindly 



pakistanipower said:


> So what trying to show Mr mentally ill brain fart @Asoka its possibilities that J-20 using moderate afterburner which can't show shock diamonds or flaming red hot butt,you are contridic yourself Mr fcuking @Asoka


The J-20 is not using afterburners. Period. There is a very distinguished glow that comes with afterburners and that very subtle flame does not consititute afterburners. Just admit that the Zhuhai demo wasn't using afterburners; find other examples to support your claim

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Hyperion said:


> @pakistanipower stop ridiculing others who don't agree with your pov in one liners. Take a hike if you don't like what someone else has to say. I have been watching your posts for sometime now.



Thanks Bro, for your support and kindness. 



Figaro said:


> Yeah. I'm surprised how Asok has managed to maintain his civility towards PP. Had it been me, I probably wouldn't have responded that kindly
> 
> 
> The J-20 is not using afterburners. Period. There is a very distinguished glow that comes with afterburners and that very subtle flame does not consititute afterburners. Just admit that the Zhuhai demo wasn't using afterburners; find other examples to support your claim



Thanks Figaro for your support and kindness. I am developing immunity from constant insults and ridicules like that. Before you came along, no one else, seems to understanding, what is the difference between using AB and not using AB, a genuinely vertical climb and just a high angle climb, and TWR < 1 and TWR > 1.

The lunatical and crazed, incoherent, illogical rantings from PP does getting tiresome, sometimes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> Thanks Bro, for your support and kindness.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Figaro for your support and kindness. I am developing immunity from constant insults and ridicules like that. Before you came along, no one else, seems to understanding, what is the difference between using AB and not using AB, a genuinely vertical climb and just a high angle climb, and TWR < 1 and TWR > 1.
> 
> The lunatical and crazed, incoherent, illogical rantings from PP does getting tiresome, sometimes.


and you know everything fcuking Mr @Asoka what a loser you are fcuking idiot retard head @Asoka

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> Thanks Figaro for your support and kindness. I am developing immunity from constant insults and ridicules like that. Before you came along, no one else, seems to understanding, what is the difference between using AB and not using AB, a genuinely vertical climb and just a high angle climb, and TWR < 1 and TWR > 1.
> 
> The lunatical and crazed, incoherent, illogical rantings from PP does getting tiresome, sometimes.


That thrust to weight ratio is above 1 for 4 and 4.5 gen jet even with light weapon load period @Asoka , iknow better than you what is the difference between using AB and not using AB, a genuinely vertical climb and just a high angle climb, and TWR < 1 and TWR > 1.
you're all posts are illogical, crap, lunatics, and have no base at all crap head @Asoka 



Figaro said:


> The J-20 is not using afterburners. Period. There is a very distinguished glow that comes with afterburners and that very subtle flame does not consititute afterburners. Just admit that the Zhuhai demo wasn't using afterburners; find other examples to support your claim


possibility Mr as @Asoka said that with Moderate AB shock diamonds and flame wont come out from engine, and how do you so confirmed that J-20 is not using a AB just from some forums speculations and wild guesses huh Mr. @Figaro


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> That thrust to weight ratio is above 1 for 4 and 4.5 gen jet even with light weapon load period @Asoka , iknow better than you what is the difference between using AB and not using AB, a genuinely vertical climb and just a high angle climb, and TWR < 1 and TWR > 1.
> you're all posts are illogical, crap, lunatics, and have no base at all crap head @Asoka
> 
> 
> possibility Mr as @Asoka said that with Moderate AB shock diamonds and flame wont come out from engine, and how do you so confirmed that J-20 is not using a AB just from some forums speculations and wild guesses huh Mr. @Figaro


Uhh ... if you look at the J-20's flame, it is clearly not a vibrant or large one, meaning the use of afterburners is unlikely. If you don't believe, you should just search up photos of afterburners

for @pakistanipower 













Come'on man .....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

Asoka said:


> Thanks Bro, for your support and kindness.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Figaro for your support and kindness. I am developing immunity from constant insults and ridicules like that. Before you came along, no one else, seems to understanding, what is the difference between using AB and not using AB, a genuinely vertical climb and just a high angle climb, and TWR < 1 and TWR > 1.
> 
> The lunatical and crazed, incoherent, illogical rantings from PP does getting tiresome, sometimes.


Some suggestion, the board software has a feature so-called IGNORE LIST, you can add any annoying regged persona there as necessary  https://defence.pk/pdf/account/ignored

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

samsara said:


> Some suggestion, the board software has a feature so-called IGNORE LIST, you can add any annoying regged persona there as necessary  https://defence.pk/pdf/account/ignored


The problem with the "ignore" function is that the person you ignore may still continue personal attacks on you ... while all the time not knowing it ... and thus embarrassing you along the way. That's why I hardly use the ignore button ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LJQC

Figaro said:


> Uhh ... if you look at the J-20's flame, it is clearly not a vibrant or large one, meaning the use of afterburners is unlikely. If you don't believe, you should just search up photos of afterburners



Min AB can be judged by a clearly visible bright flame holder ring. This means AB is just ignited but not come into a full burn.

MIL does not have the fuel ignited hence you should not see any flame coming out of the flame holder ring. That's pure afterburner engine science.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

LJQC said:


> Min AB can be judged by a clearly visible bright flame holder ring. This means AB is just ignited but not come into a full burn.
> 
> MIL does not have the fuel ignited hence you should not see any flame coming out of the flame holder ring. That's pure afterburner engine science.
> 
> View attachment 421995
> 
> 
> View attachment 421996
> 
> 
> View attachment 421997


We are talking about the J-20 Zhuhai demo, which imo, clearly did not turn on the afterburner during its aerial maneuvers. All engines have a sort of "flameholder ring" when they are turned on; this does not mean that they are using afterburners ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## samsara

And quoted from some other mil forum about the afterburner state:

_If you see a 'ring of flame' inside an engine nozzle, the engine is in augmentation/reheat/augmentor. If not, THERE IS NO VISIBLE FLAME that will appear in the engine's exhaust. The exception seeing 'light' inside the nozzle is the F119 whose turbine CAN be seen during certain phases of operation due to the turbine blades glowing at their maximum operating temperature. Other new engine types may do this as well, but it is a CONSTANT GLOW, NOT a flickering fire._​
*NO AFTERBURNER = NO VISIBLE FLAME*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LJQC

Figaro said:


> We are talking about the J-20 Zhuhai demo, which imo, clearly did not turn on the afterburner during its aerial maneuvers. All engines have a sort of "flameholder ring" when they are turned on; this does not mean that they are using afterburners ...



Yes, definitely J-20 at Zhuhai demo, with blue flames visible on both planes. Also the bright and heated flame holder ring with flame coming out is clearly visible from J-20 on the right:






All afterburner engine have flame holder equipped physically, even they are turned off. It become bright only when AB is lit, because the fuel coming out of the afterburner fuel pipe is ignited. This is also called afterburner light-off in technical terms, indicative of the presence of flame adjacent flame holder.

You can clearly see when the afterburner of F-16 light-off in this old video posted before:





From F-16C Block50 manual:


> When AB operation is first initiated, the exhaust nozzle pre-opens up to 10 percent more than MIL exhaust nozzle position to increase stall margin during AB light-off. Fuel flow and exhaust nozzle area are held at minimum AB levels until the flame detector determines that light-off (within 5 seconds (greater than 40deg F) or 10 seconds (40deg F or less) of AB selection) has occurred. Once AB light-off occurs, fuel flow and exhaust nozzle area increase to the requested AB level with a corresponding increase in thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> Uhh ... if you look at the J-20's flame, it is clearly not a vibrant or large one, meaning the use of afterburners is unlikely. If you don't believe, you should just search up photos of afterburners
> 
> for @pakistanipower
> View attachment 421993
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come'on man .....


These are full AB not moderate AB as @Asoka said that on the moderate AB can't show the shock diamonds and flames, this is not my words that's @Asoka words Mr @Figaro


----------



## Figaro

LJQC said:


> Yes, definitely J-20 at Zhuhai demo, with blue flames visible on both planes. Also the bright and heated flame holder ring with flame coming out is clearly visible from J-20 on the right:
> View attachment 421999
> 
> 
> 
> All afterburner engine have flame holder equipped physically, even they are turned off. It become bright only when AB is lit, because the fuel coming out of the afterburner fuel pipe is ignited. This is also called afterburner light-off in technical terms, indicative of the presence of flame adjacent flame holder.
> 
> You can clearly see when the afterburner of F-16 light-off in this old video posted before:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From F-16C Block50 manual:


That is simply an aircraft engine turned on ... that does not mean it is using afterburners at all! Obviously, an in-flight jet engine is going to have that "glow-ring". There is simply no exhaust coming from the J-20 ... zilch



pakistanipower said:


> These are full AB not moderate AB as @Asoka said that on the moderate AB can't show the shock diamonds and flames, this is not my words that's @Asoka words Mr @Figaro


How are those full afterburners?!?!?!? Do you want me to post pics of full afterburners ... ?!?!!?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LJQC

Figaro said:


> That is simply an aircraft engine turned on ... that does not mean it is using afterburners at all! Obviously, an in-flight jet engine is going to have that "glow-ring". There is simply no exhaust coming from the J-20 ... zilch
> 
> 
> How are those full afterburners?!?!?!? Do you want me to post pics of full afterburners ... ?!?!!?



So by your logic, you mean this F-16 during landing has its engine turned off just because there is no glow-ring?






And what about this? The engine is turned on again during flight?


----------



## Asoka

samsara said:


> Some suggestion, the board software has a feature so-called IGNORE LIST, you can add any annoying regged persona there as necessary  https://defence.pk/pdf/account/ignored



I already added PP and others to my Ignore list. Thanks for your support.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

LJQC said:


> So by your logic, you mean this F-16 during landing has its engine turned off just because there is no glow-ring?
> View attachment 422003
> 
> 
> And what about this? The engine is turned on again during flight?
> View attachment 422004


You cannot tell because the core is obscured by the nozzles ... nice try!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LJQC

Figaro said:


> You cannot tell because the core is obscured by the nozzles ... nice try!


The nozzle definitely cannot obscure the core from that angle my friend. There's just no glow-ring. Period.


----------



## Figaro

LJQC said:


> The nozzle definitely cannot obscure the core from that angle my friend. There's just no glow-ring. Period.


And you can tell by?!?!?!? The nozzle is obscuring the interior engine portion my friend ... you can post another photo to prove it ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> That is simply an aircraft engine turned on ... that does not mean it is using afterburners at all! Obviously, an in-flight jet engine is going to have that "glow-ring". There is simply no exhaust coming from the J-20 ... zilch
> 
> 
> How are those full afterburners?!?!?!? Do you want me to post pics of full afterburners ... ?!?!!?


What is you talking about these not full AB or may be you're blind, yes all 3 are full AB Mr @Figaro then show me real full AB


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> What is you talking about these not full AB or may be you're blind, yes all 3 are full AB Mr @Figaro then show me real full AB


I'm talking about the J-20 Zhuhai demo ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

@LJQC Previously, I have posted the vertical climb of J-20, and ask you specifically, if you see any evidence of AB turned on.

See Message #150.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...-to-keep-the-j-20-thread-clean.514445/page-10

Have you examined it, yet?

If you posted pictures of J-20 using AB, any other times, it does not prove, it's AB was turned on, during that vertical climb.

This is just plain logic.

Don't evade my question or request, plz. Let's be honest.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> I'm talking about the J-20 Zhuhai demo ...


But I talking about those images you posted in your above post of 157 those are are full AB Mr @Figaro


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> But I talking about those images you posted in your above post those are are full AB on


Yes. Indeed the 3 images I posted were full afterburners ... without a doubt. I am referring to the series of images of the J-20 at Zhuhai, one of them being your profile pic. They were not engaging afterburners ... period. If they were, they would give off the exhaust shown in the above 3 pictures (even if the J-20 was not engaged in full afterburners, the lighting would've still been very vibrant)



Asoka said:


> @LJQC Previously, I have posted the vertical climb of J-20, and ask you specifically, if you see any evidence of AB turned on.
> 
> See Message #150.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...-to-keep-the-j-20-thread-clean.514445/page-10
> 
> Have you examined it, yet?
> 
> If you posted pictures of J-20 using AB, any other times, it does not prove, it's AB was turned on, during that vertical climb.
> 
> This is just plain logic.
> 
> Don't evade my question or request, plz. Let's be honest.


Because it's not turned on. Just because there is an engine "glow" does not mean there is full afterburners as that guy suggests. When a jet engine is in flight, of course it's going to glow ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> Yes. Indeed the 3 images I posted were full afterburners ... without a doubt. I am referring to the series of images of the J-20 at Zhuhai, one of them being your profile pic. They were not engaging afterburners ... period. If they were, they would give off the exhaust shown in the above 3 pictures (even if the J-20 was not engaged in full afterburners, the lighting would've still been very vibrant)


but i quoting Mr @Asoka theory that with a moderate AB setting, shock diamonds and flames wont come out from the engine so there was a possibilities in Zuhai airshow mderate AB so shock diamonds and flames wont comes out to the engine, I know its was wrong i want to show you contradict sentances from Mr @Asoka , Mr @Figaro


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> Yes. Indeed the 3 images I posted were full afterburners ... without a doubt. I am referring to the series of images of the J-20 at Zhuhai, one of them being your profile pic. They were not engaging afterburners ... period. If they were, they would give off the exhaust shown in the above 3 pictures (even if the J-20 was not engaged in full afterburners, the lighting would've still been very vibrant)
> 
> 
> Because it's not turned on. Just because there is an engine "glow" does not mean there is full afterburners as that guy suggests. When a jet engine is in flight, of course it's going to glow ...




The fact is, both WS-10 and AL-31's Military thrust is only around, 8.6 tons. And times 2 gives 17.2 tons. Not including several tons of fuel, this is already less than the empty weight of J-20. (20+ tons, I presume, because F-22 is 19.7 tons, and J-20 is 3.5 meters longer than F-22, therefore much heavier.)

So, if J-20 was powered by either Ws-10 or AL-31, during the vertical climb, you would definitely see *a long red hot flame shooting out. 
*
And there was no a long red hot flame shooting out, that we can all see, so one must be open to the possibility, *J-20 is powered by a much more powerful engine*, rather than by WS-10 or AL-31.

It can not be WS-10 or AL-31, because none of the Suikois or J-11 or J-15, J-16 powered by these two engines, have demonstrated vertical climb, w/o using AB.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> but i quoting Mr @Asoka theory that with a moderate AB setting, shock diamonds and flames wont come out from the engine so there was a possibilities in Zuhai airshow mderate AB so shock diamonds and flames wont comes out to the engine, I know its was wrong i want to show you contradict sentances from Mr @Asoka , Mr @Figaro


What do you mean by "moderate afterburner", that is a confusing term. Either its running an afterburner or not, anything in between is suggested to be an afterburner by default

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> The fact is, both WS-10 and AL-31's Military thrust is only around, 8.6 tons. And times 2 gives 17.2 tons. Not including several tons of fuel, this is already less than the empty weight of J-20. (20+ tons, I presume, because F-22 is 19.7 tons, and J-20 is 3.5 meters longer than F-22, therefore much heavier.)
> 
> So, if J-20 was powered by either Ws-10 or AL-31, during the vertical climb, you would definitely see *a long red hot flame shooting out.
> *
> And there was no a long red hot flame shooting out, that we can all see, so one must be open to the possibility, *J-20 is powered by a much more powerful engine*, rather than by WS-10 or AL-31.
> 
> It can not be WS-10 or AL-31, because none of the Suikois or J-11 or J-15, J-16 powered by these two engines, have demonstrated vertical climb, w/o using AB.


 MR @Asoka


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> MR @Asoka


He already *blocked *you ... so really no point of responding LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> What do you mean by "moderate afterburner", that is a confusing term. Either its running an afterburner or not, anything in between is suggested to be an afterburner by default


Throttle setting least throttle setting means no AB, max throttle setting means full AB, in between least and full @Asoka suggests moderate throttle setting means "moderate AB"



Figaro said:


> He already *blocked *you ... so really no point of responding LOL


 doesn't matter he just start to talking WS-15 crap in 2016 zuhai airshow , how about special version of WS-10 specially design for J-20 with a higher thrust lower life span versions that all i am talking about Mr @Figaro


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> Throttle setting least throttle setting means no AB, max throttle setting means full AB, in between least and full @Asoka suggests moderate throttle setting means "moderate AB"
> 
> 
> doesn't matter he just start to talking WS-15 crap in 2016 zuhai airshow , how about special version of WS-10 specially design for J-20 with a higher thrust lower life span versions that all i am talking about Mr @Figaro


Well I know. But no point in responding to his posts now as he has blocked you (and hence won't read your posts). Now, can you stop this ridiculous back and forth exchange with Asoka?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> Well I know. But no point in responding to his posts now as he has blocked you (and hence won't read your posts). Now, can you stop this ridiculous back and forth exchange with Asoka?


he didn't understand me at all, not me but all Chinese other senior members which saying that WS-15 was completed its ground testing and soon it will start testing on IL-76 testbed @Asoka wont agree with anyone and insisting his crap that J-20 using WS-15 from day one, what should i do Mr @Figaro


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> he didn't understand me at all, not me but all Chinese other senior members which saying that WS-15 was completed its ground testing and soon it will start testing on IL-76 testbed @Asoka wont agree with anyone and insisting his crap that J-20 using WS-15 from day one, what should i do Mr @Figaro


*Ignore *him. Please. Just ignore him if you don't agree with his arguments. Don't be condescending towards Asoka; he treats you with respect and you ought to also do the same. Asoka is not asking for your approval or criticizing you directly, so there's no need for bashing. And if you really don't like what he has to say, just block him. Don't further derail the thread with pointless back and forth arguments which aren't conducive to the J-20. We're not 10 year old kids, now are we?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

If J-20's empty weight is 22 tons (2 more than F-22) and carrying only 4 tons of internal fuel for the demo, than it's flying weight would be 26 tons, that is *8.8 tons (or 51.2%)* more than the military thrusts (17.2 tons) of two WS-10 or AL-31 engine.

At such a load on the engines,* not only their AB must be turned on, but it must be turned on to near full blast*, and a long red hot flame must be definitely visible, in a cloudy overcast day.

There is no visual evidence, that J-20's AB was even turned on, during the vertical climb demo, much less, turned on to full blast.

A su-27 equipped with Al-31 engines, turned on afterburner in full blast.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> *Ignore *him. Please. Just ignore him if you don't agree with his arguments. Don't be condescending towards Asoka; he treats you with respect and you ought to also do the same. Asoka is not asking for your approval or criticizing you directly, so there's no need for bashing. And if you really don't like what he has to say, just block him. Don't further derail the thread with pointless back and forth arguments which aren't conducive to the J-20. We're not 10 year old kids, now are we?


Please give this advice to also @Asoka to come with solid and concrete prove not some of his speculation and false assertions he is not trying to understand others, forget me but other respected senior Chinese members like @ChineseTiger1986 , @Beast , @wanglaokan , @cirr , @cnleio and others who knows better than @Asoka on J-20/WS-15 conditions Mr @Figaro


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> Please give this advice to also @Asoka to come with solid and concrete prove not some of his speculation and false assertions he is not trying to understand others, forget me but other respected senior Chinese members like @ChineseTiger1986 , @Beast , @wanglaokan , @cirr , @cnleio and others who knows better than @Asoka on J-20/WS-15 conditions Mr @Figaro


He has a choice to believe in whatever opinion he so desires. I have already told him that his premise is flawed but obviously, Asoka has not concurred ... so I stopped trying. If one believe's so strongly in his/her opinion, there is nothing you can do to change that. If Asoka decides to go against the advice of senior members, its his choice and it is not in my capability to convince him to do otherwise. Just let it be ... and please stop arguing with Asok. Neither side is going to give in and it is nauseating to watch you guys do so ... he has already done his part by stepping out of the argument (by blocking you LOL), now it is your turn @pakistanipower

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LJQC

Figaro said:


> And you can tell by?!?!?!? The nozzle is obscuring the interior engine portion my friend ... you can post another photo to prove it ...


As you requested:





Those two images are shot within 1 sec interval at takeoff on the runway.

And I have a perfect angled J20 video:




Notice when the flame came out and the nozzle opens. The nozzle control system looks pretty similar to Su27:


> Before engine start, during the ignition and when in IDLE mode, the nozzles are completely open to provide the most favorable conditions for engine start: the greatest torque of the turbine, minimum overheating, and minimum thrust during IDLE mode. When the throttle is moved forward to 77-81% of the engine RPM, the nozzles close partially in order to produce improved thrust characteristics. When the afterburner is switched on, the nozzles opens in order to maintain the turbine exhaust temperature.



At last, I don't think that F-16 nozzle has obscured the glow at all. One can clearly see the flame gradually comes out. I doubt you watch it carefully.







Asoka said:


> @LJQC Previously, I have posted the vertical climb of J-20, and ask you specifically, if you see any evidence of AB turned on.
> 
> See Message #150.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...-to-keep-the-j-20-thread-clean.514445/page-10
> 
> Have you examined it, yet?
> 
> If you posted pictures of J-20 using AB, any other times, it does not prove, it's AB was turned on, during that vertical climb.
> 
> This is just plain logic.
> 
> Don't evade my question or request, plz. Let's be honest.



No one honestly can judge when it's in a vertical climb since what happens in the nozzles are so obscured. I do not so I judge by its openness of the nozzle in my posts before. Like this J-15 which definitely took off with full afterburner but you cannot see any flame coming out of the nozzle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

pakistanipower said:


> Please give this advice to also @Asoka to come with solid and concrete prove not some of his speculation and false assertions he is not trying to understand others, forget me but other respected senior Chinese members like @ChineseTiger1986 , @Beast , @wanglaokan , @cirr , @cnleio and others who knows better than @Asoka on J-20/WS-15 conditions Mr @Figaro


@pakistanipower, The way I see it is YOU are trying hard, very hard to shut @Asoka off from giving his views with your many terse posts!!

If you don't like what he posted, simply ignore him. Let the rest members decide on their own what to read, what to ignore, what to take seriously. Are you okay with this forum principle?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

LJQC said:


> As you requested:
> 
> View attachment 422014
> 
> 
> Those two images are shot within 1 sec interval.
> 
> 
> 
> No one honestly can judge when it's in a vertical climb since what happens in the nozzles are so obscured. I do not so I judge by its openness of the nozzle in my posts before. Like this J-15 which definitely took off with full afterburner but you cannot see any flame coming out of the nozzle.
> 
> View attachment 422016
> 
> 
> View attachment 422017



*Your reply is disingenuous,(不诚实的诡辩) not candid or sincere, (synonyms: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, duplicitous, lying), at best. *

I have also said in the previous post.

"If J-20's empty weight is 22 tons (2 more than F-22) and carrying only 4 tons of internal fuel for the demo, than it's flying weight would be 26 tons, that is *8.8 tons (or 51.2%)* more than the military thrusts (17.2 tons) of two WS-10 or AL-31 engine.

At such a load on the engines,* not only their AB must be turned on, but it must be turned on to near full blast*, and a long red hot flame must be definitely visible, in a cloudy overcast day.

There is no visual evidence, that J-20's AB was even turned on, during the vertical climb demo, much less, turned on to full blast.

A su-27 equipped with Al-31 engines, turned on afterburner in full blast."

I used the example of the Vertical climb, during the airshow, to demonstrate that J-20 can not be using a "low" power engine like WS-10 or AL-31, otherwise, *it would have to turn on its AB to near full blast.*

And you tell you me, you can not see, whether the AB is turned on or not, because

*"No one honestly can judge, when it's in a vertical climb, since what happens, in the nozzles ,are so obscured. "*



samsara said:


> @pakistanipower, The way I see it is YOU are trying hard, very hard to shut @Asoka off from giving his views with your many terse posts!!
> 
> If you don't like what he posted, simply ignore him. Let the rest members decide on their own what to read, what to ignore, what to take seriously. Are you okay with this forum principle?



Thank you, Bros. For trying to get a mad dog, off my back. @Figaro.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LJQC

Asoka said:


> *Your reply is disingenuous,(不诚实的诡辩) not candid or sincere, (synonyms: insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, duplicitous, lying), at best. *
> 
> I have also said in the previous post.
> 
> "If J-20's empty weight is 22 tons (2 more than F-22) and carrying only 4 tons of internal fuel for the demo, than it's flying weight would be 26 tons, that is *8.8 tons (or 51.2%)* more than the military thrusts (17.2 tons) of two WS-10 or AL-31 engine.
> 
> At such a load on the engines,* not only their AB must be turned on, but it must be turned on to near full blast*, and a long red hot flame must be definitely visible, in a cloudy overcast day.
> 
> There is no visual evidence, that J-20's AB was even turned on, during the vertical climb demo, much less, turned on to full blast.
> 
> A su-27 equipped with Al-31 engines, turned on afterburner in full blast."
> 
> I used the example of the Vertical climb, during the airshow, to demonstrate that J-20 can not be using a "low" power engine like WS-10 or AL-31, otherwise, *it would have to turn on its AB to near full blast.*
> 
> And you tell you me, you can not see, whether the AB is turned on or not, because
> 
> *"No one honestly can judge, when it's in a vertical climb, since what happens, in the nozzles ,are so obscured. "*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, Bros. For trying to get a mad dog, off my back. @Figaro.



I'm not asking whether the aircraft should turn its AB on or not. I'm just pointing out that Max AB does not necessarily comes with a visible red hot flame, using J15 as an example.

I live in Hong Kong and have been to the 2016 Zhuhai airshow myself. The day when J-20s perform their demo is not overcast at all. There's a good reason that you did not see any flame cones coming out of the nozzle.


----------



## Asoka

LJQC said:


> I'm not asking whether the aircraft should turn its AB on or not. I'm just pointing out that Max AB does not necessarily comes with a visible red hot flame, using J15 as an example.
> 
> I live in Hong Kong and have been to the 2016 Zhuhai airshow myself. The day when J-20s perform their demo is not overcast at all. There's a good reason that you did not see any flame cones coming out of the nozzle.



The example of J-15 can not be said, that its AB was turned on, to the Maximum, if it was turned on (I agreed that it looks like, it was turned on). There was no long hot flame shooting out, as in this F-16.






It might not be overcast, but it definitely cloudy, so its perfect to witness a long hot flame, coming out of a jet engine.

If J-20 was using either the *Ws-10 or AL-31 *during the vertical climb demo, its AB must have turned on to near *MAXIMUM* to supply enough thrust, to be greater than its flying weight.

This is my point, not whether its AB was just on or not.

We, definitely, *see no long hot burning flames*, coming out of J-20's nozzles, on that vertical climb.

Lets see the demo again. Does it looks like, that's the kind of weather, that makes difficult to see a long hot flames coming out of a jet engine?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyperion

@Deino, I see that you that you are very short on time for moderation. No worries.



pakistanipower said:


> deleted by moderator due to insults @Asoka

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Hyperion said:


> @Deino, I see that you that you are very short on time for moderation. No worries.




Yes indeed there's right now not enough time to clean up all this BS here; I thought to separate this nasty engine discussion from the J-20-thread could help ... seems as if I was wrong.

*Anyway therefore an open call to all involved.

I know some deem certain opinions from certain members as a downgrade of this forum, as stupid or whatever but as long as the discussion is civilised I won't delete such posts.

However I beg all - esp. those who already made Your point more than 1000-times - to stop from refraining the same argument over and over again. No-one here will ever convince anyone with another opinion by postsing countless, long and boring posts with the same argument all over again. 

As such, either ignore it, ignore a certain member but mots of all: 

DON't feed the trolls. The more You reply, the more they have faun to annoy ... 

And now back to the topic, which is IMO by now only possible when new evidence come out. For the moment all is said and done. 

Deino*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LJQC

Asoka said:


> The example of J-15 can not be said, that its AB was turned on, to the Maximum, if it was turned on (I agreed that it looks like, it was turned on). There was no long hot flame shooting out, as in this F-16.
> 
> View attachment 422021
> 
> 
> It might not be overcast, but it definitely cloudy, so its perfect to witness a long hot flame, coming out of a jet engine.
> 
> If J-20 was using either the *Ws-10 or AL-31 *during the vertical climb demo, its AB must have turned on to near *MAXIMUM* to supply enough thrust, to be greater than its flying weight.
> 
> This is my point, not whether its AB was just on or not.
> 
> We, definitely, *see no long hot burning flames*, coming out of J-20's nozzles, on that vertical climb.
> 
> Lets see the demo again. Does it looks like, that's the kind of weather, that makes difficult to see a long hot flames coming out of a jet engine?



Speaking of the weather, if I recall right, that day is hazy but the sun is shining high. The overall brightness is good. Even if the weather is as cloudy as the image below, it still doesn't show a hot long flame.

And for an aircraft like Su33, performing a carrier take off using a ski-jump, you always want to at least select afterburner to gain as much speed as possible at the top of the ski-jump. Or it can be dangerous. The need to select afterburner here is the same as in vertical climbing in a 3rd gen fighter.

So what I can tell from the image below are:
1. It is using afterburner.
2. If it really is in full burner, then cloudy weather does not mean you can see a long hot flames coming out of a jet engine.






Then I'm looking at the 4K video of J20 Zhuhai airshow to get a better and closer view:





At the beginning of the vertical climb, I can see the bluish glow of flame in the nozzle but no long hot burning flames, just like the Su33 image. So if the light conditions are similar, then I can tell that the J20 is also using afterburner, at least at the beginning of the vertical climb.






There're also some moments that you can directly see a burning flame holder inside the nozzle. (This one during the break turn.) But still, there's no long flames coming out of the nozzle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## siegecrossbow

Asoka said:


> If J-20's empty weight is 22 tons (2 more than F-22) and carrying only 4 tons of internal fuel for the demo, than it's flying weight would be 26 tons, that is *8.8 tons (or 51.2%)* more than the military thrusts (17.2 tons) of two WS-10 or AL-31 engine.
> 
> At such a load on the engines,* not only their AB must be turned on, but it must be turned on to near full blast*, and a long red hot flame must be definitely visible, in a cloudy overcast day.
> 
> There is no visual evidence, that J-20's AB was even turned on, during the vertical climb demo, much less, turned on to full blast.
> 
> A su-27 equipped with Al-31 engines, turned on afterburner in full blast.
> 
> View attachment 422012



That's not how vertical climb works though. You don't necessarily need a thrust to weight of over one to perform a vertical climb since you can channel a portion of the plane's forward momentum into a climb. The J-20 didn't go into a climb immediately after take off, so it probably built up some momentum before the climb.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

LJQC said:


> Speaking of the weather, if I recall right, that day is hazy but the sun is shining high. The overall brightness is good. Even if the weather is as cloudy as the image below, it still doesn't show a hot long flame.
> 
> And for an aircraft like Su33, performing a carrier take off using a ski-jump, you always want to at least select afterburner to gain as much speed as possible at the top of the ski-jump. Or it can be dangerous. The need to select afterburner here is the same as in vertical climbing in a 3rd gen fighter.
> 
> So what I can tell from the image below are:
> 1. It is using afterburner.
> 2. If it really is in full burner, then cloudy weather does not mean you can see a long hot flames coming out of a jet engine.
> 
> View attachment 422113
> 
> 
> Then I'm looking at the 4K video of J20 Zhuhai airshow to get a better and closer view:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the beginning of the vertical climb, I can see the bluish glow of flame in the nozzle but no long hot burning flames, just like the Su33 image. So if the light conditions are similar, then I can tell that the J20 is also using afterburner, at least at the beginning of the vertical climb.
> 
> View attachment 422111
> 
> 
> There're also some moments that you can directly see a burning flame holder inside the nozzle. (This one during the break turn.) But still, there's no long flames coming out of the nozzle.
> 
> View attachment 422112




What I am saying is that if J-20 is using either Ws-10 or AL-31, it will have to use its AB, and *turn it to full or maximum power*, in order to have a vertical climb.

You have consistently asserted that it is turned on, but it's invisible, because the plane has turned upward, so the flame became invisible.

But the engine exhaust flame at full Afterburner, will be *highly visible from any angle*, not visible, or nearly invisible, or obscured by the weather.

And we don't see that *long bluish flame* at all. And yet we are even debating, whether its turned on at all. That shouldn't happen, if J-20 is using a "underpowered" Ws-1 or AL-31 engine.

I admit that I am not absolutely sure, that there is no bluish flame at all, *but I am absolutely certain, that there is no long long bluish flame, with shock diamonds, shooting out.*

And that, in my opinion, lacking a highly visible blue flames, like this F135 engine below, proves J-20 is not using a "underpowered" Ws-10 or AL-31 engine, but a very powerful engine, that do not require the AB turned on, to near the maximum, to power a large and heavy fighter like J-20 up a sustained vertical climb.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

*Guys ... can You leave it !

And esp. @Asoka ... it's enough. You theory on "a fighter can only climb with full AB in full reheat and then You see a HUUUUUGE flame and since I cannot see that on the J-20 it must have a super-stronk engine" is already posted so often.

It's fine ... all arguments are on the table and no need to go back and forth over and over again.

Otherwise I close this thread until new evidence emerge.*

Deino


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> *Guys ... can You leave it !
> 
> And esp. @Asoka ... it's enough. You theory on "a fighter can only climb with full AB in full reheat and then You see a HUUUUUGE flame and since I cannot see that on the J-20 it must have a super-stronk engine" is already posted so often.
> 
> It's fine ... all arguments are on the table and no need to go back and forth over and over again.
> 
> Otherwise I close this thread until new evidence emerge.*
> 
> Deino


But isn't this basically a dump thread that is intended for these nonsensical conversations? Basically to purify the original J-20 thread

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> *Guys ... can You leave it !
> 
> And esp. @Asoka ... it's enough. You theory on "a fighter can only climb with full AB in full reheat and then You see a HUUUUUGE flame and since I cannot see that on the J-20 it must have a super-stronk engine" is already posted so often.
> 
> It's fine ... all arguments are on the table and no need to go back and forth over and over again.
> 
> Otherwise I close this thread until new evidence emerge.*
> 
> Deino





"*"a fighter, can only climb, with full AB, in full reheat, and then You see a HUUUUUGE flame, and since I cannot see, that on the J-20, it must have a super-stronk engine"*

@Deino, What you wrote is nonsense. Please present my theory more accurately. Otherwise, I think you still don't understand me. Thank you!

What I am saying, is that if J-20 was equipped with a "underpowered" engine like WS-10 or AL-31, it must turn on the AB to near full power, to lift a large and heavy fighter like J-20, in a sustained vertical climb. If that's the case, we will definitely see, a long and highly visible bluish flame shooting out. And since we didn't see that happen, it must be using a much more powerful engines than WS-10 or AL-31."

"*And esp. @Asoka ... it's enough. "
*
You would think an one-eyed-man, in a village of total blinds, would be welcomed as saviors. No! He is treated as an threatening troublemaker, incessantly being attacked, insulted and ridiculed, for telling them ridiculous things; things that they can not see, nor they have any ideas of.

"*Otherwise I close this thread until new evidence emerge." *And run this troublesome Asoka, out of the village.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> "*"a fighter, can only climb, with full AB, in full reheat, and then You see a HUUUUUGE flame, and since I cannot see, that on the J-20, it must have a super-stronk engine"*
> 
> @Deino, What you wrote is nonsense. Please present my theory more accurately. Otherwise, I think you still don't understand me. Thank you!
> 
> What I am saying, is that if J-20 was equipped with a "underpowered" engine like WS-10 or AL-31, it must turn on the AB to near full power, to lift a large and heavy fighter like J-20, in a sustained vertical climb. If that's the case, we will definitely see, a long and highly visible bluish flame shooting out. And since we didn't see that happen, it must be using a much more powerful engines than WS-10 or AL-31."
> 
> "*And esp. @Asoka ... it's enough. "
> *
> You would think an one-eyed-man, in a village of total blinds, would be welcomed as saviors. No! He is treated as an threatening troublemaker, incessantly being attacked, insulted and ridiculed, for telling them ridiculous things; things that they can not see, nor they have any ideas of.
> 
> "*Otherwise I close this thread until new evidence emerge." *And run this troublesome Asoka, out of the village.




No, plain and simple it is enough !


----------



## cirr

Deino said:


> *Guys ... I especially opened a new thread for this nasty engine discussion !
> 
> So please keep this one clean.*
> 
> By the way this must be the most recent new LRIP J-20.
> View attachment 421706

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


>




May I ask for a translation or summary, please?


----------



## cirr

Deino said:


> May I ask for a translation or summary, please?



Notice the pic of Taihang Mountain on the right.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> Notice the pic of Taihang Mountain on the right.



Thanks and even if I know that hint, does it mean:

1. the WS-10 was tested for the first time on a J-20?

2. the WS-10 powers the J-20 from the beginning?

3. the WS-10 will power the J-20 some day ?

Seems to be also here:
http://www.fyjs.cn/thread-1880618-1-1.html


----------



## siegecrossbow

Deino said:


> Thanks and even if I know that hint, does it mean:
> 
> 1. the WS-10 was tested for the first time on a J-20?
> 
> 2. the WS-10 powers the J-20 from the beginning?
> 
> 3. the WS-10 will power the J-20 some day ?
> 
> Seems to be also here:
> http://www.fyjs.cn/thread-1880618-1-1.html



Seems to imply that WS-10B will be used to power the J-20 in the near future. Speculation remains as whether the switch will be permanent or just for trial, as in the case of the J-10B.

One interesting aspect of this is that the WS-10B doesn't actually produce greater thrust than the AL-31FN Series3/AL-31F M1 engines. Why not wait till WS-15 is ready to switch?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

siegecrossbow said:


> Seems to imply that *WS-10B will be used to power the J-20 in the near future*. Speculation remains as whether the switch will be permanent or just for trial, as in the case of the J-10B.
> 
> One interesting aspect of this is that the WS-10B doesn't actually produce greater thrust than the AL-31FN Series3/AL-31F M1 engines. Why not wait till WS-15 is ready to switch?




Upps  ... does this mean from our list of three possible contenders for the current engine, suddenly two disappeared ??? 

Let me refrain the three option under discussions here:


1. an AL-31FN in the 200x-demonstrators, AL-31FN Series 3 for the 201x-prototypes and for the LRIP-birds a most likely an AL-31FM-2-based design (Deino-theory)

2. an WS-10-based design.

3. a prototype WS-15 from day one and now a +210kN serial WS-15 (Asoka-theory)


But if Pupu is correct and his post is slated to assume, that the *WS-10B will be used to power the J-20 in the near future*, it means so far the J-20 CANNOT be powered by a WS-10-version and if not even the WS-10 is mature, how could then be the WS-15 certified?

I would say if this is correct, options 2 & 3 just died a sudden death.
Or am I wrong ?? @Asoka ??

Deino


----------



## siegecrossbow

Deino said:


> Upps  ... does this mean from our list of three possible contenders for the current engine, suddenly two disappeared ???
> 
> Let me refrain the three option under discussions here:
> 
> 
> 1. an AL-31FN in the 200x-demonstrators, AL-31FN Series 3 for the 201x-prototypes and for the LRIP-birds a most likely an AL-31FM-2-based design (Deino-theory)
> 
> 2. an WS-10-based design.
> 
> 3. a prototype WS-15 from day one and now a +210kN serial WS-15 (Asoka-theory)
> 
> 
> But if Pupu is correct and his post is slated to assume, that the *WS-10B will be used to power the J-20 in the near future*, it means so far the J-20 CANNOT be powered by a WS-10-version and if not even the WS-10 is mature, how could then be the WS-15 certified?
> 
> I would say if this is correct, options 2 & 3 just died a sudden death.
> Or am I wrong ??
> 
> Deino



Are you right or are you right ;D.

Did Russian ever sell China AL-31FM-2? I am of the opinion that the current J-20s are using the same engines as the ones on the J-10B/Cs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ozranger

Deino said:


> Upps  ... does this mean from our list of three possible contenders for the current engine, suddenly two disappeared ???
> 
> Let me refrain the three option under discussions here:
> 
> 
> 1. an AL-31FN in the 200x-demonstrators, AL-31FN Series 3 for the 201x-prototypes and for the LRIP-birds a most likely an AL-31FM-2-based design (Deino-theory)
> 
> 2. an WS-10-based design.
> 
> 3. a prototype WS-15 from day one and now a +210kN serial WS-15 (Asoka-theory)
> 
> 
> But if Pupu is correct and his post is slated to assume, that the *WS-10B will be used to power the J-20 in the near future*, it means so far the J-20 CANNOT be powered by a WS-10-version and if not even the WS-10 is mature, how could then be the WS-15 certified?
> 
> I would say if this is correct, options 2 & 3 just died a sudden death.
> Or am I wrong ??
> 
> Deino



After watching so many debates, mostly on CJDBY or FYJS, together with small pieces of related information drawn from Chinese technical publications by the posters, I have come to an impression that an engine directly derived from AL-31F with improved material is under limited production and dedicated for J-20 before having new options. Such an engine might be manufactured from scratch as it is known that there are already overhaul and rebuild production lines for AL-31F in China, or more likely, from an imported AL-31F with parts being replaced or even some bigger adjustment applied. That could explain why you can see typical AL-31F nozzles on J-20 but the state media keep implying J-20 is having engines crafted by indigenous manufacturers. 

Not sure if it is too fictitious to others but it made sense to me.


----------



## Deino

ozranger said:


> After watching so many debates, mostly on CJDBY or FYJS, together with small pieces of related information drawn from Chinese technical publications by the posters, I have come to an impression that an engine directly derived from AL-31F with improved material is under limited production and dedicated for J-20 before having new options. Such an engine might be manufactured from scratch as it is known that there are already overhaul and rebuild production lines for AL-31F in China, or more likely, from an imported AL-31F with parts being replaced or even some bigger adjustment applied. That could explain why you can see typical AL-31F nozzles on J-20 but the state media keep implying J-20 is having engines crafted by indigenous manufacturers.
> 
> Not sure if it is too fictitious to others but it made sense to me.




*AMEN* 

Since it is de fact what I'm sayi8ng since I'm a member here. The only point I don't agree, I'm almost sure it is - as in the J-10B/C - an AL-31FN-based design with the gear-box relocated. IMO it does not make sense to re-use the same arrangement of a Flanker when the J-10 uses the same engine installation.

Otherwise You are spot on, since it explains both the relationship, the external similarities and also the "made in China" claims.

Deino



siegecrossbow said:


> Are you right or are you right ;D.
> 
> Did Russian ever sell China AL-31FM-2? I am of the opinion that the current J-20s are using the same engines as the ones on the J-10B/Cs.




Yes ... but that would be impossible to accept by some here.


----------



## ozranger

Deino said:


> *AMEN*
> 
> Since it is de fact what I'm sayi8ng since I'm a member here. The only point I don't agree, I'm almost sure it is - as in the J-10B/C - an AL-31FN-based design with the gear-box relocated. IMO it does not make sense to re-use the same arrangement of a Flanker when the J-10 uses the same engine installation.
> 
> Otherwise You are spot on, since it explains both the relationship, the external similarities and also the "made in China" claims.
> 
> Deino
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes ... but that would be impossible to accept by some here.



Sorry I am a bit confused of what you disagreed. But if I guessed that right, you might have thought my reference to AL-31F was only the one on a Flanker but the AL-31FN. If so, I have to clarify that my reference to AL-31F is generally of the engine family and it does include the AL-31FN variant.

Some overhaul production lines were reportedly imported from Russia to a PLA facility in early years when Su-27 fighters were imported. It was also reported that thereafter the PLA facility developed a series of rebuild solutions using advanced technology to rebuild over worn parts and extend their live cycles. So I guess that is just the place to complete final assembly of the current J-20 engines, with parts being outsourced to other companies in China.

Of course there is yet credible evidence to back my guess.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## LJQC

ozranger said:


> Such an engine might be manufactured from scratch as it is known that there are already overhaul and rebuild production lines for AL-31F in China, or more likely, from an imported AL-31F with parts being replaced or even some bigger adjustment applied.



Last time I was in a dinner with guys including Yankee（养鸡） talking about turning performance of J-20, I got the information that the sustained turn performance at subsonic speeds is pretty comparable to that of a F-16. On what altitude/detailed speed settings he did not say. But to me it totally make sense when J-20 is using AL-31F thrust level engines.

And speaking of vertical climb, the Russian Knights at Aero India 2013 performed a vertical climb that sustained longer than that of J-20 at Zhuhai airshow 2016, without any visible shock diamond. So it's reasonable for J-20 to do the same.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

ozranger said:


> Sorry I am a bit confused of what you disagreed. But if I guessed that right, you might have thought my reference to AL-31F was only the one on a Flanker but the AL-31FN. If so, I have to clarify that my reference to AL-31F is generally of the engine family and it does include the AL-31FN variant.
> 
> ....



Yes. I just wanted to differ between the Flanker's AL-31F and the FN. Otherwise I fully agree with you.


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

All the oceans of ink spilled about the J-20's engines obscure one very crucial fact: They're dogsh*t that don't belong on a stealth fighter. Full stop. Whether they're WS-10-Somethings or AL-31-Whatevers, they don't belong on the J-20. I don't know why we're splitting hairs about whether the inadequate engines are Russian or Chinese.

There's been talk that the WS-15 won't be ready until 2022 at the earliest -- that is absolutely outrageous if true. Why this sorry state of affairs?


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Yes. I just wanted to differ between the Flanker's AL-31F and the FN. Otherwise I fully agree with you.


Isn't one made by Salyut and the other by Saturn? If I'm correct, they're two different companies who share similar designations...



ZeEa5KPul said:


> All the oceans of ink spilled about the J-20's engines obscure one very crucial fact: They're dogsh*t that don't belong on a stealth fighter. Full stop. Whether they're WS-10-Somethings or AL-31-Whatevers, they don't belong on the J-20. I don't know why we're splitting hairs about whether the inadequate engines are Russian or Chinese.
> 
> There's been talk that the WS-15 won't be ready until 2022 at the earliest -- that is absolutely outrageous if true. Why this sorry state of affairs?


I don't see why a 140-150 kN engine would be unsuitable for the J-20? Both it and the F-22 are in the same weight class (J-20 might be even lighter) while the F-119 only offers a bit more thrust @156. That's not to big of a difference although the latter offers thrust vectoring ...



LJQC said:


> Last time I was in a dinner with guys including Yankee（养鸡） talking about turning performance of J-20, I got the information that the sustained turn performance at subsonic speeds is pretty comparable to that of a F-16. On what altitude/detailed speed settings he did not say. But to me it totally make sense when J-20 is using AL-31F thrust level engines.
> 
> And speaking of vertical climb, the Russian Knights at Aero India 2013 performed a vertical climb that sustained longer than that of J-20 at Zhuhai airshow 2016, without any visible shock diamond. So it's reasonable for J-20 to do the same.


It could perhaps be the AoA limiter... the J-20's ITR should be pretty close to the F-22 given its aerodynamic layout. The F-16 comparison is a little too conservative... but then again, the Zhuhai demonstration wasn't great either. We'll just have to look at more videos...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Isn't one made by Salyut and the other by Saturn? If I'm correct, they're two different companies who share similar designations...
> ...




Nope ... both Salyut and Saturn produce the AL-31F for the Flanker series, however the AL-31FN and -FN Series 3 is only produced by Salyut. And now take a look who delivers its engine to which Chinese company?

*AL-31F for the Flanker series: ... deliveries to Shenyang only !*
Salyut (http://salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=663),
UMPO aka npo-Saturn (http://www.umpo.ru/en/Good435_139_113.aspx)

*AL-31FN / -FN Series 3 for the J-10 series ... deliveries to Chengdu only !*
Salyut (http://salut.ru/ViewTopic.php?Id=664)

... and then make a guess who developed the AL-31FM-family ?? 

Deino


----------



## Zhu Rong Zheng Yang

Deino said:


> @Zhu Rong Zheng Yang
> Already done ! ... by the way, what's Your conclusion on the latest engine discussion following cirr's post?
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...j-20-thread-clean.514445/page-14#post-9825798



I am sorry for cluttering the J-20 thread with off topic posts. 
When, I have a Detailed, Solid and Tangible Proof that J-20 is using PRC self made engine, 
I will post them on this thread asap. 
For now, I will be quiet. 


Maybe has been posted before ... ...

J-20A ~ sn 78274 , 78275, 78276

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Zhu Rong Zheng Yang said:


> I am sorry for cluttering the J-20 thread with off topic posts.
> When, I have a Detailed, Solid and Tangible Proof that J-20 is using PRC self made engine,
> I will post them on this thread asap.
> For now, I will be quiet.
> 
> 
> Maybe has been posted before ... ...
> 
> J-20A ~ sn 78274 , 78275, 78276
> 
> View attachment 422715


Already posted! Sorry ... but this was the day before the 81 parade

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Some guy posted a picture of J-20, alongside with a picture of Taihang mountain, don't change anything or mean anything.

It is strange that some people think it does.


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> Some guy posted a picture of J-20, alongside with a picture of Taihang mountain, don't change anything or mean anything.
> 
> It is strange that some people think it does.




Issue is only that this "Some guy" is pupu; I'm sure Yu know him.

So IMO even if I agree to be careful and not to take any Big Shrimp's word for gospel, he is surely not only an ordinary "some guy".

At least You have to admit *IF* these reports that a WS-10-version *WILL* power (and so never did so far) the chances of the two other options became dramatically smaller. Or not?


----------



## ckf

Figaro said:


> I don't see why a 140-150 kN engine would be unsuitable for the J-20? Both it and the F-22 are in the same weight class (J-20 might be even lighter) while the F-119 only offers a bit more thrust @156. That's not to big of a difference although the latter offers thrust vectoring...


This make sense for project mgmt, use proven tech in roll out and could see ws-15 later on. J20 is top priority/national security issue for plaaf...people need to step back and just smile that you are alive and knows nothing.


----------



## Asoka

LJQC said:


> Last time I was in a dinner with guys including Yankee（养鸡） talking about turning performance of J-20, I got the information that the sustained turn performance at subsonic speeds is pretty comparable to that of a F-16. On what altitude/detailed speed settings he did not say. But to me it totally make sense when J-20 is using AL-31F thrust level engines.
> 
> And speaking of vertical climb, the Russian Knights at Aero India 2013 performed a vertical climb that sustained longer than that of J-20 at Zhuhai airshow 2016, without any visible shock diamond. So it's reasonable for J-20 to do the same.



1.) The first 15 seconds was a loop, not a vertical climb. The second climb is a high angle, near vertical climb that made Flankers family famous. I estimate the angle, during the climb, to be around 65-70 degrees.





2.) I see no long bluish flame shooting out, either. Probably using military power.

3.) The Su-30SM used by the Russian Knights weights empty at 17,800kg and uses the AL-31FP engine with Max Thrust 125KN. (I estimate the J-20, is at least two tons ,more than F-22's 19.7 tons. There is more than 4 tons difference of weight between Su-30sm and J-20. Also how much fuel they are carrying is also an important factor. So its important to see *when* did they demonstrated a real vertical climb, at the beginning of a long demo or at the end.)

4.) So I see no reason to believe that Su-30SM can't do, what we have seen in this video. It has excellent aerodynamic characteristics that allow it, to climb with such high angle, without losing control.

5.) But at 70 degrees, is at the edge of the *wing stall limit, *of all modern fighters, including the Su-30, F-22, T-50 and J-20.

*Beyond that, the wings lose its ability to create upward lift, and must rely solely on the engine performance to provide the vertical lift, necessary for the genuine vertical climb, in a sustained manner (that is, not a loop).*

Further more, the high attack angle, makes the whole plane acts like a giant air brake, that quickly bleeds the horizontal speed to zero. So it does not make sense to point your nose that high, if you want to climb fast.

A slow vertical climb is usually done to demonstrate that you have abundant excess engine power.



Deino said:


> Issue is only that this "Some guy" is pupu; I'm sure Yu know him. I don't follow rumors.
> 
> I got my informations from reading technical articles and make up my mind, if the performances of J-20 fits what I have read.
> 
> So IMO even if I agree to be careful and not to take any Big Shrimp's word for gospel, he is surely not only an ordinary "some guy".
> 
> At least You have to admit *IF* these reports that a WS-10-version *WILL* power (and so never did so far) the chances of the two other options became dramatically smaller. Or not?



I actually don't know him. Never read anything he said. Some one might have mentioned his name in the past, several months ago.

WS-10's design was Frozen in 2006, and went into serial production around 2009.

And J-20's appeared in late 2010. If a new engine, other than the original Ws-10*, *powered J-20's first flight, then this engine must be developed and bench tested between 2006-2010.

And this engine has 3-D TVC, 210kN thrust as we have seen.

There are still no words that another version of WS-10 is being developed. No pictures, no official announcements. Nothing. I believe the WS-10 line, will be dropped, in favor of Ws-15. That is, no more variants, after the first Ws-10.

But there are plenty of rumors, and even official acknowledgment that there is an engine called WS-15, that is its intended engine for J-20. In 2007, an insider even wrote a long article described how this engine's core was developed, and that it passed all ground bench tests in 2005, and in 2006, officially established the project to complete a TWR 10 engine.

By the way, WS-10-version, is not AL-31, isn't it?

Did you dropped your AL-31 theory, in favor of the WS-10-version theory?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Just as a teacher I use red now !



Asoka said:


> ...
> 
> 
> I actually don't know him. Never read anything he said. Some one might have mentioned his name in the past, several months ago.
> 
> WS-10's design was Frozen in 2006, and went into serial production around 2009.
> And J-20's appeared in late 2010. If a new engine, other than the original Ws-10*, *powered J-20's first flight, then this engine must be developed and tested between 2006-2010. Irrelevant if by his statement the WS-10 WILL power and so did not.
> 
> 
> And this engine has 3-D TVC, 210kN thrust as we have seen. Wrong ! Just in Your imagination.
> 
> There are still no words that another version of WS-10 is being developed. No pictures, no official announcements. Nothing. I believe the WS-10 line, will be dropped, in favor of Ws-15.
> 
> But there are plenty of rumors, and even official acknowledgment that there is an engine called WS-15, that is its intended engine for J-20. In 2007, an insider even wrote a long article described how this engine's core was developed, and that it passed all ground bench tests in 2005, and in 2006, officially established the project to complete a TWR 10 engine. Indeed the key word is "intended". As such no WS-15 yet and if also no WS-10 yet ... what option remains?
> 
> By the way, WS-10-version, is not AL-31, isn't it? YES, but since it does not use a WS-10 how is this an argument
> 
> Did you dropped your AL-31 theory, in favor of the WS-10-version theory? NO; but probably You cannot read properly



Not sure what's wrong, maybe You are just too much confused.

Pupu states that the WS-10 will power the J-20 some day soon, so it does not now. Aka if not even a WS-10 is ready now on the J-20, how could it be a WS-15??

So what option then remains?
1+1 = 2

Deino


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Just as a teacher I use red now !
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what's wrong, maybe You are just too much confused.
> 
> Pupu states that the WS-10 will power the J-20 some day soon, so it does not now. Aka if not even a WS-10 is ready now, how could it be a WS-15??
> 
> So what option then remains?
> 1+1 = 2
> 
> Deino



*"Aka if not even a WS-10 is ready now, how could it be a WS-15??"*

What?

WS-10 has been powering J-10 and J-11 for years, already.

You mean if both Ws-10 and Ws-15 are not ready, it mean only the choice left is AL-31-FN-M2 that is powering J-20 from day one?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Title1234

J 20 may have 3 production line mix between Al31 and. Ws15. That produces J20 36 aircraft per year .The forth line will start in 2019 with ws15 with twc. is it true?


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *"Aka if not even a WS-10 is ready now, how could it be a WS-15??"*
> 
> What?
> 
> WS-10 has been powering J-10 and J-11 for years, already.
> 
> You mean if both Ws-10 and Ws-15 are not ready, it mean only the choice left is AL-31-FN-M2 that is powering J-20 from day one?




Come on ! what's up with You???? .. try to play stupid in order to ignore that argument??? 

*Pupu claims that the J-20 will finally be powered by a WS-10 soon. 
That does not mean it does not power the J-11B and J-16 but simply that it does not power the J-20 today.*

But if the WS-10 was not tested nor is yet used on the J-20 today, how could the WS-15 be already done??


You see - if Pupu is correct - it immediately killed two contenders and YES, only the AL-31FN-option remains. 

Please don't try to divert this argument with nasty side-questions that are irrelevant.




Title1234 said:


> J 20 may have 3 production line mix between Al31 and. Ws15. That produces J20 36 aircraft per year .The forth line will start in 2019 with ws15 with twc. is it true?




Never ! They will never have three line in parallel open producing several different versions. And again the WS-15 won't be ready before 2020; IMO at best 2022.
So that alleged WS-10-powered variant would be at best another interim version after the current ones.

And how do You come up with a fourth line ?? why not 20 line ??? 
Stay realistic.

Deino


----------



## Asoka

"*Pupu claims, that the J-20 will finally be powered, by a WS-10 soon."
*
Are you out of your mind, Deino? You are delirious!!! Use your logical German head, for a second, my brother.

*"And again, the WS-15 won't be ready, before 2020; IMO at best 2022."
*
WS-15 has been ready, since late 2010, and flown since Jan. 2011, and entered LRIP already.

And soon W-20 will be mass produced, along with its own intended engine, WS-15, not anything else.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> "*Pupu claims, that the J-20 will finally be powered, by a WS-10 soon."
> *
> Are you out of your mind, Deino? You are delirious!!! Use your logical German head, for a second, my brother.
> 
> *"And again the WS-15 won't be ready before 2020; IMO at best 2022."
> *
> WS-15 has been ready, since late 2010, and flown since Jan. 2011, and entered LRIP already.
> 
> And soon W-20 will be mass produced, along with its own intended engine, WS-15, not anything else.



Pardon but I use my "logical German head", but then please translate Pupu's post in Your words and explain what he meant.

At least @siegecrossbow translated it the way I told You.

So then explain in Your logic ...

Fact is only You claim WS-15 is ready, and if not even WS-10 was installed in a J-20 now, how could a WS-15 but even more if it is already a WS-15, why should they use a WS-10 ??

I beg You to use Your brain ...


----------



## siegecrossbow

If the WS-15 were ready we'd probably see confirmation on CCTV 1 or 4.


----------



## cirr



Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Leclan

seems nozzle has been replaced with jagged edges.
hope it's a real pic

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ozranger

Deino said:


> Pardon but I use my "logical German head", but then please translate Pupu's post in Your words and explain what he meant.
> 
> At least @siegecrossbow translated it the way I told You.
> 
> So then explain in Your logic ...
> 
> Fact is only You claim WS-15 is ready, and if not even WS-10 was installed in a J-20 now, how could a WS-15 but even more if it is already a WS-15, why should they use a WS-10 ??
> 
> I beg You to use Your brain ...



I've read quite a few Internet posts about WS-15 progress. My impression is that it can't get ready within at least the next 3 years. As WS-10 family is maturing progressively, I am in favor of the idea that a model out of the WS-10 family would be fitted into the J-20.


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


>



Thanks a lot, that image made my day. 

Clearly a WS-10 of sone variant, just look at the internal structure.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

I think with this image showing the first ever WS-10 on a J-20 it is now clearly proven that so far neither any operational J-20 uses a Taihang and that also means that WS-15-theory just crashed like a house of cards.

Why would anyone fit a WS-10 if the WS-15 should be operational "from day one".

I'm interested to read Your conterarguments @Asoka !

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

What a tragedy. This all but confirms the rumours that the WS-15 won't be ready for at least five more years.

This is a day for mourning, not celebration.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Leclan

ZeEa5KPul said:


> What a tragedy. This all but confirms the rumours that the WS-15 won't be ready for at least five more years.
> 
> This is a day for mourning, not celebration.


for rational people，this is of cause a day worth celebrating.double ws10 settings have been proved by J11B and J16. I think J20 will adapt it faster than J10.
this means a lot. chinese engine industry is growing better day by day

I expect ws15 could be at low production at 2025 and full state at 2030. ws10 can be upgrade as a reliable engine and its derivation can power up Y20 and H20. that will be good enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Leclan said:


> for rational people，this is of cause a day worth celebrating.double ws10 settings have been proved by J11B and J16. I think J20 will adapt it faster than J10.
> this means a lot. chinese engine industry is growing better day by day


I fail to see anything worth celebrating. And "getting better" doesn't win wars -- only being the best wins wars. There's no "most improved" prize in war.

Why isn't the WS-15 ready? Gobs of money have been spent and legions of engineers have been trained and put to work. *So where's the f*cking engine?!*


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ZeEa5KPul said:


> What a tragedy. This all but confirms the rumours that the WS-15 won't be ready for at least five more years.
> 
> This is a day for mourning, not celebration.



I certainly not jump into conclusion just base on one picture, WS-10 modified or what so ever it's still a Chinese engine and deserve to celebrate because this mean J-20 don't have to depend foreign power plant. Let Chinese engineer time to properly fix the engine issue and make all our fighter Jet even better.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

OMG! You guys are way more delusional than I can imagine. I am really speechless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> OMG! You guys are way more delusional than I can imagine. I am really speechless.




Does this mean You have no argument, no explanation on this latest image nor pupu's report ??
Simply nothing and calling all of us stupid, ignorant, delusional??

Sorry to say so, but it sounds as if right now You are the one, who's playing an ostrich hiding his head in the sand.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## grey boy 2

They said Russian engines production line having difficulties catching up with the much increasing demand, quality control going downhill due to the problematic old to new team process
So, conclusion will be "Its time that WE have to start to trust domestic engines"

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Figaro

ZeEa5KPul said:


> I fail to see anything worth celebrating. And "getting better" doesn't win wars -- only being the best wins wars. There's no "most improved" prize in war.
> 
> Why isn't the WS-15 ready? Gobs of money have been spent and legions of engineers have been trained and put to work. *So where's the f*cking engine?!*


Building engines is extremely difficult, arguably the hardest part of building any aircraft. Just 20 years ago, China had a virtually non-existent engine base, now it is rapidly closing the gap with Western powers (even if a gap still remains). Engine-building is not a sector where you can just throw billions of dollars and magically sprout a 210kN engine. It takes a lot of time and expertise ...



grey boy 2 said:


> They said Russian engines production line having difficulties catching up with the much increasing demand, quality control going downhill due to the problematic old to new team process
> So, conclusion will be "Its time that WE have to start to trust domestic engines"


That's pretty logical. Russian engines traditionally have a lot of quality/reliability issues. Remember how all the J-10's crashes were caused by faulty AL-31F engines? So much for Russian ingenuity ...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

So this is the engine that getting mass produced by Shenyang's Liming factory according to CCTV-4, not the previous ones from the J-20 flight demonstrators.



Deino said:


> I think with this image showing the first ever WS-10 on a J-20 it is now clearly proven that so far neither any operational J-20 uses a Taihang and that also means that WS-15-theory just crashed like a house of cards.
> 
> Why would anyone fit a WS-10 if the WS-15 should be operational "from day one".
> 
> I'm interested to read Your conterarguments @Asoka !
> 
> Deino
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 422795



This comic cartoony is the Chinese way of satire.

It means that the AL-31 family usually got more explosive power at the expense of having shorter lifespan.

The J-20 needs to fit with engine with less explosive power but with longer lifespan and perhaps with higher thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> So this is the engine that getting mass produced by Shenyang's Liming factory according to CCTV-4, not the previous ones from the J-20 flight demonstrators.
> 
> 
> 
> This comic cartoony is the Chinese way of satire.
> 
> It means that the AL-31 family usually got more explosive power at the expense of having shorter lifespan.
> 
> The J-20 needs to fit with engine with less explosive power but with longer lifespan and perhaps with higher thrust.


The AL-31 is inferior to the Chinese WS-10 in reliability, quality, and thrust. No wonder why the Chinese decided to dump their AL-31F's for WS-10B engines ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> The AL-31 is inferior to the Chinese WS-10 in reliability, quality, and thrust. No wonder why the Chinese decided to dump their AL-31F's for WS-10B engines ...



The only advantage with the AL-31 is the explosive power, which means it can reach the AB mode in the shortest amount of time. While it takes longer for the American/Chinese engine to reach the AB mode.

The core design of the WS-10 was inspired by the CFM56, so naturally the WS-10 shares more specifications with its American counterparts.



ZeEa5KPul said:


> I fail to see anything worth celebrating. And "getting better" doesn't win wars -- only being the best wins wars. There's no "most improved" prize in war.
> 
> Why isn't the WS-15 ready? Gobs of money have been spent and legions of engineers have been trained and put to work. *So where's the f*cking engine?!*



Maybe we were too optimistic about the progress of the WS-15, since the jet engine is considered as the diamond on the crown for the traditional industry, which is above the hierarchy of the nuclear submarine, ICBM, etc.

The turbofan engine needs a lot of cumulative experience, and there is no shortcut way like we did in the quantum network, AI, and other IT industries.

Maybe in the post-turbofan era, China with significantly more advanced ramjet/scramjet technology can easily march ahead the US, since everybody has to start from scratch.

But in the current turbofan era, the US and UK got a lot of more cumulative experience than us, there is no shortcut way, so we have to keep catching up.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Deino

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> So this is the engine that getting mass produced by Shenyang's Liming factory according to CCTV-4, not the previous ones from the J-20 flight demonstrators.
> ...



Not only the demonstrators (2001 & 2002) but also the prototypes (201x) and to add all so far flying J-20 LRIP-birds.

But Your explanation could indeed be the solution: CCTV-4's report was meant this engine "will power the J-20 soon" and not that it already powers it.

By the way any info on how recent this image is? Given that pupu's rumour appeared just yesterday I wouldn't be surprised if that image is at best a few days old.

Anyway I'm still interested on how @Asoka will hold his WS-15 theory?

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Deino said:


> Not only the demonstrators (2001 & 2002) but also the prototypes (201x) and to add all so far flying J-20 LRIP-birds.
> 
> But Your explanation could indeed be the solution: CCTV-4's report was meant this engine "will power the J-20 soon" and not that it already powers it.
> 
> By the way any info on how recent this image is? Given that pupu's rumour appeared just yesterday I wouldn't be surprised if that image is at best a few days old.
> 
> Anyway I'm still interested on how @Asoka will hold his WS-15 theory?
> 
> Deino



The documentary of the CCTV-4 was aired in May 2017, and the decision to implement the J-20A2 was done in the first half of 2016.

The documentary mentioned about the Zhuhai show in November 2016, so it is likely that they started producing the J-20A2 since the end of 2016. But instead, China has only showed the deployed J-20A1 in the public so far.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Hyperion

Couldn't agree more. And never forget, engine building or anything to do with metallurgy in general is equal parts science and art, and not many out there want to give away the art part of it. No matter the monetary incentives. 

In another life, I was an awesome metallurgical engineer! 

Note for @Asoka, mate, I enjoy the counterpoints you put forward and your zeal in general. Never give up. Do what you do best. Question. Question. Question. Never let @Deino or anyone else tell you otherwise. 



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The turbofan engine needs a lot of cumulative experience, and there is no shortcut way like we did in the quantum network, AI, and other IT industries.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Hyperion said:


> Couldn't agree more. And never forget, engine building or anything to do with metallurgy in general is equal parts science and art, and not many out there want to give away the art part of it. No matter the monetary incentives.
> 
> In another life, I was an awesome metallurgical engineer!
> 
> Note for @Asoka, mate, I enjoy the counterpoints you put forward and your zeal in general. Never give up. Do what you do best. Question. Question. Question. Never let @Deino or anyone else tell you otherwise.



Here is the chronological timeline for the availability of the iconic US weapons.

1975: Nimitz
1990: Trident II
1991: Arleigh Burke
1997: Seawolf & B-2 Spirit
2005: F119

When the US was capable to build so many marvelous war machines, yet it still took them so many years to field the F119 turbofan engine for the F-22. When the J-20B with the WS-15 is designated to overwhelm the F-22, so the WS-15 is designated to be superior over the F119 as well. So for China, the WS-15 is no less pushover than the incoming Type 003 nuclear supercarrier and JL-3 SLBM.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Hyperion

You know something, what I would like China doing is, start working on 2D TV of WS-10 and implement it ASAP. Why leave an important variable of 'super manoeuvrability' out of the equation? Furthermore, keep the WS15 project full throttle in parallel and not lose focus. The good part is, the prevailing geo strategic environment for 4 - 6 years timespan, gives China a free run to carry out R&D to it's liking. But remember, that's about all the time China will get. Either it makes or not will depend squarely on China. In short, you should not lose focus.

One more thing, F119 is incorrectly reported to be 160 kN class (by intention). That's just plain BS. Think more on the lines of 210kN.




ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Here is the chronological timeline for the availability of the iconic US weapons.
> 
> 1975: Nimitz
> 1990: Trident II
> 1991: Arleigh Burke
> 1997: Seawolf
> 2005: F119
> 
> When the US was capable to build so many marvelous war machines, yet it still took them so many years to field the F119 turbofan engine for the F-22. When the J-20B with the WS-15 is designated to overwhelm the F-22, so the WS-15 is designated to be superior over the F119 as well. So for China, the WS-15 is no less pushover than the incoming Type 003 nuclear supercarrier and JL-3 SLBM.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Hyperion said:


> You know something, what I would like China doing is, start working on 2D TV of WS-10 and implement it ASAP. Why leave an important variable of 'super manoeuvrability' out of the equation? Furthermore, keep the WS15 project full throttle in parallel and not lose focus. The good part is, the prevailing geo strategic environment for 4 - 6 years timespan, gives China a free run to carry out R&D to it's liking. But remember, that's about all the time China will get. Either it makes or not will depend squarely on China. In short, you should not lose focus.
> 
> One more thing, F119 is incorrectly reported to be 160 kN class (by intention). That's just plain BS. Think more on the lines of 210kN.



The F119 without the 2D TVC nozzle probably got an AB thrust of 175KN, and the 2D TVC nozzle is a penalty and probably caused it to lose around 10% of thrust.

The WS-15 is running smoothly in its development according China's military expert in a CCTV interview from last year. Optimistically, we could see it being installed on the J-20B around 2020. For all the information I heard, China has chosen the 3D TVC nozzle for the WS-15, and it is a 180KN class turbofan engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The F119 without the 2D TVC nozzle probably got an AB thrust of 175KN, and the 2D TVC nozzle is a penalty and probably caused it to lose around 10% of thrust.
> 
> The WS-15 is running smoothly in its development according China's military expert in a CCTV interview from last year. Optimistically, we could see it being installed on the J-20B around 2020. For all the information I heard, China has chosen the 3D TVC nozzle for the WS-15, and it is a 180KN class turbofan engine.



Speaking of 2D nozzle, can J-20 engine to incorporate this section, is it hard to do?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyperion

Well, if it were me, I'd rather go with 2DTVC, on a canarded platform. But hey, that's me!



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The F119 without the 2D TVC nozzle probably got an AB thrust of 175KN, and the 2D TVC nozzle is a penalty and probably caused it to lose around 10% of thrust.
> 
> The WS-15 is running smoothly in its development according China's military expert in a CCTV interview from last year. Optimistically, we could see it being installed on the J-20B around 2020. For all the information I heard, China has chosen the 3D TVC nozzle for the WS-15, and it is a 180KN class turbofan engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Speaking of 2D nozzle, can J-20 engine to incorporate this section, is it hard to do?



Yes, the J-20 can incorporate with this feature, but expect the WS-15 to lose about 10% of thrust over few RCS reducing on the rear.



Hyperion said:


> Well, if it were me, I'd rather go with 2DTVC, on a canarded platform. But hey, that's me!



Then expect the WS-15 with an AB thrust of 162KN, but its rear will get a slightly lower RCS.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## 帅的一匹

Sawtooth Nozzle of WS10 engine variant on J20, no more dispute







No Al31 from now on , and no WS15 yet.

@Deino this thread could be closed

The development path of J20 engine is very clear: al31----WS10b----WS15

J20 is a strategic weapon, so we can't always rely on others supplying critical parts like engine.

This picture means mass production of J20 begins.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yes, the J-20 can incorporate with this feature, but expect the WS-15 to lose about 10% of thrust over few RCS reducing on the rear.
> 
> 
> 
> Then expect the WS-15 with an AB thrust of 162KN, but its rear will get a slightly lower RCS.


162KN is more than enough

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

wanglaokan said:


> 162KN is more than enough



So would you have the WS-15 of the AB thrust of 162KN and TWR 10 with more stealth on the rear or the WS-15 with the AB thrust of 180KN and TWR 11 with less stealth on the rear?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> So would you have the WS-15 of the AB thrust of 162KN and TWR 10 with more stealth on the rear or the WS-15 with the AB thrust of 180KN and TWR 11 with less stealth on the rear?


Without any doubt I will go for 162KN with more stealthy rear. The top priority of a 5th generation fighter is to stay as stealthy as it can.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

wanglaokan said:


> Without any doubt I will go for 162KN with more stealthy rear. The top priority of a 5th generation fighter is to stay as stealthy as it can.



Then this is the J-20B we can expect.

In the next time, if we see a J-20 with the flat nozzle, then we can be sure it is the legendary WS-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 帅的一匹

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Then this is the J-20B we can expect.
> 
> In the next time, if we see a J-20 with the flat nozzle, then we can be sure it is the legendary WS-15.
> 
> View attachment 422887
> 
> 
> View attachment 422888


Or maybe ceramic sawtooth nozzle with 3D TVC.

If two stealthy fighters can't lock on each other in BVR scenario, they have to go dogfight.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

wanglaokan said:


> Or maybe ceramic sawtooth nozzle with 3D TVC.
> 
> If two stealthy fighters can't lock on each other in BVR scenario, they have to go dogfight.



Do you think it is possible for two different types of nozzle for the WS-15?


----------



## 帅的一匹

But I highly be skeptical the efficiency of 3D TVC in super sonic maneuver.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Do you think it is possible for two different types of nozzle for the WS-15?


No need bro, I think ceramic round Nozzle like F35 is better.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

wanglaokan said:


> But I highly be skeptical the efficiency of 3D TVC in super sonic maneuver.



Maybe it is only good for the dogfight.

BTW, the 3D TVC will be fully tested on the WS-10B. So after that, they can decide whether the incoming WS-15 should go after 2D or 3D.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

It's a perfect balance between stealthy and thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

wanglaokan said:


> It's a perfect balance between stealthy and thrust.



If the WS-15 has the performance of 180KN & TWR 11, then losing 10% with the 2D flat nozzle is not a big deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## lmjiao

Finally, after debating for so many years. We got the answer.

Congratulations to J-20 A2 !
Congratulations to Taihang !

During anti-imperial Japan war in 1930s&40s, the Chinese soldiers fighting in the Taihang mountains was the back bone of China.
80years later, engine named Taihang become back bone of PLAAF.

Viva la Taihang!




Fig. The Taihang Mountains

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

In last year's Zhuhai Air Show, China had introduced its 140KN WS-10B with a code name as the fourth gen engine.

Now this is the stealth version of the WS-10B, and based on the pattern of the previous WS-10, the optimized version of the WS-10B can reach 155KN. So the previous rumor about the 155KN WS-10G was not groundless after all.

Now we put all puzzles together, we can perceive a bigger and clearer picture overall.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Then this is the J-20B we can expect.
> 
> In the next time, if we see a J-20 with the flat nozzle, then we can be sure it is the legendary WS-15.
> 
> View attachment 422887
> 
> 
> View attachment 422888



I want to see a J-20 with 2D nuzzle as the CG image, look so cool

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## rcrmj

Asoka said:


> *"can't put their new engines, on there new airframes, without extensive air testing, on other aircrafts."*
> 
> Yes, first, bench tests, then third party platforms test, are the usual american and Russian testing procedures, but according to the development plan, I posted earlier, testing on third party platforms *was to be skipped,* if bench testing was successful, and put WS-15 onto J-20, directly, for further testing. This is more risky, for sure, but there are no laws against that.
> 
> "Specifically, this says, . . . during the 7th 5 years plan (1986-1990) (planning, preliminary researches), 8th 5 years plan 1991-1995 (planning, preliminary researches) 9th 5 years plan 1996-2000(planning, preliminary researches and engine core researches), 10th 5 years plan 2000-2005(planning, focus on engine core), 11th 5 years plan 2005-2010 ( engine core pass bench test), *12th 5 years plan (2010-2015), if bench tests were successful, skip testing on third party platforms, and directly install on J-20 for testing , , ,"*
> 
> It is more risking, I am sure, but J-20 was an extremely urgent project, they have to take more risks, to meet the tight schedule.
> 
> *"I am reporting you for your baseless and clueless debates."*
> 
> Be a little more mature, Bro.
> 
> Some people keep claiming WS-15 began bench testing on 2015, but according to this article, *ground bench testing of the engine core was completed on 2005*.
> 
> http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5387c42f0102xjuz.html
> 
> 1.) 2000年, WS-15核心机开始研制。 *"2000, WS-15 engine core start to develop."*
> 
> 2.) 2005年：WS-15核心机完成地面台架测试。*"2005: WS-15 engine core completed ground bench testings"*
> 
> 3.) 2006年: WS-15发动机立项。*"2006: WS-15 engine project was formally established."*
> 
> 4.) 2009年12月：WS-15核心机完成高空台测试。*"December 2009: WS-15 engine core completed high altitude platform tests."*
> 
> 5.) 2011年：中航黎明完成WS-15验证机, 并提前交付。*"2011: Liming Factory completed the WS-15 prototype, and was delivered ahead of schedule."*
> 
> 6.) 2012年底--2013年初：WS-15工程验证机通过高空台测试*。"early 2013: WS-15 engineering prototype passed high altitude testings."
> *
> 7.) 2014年：歼20第2011号进行WS-15单发试飞。*"2014: J-20, number 2011, started testing with one WS-15 engine." (the other engine was probably the older version of WS-15)
> *
> 8.) 2015年：歼20第2016号进行WS-15双发考核试飞；*"2015: J-20, number 2016, with two WS-15 engines verification testings.
> *
> 9.) 2016年：歼20第2101号生产型完成定型。*"2016: J-20, number 2101, completed production model testings."
> *
> 10.) 2016年底：歼20第2101号量产服役型奔赴珠海航展。*"end of 2016: J-20, number 2101, production and service model, demonstrated at the Zhuhai China Airshow.
> *
> Notice, This article gave very specific dates and testing and develop timeline. The writer obviously got insider level informations.


no, anyone can come-up with a seemly detailed "development timeline"``````there are two VERY important engines still under development, one has started air test some time in 2016``````````

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Maybe it is only good for the dogfight.
> 
> BTW, the 3D TVC will be fully tested on the WS-10B. So after that, they can decide whether the incoming WS-15 should go after 2D or 3D.


Uhh ... not exactly. I have my doubts as to if the Chinese are going to add 3D thrust vectoring to their engines. TVC bleeds energy during high intensive aerial maneuvers ... that's how a Eurofighter beat a F-22 which engaged its 2D thrust vectoring. China should instead look to increase the thrust of its engine ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Daniel808

*The latest image (September 2017) indicated that since early 2017 a J-20A prototype has been fitted with two indigenous WS-10X turbofan engines featuring stealth nozzles with saw tooth edges, suggesting the Chinese engine technology has become mature enough to finally have the Russian engines replaced.*
*





Congratulations 

*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

rcrmj said:


> no, anyone can come-up with a seemly detailed "development timeline"``````there are two VERY important engines still under development, one has started air test some time in 2016``````````



Now we can hope that the WS-15 is going smoothly and can conduct its maiden flight around 2020.

The US will very likely start the development of the 6th gen aircraft in the 2020s, and the earlier engine for their 6th gen aircraft will likely be the improved version of the F119.

So by 2030, both China and USA will test their 6th gen aircraft, the improved WS-15 for China's earlier 6th gen, and the improved F119 for USA's earlier 6th gen.

Check here is the brief concept of the US 6th gen aircraft. Although it is just a concept, but I do believe the US has started to plan their 6th gen project.

That's why the role of the WS-15 will extremely crucial, it will serve as the backbone for the later J-20 and play the transitional role for China's earlier 6th gen aircraft.

That's why the F119 won't be retired soon, it will also sustain the earlier model for the US 6th gen aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## F-22Raptor

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Now we can hope that the WS-15 is going smoothly and can conduct its maiden flight around 2020.
> 
> The US will very likely start the development of the 6th gen aircraft in the 2020s, and the earlier engine for their 6th gen aircraft will likely be the improved version of the F119.
> 
> So by 2030, both China and USA will test their 6th gen aircraft, the improved WS-15 for China's earlier 6th gen, and the improved F119 for USA's earlier 6th gen.
> 
> Check here is the brief concept of the US 6th gen aircraft. Although it is just a concept, but I do believe the US has started to plan their 6th gen project.
> 
> That's why the role of the WS-15 will extremely crucial, it will serve as the backbone for the later J-20 and play the transitional role for China's earlier 6th gen aircraft.
> 
> That's why the F119 won't be retired soon, it will also sustain the earlier model for the US 6th gen aircraft.














This is the US next generation engine. This engine will feature the first 3 stream adaptive turbofan engine in aviation history. This engine will achieve up to a 20% higher max thrust, 30% improvement in range, 25% better fuel consumption. It took 10 years of R&D to develop this engine.

As far as a 6th gen fighter, development of the relevant technologies is being funded now.


----------



## Deino

wanglaokan said:


> Sawtooth Nozzle of WS10 engine variant on J20, no more dispute
> ...



Indeed, and exactly like I showed yesterday and always said. The WS-10 is so easily to identify; the current (fitted to all J-20s exept the new LRIP-bird) engine was never a Taihang.





> *No Al31 from now on* , and no WS15 yet.
> 
> @Deino this thread could be closed
> 
> The development path of J20 engine is very clear: al31----WS10b----WS15
> 
> ...




Yes and NO. I agree with You that the race is over and I hope that after all these near endless discussions, heated debates - including my bet - and sometimes harsh words @Asoka and especially @Beast are at least so fair and admit that they were wrong.
I do not want to open bottles of champagne to celebrate that I was right but they should at least admit that they were wrong.

All engines so far used on all J-20s tested and operational so far are NO WS-10 and even less a WS-15. It is - like You said from now on - hopefully no longer an AL-31, but that means until now it was an AL-31FN of some sort.

Deino


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Indeed, and exactly like I showed yesterday and always said. The WS-10 is so easily to identify; the current engine was never a Taihang.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes and NO. I agree with You that the race is over and I hope that after all these near endless discussions, heated debates - including my bet - and sometimes harsh words @Asoka and especially @Beast are at least so fair and admit that they were wrong.
> I do not want to open bottles of champagne to celebrate that I was right but they should at least admit that they were wrong.
> 
> All engines so far used on all J-20s tested and operational so far are NO WS-10 and even less a WS-15. It is - like You said from now on - hopefully no longer an AL-31, but that means until now it was an AL-31FN of some sort.
> 
> Deino


Didn't we just witness a WS-10X yesterday?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

F-22Raptor said:


> This is the US next generation engine. This engine will feature the first 3 stream adaptive turbofan engine in aviation history. This engine will achieve up to a 20% higher max thrust, 30% improvement in range, 25% better fuel consumption. It took 10 years of R&D to develop this engine.
> 
> As far as a 6th gen fighter, development of the relevant technologies is being funded now.



I meant the transitional engine for the 6th aircraft engine, not the definitive one.

The one in Raytheon's promotional video is the F119.

BTW, this one looks closer to the F135 than to the F119.



Deino said:


> Indeed, and exactly like I showed yesterday and always said. The WS-10 is so easily to identify; the current engine was never a Taihang.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes and NO. I agree with You that the race is over and I hope that after all these near endless discussions, heated debates - including my bet - and sometimes harsh words @Asoka and especially @Beast are at least so fair and admit that they were wrong.
> I do not want to open bottles of champagne to celebrate that I was right but they should at least admit that they were wrong.
> 
> All engines so far used on all J-20s tested and operational so far are NO WS-10 and even less a WS-15. It is - like You said from now on - hopefully no longer an AL-31, but that means until now it was an AL-31FN of some sort.
> 
> Deino



Not AL-31FN, not the AL-31FM2 as well, since it is still in the testing stage.

Maybe the 135KN AL-31FM1.

I guess the reason they chose the AL-31FM1 over the similar thrust WS-10A2 might be the lower bypass ratio of the AL-31 type of engine which is more suitable for the limited supercruise.

The WS-10B will have higher thrust and longer lifespan compared to the AL-31FM1, and its bypass ratio could also likely be improved.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## F-22Raptor

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I meant the transitional engine for the 6th aircraft engine, not the definitive one.
> 
> The one in Raytheon's promotional video is the F119.
> 
> BTW, this one looks closer to the F135 than to the F119.



These engines are actually advanced enough, that production may begin in 5 years time. That is confirmed here:

Truly game-changing breakthroughs in US fighter engines are nearly in hand. After more than a decade of labor by Air Force Research Laboratory and engine-makers Pratt & Whitney and General Electric Aviation, increases in speed and range, reduced dependency on tankers, and a menu of new tactics are just some of the advantages coming in the next few years.

By 2021, engineers are expected to have built and tested flightworthy engines that could, for example, give new fighters 30 percent more range than they have today, produce enough spare power to fire directed energy weapons, or run cool enough to improve stealth. Besides those advantages, new engines could provide great benefit to the F-35 strike fighter, allowing it to sustain high-speed flight at treetop altitudes, something it can’t do today. The work is advanced enough that, given a green light, a new development program with a short execution time line could be launched and start producing new power plants by the early 2020s.

More info at the link:
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2017/August 2017/Engines-of-Innovation.aspx


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Didn't we just witness a WS-10X yesterday?



Oh come on, the Current - means fitted to all J-20s exept the new LRIP-bird - engine on all operational J-20s so far. Do I need to add this part on all my posts.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> ...
> Not AL-31FN, not the AL-31FM2 as well, since it is still in the testing stage.
> 
> Maybe the 135kN AL-31FM1.
> 
> I guess the reason they chose the AL-31FM1 over the similar thrust WS-10A2 might be the lower bypass ratio of the AL-31 type of engine which is more suitable for the limited supercruise.
> 
> The WS-10B will have higher thrust and longer lifespan compared to the AL-31FM1, and its bypass ratio could also likely be improved.



Why don't You think an FN-based design since it would ease commonality?
IMO the 135KN AL-31FM1 is unlikely since its thrust gives not much more than the already available FN Series 3. Also the FM2 was already bench-tested and if financed by China, I'm sure, its development timeline would fit the LRIP-birds.

Deino


----------



## lmjiao

@Deino
Dear Mod，

Now that the debate over J-20 engines is over, I think at least you could consider changing the current title of this thread “The endless J-20-engine saga ... to keep the J-20-thread clean”

Because:
1. It is now ended, not a endless one
2. the word "keep clean" is a little bit offensive to every one included in these discussion, include yourself.

lmjiao

@Deino Thanks for the new title

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

lmjiao said:


> @Deino
> Dear Mod，
> 
> Now that the debate over J-20 engines is over, I think at least you could consider changing the current title of this thread “The endless J-20-engine saga ... to keep the J-20-thread clean”
> 
> Because:
> 1. It is now ended, not a endless one
> 2. the word "keep clean" is a little bit offensive to every one included in these discussion, include yourself.
> 
> lmjiao



Agreed, even if I'm not sure if this is better?!:

*The J-20-engine discussion is over ... to separate from the J-20-news !*

Otherwise You are correct and it was indeed a hash discussion.
Anyway I think at least it could be admitted that the race is over, that the engine mystery became a bit more clear.
But still calling others "delusional" with now the facts on the table is IMO plain 



Asoka said:


> OMG! You guys are way more delusional than I can imagine. I am really speechless.



Deino


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Agreed, even if I'm not sure if this is better?!:
> 
> *The J-20-engine discussion is over ... to separate from the J-20-news !*
> 
> Otherwise You are correct and it was indeed a hash discussion.
> Anyway I think at least it could be admitted that the race is over, that the engine mystery became a bit more clear.
> But still calling others "delusional" with now the facts on the table is IMO plain
> 
> 
> 
> Deino



Folks, our son Amadeus was born this morning at 5:23AM. I won't have time to reply to any of the postings, for the foreseeable future.

I will let Mr. Deino take his "victory" lap for now. I am worry about his mental state. I hope he won't lose his mind over this "engine thing".

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

As said in the dedicated J-20-thread here another question:



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The name is irrelevant, the WS-10B and WS-10 belong to two different generations.
> The WS-10 got many optimization with the improvement of thrust and lifespan, and the WS-10B will experience the same. So the WS-10B in the near future will have higher thrust and longer lifespan than the current one.



So they the difference between WS-10 and WS-10B is comparable to the step from the early US F100-PW-100 and -200 to the later uprated and improved versions F100-PW-229. But where in this line dooes the WS-10A fit in? 

I just noticed after a second read that You use different WS-10-designations sometimes: Could You please correct me or give a brief summary?

- As far as i thought, the first generation Taihang was plain and simple the WS-10. This was first sppotted in that J-11/WS-10-testbed but not used operationally.

- The first serial Taihangs were then WS-10A (with their gear-box on top) and are all used in the Flanker version (J-11B/BS ...).

- For the WS-10B there are contradicting reports: Sometimes it is used as the WS-10A-development for the J-10 with the gear-box now on the bottom as tested in no. 1004, 1035 and a few Batch 01 J-10B, while for others the WS-10B is a different generation. 
So how is the J-10B-version called?? WS-10A2 and WS-10A1 is for the Flankers?

- and finally if I'm not mistaken, the WS-10IPE (sometimes called WS-10G) is now again a different even further development?

Thanks again, 
Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## grey boy 2

Asoka said:


> Folks, my son Amadeus was born this morning at 5:23AM. I won't have time to reply to any the postings, for the foreseeable future.
> 
> I will let Mr. Deino take his "victory" lap for now. I am worry about his mental state. I hope he won't lose his mind over this "engine thing".


Congratulation bro, say HI to Amadeus for me hehe old man LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> Folks, my son Amadeus was born this morning at 5:23AM. I won't have time to reply to any the postings, for the foreseeable future.
> 
> I will let Mr. Deino take his "victory" lap for now. I am worry about his mental state. I hope he won't lose his mind over this "engine thing".




Congrats to You, Your son and most of all Your wife! 
I wish You and Your family all the best one could wish on earth. 

But is it really necessary to give a side-kick by questioning my "mental state" instead of simply admitting being wrong? I remember some members here calling to ban me alone for proposing such a theory, some - esp. @Beast - were already celebrating my "throw-out" after that strange TV-report and strongly demanded my resignment as moderator or member here, ... and now? Nothing.  A strange behavior ..

As a sportsman I think it's only fair to say one was right and admit one was wrong and then it's done.

Anyway ... *up to the next issue: what's the exact designation of the engines used so far, what's the exact designation and even more what are the exact specifications of this mystery WS-10B or WS-10X and finally when will that J-20A2 fly?*

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Deino said:


> As said in the dedicated J-20-thread here another question:
> 
> 
> 
> So they the difference between WS-10 and WS-10B is comparable to the step from the early US F100-PW-100 and -200 to the later uprated and improved versions F100-PW-229. But where in this line dooes the WS-10A fit in?
> 
> I just noticed after a second read that You use different WS-10-designations sometimes: Could You please correct me or give a brief summary?
> 
> - As far as i thought, the first generation Taihang was plain and simple the WS-10. This was first sppotted in that J-11/WS-10-testbed but not used operationally.
> 
> - The first serial Taihangs were then WS-10A (with their gear-box on top) and are all used in the Flanker version (J-11B/BS ...).
> 
> - For the WS-10B there are contradicting reports: Sometimes it is used as the WS-10A-development for the J-10 with the gear-box now on the bottom as tested in no. 1004, 1035 and a few Batch 01 J-10B, while for others the WS-10B is a different generation.
> So how is the J-10B-version called?? WS-10A2 and WS-10A1 is for the Flankers?
> 
> - and finally if I'm not mistaken, the WS-10IPE (sometimes called WS-10G) is now again a different even further development?
> 
> Thanks again,
> Deino



After watching the documentary from CCTV-4, I just realize that the past designation was wrong. So far, it seems the WS-10B is only designated to power the J-20. So those WS-10 that used to power the J-10 were definitely not the 4th gen B, maybe the WS-10A1 or WS-10A2.

Now it is very clear for the official designation:

WS-10 -> 3rd gen
WS-10B -> 4th gen
WS-15 -> 5th gen

Just like the CV-17, when its official code name is the Type 002, then we don't call it the Type 001A anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

Thanks !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> After watching the documentary from CCTV-4, I just realize that the past designation was wrong. So far, it seems the WS-10B is only designated to power the J-20. So those WS-10 that used to power the J-10 were definitely not the 4th gen B, maybe the WS-10A1 or WS-10A2.
> 
> Now it is very clear for the official designation:
> 
> WS-10 -> 3rd gen
> WS-10B -> 4th gen
> WS-15 -> 5th gen
> 
> Just like the CV-17, when its official code name is the Type 002, then we don't call it the Type 001A anymore.


I agree with you that WS10b is only developed for J20.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## lmjiao

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> After watching the documentary from CCTV-4, I just realize that the past designation was wrong. So far, it seems the WS-10B is only designated to power the J-20. So those WS-10 that used to power the J-10 were definitely not the 4th gen B, maybe the WS-10A1 or WS-10A2.
> 
> Now it is very clear for the official designation:
> 
> WS-10 -> 3rd gen
> WS-10B -> 4th gen
> WS-15 -> 5th gen
> 
> Just like the CV-17, when its official code name is the Type 002, then we don't call it the Type 001A anymore.


This clearly explains everything.

In Chinese official documents, the "X-th gen" saying is really important.

Any explainating why WS-10B is a 4th gen? Because of FADEC?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## siegecrossbow

Daniel808 said:


> *The latest image (September 2017) indicated that since early 2017 a J-20A prototype has been fitted with two indigenous WS-10X turbofan engines featuring stealth nozzles with saw tooth edges, suggesting the Chinese engine technology has become mature enough to finally have the Russian engines replaced.
> 
> View attachment 422911
> 
> 
> Congratulations
> *



Finally with jagged nozzles!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## siegecrossbow

ZeEa5KPul said:


> I fail to see anything worth celebrating. And "getting better" doesn't win wars -- only being the best wins wars. There's no "most improved" prize in war.
> 
> Why isn't the WS-15 ready? Gobs of money have been spent and legions of engineers have been trained and put to work. *So where's the f*cking engine?!*



It's better than getting bottle-necked by using Russian engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Galactic Penguin SST

*China successfully purifies rare metal rhenium used to make aircraft engines*

September 04, 2017

A Chinese private enterprise has successfully purified the rare metal rhenium to manufacture the single crystal blade, which is crucial for the production of aircraft engines, CCTV.com reported on Sept. 3.

The rare metal was purified after a year and a half effort by Chengdu Aerospace Superalloy Technology Co. Ltd. in cooperation with the Hunan Research Institute for Nonferrous Metals.

The company discovered a mine with about 176 tons of rhenium in Shaanxi province in 2010, accounting for 7 percent of the world’s total reserves of the metal.

A report released by the U.S. Geological Survey shows that the explored reserve of rhenium in the earth’s crust is only about 2,500 tons, even less than that of rare elements. The price for each gram is 200 to 300 RMB (about $31 to 46), which makes it as expensive as platinum.

The metal is the main material for producing the single crystal blade, which is crucial for manufacturing aircraft engines, and the technology directly affects the performance of the engine.

Zhang Zheng, chairman of the company, put together a professional team through the country’s talent recruitment program.

Verified results show that the single crystal blade met Europe and U.S quality standards in terms of tensile properties and endurance performance at high temperatures.


The success makes the company China’s first to achieve mass production of the single crystal blade for manufacturing aircraft engines.

Aircraft engines, as one of the most complicated mechanical systems, should be able to work under high temperatures, high pressures, high rotation speeds, and high load; and be high power, light weight, long lasting, and highly reliable.

China has been faced with a hurdle of self-developing aircraft engines, because the U.S. and some Western countries have blocked certain exports such as rhenium to China for many years.









Spoiler



http://en.people.cn/NMediaFile/2017/0904/FOREIGN201709041733000423825341507.jpg
http://en.people.cn/n3/2017/0904/c90000-9264309.html


▲ 176 tons of rhenium in Shaanxi province in 2010, accounting for 7 percent of the world’s total reserves of the metal.







Spoiler



http://en.people.cn/NMediaFile/2017/0904/FOREIGN201709041733000543667169200.jpg
http://en.people.cn/n3/2017/0904/c90000-9264309.html


▲ 176 tons of rhenium in Shaanxi province in 2010, accounting for 7 percent of the world’s total reserves of the metal.







Spoiler



http://en.people.cn/NMediaFile/2017/0904/FOREIGN201709041733000300452816572.jpg
http://en.people.cn/n3/2017/0904/c90000-9264309.html


▲ 176 tons of rhenium in Shaanxi province in 2010, accounting for 7 percent of the world’s total reserves of the metal.







Spoiler



http://en.people.cn/NMediaFile/2017/0904/FOREIGN201709041734000031247873473.jpg
http://en.people.cn/n3/2017/0904/c90000-9264309.html


▲ 176 tons of rhenium in Shaanxi province in 2010, accounting for 7 percent of the world’s total reserves of the metal.

http://en.people.cn/n3/2017/0904/c90000-9264309.html

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## kuge

Deino said:


> Indeed, and exactly like I showed yesterday and always said. The WS-10 is so easily to identify; the current (fitted to all J-20s exept the new LRIP-bird) engine was never a Taihang.
> 
> Yes and NO. I agree with You that the race is over and I hope that after all these near endless discussions, heated debates - including my bet - and sometimes harsh words @Asoka and especially @Beast are at least so fair and admit that they were wrong.
> I do not want to open bottles of champagne to celebrate that I was right but they should at least admit that they were wrong.
> 
> All engines so far used on all J-20s tested and operational so far are NO WS-10 and even less a WS-15. It is - like You said from now on - hopefully no longer an AL-31, but that means until now it was an AL-31FN of some sort.
> 
> Deino


what to make of off the comments that the two j-20s were flying with "domestic produced engines" on 81-day? Was the commentator wrong about that?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Han Patriot

kuge said:


> what to make of off the comments that the two j-20s were flying with "domestic produced engines" on 81-day? Was the commentator wrong about that?


Normally when they announced it, the jets would have been using domestic engine for some time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

kuge said:


> what to make of off the comments that the two j-20s were flying with "domestic produced engines" on 81-day? Was the commentator wrong about that?



Yes ... IMO that commentator was in his mind referring to that CCTV report which in fact - even if stated - meant "will use a domestic engine soon".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

lmjiao said:


> This clearly explains everything.
> 
> In Chinese official documents, the "X-th gen" saying is really important.
> 
> Any explainating why WS-10B is a 4th gen? Because of FADEC?



The FADEC is an important feature for the 5th gen stealth aircraft, and if the WS-10B is chosen to power the J-20A, then it is indeed because of this.

Russia's production rate can only supply few engines for the J-20A, so the J-20A still needs to depend on the WS-10B which can already meet its production demand.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The FADEC is an important feature for the 5th gen stealth aircraft, and if the WS-10B is chosen to power the J-20A, then it is indeed because of this.
> 
> Russia's production rate can only supply few engines for the J-20A, so the J-20A still needs to depend on the WS-10B which can already meet its production demand.




Two questions again: Will this WS-10-powered version get a new letter aka J-20B if the current ones are J-20A ??

and by the way, which WS-10-version does the J-16 use ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Deino said:


> Two questions again: Will this WS-10-powered version get a new letter aka J-20B if the current ones are J-20A ??
> 
> and by the way, which WS-10-version does the J-16 use ?



Any J-20 without the WS-15 cannot be labelled as the J-20B, and I think those big shrimps have made that clear.

So the J-20A itself has to be distinguished into A1 and A2 according to Yankeesama.

There are many optimized versions for the WS-10, and I think the one used by the J-16 could be the WS-10A2.

Here is an example the two different versions of the WS-10, and you can see the color of the ring on both WS-10 is different.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

wanglaokan said:


> I agree with you that WS10b is only developed for J20.



Taihang class:
WS-10 subclass -> 3rd gen & 120-140KN
WS-10B subclass -> 4th gen & 140KN~

Emei class:
WS-15 subclass -> 5th gen & 180KN~
WS-15B subclass -> 6th gen???

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

siegecrossbow said:


> It's better than getting bottle-necked by using Russian engines.


Exactly, Siege. An engine is the *heart *of any aircraft. You wouldn't want a temporary or imported heart, now would you? And given constant Russian reliability and QA issues, it's no surprise that CAC wanted to ditch those Russian engines, even if it meant a small trade-off in thrust.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Taihang class:
> WS-10 subclass -> 3rd gen & 120-140KN
> WS-10B subclass -> 4th gen & 140KN~
> 
> Emei class:
> WS-15 subclass -> 5th gen & 180KN~
> WS-15B subclass -> 6th gen???


Let's not get over the top with WS-15B yet ... I really want to see more info of the WS-15 though

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 星海军事

Make sure we are clear with the unit before we discuss.

WS-10/WS-10A -- 12,500 kgf
WS-10H -- 12,800 kgf
WS-10B -- 13,200 kgf
WS-10IPE -- 14,000 kgf

“FWSX发动机是我国第一台具有自主知识产权的推重比8一级军用发动机……FWSXH发动机就是在FWSX发动机这个高起点的基础上进行研制……起飞推力由12500千克力提高到12800千克力，满足歼-XX飞机舰上全状态起飞性能要求”
——马会宁. "舰载机附件“三防”及起飞增推设计研究." _中国航空学会动力年会 _2010.​
However, as it is known to all, the 12,800 kgf WS-10H project was eventually abandoned and never entered mass production.

“晚上10时多，动力所总设计师刘永泉满脸兴奋地向大家报告：某型发动机试验成功，“十二五”研制目标顺利实现！……*十年磨一剑*，发动机在经历了无数次地面、空中考核试验试飞，史上最苛刻的考核长试、创新试验项目后，验证了能力，得到了试飞员的高度认可。”
——李晶雪. "铸国防空疆之重器——记中航工业发动机研究院、动力所总设计师刘永泉." _中国航空报 _2016.​
WS-10B is the first improved version to meet the target performances set in the late 1980s. It took nearly 10 years for WS-10B to reach its design finalization.

“*某型涡扇航空发动机已定型*，完成了大量的地面及飞行试验，在其基础上，改进发展了*某性能增强型涡扇发动机**……使地面台架最大推力增大12%……目前某性能增强型涡扇发动机已完成预先研究，为工程验证机研制阶段。”
——边家亮等. "某性能增强型涡扇发动机稳态性能调试方法研究." _中国科协年会_ 2013.​
*性能增强型涡扇发动机（Improved Performance Engine，IPE）

WS-10B was still under rigid testing in 2014. Thus, the finalized engine mentioned is WS-10, with a thrust of 12,500 kgf.

12,500 × 112% = 14,000

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

The third gen WS-10A is 13200 kg with a TWR of 7.5.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 星海军事

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The third gen WS-10A is 13200 kg with a TWR of 7.5.
> 
> View attachment 423116



The 7th Five Year Plan (“七五”) is the initiative began in 1986 and ended in 1990. This is exactly what I refer to as "the target performances set in the late 1980s". WS-10A was as well abandoned and replaced by WS-10B1.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Another interesting theory here sometimes proposed by certain members also crashed like a house of cards. 

Some said the current engine is a hybrid - or like I said FRANKENSTEIN - engine using the WS-15's core and parts from the WS-10 + AL-31. 



> 回复@左手王ZSW:自然不会是真
> 
> 
> 
> 
> //@左手王ZSW:曾闻言歼20使用的WS-10改进型是ws15的芯套了个ws10的壳...不知道是真是假
> 
> http://weibo.wbdacdn.com/user/1496809922/page3.html#utm_source=ifvisible




*With some help at the SDF, here's a verbatim translation:
---------------------------------------------------------*
左手王ZSW asks pupu-2012, "I heard a rumor that WS-10 fitted on the J-20 has WS-15's core wrapped in WS-10's casing... Don't know if this is true or not."

pupu-2012 replies to 左手王ZSW, "Naturally NOT true."
*---------------------------------------------------------
End translation*


So contrary to what some fan-boys always potsed, Pupu unambiguously and categorically *refuted* it. 

Oh, these are bad days for chest-bumping fan-boys. 

Anyway, like others already said: A Chinese engine financial on the PLAAF's premier fighter is a great achievement and worth to celebrate. 

Deino


----------



## kuge

Han Warrior said:


> Normally when they announced it, the jets would have been using domestic engine for some time.


what domestic engine variant is that? the j20a ws-10b has yet to take to the sky....


----------



## Han Patriot

kuge said:


> what domestic engine variant is that? the j20a ws-10b has yet to take to the sky....


By the time pictures start surfacing with a domestic engine, they would have been testing the engines on J20 long before that. That's why official media was claiming it had domestic engine all along. To be fair to Deino, the media did not claim all J-20s were using domestic engines, they only said J-20s are using domestic engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Does @Asoka still believe in his WS-15 theory? Seems like the WS-10X revelation proved him wrong...


----------



## Deino

Han Warrior said:


> By the time pictures start surfacing with a domestic engine, they would have been testing the engines on J20 long before that. That's why official media was claiming it had domestic engine all along. To be fair to Deino, the media did not claim all J-20s were using domestic engines, they only said J-20s are using domestic engines.



No, plain and simple NO !

These latest reports all say clearly this is a new prototype; actually the first one fitted with a WS-10. So even if this engine was already installed some time ago and that report might wanted to hint on it, it never flew by then (not even now) and no other J-20 so far uses this engine.

So just accept that report is wrong, maybe over-enthusiastically in anticipation that the WS-10 WILL power the J-20, that reporter said it already does. But that's wrong. End of the story.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> No, plain and simple NO !
> 
> These latest reports all say clearly this is a new prototype; actually the first one fitted with a WS-10. So even if this engine was already installed some time ago and that report might wanted to hint on it, it never flew by then (not even now) and no other J-20 so far uses this engine.
> 
> So just accept that report is wrong, maybe over-enthusiastically in anticipation that the WS-10 WILL power the J-20, that reporter said it already does. But that's wrong. End of the story.
> 
> Deino


Do you know if the PLAAF is satisfied with their performance as to enter batch production ...


----------



## Han Patriot

Deino said:


> No, plain and simple NO !
> 
> These latest reports all say clearly this is a new prototype; actually the first one fitted with a WS-10. So even if this engine was already installed some time ago and that report might wanted to hint on it, it never flew by then (not even now) and no other J-20 so far uses this engine.
> 
> So just accept that report is wrong, maybe over-enthusiastically in anticipation that the WS-10 WILL power the J-20, that reporter said it already does. But that's wrong. End of the story.
> 
> Deino


What report Deino, it was only a picture to begin with and some commentaries from unknown sources.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Another interesting theory here sometimes proposed by certain members also crashed like a house of cards.
> 
> Some said the current engine is a hybrid - or like I said FRANKENSTEIN - engine using the WS-15's core and parts from the WS-10 + AL-31.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *With some help at the SDF, here's a verbatim translation:
> ---------------------------------------------------------*
> 左手王ZSW asks pupu-2012, "I heard a rumor that WS-10 fitted on the J-20 has WS-15's core wrapped in WS-10's casing... Don't know if this is true or not."
> 
> pupu-2012 replies to 左手王ZSW, "Naturally NOT true."
> *---------------------------------------------------------
> End translation*
> 
> 
> So contrary to what some fan-boys always potsed, Pupu unambiguously and categorically *refuted* it.
> 
> Oh, these are bad days for chest-bumping fan-boys.
> 
> Anyway, like others already said: A Chinese engine financial on the PLAAF's premier fighter is a great achievement and worth to celebrate.
> 
> Deino


So Pupu just refuted @Asoka's theory? Wonder what the latter has to say ...



Han Warrior said:


> What report Deino, it was only a picture to begin with and some commentaries from unknown sources.


I'm pretty sure it was leaked and confirmed by some "Big Shrimps", who possibly visited it on site. I'd trust them with these predictions ... that's what they do



kuge said:


> what domestic engine variant is that? the j20a ws-10b has yet to take to the sky....


That's obviously a WS-10X variant ... most likely a WS-10B.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Han Warrior said:


> What report Deino, it was only a picture to begin with and some commentaries from unknown sources.



That report from pupu !

Please don't take this as an offence and I know, hope is the last thing that dies ... but do You really think they fitted AL-31 first, then a secret Chinese engine which is mentioned in that CCTV-report and all J-20s operational are using it, now a so far not flown WS-10B-powered aircraft appears and in a few years they will fit the WS-15 ???

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Han Patriot

Deino said:


> That report from pupu !
> 
> Please don't take this as an offence and I know, hope is the last thing that dies ... but do You really think they fitted AL-31 first, then a secret Chinese engine which is mentioned in that CCTV-report and all J-20s operational are using it, now a so far not flown WS-10B-powered aircraft appears and in a few years they will fit the WS-15 ???
> 
> Deino


No don't get me wrong Deino, I am not that naive, I believe the PLA tested many engines, AL-31, WS-X, etc. The point I am trying to say is if the news is out now, it would have been already done a year or two back. This is how Chinese military operates. They will only reveal something they had already done. That's why CCTV report does not contradict this at all nor doe sit contradict you. The CCTV report says that J20 is using a domestic engine, it didn't say no AL-31X were ever tested or evaluated or flown on J-20s before.

Btw, the picture/commentary from PUPU just says WS-XX on J-20 prototype, no mention on when it was tested, etc. It is not even official.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

Han Warrior said:


> No don't get me wrong Deino, I am not that naive, I believe the PLA tested many engines, AL-31, WS-X, etc. The point I am trying to say is if the news is out now, it would have been already done a year or two back. This is how Chinese military operates. They will only reveal something they had already done. That's why CCTV report does not contradict this at all nor doe sit contradict you. The CCTV report says that J20 is using a domestic engine, it didn't say no AL-31X were ever tested or evaluated or flown on J-20s before.


Testing different engines involves substantial internal redesign of an aircraft, especially since the Taihang series is quite different than the AL-31F series. It's not as simple as inserting them and switching engines at will ... which is why the J-20 probably has used the AL-31F series up until now ...



Deino said:


> Another interesting theory here sometimes proposed by certain members also crashed like a house of cards.
> 
> Some said the current engine is a hybrid - or like I said FRANKENSTEIN - engine using the WS-15's core and parts from the WS-10 + AL-31.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *With some help at the SDF, here's a verbatim translation:
> ---------------------------------------------------------*
> 左手王ZSW asks pupu-2012, "I heard a rumor that WS-10 fitted on the J-20 has WS-15's core wrapped in WS-10's casing... Don't know if this is true or not."
> 
> pupu-2012 replies to 左手王ZSW, "Naturally NOT true."
> *---------------------------------------------------------
> End translation*
> 
> 
> So contrary to what some fan-boys always potsed, Pupu unambiguously and categorically *refuted* it.
> 
> Oh, these are bad days for chest-bumping fan-boys.
> 
> Anyway, like others already said: A Chinese engine financial on the PLAAF's premier fighter is a great achievement and worth to celebrate.
> 
> Deino


I would rather them be testing a WS-15 "Frankenstein" engine than the current WS-10X ... but it's a steep improvement nonetheless

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

Figaro said:


> Testing different engines involves substantial internal redesign of an aircraft, especially since the Taihang series is quite different than the AL-31F series. It's not as simple as inserting them and switching engines at will ... which is why the J-20 probably has used the AL-31F series up until now ...


I am no engine expert, but judging by Chinese experimentation activities, I would not rule out Al-xx and WS-xx were tested, after all, physically WS-XX is similar to AL-xx? As for WS-15, that's too far fetched, maybe in the near future but definitely not now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Deino said:


> Some said the current engine is a hybrid - or like I said FRANKENSTEIN - engine using the WS-15's core and parts from the WS-10 + AL-31.


That not totally impossible sir their few example of that B-2 F-118 uses core and other tech from F-110, WS-10 uses the core of CFM-56 and its other tech


----------



## Deino

pakistanipower said:


> That not totally impossible sir their few example of that B-2 F-118 uses core and other tech from F-110, WS-10 uses the core of CFM-56 and its other tech



Again. It is surely not impossible to use in-house technologies at General Electric from the F110 in the F118 since they are from the same designer& manufactor. In the same way Salut or Saturn use more modern technologies from the one AL-31-family member in another one, but it is not possible to use a WS-15 core - by the way how confirmed is that this part is production-ready ?? - mate it with the WS-10's fan-section and add an afterburner-nozzle from a AL-31FN. 

That's technical nonsense.


----------



## Han Patriot

Deino said:


> Again. It is surely not impossible to use in-house technologies at General Electric from the F110 in the F118 since they are from the same designer& manufactor. In the same way Salut or Saturn use more modern technologies from the one AL-31-family member in another one, but it is not possible to use a WS-15 core - by the way how confirmed is that this part is production-ready ?? - mate it with the WS-10's fan-section and add an afterburner-nozzle from a AL-31FN.
> 
> That's technical nonsense.


We are only seeing a picture of unknown source,I think we should wait for more official releases before making any assumptions.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

pakistanipower said:


> That not totally impossible sir their few example of that B-2 F-118 uses core and other tech from F-110, WS-10 uses the core of CFM-56 and its other tech



The core of the WS-10 is a reverse engineering of the CFM-56.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## j20blackdragon

J-10B #1035 prototype powered by WS-10 showed up in 2011.

You can confirm the date with these two sources.

Source 1:
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2011-08-08/chengdu-flies-chinese-powered-j-10-fighter

Source 2:
http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2011/07/just-bunch-j-10-photos.html







J-10B production began in 2013.

On the other hand, J-20 production began in December 2015 (#2101), and the WS-10X prototype shows up in September 2017...

Something is wrong here.

By the way, the AL-31FN Series 3 deal was also signed in 2011.
http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2011/07/123-af-31fn-engine-as-ordered-by-china.html

J-10B production began two years later.

Regarding the J-20, we still have no evidence of any AL-31 deal whatsoever. What exactly is powering the initial prototypes and early LRIP? We still don't know.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ozranger

j20blackdragon said:


> J-10B #1035 prototype powered by WS-10 showed up in 2011.
> 
> You can confirm the date with these two sources.
> 
> Source 1:
> http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2011-08-08/chengdu-flies-chinese-powered-j-10-fighter
> 
> Source 2:
> http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2011/07/just-bunch-j-10-photos.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-10B production began in 2013.
> 
> On the other hand, J-20 production began in December 2015 (#2101), and the WS-10X prototype shows up in September 2017...
> 
> Something is wrong here.
> 
> By the way, the AL-31FN Series 3 deal was also signed in 2011.
> http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2011/07/123-af-31fn-engine-as-ordered-by-china.html
> 
> J-10B production began two years later.
> 
> Regarding the J-20, we still have no evidence of any AL-31 deal whatsoever. What exactly is powering the initial prototypes and early LRIP? We still don't know.



I personally believe they were AL-31FN engines custom built in China with parts sourced from Chinese manufacturers and assembled in the PLAAF AL-31(FN) overhaul and rebuild facility.


----------



## Figaro

ozranger said:


> I personally believe they were AL-31FN engines custom built in China with parts sourced from Chinese manufacturers and assembled in the PLAAF AL-31(FN) overhaul and rebuild facility.


Not anymore . The Chinese have ditched those AL-31F engines ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nan Yang

*China's stealth fighter may be getting a new engine*
Relying on Russian engines has put China at the mercy of a single, foreign supplier. That could be changing.

By Jeffrey Lin and P.W. Singer Yesterday at 1:15pm




A FLIGHT SEEN AROUND THE WORLD

Two J-20s make the public debut of China's first stealth fighter, coming low over the Zhuhai runway.

dafeng cao (@xinfengcao)

With its J-20 heavy fighter, China became the second nation in the world (after the USA) to field a fleet of stealthy fifth generation fighters. But until recently, there has been a key limitation for the J-20 heavy fighter, and Chinese aerospace in general: a reliance on foreign engines. That's looks to be changing, quickly.
Images that just surfaced online show a new-built J-20 with stealthy WS-10 turbofan engines, which are developed and manufactured in China. These engines are distinguished by their serrated afterburner nozzles and interior flaps for manipulating the exhaust flow.

Once these new J-20s enter service, China will have comprehensively mastered the major parts of fighter technology, including radars, stealthy fuselage, missiles, computers, and engines. 





WS-10A

The WS-10A, which powers the J-11 heavy fighters, is China's first operational low bypass, afterburning turbofan engines.

Errymath

Both prototype and production models of the J-20 fighter currently rely on an advanced variant of the Russian Al-31 turbofan engine. Using this tech since the fighter's first flight in 2011 has put China at the mercy of a single, foreign supplier. But not for much longer, it seems.

Photos of the new Chinese J-20, production number "2021," reveal turbofan engines that clearly belong to the WS-10 Taihang (built by Shenyang Liming). Among the shared features are the semicircle of small flaps, vanes for controlling exhaust flows, on the inner nozzle, and wider afterburning, variable geometry petals. The Russian Salyut AL-31 does not have those features. 

Additionally, the WS-10X (possibly officially designated WS-10G or WS-10IPE) has sawtoothed serrations on the edges of its afterburning nozzles, like the F-35's F119 engine. The sawtooth edges provide a gain in stealthiness, as they redirect radar waves away from the nozzles. (The straight edges on non-stealthy engines like the AL-31 are major contributors to the radar cross section of a fighter). 

In addition to the gains in stealth, the WS-10X is believed to provide about 14-15 tons of thrust. This may be enough power to allow the J-20 to engage in low supersonic supercruise at Mach 1-1.2 speeds. The Eurofighter Typhoon has a similar low supercruise capability, which means it can hit supersonic speeds without using fuel-thirsty afterburners. 

The gains in engine connect to broader news in materials. The Chengdu Aerospace Superalloy Technology Company, a privately held corporation, made a major breakthrough in superalloy research. CASTC, according to the Global Times and People's Daily, is producing world class single crystal turbine blades from rhenium-nickel superalloys; adding rhenium to nickel increases the superalloy's melting point, allowing for a hotter and more efficient engine. High rhenium content superalloys are used in light weight, high thrust engines like the F-22 Raptor's F109 turbofan. Previously, the development of Chinese engines like the WS-10 were delayed as they suffered from quality control issues regarding single crystal turbine blades. China's mastery of the rhenium superalloy (and by the private sector, no less) won't just help China build current fighter engines, but also quickly research more capable, higher tech models.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Not anymore . The Chinese have ditched those AL-31F engines ...




But the question is: Since when ?


----------



## beijingwalker

*China's stealth fighter may be getting a new engine*
Relying on Russian engines has put China at the mercy of a single, foreign supplier. That could be changing.
By Jeffrey Lin and P.W. Singer 15 hours ago




A FLIGHT SEEN AROUND THE WORLD

Two J-20s make the public debut of China's first stealth fighter, coming low over the Zhuhai runway.

With its J-20 heavy fighter, China became the second nation in the world (after the USA) to field a fleet of stealthy fifth generation fighters. But until recently, there has been a key limitation for the J-20 heavy fighter, and Chinese aerospace in general: a reliance on foreign engines. That's looks to be changing, quickly.

Images that just surfaced online show a new-built J-20 with stealthy WS-10 turbofan engines, which are developed and manufactured in China. These engines are distinguished by their serrated afterburner nozzles and interior flaps for manipulating the exhaust flow.

Once these new J-20s enter service, China will have comprehensively mastered the major parts of fighter technology, including radars, stealthy fuselage, missiles, computers, and engines. 





WS-10A
The WS-10A, which powers the J-11 heavy fighters, is China's first operational low bypass, afterburning turbofan engines.

Both prototype and production models of the J-20 fighter currently rely on an advanced variant of the Russian Al-31 turbofan engine. Using this tech since the fighter's first flight in 2011 has put China at the mercy of a single, foreign supplier. But not for much longer, it seems.

Photos of the new Chinese J-20, production number "2021," reveal turbofan engines that clearly belong to the WS-10 Taihang (built by Shenyang Liming). Among the shared features are the semicircle of small flaps, vanes for controlling exhaust flows, on the inner nozzle, and wider afterburning, variable geometry petals. The Russian Salyut AL-31 does not have those features. 

Additionally, the WS-10X (possibly officially designated WS-10G or WS-10IPE) has sawtoothed serrations on the edges of its afterburning nozzles, like the F-35's F119 engine. The sawtooth edges provide a gain in stealthiness, as they redirect radar waves away from the nozzles. (The straight edges on non-stealthy engines like the AL-31 are major contributors to the radar cross section of a fighter). 

In addition to the gains in stealth, the WS-10X is believed to provide about 14-15 tons of thrust. This may be enough power to allow the J-20 to engage in low supersonic supercruise at Mach 1-1.2 speeds. The Eurofighter Typhoon has a similar low supercruise capability, which means it can hit supersonic speeds without using fuel-thirsty afterburners. 

The gains in engine connect to broader news in materials. The Chengdu Aerospace Superalloy Technology Company, a privately held corporation, made a major breakthrough in superalloy research. CASTC, according to the Global Times and People's Daily, is producing world class single crystal turbine blades from rhenium-nickel superalloys; adding rhenium to nickel increases the superalloy's melting point, allowing for a hotter and more efficient engine. High rhenium content superalloys are used in light weight, high thrust engines like the F-22 Raptor's F109 turbofan. Previously, the development of Chinese engines like the WS-10 were delayed as they suffered from quality control issues regarding single crystal turbine blades. China's mastery of the rhenium superalloy (and by the private sector, no less) won't just help China build current fighter engines, but also quickly research more capable, higher tech models. 

http://www.popsci.com/china-stealth-fighter-new-engine

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## CriticalThought

Wonderful, and well done!! This is another monumental achievement in the long list of 'super achievements' made by China in recent decades.

China's other fighter programs, such as J-10 and FC-1, regularly benefit from technologies that trickle down from top of the line research done for J-20. Looking forward to good times ahead.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ziaulislam

I will give it another 3 years when they publically announce that they no longer need foreign engines


----------



## Imran Khan

great news waiting since long time

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

beijingwalker said:


> *China's stealth fighter may be getting a new engine*



*Come on @beijingwalker !

Why again a new thread ??? It was already posted this morning and already merged. So why again a new one especialyl if You surely know we have a dedicated already??*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lmjiao

ziaulislam said:


> I will give it another 3 years when they publically announce that they no longer need foreign engines


Quite enough, I think.


----------



## sinait

ziaulislam said:


> I will give it another 3 years when they publically announce that they no longer need foreign engines


Maybe foreign engines are no longer essential in the future, but why the need to say no if it is cheap and still useful, especially if supplies and spare parts availability are assured.
China can always concentrate their production on other more pressing needs and future opportunities like commercial jet engines.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CriticalThought

sinait said:


> Maybe foreign engines are no longer essential in the future, but why the need to say no if it is cheap and still useful, especially if supplies and spare parts availability are assured.
> China can always concentrate their production on other more pressing needs and future opportunities like commercial jet engines.
> .



If you don't establish demand for your product the industry will not take off and further R&D will become stunted.

The real battle has started now. Companies like GM are moving towards Carbon Matrix Composites for engine blades. For increasing stealth and performance, there is always the need to decrease IR signature while improving thrust.

You don't want to make a mistake like Indians who kept researching Tejas for 30 years. You need to operationalize thus technology so you get real world feedback and perform further research.


----------



## sinait

CriticalThought said:


> If you don't establish demand for your product the industry will not take off and further R&D will become stunted.
> 
> The real battle has started now. Companies like GM are moving towards Carbon Matrix Composites for engine blades. For increasing stealth and performance, there is always the need to decrease IR signature while improving thrust.
> 
> You don't want to make a mistake like Indians who kept researching Tejas for 30 years. You need to operationalize thus technology so you get real world feedback and perform further research.


Precisely, of the need to move quickly, China need to concentrate resources onto essential and pressing needs like W-15, WS-20, WS-10x engines for new fighter jets and lucrative commercial jet engines, and not on items that already have a steady and reliable supply, especially where modifications are needed to fit the new engines.

Failure of the Indians on the Tejas are more of their industrial incapability rather than strategy.
Of course industrial incapability could also result from past strategy failure.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Title1234

J20 may have three production line one with AL31. Two with ws19G. The new forth line will start by 2019 with ws15 with two. 12 J 20 for each line per year now China have around 100 J20. This is the best way to boots bomber of J20 .

Ws19G correct to Ws10G sorry.


----------



## Figaro

Title1234 said:


> J20 may have three production line one with AL31. Two with ws19G. The new forth line will start by 2019 with ws15 with two. 12 J 20 for each line per year now China have around 100 J20. This is the best way to boots bomber of J20 .
> 
> Ws19G correct to Ws10G sorry.


Uhh ... that is a widely optimistic assumption. And why will the AL-31 line continue if the WS-10X is its supposed replacement (given AL-31F shortages)? The WS-15 assumption is even more comical; we have not even seen its appearance on the J-20 and you're expecting full production by 2019. Simply put it, China will probably not have 100 J-20's even by 2020.


----------



## Title123

Figaro said:


> Uhh ... that is a widely optimistic assumption. And why will the AL-31 line continue if the WS-10X is its supposed replacement (given AL-31F shortages)? The WS-15 assumption is even more comical; we have not even seen its appearance on the J-20 and you're expecting full production by 2019. Simply put it, China will probably not have 100 J-20's even by 2020.


They can move to AL41 or more advance Rusia engine or ws10g , ws15.
US F16 F15 have two kind off engine supply by two engine company too.100j20 may be wrong number if third production line just start this year.CHINA may plan to have 500 J20 so they neED 50 TO 70 per year .May be rumor russia will sell Su 35 engine to China may use for AL31 production line.

But i think we will see J20 with WS15 with tvc in 2019.Start initial trial production only not full production line.


----------



## Figaro

Title123 said:


> They can move to AL41 or more advance Rusia engine or ws10g , ws15.
> US F16 F15 have two kind off engine supply by two engine company too.100j20 may be wrong number if third production line just start this year.CHINA may plan to have 500 J20 so they neED 50 TO 70 per year .May be rumor russia will sell Su 35 engine to China may use for AL31 production line.
> 
> But i think we will see J20 with WS15 with twc in 2019.


What AL-41? Do you think China wants to re-engineer their J-20s to incorporate a foreign AL-41 engine Russia probably isn't even willing to sell? There's a reason why China switched to the WS-10X you know ... If you really think that CAC can produce 50-70 J-20s this year, you're wayyyy too optimistic . "Seeing" a J-20 with a WS-15 does not mean that it is in full production


----------



## Title123

Figaro said:


> What AL-41? Do you think China wants to re-engineer their J-20s to incorporate a foreign AL-41 engine Russia probably isn't even willing to sell? There's a reason why China switched to the WS-10X you know ... If you really think that CAC can produce 50-70 J-20s this year, you're wayyyy too optimistic . "Seeing" a J-20 with a WS-15 does not mean that it is in full production



Russia is unpredictable event they had conflicted with China in the past they made surprise by given Mig 21 blueprint to China . 50-70 J20 per year may not now but may be their goal .J20 may start initial trial production 2019 not full production.F16 F15 have two kind of engine from two engine company too .


----------



## Figaro

Title123 said:


> Russia is unpredictable event they had conflicted with China in the past they made surprise by given Mig 21 blueprint to China . 50-70 J20 per year may not now but may be their goal .J20 may start initial trial production 2019 not full production.


The Mig 21 tech transfer was many years ago ... and that was the USSR. China will not get the AL-41 engines. Period. One day CAC will indeed produce 50 J-20s a year, but I believe this will only happen when the WS-15 comes online (instead of interim WS-10X).


----------



## Deino

Title1234 said:


> J20 may have three production line one with AL31. Two with ws19G. The new forth line will start by 2019 with ws15 with two. 12 J 20 for each line per year now China have around 100 J20. This is the best way to boots bomber of J20 .
> 
> Ws19G correct to Ws10G sorry.



Pardon, but this claim is even more ridiculous that Asok's WS-15 from day one theory!! ... any hint where You got that idea??

- three production lines ... one with AL-31, 2 with WS-10G
- a fourth production line ????
- WS-15 from 2019 on ???


We just put that strange WS-15-theory to rest and now You come up with this. 

Even Chinese reports now claim that *"Latest fighter jets to use domestically made engines by 2022: experts" (http://english.chinamil.com.cn/view/2017-09/13/content_7753378.htm)*

... so no chance of a WS-15 already in 2019.

And Your comparison to the F-16 using different engines is way off since it was an industry-political decision to give both PW and GE each half of the cake.

Come on ... stay realistic. No more wet-dreams.

Deino


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Pardon, but this claim is even more ridiculous that Asok's WS-15 from day one theory!! ... any hint where You got that idea??
> 
> - three production lines ... one with AL-31, 2 with WS-10G
> - a fourth production line ????
> - WS-15 from 2019 on ???
> 
> 
> We just put that strange WS-15-theory to rest and now You come up with this.
> 
> Even Chinese reports now claim that *"Latest fighter jets to use domestically made engines by 2022: experts" (http://english.chinamil.com.cn/view/2017-09/13/content_7753378.htm)*
> 
> ... so no chance of a WS-15 already in 2019.
> 
> And Your comparison to the F-16 using different engines is way off since it was an industry-political decision to give both PW and GE each half of the cake.
> 
> Come on ... stay realistic. No more wet-dreams.
> 
> Deino


I think he means a 2019 appearance of WS-15 on a J-20 testbed ...


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> I think he means a 2019 appearance of WS-15 on a J-20 testbed ...


By some senior Chinese members here on PDF saying that WS-15 will appears in 2023 on J-20


----------



## Figaro

pakistanipower said:


> By some senior Chinese members here on PDF saying that WS-15 will appears in 2023 on J-20


2023 as in full production of J-20B (WS-15 variant)... we will first *see *a WS-15 on the J-20 by 2019 for testing purposes! If we first saw a WS-15 on the J-20 in 2023, then full production would be in the 2028-2030 time-frame!

My thoughts ...
2019/20 - WS-15 makes an appearance on the J-20 for testing purposes
2023 to 2025 - J-20B starts production with fully mature WS-15 engines (end goal 170-180kN)

This is where the 2023 figure comes from! It means the commencement of full scale WS-15 production.



Deino said:


> Pardon, but this claim is even more ridiculous that Asok's WS-15 from day one theory!! ... any hint where You got that idea??
> 
> - three production lines ... one with AL-31, 2 with WS-10G
> - a fourth production line ????
> - WS-15 from 2019 on ???
> 
> 
> We just put that strange WS-15-theory to rest and now You come up with this.
> 
> Even Chinese reports now claim that *"Latest fighter jets to use domestically made engines by 2022: experts" (http://english.chinamil.com.cn/view/2017-09/13/content_7753378.htm)*
> 
> ... so no chance of a WS-15 already in 2019.
> 
> And Your comparison to the F-16 using different engines is way off since it was an industry-political decision to give both PW and GE each half of the cake.
> 
> Come on ... stay realistic. No more wet-dreams.
> 
> Deino


@Asoka doesn't post anymore. I wonder if it's because of the WS-10X revelation


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> I think he means a 2019 appearance of WS-15 on a J-20 testbed ...



He spoke expressis verbis from a "The new forth line will start by 2019 with ws15". IMO this hints in his opinion claeryl serial production. ... IMO no chance.


----------



## Han Patriot

Deino said:


> Or that report at all if plain inaccurate at best !


No offense, but what is considered accurate then? If CCTV is not accurate, Chinamil is not accurate, then what kind of information can be considered accurate? A tweet from pupu?

All we know, the latest J20 is using this WS-10C, rather than WS-10B.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Han Warrior said:


> No offense, but what is considered accurate then? If CCTV is not accurate, Chinamil is not accurate, then what kind of information can be considered accurate? A tweet from pupu?
> 
> All we know, the latest J20 is using this WS-10C, rather than WS-10B.



From what do we know that ?? So far the this mystical WS-10C was never ever mentioned and only the WS-10B connected as the latest family member to the J-20A. Now with this IMO strange report suddenly a WS-10C is mentioned is expressis verbis connected with the J-11B ... so how do You come to the conclusion that this WS-10C is now the J-20's engine???

Deino


----------



## lmjiao

Han Warrior said:


> No offense, but what is considered accurate then? If CCTV is not accurate, Chinamil is not accurate, then what kind of information can be considered accurate? A tweet from pupu?
> 
> All we know, the latest J20 is using this WS-10C, rather than WS-10B.


Even though it is hardly to image, but what you suggested is actually the reality. Except for some official report from sth like 《新闻联播》, usually pupu is much more reliable than CCTV or Chinamil.

If you are Chinese mil fan, you know what I mean.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> From what do we know that ?? So far the this mystical WS-10C was never ever mentioned and only the WS-10B connected as the latest family member to the J-20A. Now with this IMO strange report suddenly a WS-10C is mentioned is expressis verbis connected with the J-11B ... so how do You come to the conclusion that this WS-10C is now the J-20's engine???
> 
> Deino


To be fair, the 002 was never mentioned as well ... it was always referred to as the 001A 



Han Warrior said:


> No offense, but what is considered accurate then? If CCTV is not accurate, Chinamil is not accurate, then what kind of information can be considered accurate? A tweet from pupu?
> 
> All we know, the latest J20 is using this WS-10C, rather than WS-10B.


Pupu is one of the most reliable PLAAF insiders. He correctly stated that the WS-10B would be incorporated into the J-20 right before the photo was released ... I would take his words seriously

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## clarkgap

Deino said:


> Care to explain or add a summary??



“J-20 install home-made engine.” Only several programs of CCTV-7 have reliable sources. I believe this news just come from some forum discussion.


----------



## Figaro

clarkgap said:


> “J-20 install home-made engine.” Only several programs of CCTV-7 have reliable sources. I believe this news just come from some forum discussion.


CCTV-7 is definitely not reliable. They were the ones who produced that WS-15 Liming documentary and insisted on a domestic engine


----------



## Han Patriot

Deino said:


> From what do we know that ?? So far the this mystical WS-10C was never ever mentioned and only the WS-10B connected as the latest family member to the J-20A. Now with this IMO strange report suddenly a WS-10C is mentioned is expressis verbis connected with the J-11B ... so how do You come to the conclusion that this WS-10C is now the J-20's engine???
> 
> Deino


I am not saying it is WS-10C, but what I am trying to say is do we really actually know what is happening in PLA? This is the most secretive and opaque military on earth. Therefore, there is no other way of having genuine information unless officially released through official media and CCTV programs as per globaltimes mentioned a WS-10C, could this C be the designation of the WS-10X? Who knows? I don't care as long as it's Chinese.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

Figaro said:


> CCTV-7 is definitely not reliable. They were the ones who produced that WS-15 Liming documentary and insisted on a domestic engine


Actually they didn't say WS-15 is gong to be used, they just said it's a domestic engine and at the end of the documentary, they mention the coming future of WS-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

I have always suspected, that an earlier picture of showing, a supposed J-20 installed with a WS-10 engine is a fake P.S.ed picture, but I have no proof.

That grainy picture just showed the nozzles, with no other details, to ascertain its authenticity.

Now, somebody has uploaded another picture, with the whole body of the J-20, which is an obvious fake, because we can easily identify this picture is a P.Sed picture, from the many details.
















In these two blown up pictures, All details, excepts the color of the paint job and the two ground crews, is almost identical. There is a very noticeable large gap at the nozzle, as if the nozzle was not connected to the rest of the engine, and hold up only by some anti-gravity device.

This *SAME BIG GAP *is a telltale sign of a very poor P.S. job, that should have raised alarms, in anyone's mind.

I can't understand, why this shoddily P.S.ed picture, could have easily fooled many people. I guess some people wants "proof" so badly, that they will believe anything, no matter how dubious it was.

I suspect the same faker, faked both pictures, but this time, he made the mistake of using, a picture of the whole plane, with many other easily identifiable details.

And this time, we know, at least, who uploaded the fake picture. He left his name at the bottom of the picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> I have always suspected, that an earlier picture of showing, a supposed J-20 installed with a WS-10 engine is a fake P.S.ed picture, but I have no proof.
> 
> That grainy picture just showed the nozzles, with no other details, to ascertain its authenticity.
> 
> Now, somebody has uploaded another picture, with the whole body of the J-20, which is an obvious fake, because we can easily identify this picture is a P.Sed picture, from the many details.
> 
> View attachment 425501
> 
> 
> View attachment 425500
> 
> 
> View attachment 425502
> 
> 
> In these two blown up pictures, All details, excepts the color of the paint job and the two ground crews, is almost identical. There is a very noticeable large gap at the nozzle, as if the nozzle was not connected to the rest of the engine, and hold up only by some anti-gravity device.
> 
> I can't understand, why this shoddily P.S.ed picture, could have easily fooled many people. I guess some people wants "proof" so badly, that they will believe anything, no matter how dubious it was.
> 
> I suspect the same faker, faked both pictures, but this time, he made the mistake of using, a picture of the whole plane, with many other easily identifiable details.
> 
> And this time, we know, at least, who uploaded the fake picture. He left his name at the bottom of the picture.


This is clearly not a PS ...


----------



## clarkgap

Figaro said:


> CCTV-7 is definitely not reliable. They were the ones who produced that WS-15 Liming documentary and insisted on a domestic engine



The "several programs" include Military News and Military Documentary.


----------



## Deino

Oh come on @Asoka, after your WS-15 gas proven a failure you now try to spin the theory of faked images??

Only since the new image is a stupid fake does not mean the other one is faked too.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

We shall wait to see the exact video of the prototype 2021 taking into the sky.

Otherwise, if the WS-10X theory for the J-20A2 is proven to be a falsehood, then the entire credibility of the CD forum is going to be crashed and burned into ashes.



Deino said:


> Oh come on @Asoka, after your WS-15 gas proven a failure you now try to spin the theory of faked images??
> 
> *Only since the new image is a stupid fake does not mean the other one is faked too.*
> 
> Deino



To be impartial, same should apply to the CCTV-4, just because they did make some blunders sometimes, but it doesn't mean their statement should be discredited/nitpicked every time. They are still an official outlet of the Chinese government, and their statement cannot be 100% falsehood.

The CD forum also has countless records of making the unreliable predictions.

H-18: 100% PS job.
WS-13: They keep insisted it cannot be installed on the J-31.
EMALS: They keep ignoring it even with the confirmation from the rear admiral Ma Weiming.

We should wait to see if this prototype 2021 really exists. Otherwise, the reputation of the CD forum and many other big shrimps is really at risk.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

There is no TELLTALE SIGN of a BIG GAP in a J-11D, with a genuine WS-10 engine.











Sorry to have popped your balloons and rained on your parade, @Deino. I guess you'll have to undo your Victory Lap, and recall the kisses, you have blown, to the adoring pretty girls, and return your gold medal and flowers, you have received.

I can't even begin to imagine how embarrassing this could be for Mr. @Deino and countless other *"experts"* and *"砖家"*. It seems, to fool those Chinese and Western fan-boys and "experts", is easier than taking candy from a baby.

In the past week, I have read countless articles from the so called *brick* "experts" "砖家", who agreed that J-20 has switched from the Russian AL-31 engine to a domestic WS-10 engine, based on the flimsy "evidence", of a single grainy P.S. picture, of very dubious origin.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> I have always suspected, that an earlier picture of showing, a supposed J-20 installed with a WS-10 engine is a fake P.S.ed picture, but I have no proof.
> 
> That grainy picture just showed the nozzles, with no other details, to ascertain its authenticity.
> 
> Now, somebody has uploaded another picture, with the whole body of the J-20, which is an obvious fake, because we can easily identify this picture is a P.Sed picture, from the many details.
> 
> View attachment 425501
> 
> View attachment 425513
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 425510
> 
> In these two blown up pictures, All details, excepts the color of the paint job and the two ground crews, is almost identical. There is a very noticeable large gap at the nozzle, as if the nozzle was not connected to the rest of the engine, and hold up only by some anti-gravity device.
> 
> This *SAME BIG GAP *is a telltale sign of a very poor P.S. job, that should have raised alarms, in anyone's mind.
> 
> I can't understand, why this shoddily P.S.ed picture, could have easily fooled many people. I guess some people wants "proof" so badly, that they will believe anything, no matter how dubious it was.
> 
> I suspect the same faker, faked both pictures, but this time, he made the mistake of using, a picture of the whole plane, with many other easily identifiable details.
> 
> And this time, we know, at least, who uploaded the fake picture. He left his name at the bottom of the picture.



Today, the CCTV-4 has challenged the entire AL-31FM1/WS-10X theory again.

This whole J-20 engine debate is now getting even more dramatized than the 2016 US election.

Now the entire debating point is clear; if the CD forum and many AL-31 big shrimps can provide the real evidence of the prototype 2021, they won. Otherwise, they are going to be buried by the majority of the Chinese military fans.



Asoka said:


> There is no TELLTALE SIGN of a BIG GAP in a J-11D, with a genuine WS-10 engine.
> 
> View attachment 425514
> 
> 
> View attachment 425517
> 
> 
> Sorry to have popped your balloons and rained on your parade, @Deino. I guess you'll have to undo your Victory Lap, and recall the kisses, you have blown, to the adoring pretty girls, and return your gold medal and flowers, you have received.
> 
> I can't even begin to imagine how embarrassing this could be. To fool some Chinese and Western fan-boys, is easier than taking candy from a baby.



Well, at least the CCTV-4 still has the power to get many exclusive interviews from the Chinese aviation companies and experts, while the big shrimps from the CD forum don't have this privilege.

The guest from the CCTV-4 show who challenged this theory merely represents a voice to criticize these online big shrimps. He may not be professional, but as a Senior Colonel, he definitely has more privilege to access into more classified information than any big shrimp from the CD forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

*"Only since the new image, is a stupid fake, does not mean, the other one is faked too."*

Unfortunately, This stupid fake picture's close up, is appearing *identical,* to your "real" picture, Mr. @Deino. They both have the same glaring *BIG GAP*, near the nozzles, which is a telltale sign of a shoddy P.S. job. This does not appear in a genuine picture of a J-11, with a WS-10 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> *"Only since the new image, is a stupid fake, does not mean, the other one is faked too."*
> 
> Unfortunately, This stupid fake picture's close up, is appearing *identical,* to your "real" picture, Mr. @Deino.


U made a mistake. The PSed photo was just attatching the real WS-10X engine to an old J-20 prototype. The original WS-10 photo was not faked ...


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> U made a mistake. The PSed photo was just attatching the real WS-10X engine to an old J-20 prototype. The original WS-10 photo was not faked ...



*BOTH ARE FAKES *from the same shoddy Photoshop "expert".

Explain the *BIG GAPS*! Don't ignore my point. @Figaro. Ignoring the evidences pointed by other guys, is the sign of a weak debater.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> *"Only since the new image, is a stupid fake, does not mean, the other one is faked too."*
> 
> Unfortunately, This stupid fake picture's close up, is appearing *identical,* to your "real" picture, Mr. @Deino.



Posting the PSed pic is definitely hammering their own credit.

BTW, I guess if the prototype 2021 turns out to be a baloney, they can still use the excuse to backup their falsehood like the WS-10X doesn't work, so it fails in the maiden flight, and the PLAAF has no choice but to switch back with the AL-31FM1. Only their zealous fanboys will still blindly follow them.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Today, the CCTV-4 has challenged the entire AL-31FM1/WS-10X theory again.
> 
> This whole J-20 engine debate is now getting even more dramatized than the 2016 US election.
> 
> Now the entire debating point is clear; if the CD forum and many AL-31 big shrimps can provide the real evidence of the prototype 2021, they won. Otherwise, they are going to be buried by the majority of the Chinese military fans.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, at least the CCTV-4 still has the power to get many exclusive interviews from the Chinese aviation companies and experts, while the big shrimps from the CD forum don't have this privilege.
> 
> The guest from the CCTV-4 show who challenged this theory merely represents a voice to criticize these online big shrimps. He may not be professional, but as a Senior Colonel, he definitely has more privilege to access into more classified information than any big shrimp from the CD forum.


What did senior colonel say. Who is this individual? Reminds me of that Chinese real admiral who consistently denied there was a J-20 back in 2010. Suffice to say, CCTV commentators probably aren't the best ...


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> U made a mistake. The PSed photo was just attatching the real WS-10X engine to an old J-20 prototype. The original WS-10 photo was not faked ...



They should post the real WS-10X with its real attached J-20 body.

By doing this, it will only raise more skepticism to their credibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> They should post the real WS-10X with its real attached J-20 body.
> 
> By doing this, it will only raise more skepticism to their credibility.


It's very hard to PS this if it really is ... in fact, it might even be impossible. I can check with my graphic designer friend on this if needed ... Regarding CJDBY or any other Chinese BBS, I presume there are many trolls who insist that China is not technologically sufficient ... to their detriment.


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> It's very hard to PS this if it really is ... in fact, it might even be impossible. I can check with my graphic designer friend on this if needed ... Regarding CJDBY or any other Chinese BBS, I presume there are many trolls who insist that China is not technologically sufficient ... to their detriment.


*"It's very hard to PS this if it really is ... in fact, it might even be impossible. "*

What are you talking about? Are you blind? "*it might even be impossible. "? *The one with the serial 2021 is an obvious fake, that even @Deino, can tell easily. And both pictures's *close up*, are identical, with its glaring *BIG GAPs*, near the nozzle.

These two pictures's nozzles looks identical, how could it be possible to fake one, but impossible to fake the another one? 

Where did you learn your Logic 101?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> What did senior colonel say. Who is this individual? Reminds me of that Chinese real admiral who consistently denied there was a J-20 back in 2010. Suffice to say, CCTV commentators probably aren't the best ...



He claimed to have consulted an expert from the Chinese aviation domain that the J-20 can only have a super powerful engine with the TWR above 9 in order to meet the demand.

He openly rejects any possibility with the AL-31, which implies that the WS-10 also doesn't meet the demand.



Figaro said:


> It's very hard to PS this if it really is ... in fact, it might even be impossible. I can check with my graphic designer friend on this if needed ... Regarding CJDBY or any other Chinese BBS, I presume there are many trolls who insist that China is not technologically sufficient ... to their detriment.



The new pic is clearly PSed.

By doing this, they are clearly shooting themselves on the foot.

Mr. Chen Hong is a Senior Colonel of the PLAAF. And he claimed to have consulted to a Chinese aviation expert before making the comment about the J-20 engine.

And I saw some people nitpicking him for making the blunder about the Su-35 using the AESA radar in the past. Thus, they are trying to discredit him entirely along with the CCTV-4.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> He claimed to have consulted an expert from the Chinese aviation domain that the J-20 can only have a super powerful engine with the TWR above 9 in order to meet the demand.
> 
> He openly rejects any possibility with the AL-31, which implies that the WS-10 also doesn't meet the demand.
> 
> 
> 
> The new pic is clearly PSed.
> 
> By doing this, they are clearly shooting themselves on the foot.
> 
> Mr. Chen Hong is a Senior Colonel of the PLAAF. And he claimed to have consulted to the Chinese aviation expert before making the comment on the J-20 engine.
> 
> 
> 
> And I saw some people nitpicking him for making the blunder about the Su-35 using the AESA radar, thus they are trying to discredit him entirely along with the CCTV-4.
> 
> View attachment 425525




They did shoot themselves in their feet, or in their heads, or in their big mouths, this time.

If the new fake picture, is a close up, like the old fake one. Those fan-boys will use it as additional evidences, to prove their Russian AL-31 theory is right, but the faker, made the big mistake of using, the whole image, of a known and old J-20 picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> They did shoot themselves in their feet, or in their heads, or in their big mouths.
> 
> If the new fake picture, is a close up, like the old fake one. Those fan-boys will use it as additional evidences to prove their Russian AL-31 theory is right, but the faker made the big mistake of using the whole picture of a known and old J-20 picture.



Yes, if the prototype 2021 is proven to be a falsehood, then it is going to be a domino effect. All previous theory about the AL-31FM is going to collapse, since their credibility wouldn't exist anymore, except for their cult fanboys.

BTW, I am still waiting to see if the so-called prototype 2021 does really exist.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yes, if the prototype 2021 is proven to be a falsehood, then it is going to be a domino effect. All previous theory about the AL-31FM is going to collapse, since their credibility wouldn't exist anymore, except for their culprit fanboys.
> 
> BTW, I am still waiting to see if the so-called prototype 2021 does really exist.




*"Yes, if the prototype 2021 is proven to be a falsehood, then it is going to be a domino effect"*

There is no "IF", in this open and shut case. Mr @Deino posted this, himself, in page 623. And @Figaro seconded Denio's opinion, that the new picture is a fake, with this line:
*
"How does one not notice? The cockpit ?!?!?! The J-20 had a different cockpit since 2017 prototype"*

*CASE CLOSED*. I say.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chengdu-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-news-discussions.111471/page-623

Again an idiot with too much time and not enough talent ... 






Here's the original one:






*"BTW, I am still waiting to see if the so-called prototype 2021 does really exist."*

If you still have doubts that this picture could be real, just ask @Deino. He is our resident expert and noted authors on Chinese Combat Aircrafts.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> *"Yes, if the prototype 2021 is proven to be a falsehood, then it is going to be a domino effect"*
> 
> There is no "IF", in this open and shut case. Mr @Deino posted this, himself, in page 623. And @Figaro seconded Denio's opinion, that the new picture is a fake, with this line:
> *
> "How does one not notice? The cockpit ?!?!?! The J-20 had a different cockpit since 2017 prototype"*
> 
> *CASE CLOSED*. I say.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chengdu-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-news-discussions.111471/page-623
> 
> Again an idiot with too much time and not enough talent ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the original one:



To be an online big shrimp, you gotta be careful with your own words and prediction.

Just look at POP3, a well respected PLAN veteran with a lot of expertise.

Just because he made a bad prediction on the EMALS vs steam catapult debate, his reputation and prestige have hammered so hard by the online community.

Of course, we cannot solely blame POP3 for the EMALS replacement, since the steam catapult was the original designation, and as a retired official, he definitely doesn't have the fastest access to the newest information.

And those big shrimps of the PLAAF section of the CD forum don't even have the expertise of POP3, and they are going to crash really hard this time by playing the fire.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *"It's very hard to PS this if it really is ... in fact, it might even be impossible. "*
> 
> What are you talking about? Are you blind? "*it might even be impossible. "? *The one with the serial 2021 is an obvious fake, that even @Deino, can tell easily. And both pictures's *close up*, are identical, with its glaring *BIG GAPs*, near the nozzle.
> 
> These two pictures's nozzles looks identical, how could it be possible to fake one, but impossible to fake the another one?
> 
> Where did you learn your Logic 101?
> 
> View attachment 425523
> View attachment 425524




Sorry to say so, but You are wrong again. The one on top is clearly fake - no need to talk about - and the second one below is real. Also more than obviously.


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Sorry to say so, but You are wrong again. The one on top is clearly fake - no need to talk about - and the second one below is real. Also more than obviously.



The close ups of the nozzles, esp. the BIG GAPS, shown they are identical. If one could be fake, there is no reason that another one, can't be faked.

It is most likely that they are *FAKED* by the same sloppy P.S. Faker, "*an idiot with too much time and not enough talent ...*", as you have said.

With your new post at page 623, you have proved that the old picture was a fake. With your sharp eyes, You have regained your international reputation, as a noted expert on Chinese Combat Aircraft, Mr. @Deino.

*BRAVO!* to Mr. @Deino, I said.

But You might have to go back, in time, to undo your premature victory lap celebrations, @Deino, I am afraid.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> The close ups of the nozzles, esp. the BIG GAPS, shown they are identical. If one could be fake, there is no reason that another one, can't be faked.
> 
> It is most likely that they are *FAKED* by the same sloppy P.S. Faker, "*an idiot with too much time and not enough talent ...*", as you have said.
> 
> With your new post at page 623, you have proved that the old picture was a fake. With your sharp eyes, You have regained your international reputation, as a noted expert on Chinese Combat Aircraft, Mr. @Deino.
> 
> *BRAVO!* I said.
> 
> But You might have to go back, in time, to undo your premature victory lap celebrations, @Deino, I am afraid.



I think 科京同志 was the first person who posted the pic about the WS-10X on the prototype 2021.

He posted the second pic in his Weibo, but didn't claim that the pic was PSed and got caught up by some netizens with the original pic of the prototype 2011, then he awkwardly agreed that the pic was PSed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Chinese experts argues that for a large and heavy plane like J-20 and F-22 to achieve supersonic cruise, w/o afterburner, it's engine's Thrust to Weight Ratio (TWR), *must be greater than 9*.

And neither WS-10 and AL-31 could do it, because it's TWR is less than 8.

"引言：刀口大侠, 自从看到卖国贼, 居然P图造假歼20换国发, 气的一病不起，有鉴于国贼猖獗, 刀口大侠, 近日病榻发文, 以正视听！

原文：关于我们国家的歼-20飞机，这是一个国之重器，就像那航母一样, 是非常好的武器，所以它的一些战术技术性能数据, 是非常保密。

尽管, 它已经进行了, 一些飞行表演的试飞行动，但是, 包括我们的对手，包括那些最热情的军迷和发烧友，他们所猜测那些数据，其实我认为还差这个。

他没有解开这个谜底！还真没有看到这最主要的东西！凭表面尾喷等推测是错误的。

那么我们认为就是现在有些网上说，比如说歼-20的推力，最大发动机的推力可以达到14到15吨，（网传刚换太行B的谣言）

我觉得这些数据好像都不是十分准确。

我告诉大家一个情况，为了参加你这个节目，昨天晚上专门请教了一个非常权威性的航空工业专家（真*内部人士对比某些跳大神），他告诉我这样一个情况，那么这里不妨告诉大家，一些非常有意思的航空知识。（奉旨官泄）

发动机的推重比，什么意思，就是发动机最后工作这个推力，和发动机的重量要有一个比，比值越大发动机就越好。

应该说就可以达到那种，刚才您说叫超音速巡航。它要达到什么标准？推重比要达到9以上！

就是这个推力要和这个重量发动机量一比，达到9倍以上！这个才能够做超音速飞行！（基础知识打脸某些跳大神）

而今天这些小型军用飞机, 都不能达到这一点。比如说苏-27, 它那个推力, 只有12吨，那它发动机重量相当大，它达不到这个9的比重（打脸毛发三姨夫党）！

美国的F15推力, 只有10吨左右，它也达不到, 这种超音速巡航。

像“台风”更小了（讽刺台风伪超巡，同时打脸美媒认为的歼20是低超音速伪超巡）。

所以要达到, 第四代喷气式战斗机, 这种超音速巡航，就必须要在, 推重比上, 达到9以上。

我觉得, 我们这个歼-20, 为了要实现, 这种超音速巡航，就必要, 要在发动机上, 大做文章。我这个重量轻，推力大，这个推重比, 就能使飞机超音速巡航！（明确歼20使用的是, 推重比9以上的发动机）

就刚才您说的，不使用最多燃料的情况下，我就让它超音速飞行。这才是第四代战斗机的, 最突出的特点！（不开加力, 就能超巡, 才是真*四代机）

剩下的就是介绍, 铼镍超合金高机密叶片，是目前中国企业, 能够给国产战机提供的, 最新材料生产的叶片。

分析：超音速巡航发动机, 自身推重比, 必须要达到9以上，不开加力, 超巡持续时间至少30分钟以上。（目前已知只有F22能做到）

F119发动机生产型加力推力156KN=15918KG（9.8N=1KG），自重1714KG，*推重比9.28*

AL31三姨夫发动机加力推力为12500kg，*推重比7.1*

WS-10A太行A发动机加力推力为12800kg，*推重比7.5~7.8*

WS-10B太行B发动机加力推力为13200kg~140000kg，*推重比8.1~8.2*

歼20目前已经服役，对于歼20超巡能力，官方的表态，不管是珠海航展的杜文龙, 还是朱日和阅兵的歼20飞行员张日天，都明确表示, 歼20超音速巡航, 能力优秀！

*三姨夫和太行的推重比都达不到9，都不能超音速巡航！

因此真相只有一个：歼20早已装备WS15发动机。*"



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think 科京同志 was the first person who posted the pic about the WS-10X on the prototype 2021.
> 
> He posted the second pic in his Weibo, but didn't claim that the pic was PSed and got caught up by some netizens with the original pic of the prototype 2011, then he awkwardly agreed that the pic was PSed.



The close up of both fake pictures look identical. It is most likely they are faked by the same lousy faker. If "科京同志" posted the second picture first, it is also mostly likely, he knows the faker, or he, himself, is the faker.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> The close ups of the nozzles, esp. the BIG GAPS, shown they are identical. If one could be fake, there is no reason that another one, can't be faked.
> 
> It is most likely that they are *FAKED* by the same sloppy P.S. Faker, "*an idiot with too much time and not enough talent ...*", as you have said.
> 
> With your new post at page 623, you have proved that the old picture was a fake. With your sharp eyes, You have regained your international reputation, as a noted expert on Chinese Combat Aircraft, Mr. @Deino.
> 
> *BRAVO!* to Mr. @Deino, I said.
> 
> But You might have to go back, in time, to undo your premature victory lap celebrations, @Deino, I am afraid.




They are not the same, surely not. And while the first image of the yellow bird is blurred, showing an unfinished engine installation with the panels misding - in fact nothing special - shows the second image on a very clear image a blurred nozzle, which is slightly smaller than it should be and exactly the same gap.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> Chinese experts argues that for a heavy plane like J-20 and F-22 to achieve supersonic cruise, w/o afterburner, it's engine's Thrust to Weight Ratio (TWR), *must be greater than 9*.
> 
> And neither WS-10 and AL-31 could do it, because it's TWR is less than 8.
> 
> "引言：刀口大侠, 自从看到卖国贼, 居然P图造假歼20换国发, 气的一病不起，有鉴于国贼猖獗, 刀口大侠, 近日病榻发文, 以正视听！
> 
> 原文：关于我们国家的歼-20飞机，这是一个国之重器，就像那航母一样, 是非常好的武器，所以它的一些战术技术性能数据, 是非常保密。
> 
> 尽管, 它已经进行了, 一些飞行表演的试飞行动，但是, 包括我们的对手，包括那些最热情的军迷和发烧友，他们所猜测那些数据，其实我认为还差这个。
> 
> 他没有解开这个谜底！还真没有看到这最主要的东西！凭表面尾喷等推测是错误的。
> 
> 那么我们认为就是现在有些网上说，比如说歼-20的推力，最大发动机的推力可以达到14到15吨，（网传刚换太行B的谣言）
> 
> 我觉得这些数据好像都不是十分准确。
> 
> 我告诉大家一个情况，为了参加你这个节目，昨天晚上专门请教了一个非常权威性的航空工业专家（真*内部人士对比某些跳大神），他告诉我这样一个情况，那么这里不妨告诉大家，一些非常有意思的航空知识。（奉旨官泄）
> 
> 发动机的推重比，什么意思，就是发动机最后工作这个推力，和发动机的重量要有一个比，比值越大发动机就越好。
> 
> 应该说就可以达到那种，刚才您说叫超音速巡航。它要达到什么标准？推重比要达到9以上！
> 
> 就是这个推力要和这个重量发动机量一比，达到9倍以上！这个才能够做超音速飞行！（基础知识打脸某些跳大神）
> 
> 而今天这些小型军用飞机, 都不能达到这一点。比如说苏-27, 它那个推力, 只有12吨，那它发动机重量相当大，它达不到这个9的比重（打脸毛发三姨夫党）！
> 
> 美国的F15推力, 只有10吨左右，它也达不到, 这种超音速巡航。
> 
> 像“台风”更小了（讽刺台风伪超巡，同时打脸美媒认为的歼20是低超音速伪超巡）。
> 
> 所以要达到, 第四代喷气式战斗机, 这种超音速巡航，就必须要在, 推重比上, 达到9以上。
> 
> 我觉得, 我们这个歼-20, 为了要实现, 这种超音速巡航，就必要, 要在发动机上, 大做文章。我这个重量轻，推力大，这个推重比, 就能使飞机超音速巡航！（明确歼20使用的是, 推重比9以上的发动机）
> 
> 就刚才您说的，不使用最多燃料的情况下，我就让它超音速飞行。这才是第四代战斗机的, 最突出的特点！（不开加力, 就能超巡, 才是真*四代机）
> 
> 剩下的就是介绍, 铼镍超合金高机密叶片，是目前中国企业, 能够给国产战机提供的, 最新材料生产的叶片。
> 
> 分析：超音速巡航发动机, 自身推重比, 必须要达到9以上，不开加力, 超巡持续时间至少30分钟以上。（目前已知只有F22能做到）
> 
> F119发动机生产型加力推力156KN=15918KG（9.8N=1KG），自重1714KG，*推重比9.28*
> 
> AL31三姨夫发动机加力推力为12500kg，*推重比7.1*
> 
> WS-10A太行A发动机加力推力为12800kg，*推重比7.5~7.8*
> 
> WS-10B太行B发动机加力推力为13200kg~140000kg，*推重比8.1~8.2*
> 
> 歼20目前已经服役，对于歼20超巡能力，官方的表态，不管是珠海航展的杜文龙, 还是朱日和阅兵的歼20飞行员张日天，都明确表示, 歼20超音速巡航, 能力优秀！
> 
> *三姨夫和太行的推重比都达不到9，都不能超音速巡航！
> 
> 因此真相只有一个：歼20早已装备WS15发动机。*"
> 
> 
> 
> The close up of both fake pictures look identical. It is most likely they are faked by the same lousy faker. If "科京同志" posted the second picture first, it is also mostly likely, he knows the faker, or he, himself, is the faker.



First, he got caught up by some netizens with the original pic of the prototype 2011, then awkwardly admitted that the second pic was PSed. Thus, the credibility of the originator of these pics is becoming skeptical right now.

Again, with the CCTV-4 also starts to question about the credibility of these online pics, the whole engine thing is far from being concluded.

BTW, Mr. Daokou is fine, he recently just gave a new lecture about the incoming JL-3 SLBM in his WeChat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> They are not the same, surely not. And while the first image of the yellow bird is blurred, showing an unfinished engine installation with the panels misding - in fact nothing special - shows the second image on a very clear image a blurred nozzle, which is slightly smaller than it should be and exactly the same gap.




The are identically P.S. by the same faker, "*an idiot with too much time and not enough talent ...*", as you have said.

If the second picture, was just a local blown up picture, like the first, the fan-boys would use it to claim that its an additional proof, that J-20 is using WS-10. But the details of the whole picture, gave it away. And You immediately caught that. 

Thank you, for pointing it out, in your page 623 post.

*BRAVO*, I said.

The faker shoot himself in the head, with his second picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> ...
> The close up of both fake pictures look identical. It is most likely they are faked by the same lousy faker. If "科京同志" posted the second picture first, it is also mostly likely, he knows the faker, or he, himself, is the faker.



Stop. Now you go too far. 科京同志
Is one of the most respected posters here. Calm down with such stupid accusations.



Asoka said:


> The are identically P.S. by the same faker, "*an idiot with too much time and not enough talent ...*", as you have said.
> 
> Thank you, for pointing it out, in your page 623 post.


The two grey birds 2011 and that alleged grey 2021 are the same. But the bkurred yellow one is not the same as the faked grey 2021. You must get too less sleep that you do not notice.


----------



## Asoka

*"But the blurred yellow one, is not the same, as the faked grey 2021. You must get too less sleep, that you do not notice."*

I did not said, the grey and yellow pictures, are the same picture. I am just saying, the WS-10 nozzles, *are identically faked*, in both pictures, by the same faker.

There is a big difference, here. @Deino.

*"科京同志 Is one of the most respected posters here. "*

Either your most respected poster, "科京同志", knows the faker, or he IS the faker, himself.

He owes us, an explanation, on how he got the second fake picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Deino said:


> Stop. Now you go too far. 科京同志
> Is one of the most respected posters here. Calm down with such stupid accusations.



When he posted the second pics and didn't immediately point out it as a PSed pic, this really put his credibility in an awkward position.

I just checked his Weibo, he clearly got caught up by some netizens with the original pic of the prototype 2011.

BTW, if we still couldn't see the so-called prototype 2021 taking into the sky, then this entire theory from AL-31FM to WS-10X should definitely be discarded. Just look at the J-10B/C, even it currently doesn't equip with the WS-10 in large number, but there were still few prototypes flew with the WS-10. And now, if we couldn't even see a single prototype flying with the WS-10X, then something is definitely fishy, even phony.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> When he posted the second pics and didn't immediately point out it as a PSed pic, this really put his credibility in an awkward position.
> 
> I just checked his Weibo, he clearly got caught up by some netizens with the original pic of the prototype 2011.
> 
> BTW, if we still couldn't see the so-called prototype 2021 taking into the sky, then this entire theory from AL-31FM to WS-10X should definitely be discarded. Just look at the J-10B/C, even it currently doesn't equip with the WS-10 in large number, but there were still few prototypes flew with the WS-10. And now, if we couldn't even see a single prototype flying with the WS-10X, then something is definitely fishy, even phony.




*'if we still couldn't see the so-called prototype 2021 taking into the sky, then this entire theory from AL-31FM to WS-10X should definitely be discarded"*

There is no prototype 2021. The picture is entirely a fake, just ask @Deino, if you don't believe me. It is he, who pointed it out, first.

This ridiculous" theory from AL-31FM to WS-10X" is based entirely on a blurry, local picture, showing only the nozzles. It has no source or name attached to it. The possibility that it could be a P.S. picture, should be obvious to any serious astute observer.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

We simply need to be patient. Give it a few more days, i thrust him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Deino said:


> We simply need to be patient. Give it a few more days, i thrust him.



I also hope so.

But remember, no big shrimp is absolutely immortal, even for a heavyweight expert like POP3. I have clearly witnessed how his credibility has fallen from heaven to hell, even though the misprediction about the EMALS swap was clearly not his fault, but he was just getting too overconfident with his own expertise and authority.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

That CJDBY Gongke101 poster needs to go. He claims to be a Liyang employee and spreads false figures about the WS-10B thrust level (he absolutely insists on the 13.2 tonne thrust level even though it has been refuted by Pupu). Gongke101 also claims that the WS-15 hasn't even begun ground testing yet????? WHAT???  I'm sure many of you guys have seen his posts and fanboys.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> That CJDBY Gongke101 poster needs to go. He claims to be a Liyang employee and spreads false figures about the WS-10B thrust level (he absolutely insists on the 13.2 tonne thrust level even though it has been refuted by Pupu). Gongke101 also claims that the WS-15 hasn't even begun ground testing yet????? WHAT???  I'm sure many of you guys have seen his posts and fanboys.



The CD forum has lost its impartiality long time ago, since they seem to worship the authority of few online big shrimps over the factual evidence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The CD forum has lost its impartiality long time ago, since they seem to worship the authority of few online big shrimps over the factual evidence.


The credibility of some naval "Big Shrimps" kind of went downhill when the 001A was actually revealed to be called the 002. These so-called insiders should've known at the very least what designation it was going to receive. I think that FzgFzy guy was quite accurate a couple years ago but I'm not sure now. Regardless, the most reliable PLAAF big shrimp for me is still Pupu. But then again, if the CJDBY rumor is correct about the J-20 being the future naval fighter, that would restore credibility to a forum tainted by the likes of Gongke101 and various other posers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> The credibility of some naval "Big Shrimps" kind of went downhill when the 001A was actually revealed to be called the 002. These so-called insiders should've known at the very least what designation it was going to receive. I think that FzgFzy guy was quite accurate a couple years ago but I'm not sure now. Regardless, the most reliable PLAAF big shrimp for me is still Pupu.



To me, their credibility on both PLAAF and PLAN seem to go down hill.

The misinformation about the Type 001A and steam catapult was already a huge blow to their credibility on the PLAN, and now someone even starts to challenge them on the nuclear vs non-nuclear propulsion of the Type 003. If they lose this bet again, then it is hard to see how many audience they could have left.

Now for the PLAAF, if the whole prototype 2021 turns out to be nothing but a mere scam for the rating and viewership, then we can clearly conclude that the CD forum will become history.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> He claimed to have consulted an expert from the Chinese aviation domain that the J-20 can only have a super powerful engine with the TWR above 9 in order to meet the demand.
> 
> He openly rejects any possibility with the AL-31, which implies that the WS-10 also doesn't meet the demand.
> 
> 
> 
> The new pic is clearly PSed.
> 
> By doing this, they are clearly shooting themselves on the foot.
> 
> Mr. Chen Hong is a Senior Colonel of the PLAAF. And he claimed to have consulted to a Chinese aviation expert before making the comment about the J-20 engine.
> 
> And I saw some people nitpicking him for making the blunder about the Su-35 using the AESA radar in the past. Thus, they are trying to discredit him entirely along with the CCTV-4.
> 
> View attachment 425525


I trust him. He ought to know a bit more than we do since he's in the PLAAF. Unlike some PLAN commentators who talk about the J-20 despite no aviation experience. It is very likely that the colonel does have connections to with Chinese aviation industries. Can I ask when this comment was made?



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> To me, their credibility on both PLAAF and PLAN seem to go down hill.
> 
> The misinformation about the Type 001A and steam catapult was already a huge blow to their credibility on the PLAN, and now someone even starts to challenge them on the nuclear vs non-nuclear propulsion of the Type 003. If they lose this bet again, then it is hard to see how many audience they could have left.
> 
> Now for the PLAAF, if the whole prototype 2021 turns out to be nothing but a mere scam for the rating and viewership, then we can clearly conclude that the CD forum will become history.


The 2021 prototype was based on a very basic drawing with the markings 2021 and some "sawtooth" nozzles. I personally believe it is real but we'll have to see. The picture with the WS-10X however appears to be real while the PS photo is an obvious fake.



Asoka said:


> *"It's very hard to PS this if it really is ... in fact, it might even be impossible. "*
> 
> What are you talking about? Are you blind? "*it might even be impossible. "? *The one with the serial 2021 is an obvious fake, that even @Deino, can tell easily. And both pictures's *close up*, are identical, with its glaring *BIG GAPs*, near the nozzle.
> 
> These two pictures's nozzles looks identical, how could it be possible to fake one, but impossible to fake the another one?
> 
> Where did you learn your Logic 101?
> 
> View attachment 425523
> View attachment 425524


Oh come on. You are overestimating the capabilities of photo-shoppers. As you saw with the 2021 PS (aka 2011), it was extremely poorly done and pathetically obvious. The first WS-10X photo looks like a legitimate photo taken near the nozzles ... (it would be exceptionally difficult to PS or draw that). If you are still that stubborn, I can consult my graphic-designer friend ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> I trust him. He ought to know a bit more than we do since he's in the PLAAF. Unlike some PLAN commentators who talk about the J-20 despite no aviation experience. It is very likely that the colonel does have connections to with Chinese aviation industries. Can I ask when this comment was made?
> 
> 
> The 2021 prototype was based on a very basic drawing with the markings 2021 and some "sawtooth" nozzles. I personally believe it is real but we'll have to see. The picture with the WS-10X however appears to be real while the PS photo is an obvious fake.



From few years ago, I did remember that Mr. Chen Hong also supported the theory of the J-20 powered by the AL-31F.

But today, his stance seems to have a 180 degree U-turn compared to his stance from few years ago. And he does imply that the WS-15 is the only option to power the current J-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> We simply need to be patient. Give it a few more days, i thrust him.



"We simply need to be patient. Give it a few more days, i thrust him."

WELL, Mr. Deino, this "科京同志" has implicated himself, in this faking operation, by putting his name, on this second fake picture. Even he might not know, that was a fake, at the time of uploading it, (which I very much doubt), he must know, who gave it to him, so he could post it.

He owes us an explanation on, how he got involved, in this faking operation, who contacted him, who pass on the fake picture to him.

*


Figaro said:



I trust him. He ought to know a bit more than we do since he's in the PLAAF. Unlike some PLAN commentators who talk about the J-20 despite no aviation experience. It is very likely that the colonel does have connections to with Chinese aviation industries. Can I ask when this comment was made?


The 2021 prototype was based on a very basic drawing with the markings 2021 and some "sawtooth" nozzles. I personally believe it is real but we'll have to see. The picture with the WS-10X however appears to be real while the PS photo is an obvious fake.


Oh come on. You are overestimating the capabilities of photo-shoppers. As you saw with the 2021 PS (aka 2011), it was extremely poorly done and pathetically obvious. The first WS-10X photo looks like a legitimate photo taken near the nozzles ... (it would be exceptionally difficult to PS or draw that). If you are still that stubborn, I can consult my graphic-designer friend ...

Click to expand...


"The first WS-10X photo looks like a legitimate photo taken near the nozzles ... (it would be exceptionally difficult to PS or draw that)"*

No need to over think it. They are identically P.S. at the same angle, onto different J-20 pictures, with the same WS-10 nozzle picture. Both jobs shows the same shoddy handiwork by a poor Photoshoppers, by leaving a huge and obvious gap near the nozzle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> "We simply need to be patient. Give it a few more days, i thrust him."
> 
> WELL, Mr. Deino, this "科京同志" has implicated himself, in this faking operation, by putting his name, on this second fake picture. Even he might not know, that was a fake, at the time of uploading it, (which I very much doubt), he must know, who gave it to him, so he could post it.
> 
> He owes us an explanation on, how he got involved, in this faking operation, who contacted him, who pass on the fake picture to him.
> 
> *
> 
> "The first WS-10X photo looks like a legitimate photo taken near the nozzles ... (it would be exceptionally difficult to PS or draw that)"*
> 
> No need to over think it. They are identically P.S. at the same angle, onto different J-20 pictures, with the same WS-10 nozzle picture. Both jobs shows the same shoddy handiwork by a poor Photoshoppers, by leaving a huge and obvious gap near the nozzle.


Oh my god ... the photo-shopper PSed those WS-10X engines (the old photo) onto the 2011 prototype to create a new image. Of course they're going to be identical. But that does not mean the original photo is not credible ...


----------



## Asoka

*"Regardless, the most reliable PLAAF big shrimp for me is still Pupu. "*

I could not find anything this guy, Pupu, posted regarding J-20, except the recent one regarding WS-10 and about the new blade material, which wasn't his original. He is obviously a professional rumor-monger, peddaling various types of rumors, not limited to military stuffs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Oh come on @Asoka. You offer no evidence, at least he has his credibility to back himself up. The day after he posted a photo of the J-20 with a background of the Tai mountains, that WS-10X photo appeared. He probably has some connections with the PLAAF to say the least. 
http://weibo.wbdacdn.com/user/1496809922/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Asoka said:


> *"Regardless, the most reliable PLAAF big shrimp for me is still Pupu. "*
> 
> I could not find anything this guy, Pupu, posted regarding J-20, except the recent one regarding WS-10 and about the new blade material, which wasn't his original. He is obviously a professional rumor-monger, peddaling various types of rumors, not limited to military stuffs.



*"But that does not mean the original photo is not credible ..."*

The first fake picture showed a large, unexplained gap, near the nozzle.

Explain that @Figaro. Don't keep evade my question or request.

*"Of course they're going to be identical"*

Good, you just admitted that are identical, and that means they could be both fakes. It is not impossible as you claimed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> *"But that does not mean the original photo is not credible ..."*
> 
> The first fake picture showed a large, unexplained gap, near the nozzle.
> 
> Explain the @figao. Don't keep evade my question or request.


I'm not going to waste time explain to you because you'll just dismiss it ... you are absolutely insistent on your claims and there's no amount of explanation on my behalf I can do to convince you. IMO, the photo is clearly real and does not reveal any PS ... feel free to disagree with me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

What I hate about the CD forum is the behavior of their zealous fanboys.

When Mr. Chen Hong supported the AL-31F theory from few years ago, he got praised.

Now he has changed his stance, then he immediately got bashed, nitpicked and discredited.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Asoka

*"You offer no evidence, at least he has his credibility to back himself up. The day after he posted a photo of the J-20 with a background of the Tai mountains, that WS-10X photo appeared."*

What evidence is that? By posting a picture of J-20 along with the picture of Taisang mountain.

If I posted a picture of J-20 along with the picture of Himalayas mountain, the Alps, is that mean J-20 could be using an engine called the "Himalayas", or the "Alps".

This is so laughable.

Where did you go to school?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> What I hate about the CD forum is the behavior of their zealous fanboys.
> 
> When Mr. Chen Hong supported the AL-31F theory from few years ago, he got praised.
> 
> Now he has changed his stance, then he immediately got bashed, nitpicked and discredited.


I believe that some members on CJDBY are of Hong Kong or Canadian Chinese origin. I have a Chinese colleague (from Chongqing I believe) and he tells me that many Hong Kongers and Chinese Canadians are fiercely against the CPC. That's the reason why there are so many BBS posts on how China is technologically deficient and stuff. The recent Babich article I believe was spread by these individuals ... very shameful of them ...



Asoka said:


> *"You offer no evidence, at least he has his credibility to back himself up. The day after he posted a photo of the J-20 with a background of the Tai mountains, that WS-10X photo appeared."*
> 
> What evidence is that? By posting a picture of J-20 along with the picture of Taisang mountain.
> 
> If I posted a picture of J-20 along with the picture of Himalayas mountain, the Alps, is that mean J-20 could be using an engine called the "Himalayas", or the "Alps".
> 
> This is so laughable.
> 
> Where did you go to school?


Oh come on ... he obviously meant that the J-20 was going to be equipped with WS-10X which indeed did happen. So far, you have not offered a single shred of proof for your WS-15 claim; tell me where's the WS-15 engine from your photos? You claim that the WS-15 is deliberately shrouded in AL-31F nozzles to confuse foreign observers ... where's your proof?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

*"IMO, the photo is clearly real and does not reveal any PS" @Figaro*

What evidence you got support that is a real, and does not reveal any P.S. You got no evidence. Period.

*"It's very hard to PS this if it really is ... in fact, it might even be impossible."*

At first, you claim it is impossible to fake it, now you admit, both pictures are identically faked.

*"The first WS-10X photo looks like a legitimate photo taken near the nozzles ... (it would be exceptionally difficult to PS or draw that). "*

The first picture, fooled a lot of people, is because it shows only the close up details, near the nozzle. If it shows the whole picture, it would be easily spotted as faked (by people like Deino, who probably got all the J-20 pictures, ever published on the web), as the second picture.

@Figaro You still refuse to explain, why is there *a large obvious gap*, near the nozzle, in both fake pictures.

There are no such large and obvious gaps in genuine pictures of J-11 or J-10 with WS-10 engines. Nor J-20 has shown such large gap, ever.
























That identical *large gap, in both fake pictures,* could only be the evidence of a shoddy P.S. job, by the same faker, who is "*an idiot with too much time and not enough talent* ", as @Deino nicely put it. Excuse me for posting them, again, for comparison. They are good evidence provided by Deino. It's crime not to use it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

科京同志 got caught up for using the PSed pic of the prototype 2011, which he didn't acknowledge it first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> That CJDBY Gongke101 poster needs to go. He claims to be a Liyang employee and spreads false figures about the WS-10B thrust level (he absolutely insists on the 13.2 tonne thrust level even though it has been refuted by Pupu). Gongke101 also claims that the WS-15 hasn't even begun ground testing yet????? WHAT???  I'm sure many of you guys have seen his posts and fanboys.




I don't know why you think "That CJDBY Gongke101 poster needs to go", but you, @Figaro, and @Deino *revere Pupu like a god*, and repeatedly referred him as a *"BIG SHRIMP"*, and think this professional rumor-monger has impeccable credential on the J-20 and WS-15.

In fact, he has never posted anything original regarding J-20, except his J-20 picture with the Taishang mountain.

I can't really understand where the exceptional reverence to *Pupu, His Holiness*, comes from. 



Asoka said:


> I don't know why you think "That CJDBY Gongke101 poster needs to go", but you *revere Pupu like a god*, and repeatedly refered to him as a *"BIG SHRIMP"*, and think this professional rumor-monger has impeccable credential on the J-20 and WS-15.
> 
> In fact, he has never posted anything original regarding J-20, except his J-20 picture with the Taishang mountain.



Looks like, I am not the only one, who noticed the *large and obviously identical gaps*, in both fake pictures (which I suspect are the result of a shoddy P.S. job) , between the nozzle and the body.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Suspicion 1: The gap is too fishy, since we never notice any type of engine with a such gap to the attached body of the aircraft. If the first pic is real, then it shouldn't have the same gap like the second pic which was obviously PSed.

Suspicion 2: 科京同志 should acknowledge the second pic being PSed when he posted it, and not let someone else to point out that the pic is fake. This really hammers his own credibility.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## clarkgap

Asoka said:


> I don't know why you think "That CJDBY Gongke101 poster needs to go", but you, @Figaro, and @Deino *revere Pupu like a god*, and repeatedly referred him as a *"BIG SHRIMP"*, and think this professional rumor-monger has impeccable credential on the J-20 and WS-15.
> 
> In fact, he has never posted anything original regarding J-20, except his J-20 picture with the Taishang mountain.
> 
> I can't really understand where the exceptional reverence to *Pupu, His Holiness*, comes from.
> 
> The gaps means it is
> 
> Looks like, I am not the only one, who noticed the *large and obviously identical gaps*, in both fake pictures (which I suspect are the result of a shoddy P.S. job) , between the nozzle and the body.
> 
> View attachment 425577





Asoka said:


> I don't know why you think "That CJDBY Gongke101 poster needs to go", but you, @Figaro, and @Deino *revere Pupu like a god*, and repeatedly referred him as a *"BIG SHRIMP"*, and think this professional rumor-monger has impeccable credential on the J-20 and WS-15.
> 
> In fact, he has never posted anything original regarding J-20, except his J-20 picture with the Taishang mountain.
> 
> I can't really understand where the exceptional reverence to *Pupu, His Holiness*, comes from.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like, I am not the only one, who noticed the *large and obviously identical gaps*, in both fake pictures (which I suspect are the result of a shoddy P.S. job) , between the nozzle and the body.
> 
> View attachment 425577




The gap means it is an early testing version.


----------



## Asoka

clarkgap said:


> The gap means it is an early testing version.



*Bullcraps!
*
There are no such gaps in any J-10, J-11 (with Ws-10 or AL-31), J-20, or in any Russian, or US planes.



grey boy 2 said:


> J-20 on aircraft carrier is probably a done deal



I never have any doubts that J-20 will go onboard China's new carriers, in the near future. FC-31 is such a lame joke.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Suspicion 1: The gap is too fishy, since we never notice any type of engine with a such gap to the attached body of the aircraft. If the first pic is real, then it shouldn't have the same gap like the second pic which was obviously PSed.
> 
> Suspicion 2: 科京同志 should acknowledge the second pic being PSed when he posted it, and not let someone else to point out that the pic is fake. This really hammers his own credibility.



Very Good points!

That large gap is not found in any previous picture of any planes. The fact the second picture, (which was easily spotted as fake by @Deino, and readily concurred by @Figaro), has the same identical gap, could only prove the first picture was also a fake as well.

@Figaro has keep claiming the first picture is real, but readily admitted the second is a fake. He has steadfastly refused to explain the large gaps that are identical in both pictures, despite my repeated urgings.

"科京同志" by putting his name, on the second fake picture, has implicated himself, in this fake operation. As I have said earlier, he, either, *knows* the faker, or he *IS* the faker, himself.

If he wants retain a thread of credibility, he better explain the origin of the fake pictures, clearly and convincingly.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ozranger

clarkgap said:


> The gap means it is an early testing version.



Not sure if you guys have any experience with a photo editor application such as Photoshop. I have some experience with such applications, including Photoshop and GIMP. IMHO I'd rather erase not create such a gap in that graphical image. It is a lot *HARDER* to create the gap than erase it to make the plane look real.

The gap is not on its own deterministic to the genuity of the picture unless there is other evidence.

So far I'd like to see the gap as it looks real to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## clarkgap

Asoka said:


> *Bullcraps!
> *
> There are no such gaps in any J-10, J-11 (with Ws-10 or AL-31), J-20, or in any Russian, or US planes.
> 
> 
> 
> I never have any doubts that J-20 will go onboard China's new carriers, in the near future. FC-31 is such a lame joke.
> 
> 
> 
> Very Good points!
> 
> That large gap is not found in any previous picture of any planes. The fact the second picture, (which was easily spotted as fake by @Deino, and readily concurred by @Figaro), has the same identical gap, could only prove the first picture was also a fake as well.
> 
> @Figaro has keep claiming the first picture is real, but readily admitted the second is a fake. He has steadfastly refused to explain the large gaps that are identical in both pictures, despite my repeated urgings.
> 
> "科京同志" by putting his name, on the second fake picture, has implicated himself, in this fake operation. As I have said earlier, he, either, *knows* the faker, or he *IS* the faker, himself.
> 
> If he wants retain a thread of credibility, he better explain the origin of the fake pictures, clearly and convincingly.




Not active nor test version. I mean a "early" test version.


----------



## Asoka

clarkgap said:


> Not active nor test version. I mean a "early" test version.



You either don't know a word, of what you are talking about, or just plain B.S.ing.

Stop play word game with these words *"active"*, *"test version"* or *"early test version"*.

Show me a previous picture of J-10, J-11, J-20, or any plane, that have such large gaps, near the nozzle. 

And you have proven your point.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> *"IMO, the photo is clearly real and does not reveal any PS" @Figaro*
> 
> What evidence you got support that is a real, and does not reveal any P.S. You go
> 
> 
> Asoka said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Bullcraps!
> *
> There are no such gaps in any J-10, J-11 (with Ws-10 or AL-31), J-20, or in any Russian, or US planes.
> 
> 
> 
> I never have any doubts that J-20 will go onboard China's new carriers, in the near future. FC-31 is such a lame joke.
> 
> 
> 
> Very Good points!
> 
> That large gap is not found in any previous picture of any planes. The fact the second picture, (which was easily spotted as fake by @Deino, and readily concurred by @Figaro), has the same identical gap, could only prove the first picture was also a fake as well.
> 
> @Figaro has keep claiming the first picture is real, but readily admitted the second is a fake. He has steadfastly refused to explain the large gaps that are identical in both pictures, despite my repeated urgings.
> 
> "科京同志" by putting his name, on the second fake picture, has implicated himself, in this fake operation. As I have said earlier, he, either, *knows* the faker, or he *IS* the faker, himself.
> 
> If he wants retain a thread of credibility, he better explain the origin of the fake pictures, clearly and convincingly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> t no evidence.
> 
> At first, you claim it is impossible to fake it, now you admit, both pictures are identically faked.
Click to expand...

Once again, believe what you want. Since we disagree, we'll just have to wait for pictures of the alleged 2021. There's no point in derailing the thread with useless back and forth arguments. If you insist, we can talk it over in the J-20 "endless engine saga" thread ... @Asoka



clarkgap said:


> The gap means it is an early testing version.


I really don't think so ...


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> Once again, believe what you want. Since we disagree, we'll just have to wait for pictures of the alleged 2021. There's no point in derailing the thread with useless back and forth arguments. If you insist, we can talk it over in the J-20 "endless engine saga" thread ... @Asoka
> 
> 
> I really don't think so ...




*"we'll just have to wait for pictures of the alleged 2021."*

Don't you remember what @Deino has said about this version 2021? It a fake P.S. picture. You have readily concurred it's fake.

You, suddenly, got a case of amnesia, @Figaro?
And now you want to wait more pictures to prove 2021 is not a fake?

I suggest you go back and read what the sharp eyed, Deino, has posted in page 623, and read what you have said.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chengdu-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-news-discussions.111471/page-623

I bet if the first picture also showed the whole plane, instead of just the nozzle, Deino, could also easily spotted its a fake.

And there won't be all those drama in the last two weeks.

*"If you insist, we can talk it over in the J-20 "endless engine saga" thread ... @Asoka"*

Did you also forgot that Deino has changed this thread's name, and has already celebrate the triumph of his Russian AL-31 theory, with his countless Victory Laps?

"*The J-20-engine discussion is over ... to separate from the J-20-news !"*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> *"we'll just have to wait for pictures of the alleged 2021."*
> 
> Don't you remember what @Deino has said about this version 2021? It a fake P.S. picture. You have readily concurred it's fake.
> 
> You, suddenly, got a case of amnesia, @Figaro?
> And now you want to wait more pictures to prove 2021 is not a fake?
> 
> I suggest you go back and read what the sharp eyed, Deino, has posted in page 623, and read what you have said.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chengdu-j-20-5th-generation-aircraft-news-discussions.111471/page-623
> 
> I bet if the first picture also showed the whole plane, instead of just the nozzle, Deino, could also easily spotted its a fake.
> 
> And there won't be all those drama in the last two weeks.


Why are you so insistent and stubborn 
This one is the fake ... the user simply cut and pasted the WS-10X onto a 2011 prototype and adjusted the numbers. The original WS-10X photo was real however IMO

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> Why are you so insistent and stubborn
> This one is the fake ... the user simply cut and pasted the WS-10X onto a 2011 prototype and adjusted the numbers. The original WS-10X photo was real however IMO



*"Why are you so insistent and stubborn?

This one is the fake ... the user simply cut and pasted the WS-10X onto a 2011 prototype and adjusted the numbers. The original WS-10X photo was real however IMO"*

So I am now officially "*insistent and stubborn"* because I keep pointing out, the inconvenient fact, that both "fake" and "real" pictures has the same identical large gap, that is the sign of a shoddy P.S. job, by * "an idiot with too much time and not enough talent"

"The original WS-10X photo was real however IMO"
*
You have absolutely no evidence to back up this ridiculous statement. 

*BOTH ARE FAKES. AND THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY FAKED, BY THE SAME FAKER, WITH LITTLE TALENT.
*
You keep refusing to explain, why is there such gap in the first picture.

Lets be honest, here. With every passing moment of refusal to explain this gap, your credibility is keep going down.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Usually, the first blurred pic got leaked, we shall see the pics with the higher definition very soon. The other iconic weapons like the Type 052D and Type 055 all followed this kind of pattern.

But this time, we only got the first blurred pic, then the second one has already been debunked as fake.

If we haven't seen anything so far about the prototype 2021 in a real high definition pic, I will start to determine that the whole thing from the last few weeks was just a baloney.



Asoka said:


> *"Why are you so insistent and stubborn?
> 
> This one is the fake ... the user simply cut and pasted the WS-10X onto a 2011 prototype and adjusted the numbers. The original WS-10X photo was real however IMO"*
> 
> So I am now officially "*insistent and stubborn"* because I keep pointing out, the inconvenient fact, that both "fake" and "real" pictures has the same identical large gap, that is the sign of a shoddy P.S. job, by * "an idiot with too much time and not enough talent"
> *
> You keep refusing to explain, why is there such gap in the first picture.
> 
> Lets be honest, here. With every passing moment of refusal to explain this gap, your credibility is keep going down.



I think @Figaro is a nice person, let's not to act too harsh with him.

We shall be more patient, and wait to see if the prototype 2021 does really exist.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Usually, the first blurred pic got leaked, we shall see the pics with the higher definition very soon. The other iconic weapons like the Type 052D and Type 055 all followed this kind of pattern.
> 
> But this time, we only got the first blurred pic, then the second one has already been debunked as fake.
> 
> If we haven't seen anything so far about the prototype 2021, I will start to determine that the whole thing from the last few weeks was a baloney.
> 
> 
> 
> I think @Figaro is a nice person, let's not to act too harsh with him.
> 
> We shall be more patient, and wait to see if the prototype 2021 does really exist.



*"If we haven't seen anything so far about the prototype 2021, I will start to determine that the whole thing from the last few weeks was a baloney."*

*"We shall be more patient, and wait to see if the prototype 2021 does really exist."*


What?!!!

You don't trust Deino's words that protype 2021 is entirely fake?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Usually, the first blurred pic got leaked, we shall see the pics with the higher definition very soon. The other iconic weapons like the Type 052D and Type 055 all followed this kind of pattern.
> 
> But this time, we only got the first blurred pic, then the second one has already been debunked as fake.
> 
> If we haven't seen anything so far about the prototype 2021 in a real high definition pic, I will start to determine that the whole thing from the last few weeks was just a baloney.
> 
> 
> 
> I think @Figaro is a nice person, let's not to act too harsh with him.
> 
> We shall be more patient, and wait to see if the prototype 2021 does really exist.


As was I saying, let's wait for the actual 2021 LRIP instead of further derailing the thread. There is a reason why @Deino created the endless engine saga thread in the first place

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> *"If we haven't seen anything so far about the prototype 2021, I will start to determine that the whole thing from the last few weeks was a baloney."*
> 
> What?!!!
> 
> You don't trust Deino?



I want to convince people with the factual evidence.

If @Deino can provide everything that convinces me, then I will kindly accept his statement.

For now, we are all waiting for the supposed maiden flight of the prototype 2021.

Otherwise, everything from the last few weeks will just get discarded.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> As was I saying, let's wait for the actual 2021 LRIP instead of further derailing the thread. There is a reason why @Deino created the endless engine saga thread in the first place



The name of that thread is already changed by Deino. I don't know why you and Figaro keep insisting on using the old name.

"*The J-20-engine discussion is over ... to separate from the J-20-news !"

"For now, we all wait for the supposed maiden flight of the prototype 2021."
*
There is no such "prototype 2021". It's a fake. Trust Deino on this. I do.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> The name of that thread is already changed by Deino. I don't know why you and Figaro keep insisting on using the old name.
> 
> "*The J-20-engine discussion is over ... to separate from the J-20-news !"
> 
> "For now, we all wait for the supposed maiden flight of the prototype 2021."
> *
> There is no such "prototype 2021". It's a fake. Trust Deino on this. I do.


@Deino said there was no 2021 prototype? What??? Where did he say that? All I know is that he pointed out that the PSed 2021 (aka 2011) was faked ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> The name of that thread is already changed by Deino. I don't know why you and Figaro keep insisting on using the old name.
> 
> "*The J-20-engine discussion is over ... to separate from the J-20-news !"*



The engine debate of the J-20 is far from being over, so it is by far more thrilling than the US election.

I reckon there will likely have more coming surprises, consider that CCTV-4 really doesn't like the CD forum and many other big shrimps. The PLAAF expert has made a lot of insinuation against the credibility of the CD forum and many other online big shrimps.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The engine debate of the J-20 is far from being over, so it is by far more thrilling than the US election.
> 
> I reckon there will likely have more coming surprises, consider that CCTV-4 really doesn't like the CD forum and many other big shrimps. The PLAAF expert has made a lot insinuation against the credibility of the CD forum and many other online big shrimps.


The US election was not thrilling at all ... it was an election between two horrible candidates. I couldn't care less who would win ... although Trump did surprise me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> The US election was not thrilling at all ... it was an election between two horrible candidates. I couldn't care less who would win ... although Trump did surprise me.



Now it is the growing rivalry between the Meyet forum & CCTV-4 and the CD forum/several online big shrimps.

The Meyet forum is the first Chinese online community that insists the J-20 used the WS-10X in its prototypes, then equip with the WS-15. The CCTV-4 first suggested the WS-10X, now they are also leaning toward the WS-15.

We might figure out who will become the ultimate winner after more classified information from the J-20 being unveiled.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Now it is the growing rivalry between the Meyet forum & CCTV-4 and the CD forum/several online big shrimps.
> 
> The Meyet forum is the first Chinese online community that insists the J-20 used the WS-10X in its prototypes, then equip with the WS-15. The CCTV-4 first suggested the WS-10X, now they are also leaning toward the WS-15.
> 
> We might figure out who will become the ultimate winner after more classified information from the J-20 being unveiled.


Can you link me the Meyet forum ... thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> Can you link me the Meyet forum ... thanks.



http://bbs.meyet.com/forum-24-1.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## terranMarine

Figaro said:


> Can you link me the Meyet forum ... thanks.


 i thought you said you couldn't read chinese


----------



## Figaro

terranMarine said:


> i thought you said you couldn't read chinese


There's something called Bing Translate

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> @Deino said there was no 2021 prototype? What??? Where did he say that? All I know is that he pointed out that the PSed 2021 (aka 2011) was faked ...



Fake picture means very likely there is no such plane. At least, no one has previously mentioned there is such version.

Your logical brain is not working again @Figaro?



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The engine debate of the J-20 is far from being over, so it is by far more thrilling than the US election.
> 
> I reckon there will likely have more coming surprises, consider that CCTV-4 really doesn't like the CD forum and many other big shrimps. The PLAAF expert has made a lot of insinuation against the credibility of the CD forum and many other online big shrimps.



*"The engine debate of the J-20 is far from being over"*

So you don't think Deino was right? and that his Victory Celebration might be a little premature?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> Fake picture means very likely there is no such plane. At least, no one has previously mentioned there is such version.
> 
> Your logical brain is not working again @Figaro?



I think we should refrain to use more harsh words.

We might soon discover what kind of engine the J-20 is really using.

BTW, @Figaro is not stubborn like those zealous fanboys from the CD forum.

If the J-20 is truly proven with the WS-15, then I am pretty sure he will gladly accept it.



Asoka said:


> *"The engine debate of the J-20 is far from being over"*
> 
> So you don't think Deino was right? and that his Victory Celebration might be a little premature?



Yes, that victory celebration was too premature.

The CD forum members usually loved to attack the credibility of the CCTV-4 or even the entire CCTV network.

However, in this time, the CCTV-4 is also indirectly attacking the credibility of the CD forum and their online big shrimps.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Asoka

*"The Meyet forum is the first Chinese online community that insists the J-20 used the WS-10X in its prototypes, then equip with the WS-15. The CCTV-4 first suggested the WS-10X, now they are also leaning toward the WS-15."*

I will trust Meyet over any other sources. It's founder, "Douhou" has impeccable judgment and excellent technical abilities to analysis the issues.

I have made the same assertion that J-20, from day one, was flying with a prototype of Ws-15, with a WS-15 core wrapped around with some WS-10 and AL-31 technologies. And since 2014, it's been flying with a matured WS-15 engine with 3D TVC nozzles, and has, at least, *210kN max. thrust, *in the same class as F-35's F135 engine.

This matured WS-15 engine, incredibly, is both lighter and shorter, but more powerful than WS-10 and AL-31. It uses the splitter vanes technologies pioneered by the American, A. J. Wennerstrom.

http://bbs.meyet.com/thread-505445-1-1.html

*"航空发动机压气机大小叶片技术，能够缩短核心机长度，减少零件数量，减轻发动机重量。*

1、在推重比8一级的发动机中，用单级压比3-3.5的高负荷风扇，替换3级常规风扇，轴向长度减少30-50%，重量减轻30-60%。

2、在推重比10一级的发动机中，完成了详细设计计算。计算表明，应用3级大小叶片的核心压气机将比现在6级高压压气机, *轴向尺寸减少30-40%，重量减轻30-40%，零件数减少20-30%*，设计点效率提高1%。"

*"BTW, @Figaro is not stubborn, like those zealous fanboys, from the CD forum."*

He has some logical issues that are baffling to me.

*"Yes, that victory celebration was too premature."*

Seems like, @Figaro, thinks so too. Right, Figaro? He has referred that thread with the old name.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## terranMarine

Figaro said:


> There's something called Bing Translate


well many speak in codes in those discussions, i don't think any translator will be helpful

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## kuge

terranMarine said:


> well many speak in codes in those discussions, i don't think any translator will be helpful


please provide the link anyway..thanks

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## terranMarine

kuge said:


> please provide the link anyway..thanks


Tiger just did

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> *"The Meyet forum is the first Chinese online community that insists the J-20 used the WS-10X in its prototypes, then equip with the WS-15. The CCTV-4 first suggested the WS-10X, now they are also leaning toward the WS-15."*
> 
> I will trust Meyet over any other sources. It's founder, "Douhou" has impeccable judgment and excellent technical abilities to analysis the issues.
> 
> I have made the same assertion that J-20, from day one, was flying with a prototype of Ws-15, with a WS-15 core wrapped around with some WS-10 and AL-31 technologies. And since 2014, it's been flying with a matured WS-15 engine with 3D TVC nozzles, and has, at least, *210kN max. thrust, *in the same class as F-35's F135 engine.
> 
> *"BTW, @Figaro is not stubborn, like those zealous fanboys, from the CD forum."*
> 
> He has some logical issues that are baffling to me.
> 
> *"Yes, that victory celebration was too premature."*
> 
> Seems like, @Figaro, thinks so too. Right, Figaro? He has referred that thread with the old name.



I am pretty sure that the CCTV-4 is already getting fed up with the CD forum and their online big shrimps.

No wonder they also keep insisting that the J-20 has already used the domestic engine.

Nobody else can convince the CD members that the J-20 is using the WS-15, unless it is the online big shrimps from the CD forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I am pretty sure that the CCTV-4 is already getting fed up with the CD forum and their online big shrimps.
> 
> No wonder they also keep insisting that the J-20 has already used the domestic engine.
> 
> Nobody else can convince the CD members that the J-20 is using the WS-15, unless it is the online big shrimps from the CD forum.




CD is a nest of anti-china posters. CD got shutdown for several days, couple weeks ago. Anybody knows why?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

Asoka said:


> *"The Meyet forum is the first Chinese online community that insists the J-20 used the WS-10X in its prototypes, then equip with the WS-15. The CCTV-4 first suggested the WS-10X, now they are also leaning toward the WS-15."*
> 
> I will trust Meyet over any other sources. It's founder, "Douhou" has impeccable judgment and excellent technical abilities to analysis the issues.
> 
> I have made the same assertion that J-20, from day one, was flying with a prototype of Ws-15, with a WS-15 core wrapped around with some WS-10 and AL-31 technologies. And since 2014, it's been flying with a matured WS-15 engine with 3D TVC nozzles, and has, at least, *210kN max. thrust, *in the same class as F-35's F135 engine.
> 
> *"BTW, @Figaro is not stubborn, like those zealous fanboys, from the CD forum."*
> 
> He has some logical issues that are baffling to me.
> 
> *"Yes, that victory celebration was too premature."*
> 
> Seems like, @Figaro, thinks so too. Right, Figaro? He has referred that thread with the old name.




You are out of touch with reality if you think the WS-15 will achieve 210kn thrust. The F-135 achieves 190kn and China is years behind in engine technology compared with the US. FYI, the F-135 high trust is in large part due to its size, there is no way a smaller WS-15 is able to create more thrust then a larger F-135.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

ptldM3 said:


> You are out of touch with reality if you think the WS-15 will achieve 210kn thrust. The F-135 achieves 190kn and China is years behind in engine technology compared with the US. FYI, the F-135 high trust is in large part due to its size, there is no way a smaller WS-15 is able to create more thrust then a larger F-135.


@Asoka is a bit too optimistic with his projections ... there's no use in countering his opinion. He consistently maintains that the WS-15 has a thrust of at least 210kN (probably more) and features 3D thrust vectoring ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> @Asoka is a bit too optimistic with his projections ... there's no use in countering his opinion. He consistently maintains that the WS-15 has a thrust of at least 210kN (probably more) and features 3D thrust vectoring ...



Yes, I did. And I still do, Sir.

*@Asoka is a bit too optimistic with his projections.*

210kN is actually a conservative figure, which was reached by the F135 engine, back in the early 1990's. The P&W website listed F135 as a 190kN class engine, not its actual thrust figure. No need to be totally honest, here. Just a ball park figure.

If they have *understated* its thrust by just 10%, that would put its actual thrust over 210kN.

No doubt, the Americans have more powerful engines (TWR 12-15) for their 6-Gen. fighter by now.

I am afraid to reveal the max. Thrust figure, that is actually in my mind. I have already been warned, privately, and for several times, not to reveal too much details of current Chinese Aviation technologies to Westerners.

I don't want to get in trouble with the Chinese State Security. It takes nothing to find out who I am.

It is no secret that the Chinese Internet is extensively policed by the Chinese Government.

There is no doubt, that they are also monitoring closely, all the International Internet Forums, including PDF, SDF and many others, frequented by the Chinese users, to prevent leaking of state secrets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

Figaro said:


> @Asoka is a bit too optimistic with his projections ... there's no use in countering his opinion. He consistently maintains that the WS-15 has a thrust of at least 210kN (probably more) and features 3D thrust vectoring ...




Well he also didn't know what vertical stabilizers were and he was in awe when he seen the J-20 turn using vertical stabilizers. The F-135 is a completely different class of engines then the WS-15 or AL-31. The F-135 is a very heavy class engine which reflects its high trust output. Anyone claiming an engine the size of a WS-15 is able to produce 210kn thrust is a fanboy.

He is basically claiming the WS-15 is far superior to the F-135 because he is claiming it produces considerably more thrust while being smaller.



Asoka said:


> Yes, I did. And I still do, Sir.
> 
> I am afraid to state the max. Thrust figure, that is actually in my mind. *I have already been warned, privately, and for several times, not to reveal too much details of current Chinese Aviation *technologies to Westerners.
> 
> I don't want to get in trouble with the Chinese State Security. It takes nothing to find out who I am.
> 
> It is no secret that the Chinese Internet is extensively policed by the Chinese Government.
> 
> There is no doubt, that they are also monitoring closely the Internet Forums, frequented by the Chinese users.




You didn't even know what vertical stabilizers did.  you are a fraud.

You know nothing about engines or aviation in general, you have been exposed and I can easily expose you even more.


----------



## Figaro

ptldM3 said:


> Well he also didn't know what vertical stabilizers were and he was in awe when he seen the J-20 turn using vertical stabilizers. The F-135 is a completely different class of engines then the WS-15 or AL-31. The F-135 is a very heavy class engine which reflects its high trust output. Anyone claiming an engine the size of a WS-15 is able to produce 210kn thrust is a fanboy.
> 
> He is basically claiming the WS-15 is far superior to the F-135 because he is claiming it produces considerably more thrust while being smaller.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't even know what vertical stabilizers did.  you are a fraud.
> 
> You know nothing about engines or aviation in general, you have been exposed and I can easily expose you even more.


To be fair, we do not have any measurements of the WS-15. Hence, we cannot come to the conclusion of its weight or size.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Asoka said:


> CD is a nest of anti-china posters. CD got shutdown for several days, couple weeks ago. Anybody knows why?



Meyet = The Young Turks
CCTV = The Establishment
CD = Breitbart 

Yes, the CD forum is the Breitbart in the world of the Chinese military forum, they got a niche but loyal and stubborn audience base. However, they really need to put their bread and butter on the table AKA the prototype 2021. Otherwise, they risk to completely alienate themselves from the rest of the Chinese military online community. The CCTV expert is already labelling those online reports surrounding the so-called prototype 2021 as the fake news. They are going to get completely thrashed by their opponents.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> To be fair, we do not have any measurements of the WS-15. Hence, we cannot come to the conclusion of its weight or size.



If you could use Bing Translation to read this page http://bbs.meyet.com/thread-505445-1-1.html

And look up *A. J. Wennerstrom and G. R. Frost and "splitter vanes*", then you will get a better idea of what I am talking about.

"*轴向尺寸减少30-40%，重量减轻30-40%，零件数减少20-30%*，"

Using the Splitter Vanes technology to reduce the *engine length by 30-40%*, reduce its *weight by 30-40%*, and reduce the number of *components by 20-30%,* is a big big deal by itself.

I have never heard any other technologies, making this kind of impact on performance, in Aviation engine technology.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Meyet = The Young Turks
> CCTV = The Establishment
> CD = Breitbart
> 
> Yes, the CD forum is the Breitbart in the world of the Chinese military forum, they got a niche but loyal and stubborn audience base. However, they really need to put their bread and butter on the table AKA the prototype 2021. Otherwise, they risk to completely alienate themselves from the rest of the Chinese military online community. The CCTV expert is already labelling those online reports surrounding the so-called prototype 2021 as the fake news. They are going to get completely thrashed by their opponents.



Calling CD a fake news site and a nest of anti-China posters, is a good one. That serves them right. The owner of this site, should be hauled by the Chinese State Security, for a good talk.

I am sure any type of anti-china activities is frowned upon. There is no Freedom of Speech when it comes to anti-china activities.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## gambit

Asoka said:


> I am afraid to reveal the max. Thrust figure, that is actually in my mind. *I have already been warned, privately*, and for several times, not to reveal too much details of current Chinese Aviation technologies to Westerners.
> 
> I don't want to get in trouble with the Chinese State Security. It takes nothing to find out who I am.


Give us all a break...You are a nobody...You know nothing about anything relating to the Chinese military...

We got us another Marty, here. Two Walter Mittys. This is pathetic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jkroo

LMAO in the J20 thread.

Hey, @Asoka @ChineseTiger1986 you guys are just too nice to be acceptable. lol

@Asoka bro, I support you for the issue and the continuous prooves out there for years.

1. prototype in Jiang era.

2. the different sound of the engine several years ago.

3. the reports of the material stuff of the blade in recent years.

4. the province level report of J20 in recent years (shanxi and liaoning).

5. the open report of J11B production line including the WS10 engine.

6. the caculations of vertical climb of J20 in Zhuhai has been discussed again and agian in domestic forums.

Just keep it up with your rational arguments. We need your different opinions as the rumor mill of J20 has been built here. Yeah, most discussions are based at rumors and pictures. I bet you have many chances to slapping faces. lol. It is very strange to me that some people are so sure for the information that he concluded himself without official claim of China and be so exclusive to different opinions.

Let's wait and see. Good luck and have fun.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

jkroo said:


> LMAO in the J20 thread.
> 
> Hey, @Asoka @ChineseTiger1986 you guys are just too nice to be acceptable. lol
> 
> @Asoka bro, I support you for the issue and the continuous prooves out there for years.
> 
> 1. prototype in Jiang era.
> 
> 2. the different sound of the engine several years ago.
> 
> 3. the reports of the material stuff of the blade in recent years.
> 
> 4. the province level report of J20 in recent years (shanxi and liaoning).
> 
> 5. the open report of J11B production line including the WS10 engine.
> 
> 6. the caculations of vertical climb of J20 in Zhuhai has been discussed again and agian in domestic forums.
> 
> Just keep it up with your rational arguments. We need your different opinions as the rumor mill of J20 has been built here. Yeah, most discussions are based at rumors and pictures. I bet you have many chances to slapping faces. lol. It is very strange to me that some people are so sure for the information that he concluded himself without official claim of China and be so exclusive to different opinions.
> 
> Let's wait and see. Good luck and have fun.



I am not a staunch WS-15 supporter like @Asoka.

However, something is fishy with the so-called prototype 2021. If they still cannot show us any sign of the prototype 2021, then it is most likely phony, since the CD forum also got a record of manufacturing the fake news.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

jkroo said:


> LMAO in the J20 thread.
> 
> Hey, @Asoka @ChineseTiger1986 you guys are just too nice to be acceptable. lol
> 
> @Asoka bro, I support you for the issue and the continuous prooves out there for years.
> 
> 1. prototype in Jiang era.
> 
> 2. the different sound of the engine several years ago.
> 
> 3. the reports of the material stuff of the blade in recent years.
> 
> 4. the province level report of J20 in recent years (shanxi and liaoning).
> 
> 5. the open report of J11B production line including the WS10 engine.
> 
> 6. the caculations of vertical climb of J20 in Zhuhai has been discussed again and agian in domestic forums.
> 
> Just keep it up with your rational arguments. We need your different opinions as the rumor mill of J20 has been built here. Yeah, most discussions are based at rumors and pictures. I bet you have many chances to slapping faces. lol. It is very strange to me that some people are so sure for the information that he concluded himself without official claim of China and be so exclusive to different opinions.
> 
> Let's wait and see. Good luck and have fun.



Thanks Bro, for your excellent moral support.  There is no way a "low" thrust engine like WS-10 or AL-31 could do what we have seen in J-20.

Until Just two weeks ago, there was no even a fake picture of WS-10 associated with J-20. No WS-10 supporters have even claimed the the J-20 nozzle resemble the WS-10's nozzles, unlike the AL-31 supporters, such as our excellent Mr. @Deino, who made many nozzle comparisons.

I even think these fake WS-10 pictures might have something to do with me, because I have, repeatedly, laugh about this utterly lack of nozzle resemblance. And then these fake pictures, suddenly showed up. 

I know many Chinese fan-boys follows PDF and SDF and other foreign forums, extensively, so I won't be surprised they took my ridicules seriously, and manufactured these laughable "evidences".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

May I ask You to continue This J-20-related engine stuff in the correct thread? We have a dedicated thread for this to keep the other topics clean.

Deino from France

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> May I ask You to continue This J-20-related engine stuff in the correct thread? We have a dedicated thread for this to keep the other topics clean.
> 
> Deino from France


There's an endless saga thread for a reason 



Asoka said:


> Thanks Bro, for your excellent moral support.  There is no way a "low" thrust engine like WS-10 or AL-31 could do what we have seen in J-20.
> 
> Until Just two weeks ago, there was no even a fake picture of WS-10 associated with J-20. No WS-10 supporters have even claimed the the J-20 nozzle resemble the WS-10's nozzles, unlike the AL-31 supporters, such as our excellent Mr. @Deino, who made many nozzle comparisons.
> 
> I even think these fake WS-10 pictures might have something to do with me, because I have, repeatedly, laugh about this utterly lack of nozzle resemblance. And then these fake pictures, suddenly showed up. I know many Chinese fan-boys follows PDF and SDF and other foreign forums, extensively, so I won't be surprised they took my ridicules seriously, and manufactured these laughable "evidences".


Asoka please continue your discussion in the endless engine saga thread ... you keep derailing the thread for whatever reason


----------



## jkroo

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I am not a staunch WS-15 supporter like @Asoka.
> 
> However, something is fishy with the so-called prototype 2021. If they still cannot show us any sign of the prototype 2021, then it is most likely phony, since the CD forum also got a record of manufacturing the fake news.



It's ok tiger. Just forget about 2021 and 奶大. lol

Maybe the time you witness WS15 is the type B. lol

Take it easy and just have fun.

@Asoka

Take it easy, bro. There's no official claim for the engine of J20 so everyone could be right for a certain degree.

Just forget those 'trick' thing and be yourself. It's a 江湖 lol.

Even at this time I can partially confirm that you are right for something. lol

I just want to suggest you that you should fiercely fight back when you get the correct information except the critical data which I think you have never have the chance to get in touch with these things. lol

Join the party and have fun. 

Have a good day.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

jkroo said:


> It's ok tiger. Just forget about 2021 and 奶大. lol
> 
> Maybe the time you witness WS15 is the type B. lol
> 
> Take it easy and just have fun.
> 
> @Asoka
> 
> Take it easy, bro. There's no official claim for the engine of J20 so everyone could be right for a certain degree.
> 
> Just forget those 'trick' thing and be yourself. It's a 江湖 lol.
> 
> Even at this time I can partially confirm that you are right for something. lol
> 
> I just want to suggest you that you should fiercely fight back when you get the correct information except the critical data which I think you have never have the chance to get in touch with these things. lol
> 
> Join the party and have fun.
> 
> Have a good day.



I am thinking about the current J-20 using the 155KN WS-10G with a TWR of 9.

This kinda matches the information given by the rear admiral Yin Zhuo and senior colonel Chen Hong.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I am thinking about the current J-20 using the 155KN WS-10G with a TWR of 9.
> 
> This kinda matches the information given by the rear admiral Yin Zhuo and senior colonel Chen Hong.


Or the newly mentioned WS-10C. But the WS-10B with a TWR of over 8 is still pretty good and not underpowered

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> Or the newly mentioned WS-10C. But the WS-10B with a TWR of over 8 is still pretty good and not underpowered



Regardless about the name, I think this engine has to be intermediate between the WS-10 and WS-15.

The 140KN figure maybe is really underpowered for the current J-20 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UKBengali

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I am thinking about the current J-20 using the 155KN WS-10G with a TWR of 9.
> 
> This kinda matches the information given by the rear admiral Yin Zhuo and senior colonel Chen Hong.



This is the most likely explanation.

This is a special version with uprated thrust and lower life expectancy.

I have been arguing this theory all along.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

UKBengali said:


> This is the most likely explanation.
> 
> This is a special version with uprated thrust and lower life expectancy.
> 
> I have been arguing this theory all along.



And we don't need to wait any other WS-10X, the next step is the WS-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UKBengali

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> And we don't need to wait any other WS-10X, the next step is the WS-15.



The current engine allows supercruise in low Mach 1 speeds, while WS-15 will allow supercruise at high Mach 1 speeds.
I always thought the idea of China using AL-31 in J-20 completely and utterly ridiculous. By the time that J-20 had flown in 2011, WS-10A was mature enough to be powering dozens of J-11 fighters. As the J-20 uses twin engines, then this would have minimised the risk of aircraft loss should an engine fail.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jkroo

@ChineseTiger1986

I know that, bro. But one thing is for sure that they usually don't release any correct informatioin without permission and even with the permission sometimes the time frame is amended. lol

Did you ever know anything about DF26 before the parade? We need some more patience but I think the result always be optimistic.

I have the feeling that the WS-15's core was ready for some years. Mass production? We need more clue about the production quantities of the super alloy. Not sure for now.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

@Deino 

*"You are crazy and desperate. Seems indeed as if your son is robbing you too much sleep so that you cannot think clearly anymore."*

LOL. You and @Figaro, are the one, who restarted this debate again. I was just busy taking care of my new born son, playing my toddler daughter and cooking for my wife, then you posted this new fake picture of J-20 with the supposed WS-10, and pointed them they are fake.

And Figaro, quickly seconded your judgement, with his expert opinion. 

I would not have giving them a second look, if not for the opinions of these dynamic duo.

I merely blow up the second fake picture, and notice it was faked exactly the same way as the first one, with the same *big glaring gap* at the nozzles. 

It's same WS-10 nozzle picture, copy and pasted over two different J-20 pictures. This fakery is most likely done by the same Faker.










*"The debate is over. All use an AL-31 of some sort and the WS-10B will be used soon. The first image is real and no debate necessary to argue. There is also no WS-15 for years to come .... Just leave that BS."*

*"The debate is over."*

Figaro would be disagreed, with the Excellent Mr. Deino, on this one.

"*All use an AL-31 of some sort and the WS-10B will be used soon. The first image is real and no debate necessary to argue."
*
What's the matter, Deino? You are having some regret or remorse about helping blown this whole* fakery* apart?

I give all credits to Deino and Figaro for blowing these fake WS-10 engine pictures apart.

I am going to nominate Deino and Figaro for the title of *Man of the Hour*, *Hero of Our Times*.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## terranMarine

jkroo said:


> @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> I know that, bro. But one thing is for sure that they usually don't release any correct informatioin without permission and even with the permission sometimes the time frame is amended. lol
> 
> Did you ever know anything about DF26 before the parade? We need some more patience but I think the result always be optimistic.
> 
> I have the feeling that the WS-15's core was ready for some years. Mass production? We need more clue about the production quantities of the super alloy. Not sure for now.



Just as DF-31AG came out of nowhere

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

jkroo said:


> @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> I know that, bro. But one thing is for sure that they usually don't release any correct informatioin without permission and even with the permission sometimes the time frame is amended. lol
> 
> Did you ever know anything about DF26 before the parade? We need some more patience but I think the result always be optimistic.
> 
> I have the feeling that the WS-15's core was ready for some years. Mass production? We need more clue about the production quantities of the super alloy. Not sure for now.


Now we're waiting for the the finalization of the WS-15 to be put on J-20

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

UKBengali said:


> The current engine allows supercruise in low Mach 1 speeds, while WS-15 will allow supercruise at high Mach 1 speeds.
> I always thought the idea of China using AL-31 in J-20 completely and utterly ridiculous. By the time that J-20 had flown in 2011, WS-10A was mature enough to be powering dozens of J-11 fighters. As the J-20 uses twin engines, then this would have minimised the risk of aircraft loss should an engine fail.



Yep, China has made a lot of examples of the powerful intermediate version between two generations.

Just look at the DF-31AG, a powerful intermediate version between the DF-31/DF-31A and the DF-41. Nobody would know it if it wasn't revealed during the parade. The Type 093B is just another intermediate version between the Type 093 and the Type 095.

The current WS-10G allows the J-20 to supercruise between Mach 1.2-1.3, while the WS-15 in the near future will allow it to supercruise between Mach 1.7-1.8.



jkroo said:


> @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> I know that, bro. But one thing is for sure that they usually don't release any correct informatioin without permission and even with the permission sometimes the time frame is amended. lol
> 
> Did you ever know anything about DF26 before the parade? We need some more patience but I think the result always be optimistic.
> 
> I have the feeling that the WS-15's core was ready for some years. Mass production? We need more clue about the production quantities of the super alloy. Not sure for now.



I know we can't neglect the possibility of the WS-15.

Most Chinese military fans are still conservative by nature, including myself, we just won't act like some mindless fanboys. However, keep insisting the J-20 being powered by the AL-31 is also beyond the comprehension and tolerance of the conservative Chinese military fans. Therefore, I doubt those Chinese speaking chatbots from the CD forum are even Chinese.

If the J-20 being currently powered by the WS-15 is definitely the best scenario. Otherwise, we can still wait the WS-15 to power the J-20 in the near future.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## terranMarine

@ChineseTiger1986 yup, until then it all about speculations. No need to take theories all too serious or pressing others to believe it. The day it is officially revealed then we know it for sure.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> @Deino
> 
> *"You are crazy and desperate. Seems indeed as if your son is robbing you too much sleep so that you cannot think clearly anymore."*
> 
> LOL. You and @Figaro, are the one, who restarted this debate again. I was just busy taking care of my new born son, playing my toddler daughter and cooking for my wife, then you posted this new fake picture of J-20 with the supposed WS-10, and pointed them they are fake.
> 
> And Figaro, quickly seconded your judgement, with his expert opinion.
> 
> I would not have giving them a second look, if not for the opinions of these dynamic duo.
> 
> I merely blow up the second fake picture, and notice it was faked exactly the same way as the first one, with the same *big glaring gap* at the nozzles.
> 
> It's same WS-10 nozzle picture, copy and pasted over two different J-20 pictures. This fakery is most likely done by the same Faker.
> 
> 
> View attachment 425804
> View attachment 425805
> 
> *"The debate is over. All use an AL-31 of some sort and the WS-10B will be used soon. The first image is real and no debate necessary to argue. There is also no WS-15 for years to come .... Just leave that BS."*
> 
> *"The debate is over."*
> 
> Figaro would be disagreed, with the Excellent Mr. Deino, on this one.
> 
> "*All use an AL-31 of some sort and the WS-10B will be used soon. The first image is real and no debate necessary to argue."
> *
> What's the matter, Deino? You are having some regret or remorse about helping blown this whole* fakery* apart?
> 
> I give all credits to Deino and Figaro for blowing these fake WS-10 engine pictures apart.
> 
> I am going to nominate Deino and Figaro for the title of *Man of the Hour*, *Hero of Our Times*.




Not sure why that BS again. I did not say it is a faked image. The yellow bird is real. What is so difficult to understand ??

Anyway just be patient and we will see 2021 ...


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Not sure why that BS again. I did not say it is a faked image. The yellow bird is real. What is so difficult to understand ??
> 
> Anyway just be patient and we will see 2021 ...




*"I did not say it is a faked image. The yellow bird is real."*

Yes, you did not say the first or yellow bird is fake. You said the second one is fake. I just connected the dots, and noticed that both are faked the exactly the same way, possibly by the same faker, *"an idiot who have too much time, but not enough talents"*, as you have memorably pointed out.

Good Work, Deino!
*
"Anyway just be patient and we will see 2021 .."*

Version 2021 is fake, as you have pointed out. And most likely non-existent.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> ..
> 
> Version 2021 is fake, as you have pointed out. And most likely non-existent.



I did not and I do not know how often to repeat. That yellow bird is real. Period.

You see things were no things are.

Don't make yourself a fool a second time.

Deino


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> I did not and I do not know how often to repeat. That yellow bird is real. Period.
> 
> You see things were no things are.
> 
> Don't make yourself a fool a second time.
> 
> Deino




I beg to disagree. Both are totally fake. By the same Faker.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> I beg to disagree. Both are totally fake. By the same Faker.




Again only a desperate theory as illusional like your failed WS-15... No proof, nothing. 

But anyone is allowed to have its own opinion even a wrong one.

But wait... You are accusing one unknown faker, you are accusing respected members here ... Maybe it is you who faked that grey bird and spun that theory only to get a final chance to revive your WS-15 theory?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Again only a desperate theory as illusional like your failed WS-15... No proof, nothing.
> 
> But anyone is allowed to have its own opinion even a wrong one.
> 
> But wait... You are accusing one unknown faker, you are accusing respected members here ... Maybe it is you who faked that grey bird and spun that theory only to get a final chance to revive your WS-15 theory?



*"you are accusing respected members here ... Maybe it is you who faked that grey bird"*

But I am not *"科京同志"*. How would someone else, upload the fake pictures, through his account?

You are getting delusional again. Herr Deino. Take care yourself. Don't lose your mind over this "engine thing".

I state my humble opinion, again. It is the same person, who faked both pictures. And either your respected member, *"科京同志"*, knows this faker, or *HE IS THE FAKER*, himself.

By putting his name on the fake pictures, and uploaded them, he has implicated himself in this fakery operation.

*This "科京同志"* owes us a good explanation, on how he got those fake pictures, if he wants to clear his name.

Again, I want to congratulate you and @Figaro on breaking this fake operation, wide open, and let me connects the dots.

You guys makes a good team. I must admit. Despite our differences on the identity of J-20's engine.

I think you and Figaro are fine persons.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Again only a desperate theory as illusional like your failed WS-15... No proof, nothing.
> 
> But anyone is allowed to have its own opinion even a wrong one.
> 
> But wait... You are accusing one unknown faker, you are accusing respected members here ... Maybe it is you who faked that grey bird and spun that theory only to get a final chance to revive your WS-15 theory?





Asoka said:


> *"you are accusing respected members here ... Maybe it is you who faked that grey bird"*
> 
> But I am not *"科京同志"*. How would someone else, upload the fake pictures, through his account?
> 
> You are getting delusional again. Herr Deino. Take care yourself. Don't lose your mind over this "engine thing".
> 
> I state my humble opinion, again. It is the same person, who faked both pictures. And either your respected member, *"科京同志"*, knows this faker, or *HE IS THE FAKER*, himself.
> 
> By putting his name on the fake pictures, and uploaded them, he has implicated himself in this fakery operation.
> 
> *This "科京同志"* owes us a good explanation, on how he got those fake pictures, if he wants to clear his name.
> 
> Again, I want to congratulate you and @Figaro on breaking this fake operation, wide open, and let me connects the dots.
> 
> You guys makes a good team. I must admit. Despite our differences on the identity of J-20's engine.
> 
> I think you and Figaro are fine persons.


Asoka, you need to calm down. Instead of ridiculing other posters here, why don't we just wait a couple of days or even weeks for additional 2021 photos? There's no point of attacking other members here ... if they believe its real, then let them be. You're entitled to your WS-15 opinion just like @Deino is entitled to his WS-10X 2021 opinion. You've come back from an one week hiatus with a barrage of postings ... we get you're back.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> Asoka, you need to calm down. Instead of ridiculing other posters here, why don't we just wait a couple of days or even weeks for additional 2021 photos? There's no point of attacking other members here ... if they believe its real, then let them be. You're entitled to your WS-15 opinion just like @Deino is entitled to his WS-10X 2021 opinion. You've come back from an one week hiatus with a barrage of postings ... we get you're back.



*"There's no point of attacking other members here ..."*

Attacking whom? Who are you talking about? I don't even know this guy *"科京同志". *I never heard of him before. Is he a member here at PDF? What is his english name?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

*Thread re-opened again ... but please keep the J-20-thread clean from engine-related discussions.

Deino*


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *"Anyway just be patient and we will see 2021 .."*
> 
> Version 2021 is fake, as you have pointed out. And most likely non-existent.



Anything more to say ????  Or is this also faked by the same faker? 

Like I said: *just be patient and we will see 2021 *and You failed once again, You are proven wrong again. 
Time to reconsider Your analytical abilities. 

Or again another crazy theory to rescue Your WS-15-theory ??


----------



## lmjiao

Deino said:


> Anything more to say ????  Or is this also faked by the same faker?
> 
> Like I said: *just be patient and we will see 2021 *and You failed once again, You are proven wrong again.
> Time to reconsider Your analytical abilities.
> 
> Or again another crazy theory to rescue Your WS-15-theory ??
> 
> View attachment 426135
> View attachment 426136


Within a few months, even fools will understand the situation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

lmjiao said:


> Within a few months, even fools will understand the situation.




Agreed in principle even if I have my doubts, since for those who are able too see, the evidence was already on the table right from the start. But for those who only want to see what fit's their opinion even such facts are probably irrelevant and non-existent; they will hold their line, ignore the facts and spin another excuse for yet another obscure theory.

Anyway, I can't wait to see that bird in the air and hopefully we then get better images esp. of the nozzles.

Deino


----------



## Asoka

Calm down @Deino. Don't be too excited and get ahead of yourself or *you will totally embarrass yourself by yourself, again*. The details of the nozzles revealed nothing.






*"According to this, J-20's empty weight is only at 15-ton level, much lighter than that of F-22 (19.7 ton)."*

Sounds like total B.S. That means J-20 is at the same empty weight as F-35, and only 75% of F-22's empty weight, despite being 3.5m-4.5m longer. 

That's absolutely incredible. It's *TWR = 2.4* will be totally off the chart, into outer space, if it's twin WS-15 engine's max thrust is "only" 18 tons, like that of F-22's F119.

*"The author of this article is a PhD in stealth tech of aircraft from northwest tech university from Xian."*

Where in the article, says that?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> Calm down @Deino. Don't be too excited and get ahead of yourself or *you will totally embarrass yourself by yourself, again*. The details of the nozzles revealed nothing.
> 
> ..



Pardon, to disagree: The game is over, You lost and again instead of simply saying "YES, I am wrong" You are once again spinning another excuse. 

*Just for the record: Asoka vs. Deino:*

Part 1 of our now almost infamous battle-theory was: +210kN WS-15 vs AL-31FN/FM-variant .... result 0:1

Part 2 ...: the yellow J-20A + "new engine" nozzle is a blatant FAKE vs. this prototype '2021' is real .... result 0:2

If this is indeed the WS-10B we saw in that first image posted last week is maybe too early to decide since that image is too blurred, but why should it be a FAKE? As reported it is a new prototype, as reported it is 2021, and as shown in the first image it has a different exhaust.

If You like we can add a third round in our game: this nozzle is not the seen one vs. it is the same stealthy nozzle as shown here; it's simply too blurred to notice in these latest images:






So to quote Yourself: *You will totally embarrass yourself by yourself, again*.
Pardon, it has to be correct: *You totally embarrassed yourself by yourself, again. 

So, when do You finally accept the game is over, You've lost with both of Your theories and please don't embarrass Yourself even more.
*
Deino


----------



## Asoka

It's really incredible that Deino still won't admit, these pictures are faked exactly the same way ,by the same faker,*"科京同志" It's you and Figaro who pointed that the second is fake. *They are both posted by the same person.*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> It's really incredible that Deino still won't admit, these pictures are faked exactly the same way ,by the same faker,*"科京同志" It's you and Figaro who pointed that the second is fake. *They are both posted by the same person.*
> View attachment 426204
> *




To admit I'm now loosing patience and even if anyone is allowed to make a fool or idiot out of himself, You are indeed the most stubborn one I ever met and I'm again thinking about giving You a clear warning: what You are spreading here are lies, You are accusing respected members of being a faker while at the same moment You are twisting words only to try to save Your idiotic theories.  

It is annoying.  

Deino


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Pardon, to disagree: The game is over, You lost and again instead of simply saying "YES, I am wrong" You are once again spinning another excuse.
> 
> *Just for the record: Asoka vs. Deino:*
> 
> Part 1 of our now almost infamous battle-theory was: +210kN WS-15 vs AL-31FN/FM-variant .... result 0:1
> 
> Part 2 ...: the yellow J-20A + "new engine" nozzle is a blatant FAKE vs. this prototype '2021' is real .... result 0:2
> 
> If this is indeed the WS-10B we saw in that first image posted last week is maybe too early to decide since that image is too blurred, but why should it be a FAKE? As reported it is a new prototype, as reported it is 2021, and as shown in the first image it has a different exhaust.
> 
> If You like we can add a third round in our game: this nozzle is not the seen one vs. it is the same stealthy nozzle as shown here; it's simply too blurred to notice in these latest images:
> 
> 
> View attachment 426202
> 
> 
> So to quote Yourself: *You will totally embarrass yourself by yourself, again*.
> Pardon, it has to be correct: *You totally embarrassed yourself by yourself, again.
> 
> So, when do You finally accept the game is over, You've lost with both of Your theories and please don't embarrass Yourself even more.
> *
> Deino



Excuse me, Mr. Deino. Let's review some elementary logic, here.

J-20 was first revealed in late 2010, and flown in Jan. 2011.

You said J-20 was flown with *AL-31-FN-M2,* all these times, since the first flight*, *now its switched to WS-10, thus proving WS-15 was never ready, and never flown on J-20.
*
AL-31-FN-M2*'s development was announced by the Russian on September 2012, almost two years, after the fact.

How did China obtained the Russian Engine that wasn't even existed yet?

So far, there was no more news after the initial announcement. There isn't any confirmation that *AL-31-FN-M2* is even existed yet.

Did China used Time Travel Technology to go back into the Future to obtain the mystical Russian Engine?

How do you explain this logical absurdity?

Where did you goto school to get your training as a school teacher?

This is simply another blurry picture, which could also be faked easily by *"an idiot who has too much time on his hands, but not enough talents."* 

Do you mind reveal the source of these new pictures for us? I hope they are not from the same dude, who gave the fake pictures.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> To admit I'm now loosing patience and even if anyone is allowed to make a fool or idiot out of himself, You are indeed the most stubborn one I ever met and I'm again thinking about giving You a clear warning: what You are spreading here are lies, You are accusing respected members of being a faker while at the same moment You are twisting words only to try to save Your idiotic theories.
> 
> It is annoying.
> 
> Deino




*"You are accusing respected members of being a faker "*

Who is this "*respected member"* that I am accusing? I can not find any posts made by *"科京同志". *Notice, I have never accused you or anyone here at PDF of faking anything. 

Being a noted International Authority and Author on "Chinese Combat Aircrafts", who published numerous books and articles on various respected Aircraft Journals, you are a most respected member here, I do admit.

I am really lost here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> Excuse me, Mr. Deino. Let's review some elementary logic, here.
> 
> J-20 was first revealed in late 2010, and flown in Jan. 2011.
> 
> You said J-20 was flown with *AL-31-FN-M2,* all these times, since the first flight*, *now its switched to WS-10, thus proving WS-15 was never ready, and never flown on J-20.
> *
> AL-31-FN-M2*'s development was announced by the Russian on September 2012, almost two years, after the fact.
> 
> How did China obtained the Russian Engine that wasn't even existed yet?
> 
> So far, there was no more news after the initial announcement. There isn't any confirmation that *AL-31-FN-M2* is even existed yet.
> 
> Did China used Time Travel Technology to go back into the Future to obtain the mystical Russian Engine?
> 
> How do you explain this logical absurdity?
> 
> Where did you goto school to get your training as a school teacher?




You are a liar or a stupid idiot - sorry to be so harsh - !! I never said that in the same way I never said this yellow LRIP J-20 with the new nozzle is faked. It used a n AL-31FN from the beginning, later a Series 3 and later on his FM-based design.

So You are lying, You are twisting words , You are an ignorant fool and either You stop this spreading BS our You go into vacation. Take this as a warning. Period.

It's one point having another opinion and also making a fool out of Yourself, but it is something different I will no longer accept if You continue spreading lies and twisting words.
Either read carefully, try to understand but do not bring others in mis-credit by calling them a faker and twisting word.

Deino



Asoka said:


> Do you mind reveal the source of these new pictures for us? I hope they are not from the same dude, who gave the fake pictures.
> View attachment 426216



It was our own @cirr who posted this image here just scroll up (https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-625#post-9873466), again a more than respected member or do You want to accuse him too being a faker?? 

So either shut up or go and play with Your son. It is enough.

Deino


----------



## Deino

Yes You are lost, lost and stupid ... go home and make Your homework or shut up.


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> You are a liar or a stupid idiot - sorry to be so harsh - !! I never said that in the same way I never said this yellow LRIP J-20 with the new nozzle is faked. It used a n AL-31FN from the beginning, later a Series 3 and later on his FM-based design.
> 
> So You are lying, You are twisting words , You are an ignorant fool and either You stop this spreading BS our You go into vacation. Take this as a warning. Period.
> 
> It's one point having another opinion and also making a fool out of Yourself, but it is something different I will no longer accept if You continue spreading lies and twisting words.
> Either read carefully, try to understand but do not bring others in mis-credit by calling them a faker and twisting word.
> 
> Deino
> 
> 
> 
> It was our own @cirr who posted this image here just scroll up (https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-625#post-9873466), again a more than respected member or do You want to accuse him too being a faker??
> 
> So either shut up or go and play with Your son. It is enough.
> 
> Deino




*"I never said that in the same way I never said this yellow LRIP J-20 with the new nozzle is faked. It used a n AL-31FN from the beginning, later a Series 3 and later on his FM-based design."*

You have pointed the second J-20 picture with the serial number 2021 as faked, not the yellow picture. 

You have insisted on numerous times, that J-20 is flying with the Russian AL-31-FN-M2 engine, which development was only announced on September 2012.

You have insisted that Russian AL-31-FN-M2 engine was co-developed with China, or whose technology was transfered to China, or its a Russian engine, made in China, after we have pointed out that there was absolutely no news of sales, technology transfer of this engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Yes You are lost, lost and stupid ... go home and make Your homework or shut up.



*" most stubborn one ", , , "It is annoying."*

Yes, facts are most stubborn and annoying, especially, those that are inconvenient to your Russian AL-31-FN-M2 engine theory.

*"Yes You are lost"*

Yes, I am still very lost, because you still refuse to answer, who this most respected member of yours, *"科京同志" *is, on PDF.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Those saw teeth of WS-10 are a mystery for me. I have never seen them elsewhere in any other engines in the world. I have seen no explanation of their purpose. It's seen they are unique technology to the WS-10. And they seems could flip outward, when the engine is on.

Anyone knows their purpose?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *" most stubborn one ", , , "It is annoying."*
> 
> Yes, facts are most stubborn and annoying, especially, those that are inconvenient to your Russian AL-31-FN-M2 engine theory.
> 
> *"Yes You are lost"*
> 
> Yes, I am still very lost, because you still refuse to answer, who this most respected member of yours, *"科京同志" *is, on PDF.



Then go out and search in here in this forum for Yourself, look what he posted and in what quality his replies are.

Your are repeatedly bloating how much and how long You were searching the net for information to bake Your WS-15 theory and now You are not able to find a respected member in this forum on Your own, read what he posts and judge his credibility.

The only reason You refuse that - besides taking care of Your family - is that You have fear Your theory is smashed once again.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Then go out and search in here in this forum for Yourself, look what he posted and in what quality his replies are.
> 
> Your are repeatedly bloating how much and how long You were searching the net for information to bake Your WS-15 theory and now You are not able to find a respected member in this forum on Your own, read what he posts and judge his credibility.
> 
> The only reason You refuse that - besides taking care of Your family - is that You have fear Your theory is smashed once again.
> 
> Deino




*"You are not able to find a respected member in this forum on Your own"*

This most respected member *"科京同志"* you keep refering to is not found on PDF. He don't exist here. You keep refusing to answer my question "Who is he".

*@Deino YOU HAVE LIED, BY CLAIMING THIS NONEXISTENT PERSON, "科京同志", IS A MOST RESPECTED MEMBER ON PDF, TO BOOSTER HIS CREDIBILITY.
*





*"The only reason You refuse that - besides taking care of Your family - is that You have fear Your theory is smashed once again."*

I searched this most respected member *"科京同志", *along with both the chinese name, (歼20), and english name for J-20, and here is what I found, from the date: *Jan1, 2011-Aug. 31. 2017




*
This professional rumormonger *"科京同志"* and *Pupu* posted *nothing* about J-20, prior to September, 2017.

I doubt he even has the P.S. skills to faked these two fake J-20 pictures with WS-10. I suspect, somebody gave them to him, and use his influence in the *Chinese RumorMills Industry* to quickly spread those fake pictures.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> *"You are not able to find a respected member in this forum on Your own"*
> 
> This most respected member *"科京同志"* you keep refering to is not found on PDF. He don't exist here. You keep refusing to answer my question "Who is he".
> 
> *@Deino YOU HAVE LIED, BY CLAIMING THIS NONEXISTENT PERSON, "科京同志", IS A MOST RESPECTED MEMBER ON PDF, TO BOOSTER HIS CREDIBILITY.
> *
> View attachment 426290
> 
> 
> *"The only reason You refuse that - besides taking care of Your family - is that You have fear Your theory is smashed once again."*
> 
> I searched this most respected member *"科京同志", *along with both the chinese name, (歼20), and english name for J-20, and here is what I found, from the date: *Jan1, 2011-Aug. 31. 2017
> 
> View attachment 426294
> *
> This professional rumormonger *"科京同志"* and *Pupu* posted *nothing* about J-20, prior to September, 2017.
> 
> I doubt he even has the P.S. skills to faked these two fake J-20 pictures with WS-10. I suspect, somebody gave them to him, and use his influence in the *Chinese RumorMills Industry* to quickly spread those fake pictures.


. Look where this post got you ... LOL. Pupu ,while not immune to mistakes, does seem to have a better credibility than you when it comes to the PLAAF. At least he doesn't claim that the J-20 is flying with 3D thrust vectoring, 210kN thrust, and AL-31F look-alike WS-15 from day one.


----------



## Figaro

What does this say????

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

*"What does this say????"*

Why not use your BING translator. meow. meow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> Please provide evidence! We have little evidence that the current engine has 2D thrust vectoring let alone 3D ... why not first start with it has thrust vectoring at all? And besides, TVC bleeds energy and can easily be countered ...



Look at my old posts. Before, you said that's all optical illusions, show me pictures of other planes that has this *"optical illusions"* of tilted nozzles, and you have proved your point, and I will shut up for good, on this point.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-515#post-9143094

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...from-the-j-20-news.514445/page-2#post-9802232

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

Asoka said:


> Look at my old posts. Before, you said that's all optical illusions, show me pictures of other planes that has this *"optical illusions"* of tilted nozzles, and you have proved your point, and I will shut up for good, on this point.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-515#post-9143094
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...from-the-j-20-news.514445/page-2#post-9802232



the engine that has 3 D TVC is still under development and tests````how can it be on J-20? 
none of my sources point me to that```

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

This commentator on Beijing TV supports @Asoka's claim of the WS-15 ... weird
EDIT : Actually, he said that this was a possible "best case scenario" he was hoping for ...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## kuge

Figaro said:


> This commentator on Beijing TV supports @Asoka's claim of the WS-15 ... weird


that the ws15 has been with j20 or 210kn thrust? could u post the link to that video?


----------



## samsara

Figaro said:


> This commentator on Beijing TV supports @Asoka's claim of the WS-15 ... weird


The video is here:





The above screenshot was taken from around 08:43
。

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## kuge

samsara said:


> The video is here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The above screenshot was taken from around 08:43
> 。


He simply epressed his personal opinion about ws15 "might" be powering 2021 & he hopes so...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Since late last year, 2016, I have been asserting that J-20 has been using prototype version of WS-15, since day one of testing, and this engine has Thrust Vectoring Control (TVC) nozzles and it has, at least, 210kN of thrust.

That J-20 was using an engine with TVC, from day one, has been confirmed by Chinese chief test pilot of J-10, PLAAF Senior Colonel, 徐勇凌, back in 2011, in an interview, with the Chinese "Journal of Naval and Merchant Ships".

"In my opinion, the J-20 development team, embodied, enough courage and innovative spirit. We have ended the state of following others, step by step, in technical development, and we have achieved the state of independent technological innovation.

The J-20’s aerodynamic layout design breakthroughs, required extraordinary courage, and strong innovative spirit. The long distance coupling of the canards with the main wings layout design, the use of full-motion vertical tail, as well as, the integration of Vector Thrust Control (TVC) with the Engine and Flight Control Systems, into one whole unit--are breakthroughs--that without a large number of tests, is unthinkable. "


“在我看来歼二十的研制团队, 体现了, 足够的勇气和创新精神，我们已经结束了, 以往在技术上, 亦步亦趋的状态，可是了关键技术的自主创新。

歼二十气动布局, 设计上的突破, 是要有非凡的, 勇气和雄厚的技术, 作支撑的，长间距的耦合鸭式布局设计，采用全动垂尾，以及在矢量推力和飞发一体化, 控制上的突破，这些技术的采用, 没有大量的试验, 是不可想象的。”

I have anticipated that some jokers might say, he was only talking about J-20 has achieved breakthrough, in integrating Thrust Vector Control (TVC) with the Engine and Flight Control Systems, he did not mentioned that J-20 already has WS-15 engines or it has TVC, installed.

I don't have any more to say to those idiotic jokers. If they want to be stupid, I can't help it, because "you can't fix stupid".

I will only ask them this simple and obvious question: 

How do you achieve, an breakthrough, in successively integrating Thrust Vector Control (TVC) into a new fighter plane's Engine and Flight Control Systems, without first produce, an engine with TVC, and then do a large number of ground and flight tests?






中国空军试飞员徐勇凌：
歼20矢量发动机不为人知秘密

2012/9/20 20:18:28

http://bbs.tiexue.net/post2_6302648_1.html










Folks, before you dismiss this *PLAAF Senior Colonel'*s words, remember he was the chief test pilot of J-10. He may not have tested the J-20, but he is friend with all the test pilots in the PLAAF Flight Test Institute, which test and certify all new Chinese aircrafts. He knows everybody there. He is an insider of insiders. He, definitely, knows what is going on.






徐勇凌，杭州人，祖籍江苏省赣榆县班里庄（今班庄镇）军人世家出身。国际级功勋试飞员，空军试飞专家，军事理论专家。歼十飞机首席试飞员，中国试飞员学院特聘教官。空军军事理论专家库成员，中国航空学会高级会员。

昨天朋友聚会，我问一个空军的朋友，我们的四代发动机是不是自己的，当然！朋友表情生动的说。

内部的消息就不能说了，只要你注意，公开的消息已经说的明明白白了。

空军特技试飞员徐勇凌说的你总该信了吧？

*“在我看来歼二十的研制团队, 体现了, 足够的勇气和创新精神，我们已经结束了, 以往在技术上, 亦步亦趋的状态，可是了关键技术的自主创新。

歼二十气动布局, 设计上的突破, 是要有非凡的, 勇气和雄厚的技术, 作支撑的，长间距的耦合鸭式布局设计，采用全动垂尾，以及在矢量推力和飞发一体化控制上的突破，这些技术的采用, 没有大量的试验, 是不可想象的。”*


http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/p/2011-01-29/1357630576.html

以上谈话内容可见最新一期《舰船知识》2011年第三期32页，注意查找（前面说过，我照片传不上来，文字我一字不落的传上来了）。

这一段文字和上面一段文字非常清晰的传达了许多内容。

什么是*飞发一体化*？就是飞控和发动机控制的一体化，简单说就是实现飞行员的无顾虑操作，飞行员的操作通过飞行控制的电传软件实现飞行员的操作意图，而响应飞行员这个动作要求的除了各翼面还有矢量推力。

矢量推力显然在设计飞控系统时已经考虑了，否则如何一体化呢？

同时印证了发动机是矢量推力的发动机，而徐勇凌在文章前面还说过，T50在首飞时没有使用矢量推力发动机是T50的一大遗憾，目前T50已经试飞40余次，都没有使用矢量推力发动机的报道，看来毛子是真不行了。

*四代首飞的发动机是国产的矢量推力发动机*，这个意义怎么估计都不算大！

太给力了！

金属学及材料科学家师昌绪昨天以他对研发高性能战斗机的突出贡献，获得了国家最高科学技术奖。而在此三天之前，中国内地的歼-20隐形战机才刚刚进行首次公开试飞。

据中国内地研究飞机发动机的科学家介绍，曾经担任中国科学院金属研究所所长的师教授研发出了几个系列的绝密的耐热合金。

这些合金早在几十年前就已研制出来，只是因为飞机发动机所采用的金属材料需要很长时间进行测试检验，因此直到最近，师教授研制的合金材料才开始用于中国制造的飞机发动机。

1955年，师昌绪告别了他在麻省理工学院执教的岗位踏上了回国的旅途。他是美国政府明令禁止返回其社会主义祖国的30多位中国旅美科学家之一。他是和钱学森差不多同一时期离开美国的，钱学森是加州理工学院的火箭专家，后来成为中国航天领域的创始人。

师昌绪抵达上海之后，立即被分配到沈阳，那里是中国东北辽宁省的重工业基地，目的是提高钢铁产量。后来，北京与莫斯科的关系迅速恶化，俄罗斯人不再帮助他们的老盟友研制战斗机。中国军方转而求助于师昌绪等科学家。

凭借勤奋、天赋和运气，师昌绪不仅采用他在西方国家学到的传统方法制造出所需要的合金，而且还发明出一些全新的合金系列。

这些新研发的合金在实验室的试验性能相当好，以至于没人敢用它们。出于安全的考虑，飞机设计师们沿用了传统合金制造中国大规模生产的战机发动机，其性能严重落后于国外的同类产品。

此后，师昌绪开发的合金系列开始了在工业领域接受认可的漫长旅程。直到最近，由于他们的合金应用于歼-20等最先进的战斗机上，才获得了设计人员的完全认可。

上海交通大学材料科学与工程学院张澜庭教授说，这是中国航空材料科学领域期待已久的最高荣誉。张教授指出，有些人认为，中国不具备制造高性能飞机发动机的材料，但他们错了。张教授说，事实上，我们有许多质量最为上乘的材料，但为了让飞机设计人员信服地采用这些材料，我们必须进行几十年的试验——通常是30年——以保证绝对的安全。在未来10年内，中国产的发动机将开始在民用领域取代进口发动机。在军用领域，用国产取代进口发动机的工作已经开始。

中国航空领域的最高学府北京航空航天大学新型材料科学的专家指出，中国正在迅速缩小与世界一流发动机制造商之间的技术差距。随着歼-20战斗机及其他新型飞机的成功试飞，如今真该是奖励这些幕后英雄的时候了。

权威论证，歼20战机发动机堪比世界航空三甲

说歼20比SU-27大，甚至超过美国F22，这已是不争的事实。起飞重量超过35吨的数据连美国军事专家都能估算出来，这也不是自吹自擂就能唬人的。如此庞大的机体用中国现有的发动机（J-10或J-11所用）似乎是不可能的了，而所谓有俄罗斯提供，那更是无稽之谈，因为中国根本就没有进口过四代机的发动机，由此看来，中国为四代机所配套的18吨推力的WS-15太行发动机研制成功，已是没有再争论的必要了。

从首飞发动机声音判断，绝对是新型的大涵道比发动机，它的涵道比超过歼10、SU27和F22三种战机。流传的视频显示了“歼-20”的起飞过程，从中看到，起飞时并没有看到发动机尾部的喷火，这足以显示中国“歼-20”的发动机喷口红外隐身技术已达到了世界一流。据资料显示，F-22同样使用了先进的红外隐身技术，通过喷流冷却矩形喷口，垂尾、平尾、尾撑向后延伸，可遮蔽发动机喷口的红外线辐射。在炽热喷流飞出尾喷口前就得到了降温，因而红外特征显着降低。而歼20的发动机喷口竟然如此完美，很多外军专家看后都表示不可思议。

*歼20用的发动机是WS-15大推力发动机！*这点已毋庸置疑，但外界对该型发动机的性能表示怀疑，其中噪音最大的要数来自美国，在美国人眼里中国应该是一事无成才对，就凭中国闭门造车能够研制出最新一代航空发动机简直就是天方夜谭。果真如此吗，这只能说美国人高傲自大惯了，说句最通俗的话就是，美国的误判已经形成其的专利，没必要去争辩。

笔者以为，中国完全有能力制造出比美国更好的航空发动机。0早在09年某军刊就已在无形中泄露出，中国高推重比涡扇发动机核心机研制成功的消息，其中对推力矢量技术作了业内论证。在09年末某科技杂志的一篇题为“中国航空发动机获突破性进展，推重比大幅提高”的文章中，北京科技大学新金属材料国家重点实验室表示，具有中国独立自主知识产权的新一代航空航天发动机用材料、高温高性能高铌钛铝合金材料将步入产业化阶段。新型高温高性能高铌钛铝合金可以进一步提高涡扇叶片的耐高温能力，从而允许提高发动机进气口温度，进而增加发动机推力。

现今西方国家使用的耐高温材料为镍基耐高温合金，而中国研制出的新型高温高性能高铌钛铝合金，耐高温密度超过镍基高温合金的一半。这一技术将使中国航空航天发动机材料居世界领先水平，据介绍，高铌钛铝合金的应用，开辟了航空、航天、汽车等重要领域的新发展，使现有设备得到突破性发展。更为关键的是，由于高铌钛铝合金的密度大约是镍基合金的一半，使用它制造发动机高温部件，可以大大减轻发动机的重量，从而极大提高了发动机的推重比。

去年3月某报刊登了题为“中国最为先进军用航空发动机已试制交付2台”。文章说，由该公司动控所四室年轻的设计团队从研制生产到顺利交付用户2台目前国内技术最先进、功能最为复杂的某重点型号产品，文章最后一句令人兴奋，中国航空发动机决不会拖中国四代机的后腿。由此可以肯定，这歼20用的发动机就是它。

而就歼20试飞是在万众瞩目，且还有美国防长眼睛在盯着的情况下，能毫不犹豫一飞升天，说明了我们的发动机设计人员已有了充分的自信，这种自信将成为中国四代提前列装中国空军的一种保证，相信歼20试飞已经获得了很大的数据收获，同时为中国新一代战机和航空发动机打下坚实的烙印，向世界证明，中国军工世界一流，并有望与美英法争夺新一代航空发动机桂冠。

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

OMG ... stupidity and stubborness in perfection.

I really don' know how You still can stick to your claims, when all these fell together like a house of cards with the appearance of the WS-10-powered prototype???

No serial WS-10, even less a WS-15 ... No operational TVC. At best in test but never ever in any delivered one so far... You failed.

Deino

OMG ... stupidity and stubborness in perfection.

I really don' know how You still can stick to your claims, when all these fell together like a house of cards with the appearance of the WS-10-powered prototype???

No serial WS-10, even less a WS-15 ... No operational TVC. At best in test but never ever in any delivered one so far... You failed.

Deino


----------



## Asoka

*"OMG ... stupidity and stubborness in perfection."*

Is Mr. Deino talking about himself?
*
"No operational TVC."





*
View attachment 431061

*
Notice, the nozzles of the WS-15 engines was tilted toward the camera, into a nearly perfectly round circle, which would not have occurred, if it was not tilted, at all. 

The camera would have to face the tail of the plane, directly, for that effect to occur, if the nozzles were not tilted, at all.






What is that, Mr. Deino?*

They are not really tilting, like TVC nozzles, but are merely *"Optical illusion" @Deino*? This is a Russian Al-31 engine, you said, Mr. Deino? When did you see a non-TVC AL-31 engine with nozzles tilting like that, Mr. Deino?

Then show me, other plane, that also has this* "optical illusion", Mr. Deino*. There must be hundreds and thousands of pictures of planes with expandable jet nozzles, and some must have also displayed this *"optical illusions"*.

This Senior Colonel of PLAAF, is one of the most senior testing pilot of China, and he has explicitly confirmed that the designers of the J-20 *has integrated* the TVC control into the Engine and Flight Controls, from the get-go, from the beginning, from day one, of the testing.

Does Mr. Deino really believe that this integration of TVC, into the Engine and Flight Control systems, could be done *without* first producing an engine with TVC, and then performing a huge number of tests, including actual flying tests?

This Senior Colonel of PLAAF wondered why the Russian T-50 hasn't used an engine with TVC after 50 plus of flights in 2011. He even questioned whether the Russian could produce an adequate engine for the T-50 project.

Mr. Deino got nothing left, in his arguments, except denials, and put his head in the dirt, like an ostrich, and ignore and deny all the evidences that don't fit his *"Russian Engine Theory"*.

Using the appearance of a supposed WS-10 nozzles, on the newer J-20, to prove his theory that J-20 was using a Russian Engine, is just so pathetic and desperate.

It is absolutely devoid of any logic or reasoning.

Despite his long list of "Russian Engine Theories" that failed miserably, I don't expect Mr. Deino will give up, and choose to see the light.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> ...
> 
> Using the appearance of a supposed WS-10 nozzles, on the newer J-20, to prove his theory that J-20 was using a Russian Engine, is just so pathetic and desperate.
> 
> It is absolutely devoid of any logic or reasoning.
> 
> ....





The funny thing is only thst you so far preferred to ignore this new prototype. First with an alleged "it is a ps" claim and later with nothing ... But please: Why does CAC fits a non-TVC WS-10-variant on the J-20 if your alleged super-duper engine exists???

I'm eager to learn yet another excuse.
And please beware of twisting words and faked quotes ...

Deino


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> The funny thing is only thst you so far preferred to ignore this new prototype. First with an alleged "it is a ps" claim and later with nothing ... But please: Why does CAC fits a non-TVC WS-10-variant on the J-20 if your alleged super-duper engine exists???
> 
> I'm eager to learn yet another excuse.
> And please beware of rwisting words and faked quotes ...
> 
> Deino


*
"But please: Why does CAC fits a non-TVC WS-10-variant on the J-20, if your alleged super-duper engine exists???"*

The first two pictures ARE fakes. The faker must have heard of something, and then go home and faked these two pictures.

As I have said in my earlier post.

Although, I believe the testing of Ws-15 with J-20 is completed, and went into LRIP production, but the problems of mass producing the WS-15, may not have solved. It may take several more years to acquire enough experiences and skills or workers to ramp up the productions of WS-15 with reliable quality components.

24 J-20 per years, will require 48 WS-15 engines a year. I don't think the Liming Engine Factory has this production capability yet.

From the CCTV documentary, it is strenuously emphasized that the final assembly of the jet engine, is still done entirely by hands, by highly skilled technicians.

I did not entirely discounted the possibility that J-20 will equip with WS-10, *temporarily*, to keep up with the J-20 production, as the serial production of WS-15 is still need some times to work it out. Those J-20 equipped with WS-10 could be used for basic familiarity flights for new J-20 pilots, which do not requires the full set of capabilities, like supercruise or supersonic maneuverability.

If that is true, then this is a *genius solution*, for buying some times, to solve the WS-15 mass production issues, without holding back the training of new pilots, and production of the J-20.

*"The funny thing is only thst you, so far preferred, to ignore this new prototype."*

The truth is it is too early to make conclusions based on a few pictures. That's why I choose to make tentative comments only.

I have communicated with @*Figaro* about this possibility through private messages, *before* you have pointed out the second pic was a fake.

A new possibility of why J-20 is fitted with an variant of WS-10, has emerged.

China might be producing an *export variant of J-20 for Pakistan*, with a downgraded engine of WS-10, so the secrets of J-20 and WS-15 will be not be leaked out. This is what USA should have done. But choose not to do it, in favor of exporting F-35. Now their key allies will be stuck with this inferior plane, instead of the mighty F-22 Raptor.

We will heard more about that in the future, if that is true. Pakistan has expressed strong interest in obtaining J-20 from China.

We don't know anything about this WS-10 variant on the newer J-20. Is it the 125kN Ws-10a, the 145kN WS-10B, or some new WS-10 variants with 160kN or even 180kN. We don't know.

To make any conclusion is premature. To say this appearance of WS-10 on J-20 *proves* that J-20 was using a Russian Engine, all along, is simply ludicrous.

*Why? I have asked*. And you said if Ws-10 was not even installed on J-20 before, how could WS-15 be already installed on J-20, so J-20 must be using AL-31? ( I don't remember Deino's exact words, but that's the general direction of his argument.)

(*WS-10 was not ready or the Chinese don't know how to install Ws-10 on J-20? *How could anybody ignore the fact, that hundreds of J-10 and J-11s have been flying with WS-10 for years, already? That don't prove WS-10 was ready and the chinese engineers knows how to install their own engine?)

And by leap of imagination and logic-free way, you got the *"proof"* that J-20 was using AL-31 all along, and continue to totally ignore, the long list of evidences, me and others members, have provided over the years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

WS-15 for J-20  (May 2006)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> WS-15 for J-20  (May 2006)




Is this for sure? The last time such a confirmed image was posted it came out as a GE F101.


----------



## Deino

@Asoka 

*You got already a clear warning for NOT twisting words, not mis-quoting other members and even more NOT openly discussing any moderator's decision by again twisting words and misquoting.

I'm not desperate to shut You down - otherwise I would simply deleted all Your BS - and indeed it's more regret, pity or compassion how obsessed anyone can be. Consequently as I promised You as long You do not insult other members - what You repeatedly did - I won't prevent You from making a fool out of Your own. 

But enough is enough.

Deino*


----------



## j20blackdragon

Afterburners (or augmentors) have different stages. For example, the F100-PW-229 has 11 afterburner stages. Other engines may be different.

You do not see flame until the afterburner is engaged.

At minimum augmentation, some flame is visible inside the nozzle but may not even extend outside.





At maximum augmentation, the flame becomes very prominent.





The point is that the afterburner is not simply ON or OFF. There are different stages of augmentation.

We have pictures of the J-20 at or near maximum afterburner. The flame is blue and the shock diamonds are visible within the flame. Everything is visible in broad daylight.





I find it interesting that the J-20 can perform high-g maneuvers (with very noticeable vortices) seemingly without the use of maximum afterburner. The J-20 nozzles are nearly dark with only a little bit of light. On the other hand, the F-22 is oftentimes photographed doing similar maneuvers on full afterburner.









The J-20 is highly likely to be heavier, draggier, and with higher wing loading than the F-22. The J-20 also does not have access to F119 engines. I find this all a bit curious.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> First, he got caught up by some netizens with the original pic of the prototype 2011, then awkwardly admitted that the second pic was PSed. Thus, the credibility of the originator of these pics is becoming skeptical right now.
> 
> Again, with the CCTV-4 also starts to question about the credibility of these online pics, the whole engine thing is far from being concluded.
> 
> BTW, Mr. Daokou is fine, he recently just gave a new lecture about the incoming JL-3 SLBM in his WeChat.


Can you provide me Daokou's link ... thanks alot. I have never followed him but he seems to be pretty credible

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> Can you provide me Daokou's link ... thanks alot. I have never followed him but he seems to be pretty credible



Most of his articles are pinned in Meyet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

Several days ago, On Oct 13, I have posted *an old interview* of PLAAF J-10 test pilot, Senior Colonel *徐勇凌, *who stated unmistakably, *in 2011*, shortly after the first flight, that TVC was integrated into J-20's Engine and Digital Flight Control System as one unit (*矢量推力和飞发一体化)*, *from the get go, from the very beginning, from day one.*

"In my opinion, the J-20 development team, embodied, enough courage and innovative spirit. We have ended the state of following others, step by step, in technical development, and we have achieved the state of independent technological innovation.

The J-20’s aerodynamic layout design breakthroughs, required extraordinary courage, and strong innovative spirit. The long distance coupling of the canards with the main wings layout design, the use of full-motion vertical tail, as well as, *the integration of Vector Thrust Control (TVC) with the Engine and Flight Control Systems, into one whole unit*--are breakthroughs--that without a large number of tests, is unthinkable. "


“在我看来歼二十的研制团队, 体现了, 足够的勇气和创新精神，我们已经结束了, 以往在技术上, 亦步亦趋的状态，可是了关键技术的自主创新。

歼二十气动布局, 设计上的突破, 是要有非凡的, 勇气和雄厚的技术, 作支撑的，长间距的耦合鸭式布局设计，采用全动垂尾，*以及在矢量推力和飞发一体化, 控制上的突破，这些技术的采用, 没有大量的试验, 是不可想象的。”*

In this very recent TV interview, Senior Colonel *徐勇凌, *not only reiterated the claimed that J-20 has integrated Thrust Vector Control (TVC) into its Engine and Digital Flight Control System, he said he has flown the J-20 with integrated TVC, *in a simulator*. He did not said he has flown the real J-20 with TVC. (I guess he don't want to get court martial for leaking state secret on TV)

At the very end of the video: 

"Our J-20, in the area of TVC and Engine and Digital Flight Control System Integration into one unit, after I have flown it, in a simulator, *my experience with it *, is totally different from third generation aircraft."

*徐勇凌 experienced the "completed version" of J-20: Thrust Vector Control (TVC) has passed the test.*
*徐勇凌体验“完整版”歼20：矢量推力已过关*
*



*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Pardon, but IMO You again over-interpret this statement. You self say on the end but strangely mark rthe wrong part in that sentence:


> At the very end of the video:
> 
> "Our J-20, in the area of TVC and Engine and Digital Flight Control System Integration into one unit, after I have flown it, *in a simulator*, my experience with it , is totally different from third generation aircraft."
> 
> *徐勇凌 experienced the "completed version" of J-20: Thrust Vector Control (TVC) has passed the test.*
> *徐勇凌体验“完整版”歼20：矢量推力已过关*



Ergo, that TVC was not really installed in a real prototype but tested on a simulator... By the way, welcome back! 

Deino


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Pardon, but IMO You again over-interpret this statement. You self say on the end but strangely mark rthe wrong part in that sentence:
> 
> Ergo, that TVC was not really installed in a real prototype but tested on a simulator... By the way, welcome back!
> 
> Deino



He said he has flown it, in a simulator, so he won't get court martial, as the details and identity of J-20's engine, is still highly classified. He is not stupid. In the 2011 interview, he has already said J-20 *has achieved the breakthrough* of integrating TVC into its Digital FCS.

The pictures of J-20, with distinctively tilting nozzles, proves TVC is already a done deal, a while ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

YES ... all You quote - and given it is correct - does not contradict: it says "*has achieved the breakthrough* of integrating TVC into its Digital FCS" and "has flown it, in a simulator". No word on has flown in a real aircraft, nothing on has been integrated into operation use. Again my friend, You are dreaming.

Deino


----------



## Asoka

How do you achieve the *breakthrough* of integrating TVC into the Engine's FDIC and the plane's Digital FCS, without first producing an engine with TVC and do a large number of ground and fly tests? Mr. Deino. Don't evade this honest question.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Ever heard of an iron bird? Ever heard of a special dedicated single prototype--engine on a teststand?
Again, that does not rule out that a prototype at the CFTE was already equipped with such a nozzle testwise, but given that statement You Yourself quoted word by word not a single one confirms that all J-20s are using TVC from day one.

We are again in that issue: You take an argument and interpret it was WHITE and I see BLACK or very dark grey... and at least IMO You are not even willing to admit that a shade of grey is possible.


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Ever heard of an iron bird? Ever heard of a special dedicated single prototype--engine on a teststand?
> Again, that does not rule out that a prototype at the CFTE was already equipped with such a nozzle testwise, but given that statement You Yourself quoted word by word not a single one confirms that all J-20s are using TVC from day one.
> 
> We are again in that issue: You take an argument and interpret it was WHITE and I see BLACK or very dark grey... and at least IMO You are not even willing to admit that a shade of grey is possible.



The words of the Colonel are not essential. I have come to the same conclusion w/o noticing his 2011 interview, first. The pictures of J-20, with its distinctively tilting nozzles, *alone*, proves TVC is already a done deal, a while ago.

*"Ever heard of an iron bird? Ever heard of a special dedicated single prototype--engine on a test stand?"*

It's one thing to develop an TVC nozzle and test it on a special single engine, on a test stand, and it is entirely a different thing to integrate the control of the TVC into the engine's Full Digital Integrate Control (FDIC) and the target plane's Digital Flight Control System as One Unit.

You need a large number of fly tests on the target plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Pardon to be sceptical, but given Your track record on estimating a +210 kN (upps, sorry You are now already at about 240 kN), Mach 3 capability, calculating climb- and turn-rates from 3sec-gifs, fabricating theories on customised downgraded WS-10-powered varaints for traing or export and so on or mis-identifying PSed images against any reliable big shrimp or TVC ... I prefer to stay in reality.

Deino


----------



## Asoka

The Senior Colonel has strongly indicated, in this 2011 interview, that such integration of TVC with J-20's Engine FDIC and Digital FCS *has already achieved*. And he wholeheartedly praised the J-20 design team's courage and innovative spirit.



Deino said:


> Pardon to be sceptical, but given Your track record on estimating a +210 kN (upps, sorry You are now already at about 240 kN), Mach 3 capability, calculating climb- and turn-rates from 3sec-gifs, fabricating theories on customised downgraded WS-10-powered varaints for traing or export and so on or mis-identifying PSed images against any reliable big shrimp or TVC ... I prefer to stay in reality.
> 
> Deino




I, firmly, stand by, on all my predictions. Thank you for mentioned them.



Asoka said:


> The Senior Colonel has strongly indicated, in this 2011 interview, that such integration of TVC with J-20's Engine FDIC and Digital FCS *has already achieved*. And he wholeheartedly praised the J-20 design team's courage and innovative spirit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I, firmly, stand by, on all my predictions. Thank you for mentioned them.



*"turn-rates from 3sec-gifs, "*

Correction! I got the turn-rate time from the actual videos, and made the gifs to show the members. The time was not deduced from the gifs. I am well aware that gifs do not show the real time.

*"I prefer to stay in reality."*

That would be fine with me, if you don't mean stick your head into the ground, and prefer not to see reality.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> I, firmly, stand by, on all my predictions. Thank you for mentioned them.


----------



## Asoka

Take a another look with my old post:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-524#post-9226200

And watch the actual video, not just the gifs, I have made, to get a sense of *how insanely fast* J-20 was turning.






The F-22 could do the same,* it's hard to believe your eyes*, fishhook or hair pin, 3-4 seconds, 180 degrees U-turns, with its powerful TVC enabled F119 engine. I don't see that in planes with non-TVC engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> The J-20 would literally tear apart at Mach 3. That’s more impossible than his 210kN theory ...



Well, this is now an academic or even more philosophical question: is "more than impossible" even possible ?


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Well, this is now an academic or even more philosophical question: is "more than impossible" even possible ?



What's "impossible" is according to one's state of understanding or knowledge.

What was once thought to be "impossible" is now common place, in many things.

It was once thought to be "impossible" for China to produce a 5-Gen. fighter before 2020.

*"The J-20 would literally tear apart at Mach 3. That’s more impossible than his 210kN theory"*

Excuse me! This is more laughable the gambler guy's claim that: 

*"This [canards] will make it difficult for the J-20, to go below, a clean F-18E/F, in terms of total RCS."*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> ...But Asoka, I find your Mach 3 claim even more laughable than the 210 kN WS-15 ... what makes you think the J-20s design is suitable for such supersonic/interception speed?




*PLAESE* don't ask him proving his theories ...  That will only end up in the same long nonsense he already posted more than 10-times.  If You are really interested, go and search on Your own thru this topic, but please not that trash again. 

Deino


----------



## Asoka

*"But Asoka, I find your Mach 3 claim even more laughable than the 210 kN WS-15 ... what makes you think the J-20s design is suitable for such supersonic/interception speed?"*

What does it take for a fighter plane to reach and cruise at the speed of *Mach 3*?

1.) Two very powerful engines.
2.) A very aerodynamic airframe optimized for supersonic flight at that speed. That is, it has low supersonic drag.
3.) An incredibly tough airframe, that is super strong enough, to withstand the tremendous stress that will be experienced, during intense high-g maneuvers, at that high supersonic speed, for many years to come, at the typical flight load.

As far as I can see, both F-22 and J-20 meets those requirements. The fact that the top speed of F-22 is still classified, is what aroused my curiosity. The USAF or LockeedMartin don't even bother to put out, an lowball figure like *Mach 2.5* (F-15c and F-111's top speed), which will probably, seen as false, immediately.

F-22 has two very powerful engines, a very low supersonic drag airframe that enables it to supercruise at Mach 1.5 w/o AB turned on.

And it has an incredibly strong airframe that could pull, at least, *6.5g* at *Mach 1.6*. And its airframe lifespan has rating of at least *8000hrs*, possibly more than *12,000hrs*. That is, *30-40 years* of active service.

Those combination of factors is what give F-22 incredible maneuverability at subsonic and supersonic speeds.

Like F-22, J-20 is built with all titanium bulkheads, hydraulically forged, in one piece of titanium alloy, under *50,000-80,000 tons* of high pressure. That, alone, will guaranteed the airframe's bulkheads will have incredible strength and density. It's a very expensive and time-consuming manufacturing process, which takes 90 days, to manufacture one forged bulkhead, from start to finish.









The F-22 titanium forged bulkheads.





The F-35 Bulkhead. Note, it's made of Aluminum not Titanium, to save money.







The last bulkhead above is Chinese made with Titanium, using laser 3D addictive and micro-forging technique, that was reportedly able to save 90% of the materials and save 90% of the time. I don't know how strong it is, compared, to the fully forged bulkheads.

We still don't know a lot about J-20's ability. But it's safe to say, J-20 was design to match and exceed F-22,* in all areas.*

Whether that has been achieved, I will leave that to future observers.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *"But Asoka, I find your Mach 3 claim even more laughable than the 210 kN WS-15 ... what makes you think the J-20s design is suitable for such supersonic/interception speed?"*
> 
> What does it take for a fighter plane to reach and cruise at the speed of *Mach 3*?
> 
> 1.) Two very powerful engines.
> 2.) A very aerodynamic airframe optimized for supersonic flight at that speed. That is, it has low supersonic drag.
> 3.) An incredibly tough airframe, that is super strong enough, to withstand the tremendous stress that will be experienced, during intense high-g maneuvers, at that high supersonic speed, for many years to come, at the typical flight load.
> 
> As far as I can see, both F-22 and J-20 meets those requirements. The fact that the top speed of F-22 is still classified, is what aroused my curiosity. The USAF or LockeedMartin don't even bother to put out, an lowball figure like *Mach 2.5* (F-15c and F-111's top speed), which will probably, seen as false, immediately.
> 
> F-22 has two very powerful engines, a very low supersonic drag airframe that enables it to supercruise at Mach 1.5 w/o AB turned on.
> 
> And it has an incredibly strong airframe that could pull, at least, *6.5g* at *Mach 1.6*. And its airframe lifespan has rating of at least *8000hrs*, possibly more than *12,000hrs*. That is, *30-40 years* of active service.
> 
> Those combination of factors is what give F-22 incredible maneuverability at subsonic and supersonic speeds.
> 
> Like F-22, J-20 is built with all titanium bulkheads, hydraulically forged, in one piece of titanium alloy, under *50,000-80,000 tons* of high pressure. That, alone, will guaranteed the airframe's bulkheads will have incredible strength and density. It's a very expensive and time-consuming manufacturing process, which takes 90 days, to manufacture one forged bulkhead, from start to finish.
> 
> View attachment 432398
> View attachment 432399
> 
> 
> The F-22 titanium forged bulkheads.
> 
> View attachment 432400
> 
> The F-35 Bulkhead. Note, it's made of Aluminum not Titanium, to save money.
> 
> 
> View attachment 432401
> 
> 
> The last bulkhead above is Chinese made with Titanium, using laser 3D addictive and micro-forging technique, that was reportedly able to save 90% of the materials and save 90% of the time. I don't know how strong it is, compared, to the fully forged bulkheads.
> 
> We still don't know a lot about J-20's ability. But it's safe to say, J-20 was design to match and exceed F-22,* in all areas.*
> 
> Whether that has been achieved, I will leave that to future observers.


MR @Asoka your Jets top speed will Mach-3 you lost maneuverability and agility, and its become a interceptor not 5th gen AD jet like those
*MIG-25




MIG-31




SR-71




and By the way tell me @Asoka what is purpose of attaining such a high speed J-20 is not a spy plane or interceptor but a maneuverable and agile 5th gen jet *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Hey pakistani guy, aren't you the one, who was keep demanding the Mod, to ban me permanently, because you don't like what I posted? Shouldn't you ask your guru/expert, the gambler guy, for information? 
*
"MR @Asoka your Jets top speed will Mach-3, you lost maneuverability and agility, and its become a interceptor, not 5th gen AD jet, like those MIG-25"*

Not necessarily.

The Mig-25 has poor maneuverability and agility, because it's airframe was made of *high strength steel,* instead of Titanium like the SR-71. The reason being, Titanium was still very difficult to work with, in the early 1960's.

The CIA used a phoney front company to purchased the Titanium from the Russian, and go to great length and expense to produce the titanium SR-71 airframe. So only a few dozen SR-71 was produced, whereas, the Russian need to produce thousands of Mig-25 to intercept the American bombers, so they can't afford the titanium Mig-25.

To compensate the extra weight of the steel frame, the Russian has to use as little steel as possible. That means the resultant aircraft will not as strong as they would like, so it would not able to pull high-g.

In fact, it is reported, the early Mig-25 could pull only max. 3-g. The current Mig-31, the successor to Mig-25, could pull maximum 5-g, making it, having limited maneuverability and agility. (The ability to pull high-g depends on the speed. Pulling high-g at subsonic speed, is not the same on the airframe, as pulling high-g at Mach 3. So, if you could pull only 5-g at subsonic, you could pull much less g at Mach 3. You probably could fly only, at a almost straight line, at those speed.)

But that's not really a problem. They are meant to use to intercept the heavy bombers like B-52 and cruise missiles, which have even less maneuverability and agility.

The 5-Gen fighter will all have *one piece forged Titanium bulkheads*, and other forged titanium airframe component for exceptional strength. Thus, it is guaranteed that they will have the super strength to pull high-g, at those supersonic speed, so, to achieve the *superior supersonic maneuverability and agility*, which is the signature of 5-gen. fighters, that no 3-gen or 4-gen fighters will be able to match.

This is the most important feature of 5-gen fighter. The 3-gen or 4-gen fighters (like J-10, Rafael, Typhoon, Flankers, F-15, F-16, F-18) could reduce their RCS, in their future variants, but they will never have the massive engine power, and super airframe strength, required to have supercruise and *superior supersonic maneuverability and agility. *This requires a *total redesign *from the ground up.

That is, if you have the strength and power to pull high-g at *Mach 1.6,* you will have the strength and power to pull those high-g, at even higher speed, like *Mach 3*. Your maneuverability and agility, will be reduced, as you go faster. Yes. that's true. But that will be still a whole lot better than the previous generation of fighter.

Look at this chart from an old post of mine, last year. https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-485#post-9034688

*The Astonishing Supersonic Maneuverability Difference Between 4th and 5th Generation Fighters.*

I have again and again emphasized the importance of Supersonic Cruise and Supersonic Maneuverability to 5th Gen. fighter. Without ability to do Supersonic Cruise, there could be no Supersonic Maneuverability.

Here is the picture that illustrate the *astonishing difference* between Supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22. Supersonic Maneuverability is a measure of how agile of a plane is in Supersonic Speed at various height. Because the air density at different height, the Maneuverability will be greatly affected.

*Why is there such a great difference between supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22?*

*Because F-22 has TVC* that will enable it turn very effectively at high altitude and high speed, whereas, the effectiveness of traditional control surfaces of F-15, and F-35 will be much less effective at those high speed and high altitude.

Here is the 5G Maneuver Envelope. The Maximum Speed of a plane able to maneuver at 5G at various height.

As we can see, F-15, one of the most agile 4th gen. fighter in the world, could only pull a 5G Maneuver at Mach 0.8 at sea level, and at 32,000 ft, only Mach 0.7. No Supersonic Maneuverability at 5G over Mach 0.8. Basically, it could only fly pretty much in a straight line with a huge turn radius at higher speed.

Whereas, F-22 could pull 5G at nearly Mach 2 at the Maximum altitude of 65,000ft. At sea level, it could still able to reach Mach 1.3 while pulling a 5G turn.

Basically, sustained Supersonic Maneuverability is determined by Aerodynamics of the airframe, Power of the engine and structural strength of the airframe.

If you don't have outstanding Aerodynamics design, your air speed will quickly drop below supersonic during high G maneuvers. If you don't have a powerful engine in the first place, you can't do Supersonic Cruise without afterburner. If you turn on your afterburner in order to go supersonic, you will quickly run out of fuel. If your airframe isn't strong enough, your plane will fall apart at high G during Supersonic Maneuvering. If you have a very tough airframe, but a weak engine, you will be overweighted. And if you have a very powerful engine, but overweighted and have a lousy aerodynamics design, you will end up being clubbed like baby seals like F-35.

As if we can see, even the mightily powerful F-15 don't have much Supersonic Maneuverability, it is useless to talk about that for 4th Generation fighters, instead they concentrate on subsonic maneuverability. But Supersonic Maneuverability is such an awesome ability. F-15 and F-16 pilots said whenever F-22 goes into Supersonic, the fight is over. They can't follow it into those Supersonic speed without turning on the afterburner, and if they did, they would run out of fuel in minutes.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

********************************

In Summary, the notion that a high speed Supersonic Interceptor, could only have limited maneuverability and agility, and could only fly in an almost straight line, *at Mach 3, *is a thing of the past.

Today's new 5-Gen fighters are equipped with two very powerful turbofan engines, to quickly replenish lost energy, during intense high-g maneuvers; a low supersonic drag airframe, to allow supercruise at Mach 1.6; and a super tough airframe, to withstand the tremendous stress, and* a very effective Thrust Vector Control for outstanding turning performance.*

Those combination of factors makes the 5-Gen fighter (like F-22 and J-20) a very effective, very fast, very lethal, very low observability, Supersonic Interceptor and Air Superiority Fighter, *with extreme maneuverability and agility*.

There is nothing that will prevent them fulfill these role effectively. With today's advance technology, being a Supersonic Interceptor and Air Superiority Fighter, *are not mutually exclusive.
*
In the event of conflict, the Chinese air force will, mercilessly, exploit the American weakness of relying on *aerial refuel tankers*, over the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean.

They will send a cloud of stealthy J-20 fighters/interceptors, to go after their tankers and Awacs and other supporting aircrafts first, *intercept* them from a long distance away, from the Chinese mainland, with their long range missiles.

The American tankers, will not see, what is coming, before they got turning into huge fireballs in the sky, over the Pacific Ocean.

Basically, dogfights with the F-22 are for the losers. The chinese will not make this dumb mistake of tangle with the formidable Raptors, while leaving the oil tankers and AWACS, untouched.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *....
> *
> In the event of conflict, the Chinese air force will, mercilessly, exploit the American weakness of relying on *aerial refuel tankers*, over the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean.
> 
> They will send a cloud of stealthy J-20 fighters/interceptors, to go after their tankers and Awacs and other supporting aircrafts first, *intercept* them from a long distance away, from the Chinese mainland, with their long range missiles.
> 
> The American tankers, will not see, what is coming, before they got turning into huge fireballs in the sky, over the Pacific Ocean.
> 
> Basically, dogfights with the F-22 are for the losers. The chinese will not make this dumb mistake of tangle with the formidable Raptors, while leaving the oil tankers and AWACS, untouched.




And from here on we are off-topic since:

1. it is no longer a dedicated J-20&engine question.

2. it is again - as everything by You - all speculative. Therefore You should add in all sentences the for of "maybe", "by my estimation", "eventually" and so on in front of each will. You however again try to draw an images as if this is a fact written in stone.

Anyway ....

Deino


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> Hey pakistani guy, aren't you the one, who was keep demanding the Mod, to ban me permanently, because you don't like what I posted? Shouldn't you ask your guru/expert, the gambler guy, for information?
> *
> "MR @Asoka your Jets top speed will Mach-3, you lost maneuverability and agility, and its become a interceptor, not 5th gen AD jet, like those MIG-25"*
> 
> Not necessarily.
> 
> The Mig-25 has poor maneuverability and agility, because it's airframe was made of *high strength steel,* instead of Titanium like the SR-71. The reason being, Titanium was still very difficult to work with, in the early 1960's.
> 
> The CIA used a phoney front company to purchased the Titanium from the Russian, and go to great length and expense to produce the titanium SR-71 airframe. So only a few dozen SR-71 was produced, whereas, the Russian need to produce thousands of Mig-25 to intercept the American bombers, so they can't afford the titanium Mig-25.
> 
> To compensate the extra weight of the steel frame, the Russian has to use as little steel as possible. That means the resultant aircraft will not as strong as they would like, so it would not able to pull high-g.
> 
> In fact, it is reported, the early Mig-25 could pull only max. 3-g. The current Mig-31, the successor to Mig-25, could pull maximum 5-g, making it, having limited maneuverability and agility. (The ability to pull high-g depends on the speed. Pulling high-g at subsonic speed, is not the same on the airframe, as pulling high-g at Mach 3. So, if you could pull only 5-g at subsonic, you could pull much less g at Mach 3. You probably could fly only, at a almost straight line, at those speed.)
> 
> But that's not really a problem. They are meant to use to intercept the heavy bombers like B-52 and cruise missiles, which have even less maneuverability and agility.
> 
> The 5-Gen fighter will all have *one piece forged Titanium bulkheads*, and other forged titanium airframe component for exceptional strength. Thus, it is guaranteed that they will have the super strength to pull high-g, at those supersonic speed, so, to achieve the *superior supersonic maneuverability and agility*, which is the signature of 5-gen. fighters, that no 3-gen or 4-gen fighters will be able to match.
> 
> This is the most important feature of 5-gen fighter. The 3-gen or 4-gen fighters (like J-10, Rafael, Typhoon, Flankers, F-15, F-16, F-18) could reduce their RCS, in their future variants, but they will never have the massive engine power, and super airframe strength, required to have supercruise and *superior supersonic maneuverability and agility. *This requires a *total redesign *from the ground up.
> 
> That is, if you have the strength and power to pull high-g at *Mach 1.6,* you will have the strength and power to pull those high-g, at even higher speed, like *Mach 3*. Your maneuverability and agility, will be reduced, as you go faster. Yes. that's true. But that will be still a whole lot better than the previous generation of fighter.
> 
> Look at this chart from an old post of mine, last year. https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chen...news-discussions.111471/page-485#post-9034688
> 
> *The Astonishing Supersonic Maneuverability Difference Between 4th and 5th Generation Fighters.*
> 
> I have again and again emphasized the importance of Supersonic Cruise and Supersonic Maneuverability to 5th Gen. fighter. Without ability to do Supersonic Cruise, there could be no Supersonic Maneuverability.
> 
> Here is the picture that illustrate the *astonishing difference* between Supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22. Supersonic Maneuverability is a measure of how agile of a plane is in Supersonic Speed at various height. Because the air density at different height, the Maneuverability will be greatly affected.
> 
> *Why is there such a great difference between supersonic Maneuverability of F-15, F-35 and F-22?*
> 
> *Because F-22 has TVC* that will enable it turn very effectively at high altitude and high speed, whereas, the effectiveness of traditional control surfaces of F-15, and F-35 will be much less effective at those high speed and high altitude.
> 
> Here is the 5G Maneuver Envelope. The Maximum Speed of a plane able to maneuver at 5G at various height.
> 
> As we can see, F-15, one of the most agile 4th gen. fighter in the world, could only pull a 5G Maneuver at Mach 0.8 at sea level, and at 32,000 ft, only Mach 0.7. No Supersonic Maneuverability at 5G over Mach 0.8. Basically, it could only fly pretty much in a straight line with a huge turn radius at higher speed.
> 
> Whereas, F-22 could pull 5G at nearly Mach 2 at the Maximum altitude of 65,000ft. At sea level, it could still able to reach Mach 1.3 while pulling a 5G turn.
> 
> Basically, sustained Supersonic Maneuverability is determined by Aerodynamics of the airframe, Power of the engine and structural strength of the airframe.
> 
> If you don't have outstanding Aerodynamics design, your air speed will quickly drop below supersonic during high G maneuvers. If you don't have a powerful engine in the first place, you can't do Supersonic Cruise without afterburner. If you turn on your afterburner in order to go supersonic, you will quickly run out of fuel. If your airframe isn't strong enough, your plane will fall apart at high G during Supersonic Maneuvering. If you have a very tough airframe, but a weak engine, you will be overweighted. And if you have a very powerful engine, but overweighted and have a lousy aerodynamics design, you will end up being clubbed like baby seals like F-35.
> 
> As if we can see, even the mightily powerful F-15 don't have much Supersonic Maneuverability, it is useless to talk about that for 4th Generation fighters, instead they concentrate on subsonic maneuverability. But Supersonic Maneuverability is such an awesome ability. F-15 and F-16 pilots said whenever F-22 goes into Supersonic, the fight is over. They can't follow it into those Supersonic speed without turning on the afterburner, and if they did, they would run out of fuel in minutes.
> 
> View attachment 432532


only you can change natural physics Mr @Asoka , at Mach-3 you can only go straight with minimum/ no maneuverability/ agility and by the way who told you that J-20 will super cruise on Mach-3, just some initial rumors with no prove and tell me what purpose of attaining such a high speed please tell me, yeah yeah i am in a favor to ban you permanently because not the reasons you posted above but your too much bashing and wishful thinking about J-20, @Asoka please tell me what is the prove that J-20 using WS-15 from day one, what is the prove WS-15 is based on R-79, what is the prove that WS-15 has a thurst of 210-240kn, what is the prove that WS-15 has a TVC nozzles you have no prove but just has a some your false assumptions and false eye catching assessment of J-20/WS-15, prove it if you have a reliable sources, but i think you don't have a single reliable source MR crazy @Asoka


----------



## Deino

@pakistanipower 

Relax ... it's not good for Your health. The blood pressure rises to high ... You only will get a heart attack.

We will not - never ever - change his opinion. He can deduct that all; only he. He can surely cannot change physics but he is the one - the only one - who always finds a solution even to the most confirmed facts and can explain why they are not that way and why they are the way he explains. Only he is able to see these mysteries ...

The only strange thing on this is ... why on earth does nobody outside takes care of these theories??

Anyway, it's just like looking a strange comedy - sometimes in fact more a tragedy - in theatre or cinema.
As such, relax, calm down ... take some popcorn or - in my case a good French red wine - and enjoy the show.
The only problem is that the muscle ache/hangover next morning due to the enless laughter always hurts so terribly.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

*"by the way ,who told you, that J-20 will super cruise on Mach-3"*

I have never said 5-Gen fighters could supercruise at Mach 3, w/o AB.

I said F-22 and J-20 could reach Mach 3, and cruise around that speed, *with Afterburner turned on*, like Mig-25 or Mig-31 or SR-71.

Surely, you could understand that there is a big difference.

As for your other questions, read my previous posts, to get answers. If you can't understand them, well, that not my problem, its your IQ level problem.

*"at Mach-3, you can only go straight with minimum/ no maneuverability/ agility"*

How do you know that? That was true for 3-gen and 4-gen aircrafts.

I am talking about 5-Gen fighters like F-22 with TVC, that give it extreme maneuverability at subsonic, as well as, supersonic speed.

And as for J-20, it will have even better maneuverability, because it has big full moving canards, at the front, and 3-D TVC, at the back, and full moving vertical tails, to give it, unprecedented maneuverability and agility.

*"The only strange thing on this is ... why on earth, does nobody outside, takes care of these theories??"*

Because, they are not thinking about those issues, like me. Using what's publicly available informations, and deduce what's possible and what's impossible, using only standard high school level physics.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *"The only strange thing on this is ... why on earth, does nobody outside, takes care of these theories??"*
> 
> Because, they are not thinking about those issues, like me. Using what's publicly available informations, and deduce what's possible and what's impossible, using only standard high school level physics.



And You never came to the conclusion that the fact that no-one - really no-one outside this forum - believes this BS COULD be a sign that You are wrong?
Hey, if You drill a hole in Your own the knee and put a flower in it and you would be totally delighted, however quite surprised that nobody would follow you ... wouldn't it be proof enough that your idea is simply stupid and not proof in return that you are the only brilliant human being on earth ?

Deino


----------



## Asoka

*"no-one - really no-one, outside this forum - believes this BS, COULD be a sign, that You are wrong?"*

That's not true, Mr. Deino. I have remarkable agreements, with this Chinese blogger Doukou (刀口). And he has a large Chinese following. He is the only writer, other than Bill Sweetman, that I find highly credible and reliable, on the subject of J-20.

Many ideas I have, came to me, independently, and later, I found confirmations, in his website.







http://www.meyet.com/

*Why don't you hear more about my view points, outside this forum?*

Because, truths involving state secrets or classified informations, in the Chinese internet, are quickly deleted or suppressed by Chinese State Security, which vigorously monitor and police, all Chinese publications. Only the B.S. that suits them, are allowed to propagate around the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Ok ... but two guys each one with a hole in their knee and a flower in it still make a stupid idea not a genius one.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> I have never said 5-Gen fighters could supercruise at Mach 3, w/o AB.
> 
> I said F-22 and J-20 could reach Mach 3, and cruise around that speed, *with Afterburner turned on*, like Mig-25 or Mig-31 or SR-71.
> 
> Surely, you could understand that there is a big difference.
> 
> As for your other questions, read my previous posts, to get answers. If you can't understand them, well, that not my problem, its your IQ level problem.


You insane Mr, @Asoka please tell me why you think the top speed of J-20 with afterburner is MACH-3, this speed is useless for J-20 Mr @Asoka 


Asoka said:


> How do you know that? That was true for 3-gen and 4-gen aircrafts.
> 
> I am talking about 5-Gen fighters like F-22 with TVC, that give it extreme maneuverability at subsonic, as well as, supersonic speed.
> 
> And as for J-20, it will have even better maneuverability, because it has big full moving canards, at the front, and 3-D TVC, at the back, and full moving vertical tails, to give it, unprecedented maneuverability and agility.


Whether its 5th gen Jet or 3-4th gen Jets the physical laws remains same for both gen jets and i am talking about your proposed top speed of MACH-3 for J-20 under the MACH-2 J-20 extremely maneuverable/agile but at a top speed *(your crap assessment MACH-3)  has no/minimal agility because of g- force will tear apart J-20 if J-20 will try to maneuver at that speed Mr insane @Asoka 
of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-force
if you have a brain think logically Mr @Asoka *


----------



## Asoka

*"your proposed top speed of MACH-3 for J-20 under the MACH-2 J-20 extremely maneuverable/agile but at a top speed (your crap assessment MACH-3) has no/minimal agility because of g- force will tear apart J-20 if J-20 will try to maneuver at that speed"
*
Hey pakistani guy, I sometimes wonder, how are you going, to make it in this world, with your level of intelligence, and why are you in this J-20 thread, which does requires some intelligence, in some technical discussions.

Sometimes, I wonder whether you are really from Pakistan, and whether you are really an Indian, pretending to be a Pakistani, who were trying hard to act dumb, to make the Pakistanis look bad.

Anyway, I proposed 5-gen fighter like J-20 and J-22 have a top speed above Mach 3, because they have two very powerful engines (175kN for F-22, +210kN for J-20, whereas Mig-25's engine have only 100kN), and very aerodynamic airframe with very low supersonic drag, which with these two advantages, enable them supercruise at Mach 1.6, w/o AB.

And I further propose, because they have a very tough airframe, and have TVC, and plus canards for J-20, they are extremely maneuverable/agile. And even at Mach 3, they can fly much more than at straight line, unlike the previous generation of interceptor like Mig-25 and Mig-31.

What kind of g-force, they can pull at Mach 3, I, simply, don't know. But I am sure, it's going to be much better than Mig-25 or Mig-31, or SR-71.

"*g- force will tear apart J-20, if J-20 will try to maneuver, at that speed""
*
I don't know what you mean by "*maneuver"* or what kind of moves*. *Of course, their will be a limit to what they can do at Mach 3, no doubt. Beyond that, they will fall apart, that's for sure.

But that will not stop F-22 or J-20 from being an *excellent Interceptor* at intercepting large and slow bombers, oil tankers, Awacs, and other large aircrafts, because those aircrafts have little maneuverability.

I do not propose J-20 or F-22 will do, or could do, crazy stunts, at Mach 3, like the Flankers at the airshows.

No need to.

They just need to fly fast and straight, at Mach 3+, toward those target, they intend to intercepts, and launch their long range missiles, from far away, like 200-300km away. Then, turn back and go home.

Without their oil tankers, Awacs, and other large supporting aircrafts, the attacking force would have no chance to succeed. They probably can't even go home, to their airbase. They would have run out of fuel and crash in the Pacific ocean.

Because of J-20's stealthy low observability and flying at Mach 3, toward the enemies oil tankers or Awacs, the enemy fighters would have much less chance of stopping them, than if the J-20 were cruising only at Mach 1.6 - Mach 2.0.

Do you get my drift now?

Chill out and relax. You are going to have a heart attack, at this rate.

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1 | Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *"your proposed top speed of MACH-3 for J-20 under the MACH-2 J-20 extremely maneuverable/agile but at a top speed (your crap assessment MACH-3) has no/minimal agility because of g- force will tear apart J-20 if J-20 will try to maneuver at that speed"
> *
> Hey pakistani guy, I sometimes wonder, how are you going, to make it in this world, with your level of intelligence, and why are you in this J-20 thread, which does requires some intelligence, in some technical discussions.
> 
> Sometimes, I wonder whether you are really from Pakistan, and whether you are really an Indian, pretending to be a Pakistani, who were trying hard to act dumb, to make the Pakistanis look bad.
> 
> Anyway, I proposed 5-gen fighter like J-20 and J-22 have a top speed above Mach 3, because they have two very powerful engines (175kN for F-22, +210kN for J-20, whereas Mig-25's engine have only 100kN), and very aerodynamic airframe with very low supersonic drag, which with these two advantages, enable them supercruise at Mach 1.6, w/o AB.
> 
> And I further propose, because they have a very tough airframe, and have TVC, and plus canards for J-20, they are extremely maneuverable/agile. And even at Mach 3, they can fly much more than at straight line, unlike the previous generation of interceptor like Mig-25 and Mig-31.
> 
> What kind of g-force, they can pull at Mach 3, I, simply, don't know. But I am sure, it's going to be much better than Mig-25 or Mig-31, or SR-71.
> 
> "*g- force will tear apart J-20, if J-20 will try to maneuver, at that speed""
> *
> I don't know what you mean by "*maneuver"* or what kind of moves*. *Of course, their will be a limit to what they can do at Mach 3, no doubt. Beyond that, they will fall apart, that's for sure.
> 
> But that will not stop F-22 or J-20 from being an *excellent Interceptor* at intercepting large and slow bombers, oil tankers, Awacs, and other large aircrafts, because those aircrafts have little maneuverability.
> 
> I do not propose J-20 or F-22 will do, or could do, crazy stunts, at Mach 3, like the Flankers at the airshows.
> 
> No need to.
> 
> They just need to fly fast and straight, at Mach 3+, toward those target, they intend to intercepts, and launch their long range missiles, from far away, like 200-300km away. Then, turn back and go home.
> 
> Without their oil tankers, Awacs, and other large supporting aircrafts, the attacking force would have no chance to succeed. They probably can't even go home, to their airbase. They would have run out of fuel and crash in the Pacific ocean.
> 
> Because of J-20's stealthy low observability and flying at Mach 3, toward the enemies oil tankers or Awacs, the enemy fighters would have much less chance of stopping them, than if the J-20 were cruising only at Mach 1.6 - Mach 2.0.
> 
> Do you get my drift now?
> 
> Chill out and relax. You are going to have a heart attack, at this rate.


Then prove me first that J-20 has a top speed of MACH-3 from a authentic source not someone crap blogpsot
and at the speed of MACH-3 all control surfaces and TVC has a minimal effect for the jet,
I read somewhere in the net that at top speed SR-71 if trying to maneuver for the target as quickly as possible it had been miss its target by hundreds of miles
and google yourself Mr @Asoka speed vs maneuverability/agility
No one can change natural physic in the world but only you can change that natural physic Mr @Asoka
and you have a intelligence and technical ability to convince other @Asoka your false superstition and false assumptions worth nothing Mr fool @Asoka



Asoka said:


> *"your proposed top speed of MACH-3 for J-20 under the MACH-2 J-20 extremely maneuverable/agile but at a top speed (your crap assessment MACH-3) has no/minimal agility because of g- force will tear apart J-20 if J-20 will try to maneuver at that speed"
> *
> Hey pakistani guy, I sometimes wonder, how are you going, to make it in this world, with your level of intelligence, and why are you in this J-20 thread, which does requires some intelligence, in some technical discussions.
> 
> Sometimes, I wonder whether you are really from Pakistan, and whether you are really an Indian, pretending to be a Pakistani, who were trying hard to act dumb, to make the Pakistanis look bad.
> 
> Anyway, I proposed 5-gen fighter like J-20 and J-22 have a top speed above Mach 3, because they have two very powerful engines (175kN for F-22, +210kN for J-20, whereas Mig-25's engine have only 100kN), and very aerodynamic airframe with very low supersonic drag, which with these two advantages, enable them supercruise at Mach 1.6, w/o AB.
> 
> And I further propose, because they have a very tough airframe, and have TVC, and plus canards for J-20, they are extremely maneuverable/agile. And even at Mach 3, they can fly much more than at straight line, unlike the previous generation of interceptor like Mig-25 and Mig-31.
> 
> What kind of g-force, they can pull at Mach 3, I, simply, don't know. But I am sure, it's going to be much better than Mig-25 or Mig-31, or SR-71.
> 
> "*g- force will tear apart J-20, if J-20 will try to maneuver, at that speed""
> *
> I don't know what you mean by "*maneuver"* or what kind of moves*. *Of course, their will be a limit to what they can do at Mach 3, no doubt. Beyond that, they will fall apart, that's for sure.
> 
> But that will not stop F-22 or J-20 from being an *excellent Interceptor* at intercepting large and slow bombers, oil tankers, Awacs, and other large aircrafts, because those aircrafts have little maneuverability.
> 
> I do not propose J-20 or F-22 will do, or could do, crazy stunts, at Mach 3, like the Flankers at the airshows.
> 
> No need to.
> 
> They just need to fly fast and straight, at Mach 3+, toward those target, they intend to intercepts, and launch their long range missiles, from far away, like 200-300km away. Then, turn back and go home.
> 
> Without their oil tankers, Awacs, and other large supporting aircrafts, the attacking force would have no chance to succeed. They probably can't even go home, to their airbase. They would have run out of fuel and crash in the Pacific ocean.
> 
> Because of J-20's stealthy low observability and flying at Mach 3, toward the enemies oil tankers or Awacs, the enemy fighters would have much less chance of stopping them, than if the J-20 were cruising only at Mach 1.6 - Mach 2.0.
> 
> Do you get my drift now?
> 
> Chill out and relax. You are going to have a heart attack, at this rate.


And tell me Mr @Asoka what is use of that high speed of J-20 (MACH-3), J-20 is not a true interceptor/spy jet, and J-20 can Easily intercept IRS/tanker/AWACS jets at a subsonic/ trans sonic speed Mr BS @Asoka


----------



## Title123

pakistanipower said:


> You insane Mr, @Asoka please tell me why you think the top speed of J-20 with afterburner is MACH-3, this speed is useless for J-20 Mr @Asoka
> 
> Whether its 5th gen Jet or 3-4th gen Jets the physical laws remains same for both gen jets and i am talking about your proposed top speed of MACH-3 for J-20 under the MACH-2 J-20 extremely maneuverable/agile but at a top speed *(your crap assessment MACH-3)  has no/minimal agility because of g- force will tear apart J-20 if J-20 will try to maneuver at that speed Mr insane @Asoka
> of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-force
> if you have a brain think logically Mr @Asoka *


Interesting J20can reach mach3 if have engine trust enought what Asoka said may be correct.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Title123 said:


> Interesting J20can reach mach3 if have engine trust enought what Asoka said may be correct.


Just in @Asoka false assumptions and wishful thinking, What is the purpose of reaching such high speed J-20 is not a interceptor like MIG-25, MIG-31 and nor spy plane like SR-71


----------



## Asoka

Title123 said:


> Interesting, J20 can reach mach3, if have engine trust enough, what Asoka said, may be correct.



@Title123
*Mig-25 Specificifications:*

*Powerplant:* 2 × Tumansky R-15B-300 afterburning turbojets
*Dry thrust: 73.5 kN* (16,524 lbf) each
*Thrust with afterburner:* *100.1 kN* (22,494 lbf) each

*Performance*

*Maximum speed:*
*High altitude:* *Mach 3.2*[10] (3,470 km/h; 2,170 mph); Mach 2.83[10] (3,200 km/h; 1,920 mph) (continuous engine limit)
*Low altitude:* Mach 0.97[_citation needed_] (1,200 km/h; 746 mph) [91]


*F-22 Specification:*


*Powerplant:* 2 × Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 turbofans with thrust vectoring in pitch-axis
*Dry thrust:* 26,000 lb[269] (*116 kN*) each
*Thrust with afterburner:* >35,000 lb (*>156 kN*[N 5][270]) each

*Performance*


*Maximum speed:*
*At altitude:* Mach *2.25 [actually is classified]*(1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h) [estimated][116]
*Supercruise:* *Mach 1.82* (1,220 mph, 1,960 km/h)[116]

Notice, F-22's Dry thrust (*116kn*) is greater than Mig-25's full thrust (*100.1kn*), or wet thrust.

As you can see F-22 have far greater thrust than the Mig-25, and it's sleek, aerodynamic designed airframe makes Mig-25 looks positively pre-historic.

The top speed of F-22 is still classified. I just can't see why if F-22 can supercruise at Mach 1.82, with Dry or Military power, alone, but can't reach Mach 3, at higher altitude, with full power.

And if F-22 and Mig-25 can do it, there is no doubt J-20 can do it, too, because J-20's WS-15 engine each has *+210kn* vs F-22's *+156kn*, and vs Mig-25's *100kn*. And J-20 has a much slender and longer airframe, which is good for supersonic speed, than F-22.
*
Why is F-22's top speed still classified? *

I bet its because, its so scary compared to the top speed of previous generation's fighter like the Flankers, F-16s, Eagles, Typhoon, and Rafael's, which has top speed like *M**ach 2.0-2.2*.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *Mig-25 Specificifications:*
> 
> *Powerplant:* 2 × Tumansky R-15B-300 afterburning turbojets
> *Dry thrust: 73.5 kN* (16,524 lbf) each
> *Thrust with afterburner:* *100.1 kN* (22,494 lbf) each
> 
> *Performance*
> 
> *Maximum speed:*
> *High altitude:* *Mach 3.2*[10] (3,470 km/h; 2,170 mph); Mach 2.83[10] (3,200 km/h; 1,920 mph) (continuous engine limit)
> *Low altitude:* Mach 0.97[_citation needed_] (1,200 km/h; 746 mph) [91]
> 
> 
> *F-22 Specification:*
> 
> 
> *Powerplant:* 2 × Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 turbofans with thrust vectoring in pitch-axis
> *Dry thrust:* 26,000 lb[269] (*116 kN*) each
> *Thrust with afterburner:* >35,000 lb (*>156 kN*[N 5][270]) each
> 
> *Performance*
> 
> 
> *Maximum speed:*
> *At altitude:* Mach *2.25 [actually is classified]*(1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h) [estimated][116]
> *Supercruise:* *Mach 1.82* (1,220 mph, 1,960 km/h)[116]
> 
> Notice, F-22's Dry thrust (*116kn*) is greater than Mig-25's full thrust (*100.1kn*), or wet thrust.
> 
> As you can see F-22 have far greater thrust than the Mig-25, and it's sleek, aerodynamic designed airframe makes Mig-25 looks positively pre-historic.
> 
> The top speed of F-22 is still classified. I just can't see why if F-22 can supercruise at Mach 1.82, with Dry or Military power, alone, but can't reach Mach 3, at higher altitude, with full power.
> 
> And if F-22 and Mig-25 can do it, there is no doubt J-20 can do it, too, because J-20's WS-15 engine each has *+210kn* vs F-22's *+156kn*, and vs Mig-25's *100kn*. And J-20 has a much slender and longer airframe, which is good for supersonic speed, than F-22.
> *
> Why is F-22's top speed still classified? *
> 
> I bet its because, its so scary compared to the top speed of previous generation's fighter like the Flankers, F-16s, Eagles, Typhoon, and Rafael's top speed like *M**ach 2.0-2.2*.


@Asoka your endless and waste-less sh!t is continue what is the purpose of reaching MACH-3 speed for J-20 and F-22, all target for J-20 and F-22 will be intercepted on subsonic/transonic speed and you're reported your farting without the solid prove


----------



## Asoka

I thought I was the first one to come up with the max. thrust of *210kN* for WS-15. Looks like, I was wrong. Someone posted this figure back in *2012-5-20*. He beat me to it by over 4 years. Most importantly, this user *fsguoj*, like me. believes *210kN* is a quite conservative figure. Hence, I usually state the max. thrust of WS-15, as at least, *+210kN*.

https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-1342409-7-1.html
*"fsguoj 发表于 2012-5-20 09:07 


最近听捏泪人士暴料，WS15的涵道比确实0.2左右，准确的数据是最大推力210KN"
"这应该还是比较保守的数据"

"Recently, I heard someone, who is in the know, said, the by-pass-ratio of WS-15 is actually around 0.2, and the accurate figure of its maximum thrust is 210kN"

"And really, this is a relatively conservative figure." *

This user fsguoj's post was quickly deleted and banned from cjdby.com 超级大本营军事论坛. I got this quote from following up comments by other users.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

210KN is way too much beyond expectation. For me, 180KN is more than enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

pakistanipower said:


> @Asoka you beleive in this
> No No Mr @Asoka WS-15 has a thrust of 400 kn supercrusie at Mach 5 , top speed of mach 10, range is 20000 miles, and at mach 10 J-20 maneuverable as 100G, its totally invisible to radar, IR sensors, is that right Mr XXXX, insane @Asoka




Please ... even if I agree with You that he's once again wrong - two guys with the same stupid idea, still makes this idea not a brilliant one but only shows that there are more stupids out there - but *NO* personnel insults.

By the way, ... any news on 2021??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

wanglaokan said:


> 210KN is way too much beyond expectation. For me, 180KN is more than enough.



*'For me, 180KN is more than enough." *
For you that's enough. No doubt.

What is so scary is that 210kN is just my minimum estimate. The actual max. thrust of ws-15 is well beyond that. IMO. That's why the Chinese desperately wants to keep the state of WS-15's development, one of the highest state secret, and is waging a massive (and successful) deception campaign (on mainstream medias and various Internet Defense Forums) to fool the western intelligence agencies.

The real truth will blow your socks off.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

@pakistanipower 

calm down ... we won't never ever persuade him. He's on a holy crusade to persuade all stupid ones
and You cannot logically discuss with peoples who have a strong believe.


----------



## Figaro

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Meyet = The Young Turks
> CCTV = The Establishment
> CD = Breitbart
> 
> Yes, the CD forum is the Breitbart in the world of the Chinese military forum, they got a niche but loyal and stubborn audience base. However, they really need to put their bread and butter on the table AKA the prototype 2021. Otherwise, they risk to completely alienate themselves from the rest of the Chinese military online community. The CCTV expert is already labelling those online reports surrounding the so-called prototype 2021 as the fake news. They are going to get completely thrashed by their opponents.


There have been a bunch of impostors over on CJDBY, particularly in the aviation forum. There's this one individual who has many fanboys and claims to be an aviation engine insider ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> There have been a bunch of impostors over on CJDBY, particularly in the aviation forum. There's this one individual who has many fanboys and claims to be an aviation engine insider ...



The aviation section still remains a cesspool, not much of improvement.

The navy section is getting much better than before, some resident trolls simply got banned permanently, and more recognition on the progression of China's nuclear submarine.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

With now more than two months gone since the last image of the WS-10X-equipped J-20A '2021' appeared ... are there any recent news??

Image posted on 1. October:







... and at least the Russians also flew their T50 for the first time with the Izdele 30 engine:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> With now more than two months gone since the last image of the WS-10X-equipped J-20A '2021' appeared ... are there any recent news??
> 
> Image posted on 1. October:
> View attachment 441472
> 
> 
> 
> ... and at least the Russians also flew their T50 for the first time with the Izdele 30 engine:
> 
> View attachment 441473


Maybe they felt WS-10X wasn't necessary anymore? Especially if the WS-15 is getting closer to flight testing, why would they need a WS-10B? It would be much less efficient and cost more. I believe that the PLAAF will directly integrate the WS-15 into a specially designed J-20 prototype ...


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Maybe they felt WS-10X wasn't necessary anymore? Especially if the WS-15 is getting closer to flight testing, why would they need a WS-10B? It would be much less efficient and cost more. I believe that the PLAAF will directly integrate the WS-15 into a specially designed J-20 prototype ...



I think this is a bit far-fetched: a decision to install and test a certain engine and esp. an additional interim one is not reversed just after a few weeks. 
Even more I think it is a bit far-fetched to deduct from the lack of images & news that the WS-15 is ready. The most simple answer is simply there are no new leaked.

Deino


----------



## Akasa

WS-15 supposedly finished high-altitude ground testing in late 2015-2016. Flight tests aboard an Il-76 testbed is likely to occur some time in the next two years.


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> I think this is a bit far-fetched: a decision to install and test a certain engine and esp. an additional interim one is not reversed just after a few weeks.
> Even more I think it is a bit far-fetched to deduct from the lack of images & news that the WS-15 is ready. The most simple answer is simply there are no new leaked.
> 
> Deino





SinoSoldier said:


> WS-15 supposedly finished high-altitude ground testing in late 2015-2016. Flight tests aboard an Il-76 testbed is likely to occur some time in the next two years.


it doesn’t have to be a IL-76 necessarily. They already have high altitude indoor simulator that can do it better than a testbed in Sichuan. They might incorporate it onto a flanker or directly into a J-20 proptype


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> it doesn’t have to be a IL-76 necessarily. They already have high altitude indoor simulator that can do it better than a testbed in Sichuan. They might incorporate it onto a flanker or directly into a J-20 proptype



I'm sure there are benefits of testing engines on a flying testbed other than high-altitude simulations. It's also possible, although unlikely, that they'll place one of the engines on a J-20 prototype with the WS-15.


----------



## Figaro

SinoSoldier said:


> I'm sure there are benefits of testing engines on a flying testbed other than high-altitude simulations. It's also possible, although unlikely, that they'll place one of the engines on a J-20 prototype with the WS-15.


If their engine has reached maturity as they deem it, they could directly incorporate it on the WS-15. Assuming they passed all high altitude simulations and fixed that vibration problem ...


----------



## ptldM3

Asoka said:


> *'For me, 180KN is more than enough." *
> For you that's enough. No doubt.
> 
> What is so scary is that 210kN is just my minimum estimate. The actual max. thrust of ws-15 is well beyond that. IMO. That's why the Chinese desperately wants to keep the state of WS-15's development, one of the highest state secret, and is waging a massive (and successful) deception campaign (on mainstream medias and various Internet Defense Forums) to fool the western intelligence agencies.
> 
> The real truth will blow your socks off.




The only thing that has blow anyone's socks off is the fact that you are a hardcore fanboi that pulls random numbers ... (edited by moderator).

You know nothing about avaiation, stop trying to convince people that you have some special inside information because you are a nobody. Again your thrust figures are garbage.

The figure of 210kn even blows the F-135 thrust out of the water. The F-135 largely achieves its thrust because of its size. The WS-15 engine size is comparable to the AL-31. So unless god gave the WS-15 to China or some advance alien civilization built the engine for the J-20 your figure of a minimum 210kn is just making you look like a fool.


----------



## Beast

azesus said:


> I read some doctoral researcher paper it seems more likely WS-15 will have 2D TVC like F-22 because that's good for stealth and 3D TVC is not, so when you see 2D TVC like F-22 on J-20 you will know that's the W-15 complete version of J-20, because after all USA is more advanced and we all know China is fan of USA and trying to emulate it if you knew china's culture


I dont think you know anything about China culture. In Fact, I know about evil US Neocon culture. Want me to tell you more?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cirr

Mount Everest

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


> Mount Everest




 ?????

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> ?????



Some type of new engine, I think.


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> Some type of new engine, I think.




But yet another engine after the Taishan and the Emei(shan) in the future??

The Mount Everest however would be *Chomolungma *in Tibetan or *Qomolangma* in Chinese? Or am I wrong?


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> But yet another engine after the Taishan and the Emei(shan) in the future??
> 
> The Mount Everest however would be *Chomolungma *in Tibetan or *Qomolangma* in Chinese? Or am I wrong?



I have no idea, to be honest. We don't even know if this "Everest" is simply another name for an existing engine, a new type, or just a false rumor.


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> I have no idea, to be honest. We don't even know if this "Everest" is simply another name for an existing engine, a new type, or just a false rumor.




Seems as if Emei was never official and the WS-15 is the Mt Everest ... if they are correct here:

https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2425588-1-1.html


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> Seems as if Emei was never official and the WS-15 is the Mt Everest ... if they are correct here:
> 
> https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2425588-1-1.html



Well, if true, I guess it sort of makes sense; Everest is the highest peak in the world, and the WS-15 is very much so when it comes to Chinese engine technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

@cirr ... care to explain?


----------



## 星海军事

Deino said:


> Seems as if Emei was never official and the WS-15 is the Mt Everest ... if they are correct here:
> 
> https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2425588-1-1.html



You've got it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

星海军事 said:


> You've got it.


So WS-15's name is Everest?  Regardless, a very fitting name given the monumental task ... 



Deino said:


> Seems as if Emei was never official and the WS-15 is the Mt Everest ... if they are correct here:
> 
> https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2425588-1-1.html


I'm not sure though. Numerous big shrimps have referred to it as "Emei". Even AVIC posters referred to it as "Emei" engine I believe. Maybe it is talking about how the effort to develop the WS-15 is comparable to that of scaling Mt. Everest, as opposed it to Everest being the actual name?


----------



## Akasa

星海军事 said:


> You've got it.



I'm more interested in the WS-19 _Huangshan_. Any updates in that area? The prototype is apparently under construction, with flight tests to begin by 2019.


----------



## 星海军事

SinoSoldier said:


> I'm more interested in the WS-19 _Huangshan_. Any updates in that area? The prototype is apparently under construction, with flight tests to begin by 2019.


It is not likely to begin flight tests before 2020.


----------



## Deino

Again so much on WS-15 from day one ! 

http://english.chinamil.com.cn/view/2017-03/13/content_7524017.htm



> *Stealth fighter soon powered by local engines*
> 
> A domestically developed engine will soon power the nation's latest stealth fighter jet, according to a senior scientist working for Aero Engine Corp of China.
> 
> "It will not take a long time for our fifth-generation combat plane to have China-made engines," said Chen Xiangbao, vice-president of the AECC Beijing Institute of Aeronautical Materials. Chen, also a member of the Chinese Academy of Engineering, was referring to the J-20 stealth fighter.
> 
> ...



Deino


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Again so much on WS-15 from day one !
> 
> http://english.chinamil.com.cn/view/2017-03/13/content_7524017.htm
> 
> 
> 
> Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Care to explain by a translation?


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> Again so much on WS-15 from day one !
> 
> http://english.chinamil.com.cn/view/2017-03/13/content_7524017.htm
> 
> 
> 
> Deino



Could've been referring to WS-10X.


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> Could've been referring to WS-10X.




Exactly, it surely refers to the WS-10X. But if an official report confirms that "a domestically developed engine will soon power" the J-20 for the first time it simply means no Chinese engine before powered it. and if this fits nicely to the new WS-10X it means there cannot be the WS-15 or already from day one.

Deino


----------



## Akasa

Figaro said:


> I don't think that anyone realistically thought the WS-15 was ready since day 1



Unless you also happen to think that it has 210+ kN of thrust.


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> Unless you also happen to think that it has 210+ kN of thrust.


----------



## LKJ86

J-20 WS-15

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 495619
> 
> J-20 WS-15



Could you please provide a full translation? Is it meant for the future as for when the J-20 powered by the WS-15 will appear or ...?


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Could you please provide a full translation? Is it meant for the future as for when the J-20 powered by the WS-15 will appear or ...?


He means that there are ppl who’ve already seen the J-20's WS-15 and cites how the engine has a different number of outer adjustment pieces (flaps?）than the WS-10 or AL-31F. I unfortunately read it too fast originally ... no real new developments at all from this post after all


----------



## Beast

Figaro said:


> He means that there are ppl who’ve seen WS-15 already equipped with a J-20. If he was just referring to future, this post would’ve been useless


Wrong translation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

Deino said:


> Could you please provide a full translation? Is it meant for the future as for when the J-20 powered by the WS-15 will appear or ...?


18 pieces of flaps are WS10IPE, 16 pieces are AL 31F, if you found it has neither 18 nor 16 pieces```then it is a jackpot

it also says, there arent many people that have the "previlege" to have a close look up to WS-15, but few people have seen it on J-20 but didnt realize it as they are "bad at counting" flaps

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## aliaselin

rcrmj said:


> 18 pieces of flaps are WS10IPE, 16 pieces are AL 31F, if you found it has neither 18 nor 16 pieces```then it is a jackpot


He has clearly hinted that WS-15 has 15 pieces as you can know the designation from the flap number, which means the flap number equals the designation number.


----------



## Deino

aliaselin said:


> He has clearly hinted that WS-15 has 15 pieces as you can know the designation from the flap number, which means the flap number equals the designation number.



But that is only coincidence...


----------



## aliaselin

Deino said:


> But that is only coincidence...


Yes，but Gongke has hinted it in this way. Moreover, he just gave another hint it is multiples of 3


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 495665


Wasn’t this drawing from last year?


----------



## +1S

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 495665


写小米：“那个J10B飞机上的矢量发动机可以看成装着WS15矢量喷管的WS10发动机，在矢量推力功能上没有差别，只不过在喷管的结构细节和材料选择上和WS15用的矢量喷管还是有一些区别WS15矢量喷管选用的材料要先进得多，锯齿裙边上V形挡边的结构形式也有差别”
“矢量喷管已经放弃了不太行原来那种三排调节片的结构了，只有收敛和扩散调节片。在我看来，实际上目前露面的几种360度矢量喷管的结构都差不多，包括EJ200、Type30和WS15”

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## foxhoundbis

+1S said:


> 写小米：“那个J10B飞机上的矢量发动机可以看成装着WS15矢量喷管的WS10发动机，在矢量推力功能上没有差别，只不过在喷管的结构细节和材料选择上和WS15用的矢量喷管还是有一些区别WS15矢量喷管选用的材料要先进得多，锯齿裙边上V形挡边的结构形式也有差别”
> “矢量喷管已经放弃了不太行原来那种三排调节片的结构了，只有收敛和扩散调节片。在我看来，实际上目前露面的几种360度矢量喷管的结构都差不多，包括EJ200、Type30和WS15”



Hey friend! Think of us, we are interested by China's WS-15, but unfortunately we do not understand chinese's tongue. A good translation would be highly appreciated.
Thx.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sinait

foxhoundbis said:


> Hey friend! Think of us, we are interested by China's WS-15, but unfortunately we do not understand chinese's tongue. A good translation would be highly appreciated.
> Thx.


This is from Google Translate.
Xiaomi write: "The vector engine on the J10B aircraft can be seen as the WS10 engine with the WS15 vector nozzle. There is no difference in the vector thrust performance, except for the structural details and material selection of the nozzle and the vector nozzle for the WS15. 
The material used on the WS15 vector nozzle is much more advanced, and the structure of the V-shaped rib on the serrated skirt is also different."
"The vector nozzle has given up the structure of the original Taihang three-row patch, not only the convergence and diffusion adjustment. In my opinion, the structure of several currently known 360-degree vector nozzles are similar, including EJ200, Type30 and WS15"
.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## foxhoundbis

sinait said:


> This is from Google Translate.


We are in 2018 could you find me a person in this world that does not know Google, and all its products, especially Google Translate. U cannot find other than those who are more than 90's years old. English is not my mother tongue as U can guess, but when I compare translation into french, most of the time GT is far to be accurate. And sometimes its translation mislead you. It is a robot, and not a man. It is obvious that I tried with GT, but I don't find it very interesting. For that reason I ask a simple translation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sinait

foxhoundbis said:


> We are in 2018 could you find me a person in this world that does not know Google, and all its products, especially Google Translate. U cannot find other than those who are more than 90's years old. English is not my mother tongue as U can guess, but when I compare translation into french, most of the time GT is far to be accurate. And sometimes its translation mislead you. It is a robot, and not a man. It is obvious that I tried with GT, but I don't find it very interesting. For that reason I ask a simple translation.


What I post is from Google Translate.
I put it in my post to give credit to them, so I don't take credit from their work.
So, was what I got out from Google Translate simple and clear enough for you.?

A little bit of simple and common sense skill is needed to get a good translation out.
Chinese technical text is quite difficult, so I think Google did a good job.
I would think priority for Google would be for Chinese to English, so Chinese to French may not be as good.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

foxhoundbis said:


> We are in 2018 could you find me a person in this world that does not know Google, and all its products, especially Google Translate. U cannot find other than those who are more than 90's years old. English is not my mother tongue as U can guess, but when I compare translation into french, most of the time GT is far to be accurate. And sometimes its translation mislead you. It is a robot, and not a man. It is obvious that I tried with GT, but I don't find it very interesting. For that reason I ask a simple translation.


Google translate is generally pretty poor for character based languages like Chinese ... especially for colloquial terms.


----------



## sinait

Figaro said:


> Google translate is generally pretty poor for character based languages like Chinese ... especially for colloquial terms.


Those who think you can just dump it in wholesale and have a perfect translation out will be disappointed.
So now that he knows that it needs a bit of intelligence and effort to get a good translation and instead of being appreciative, he rants.

It needs some work where the output text appear nonsensical or reversed and involves choosing from several texts with similar meanings that is optimum in this context.
I waited some time before I decided to contribute, preferring to let Chinese members do it.
Chinese technical text and jargon not my cup of tea, just like medical terms would be intelligible to most of us.
Google did a decent job considering the difficulties.
.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

sinait said:


> So, was what I got out from Google Translate simple and clear enough for you.?


Nope!



sinait said:


> ... so I think Google did a good job.


No one doubts.



sinait said:


> I would think priority for Google would be for Chinese to English, so *Chinese to French may not be as good*.


I never said that I used chineese to french. Most of translate tools are optimized for English tongue at first. I did not dare french.



sinait said:


> Those who think you can just dump it in wholesale and have *a perfect translation* out will be disappointed.


AFAIK, no one asks the perfection. However a translation is to translate an idea, from one tongue to another. This is not paste of words like a collection of 'spaghetti'. As I said GT is a robot, it is fine for some basic purpose, and in fact a good job of Google. However it does not suit for a complex text, and tongue, like it was posted. My purpose was to understand whether the WS-15 is ready or not. Is this engine still in test ? If yes, until when ? The J-20 will be equipped with this engine, so when ? I noticed that most of the time regarding chinese military news, it is always a matter of 'unknown' fans, if not 'fakes' on Internet went out of nowhere. No straightforward news of chinese's media mainstream networks. I don't know how to think.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

foxhoundbis said:


> I noticed that most of the time regarding chinese military news, it is always a matter of 'unknown' fans, if not 'fakes' on Internet went out of nowhere. No straightforward news of chinese's media mainstream networks. I don't know how to think.


This is the difference between China and other countries.
The ministry of national defense of China often confirms the informations at last minute, when almost everyone has known that.
So, you would often find many surprises.
Just like: J-20, Type 002/3...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sinait

foxhoundbis said:


> Nope!
> No one doubts.
> 
> I never said that I used chineese to french. Most of translate tools are optimized for English tongue at first. I did not dare french.
> 
> AFAIK, no one asks the perfection. However a translation is to translate an idea, from one tongue to another. This is not paste of words like a collection of 'spaghetti'. As I said GT is a robot, it is fine for some basic purpose, and in fact a good job of Google. However it does not suit for a complex text, and tongue, like it was posted. My purpose was to understand whether the WS-15 is ready or not. Is this engine still in test ? If yes, until when ? The J-20 will be equipped with this engine, so when ? I noticed that most of the time regarding chinese military news, it is always a matter of 'unknown' fans, if not 'fakes' on Internet went out of nowhere. No straightforward news of chinese's media mainstream networks. I don't know how to think.





foxhoundbis said:


> *Nope!*


Tsk tsk, what a rude and uncouth tone used.
Some would have thought I was paid by you to post the translation and you were unsatisfied with the job done.
Or did somebody told you that China owe you a prompt official update on their engine development?
.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## foxhoundbis

sinait said:


> Or did somebody told you that China owe you a prompt official update on their engine development?
> .


China owes me ? Owes me what ? First of all Iam not chinese, moreover I never asked the moon, just basic news. 
However as LKJ explained above, regarding China is quite normal, I forgot that with China is still miser regarding this kind of news.


----------



## LKJ86

foxhoundbis said:


> China owes me ? Owes me what ? First of all Iam not chinese, moreover I never asked the moon, just basic news.
> However as LKJ explained above, regarding China is quite normal, I forgot that with China is still miser regarding this kind of news.


1. If you want basic news, you can search the military websites, like Janes and so on.
2. Doing a good translation is not a easy job. You need some knowledge of military affairs, network argots, and so on. It takes time.
3. If you don't satisfy the translation, you can try other ways. But the person who provides the translation doesn't owe you anything. Nothing is taken for granted.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## gambit

foxhoundbis said:


> AFAIK, no one asks the perfection. However a translation is to translate an idea, from one tongue to another. This is not paste of words like a collection of 'spaghetti'. As I said GT is a robot, it is fine for some basic purpose, and in fact a good job of Google. However it does not suit for a complex text, and tongue, like it was posted. My purpose was to understand whether the WS-15 is ready or not. Is this engine still in test ? If yes, until when ? The J-20 will be equipped with this engine, so when ? I noticed that most of the time regarding chinese military news, it is always a matter of 'unknown' fans, if not 'fakes' on Internet went out of nowhere. No straightforward news of chinese's media mainstream networks. I don't know how to think.


You are asking for the impossible. Of the Chinese members in this forum, and their supporters, *NONE* of them served in the military and/or have experience in related fields. As such, they cannot explain complex technical issues involved. In the past, some tried and they ended up butchering the technical ideas in explaining and moving so far out that they ended up defying the laws of nature in trying to hype up Chinese accomplishments.

At the theoretical level, a turbine, aka 'jet', engine, is the same as the internal combustion engine in your car. We have an enclosed chamber, air, fuel, a fuel atomizing method, an air-fuel mixture method, an ignition source, and finally a method to control and exploit the explosion.

To move a car, we direct the fuel-air explosion into mechanical actions. Pistons, connecting rods, crankshafts, transmission, and so on...

To move an aircraft, we direct the fuel-air explosion into atmosphere, and Newton's laws takes over, to simplify a bit.

So then why is it -- if at the theoretical level both ideas are the same -- the turbine engine is so difficult to design, engineer, operate, and maintain? If you look at both methods, it seems the turbine engine should be easier to do all those things. Theoretically, we are not translating the explosion into mechanical actions. We are simply venting to atmosphere.

The theory is actually correct. The turbine engine is *CONCEPTUALLY* simpler precisely because we are not translating the force of the explosion into mechanical actions to the extent of the automobile version of the internal combustion engine.

In the auto version, we have mechanical translations in the up/down (pistons) and rotational (crankshaft).

In the turbine design, we have a rotating core shaft. And that is it.

The problem is *HEAT*.

Heat in the internal combustion engine design for the car is *NOT* constant. We have an explosion and then none for one chamber. Same for the other chambers. Now repeat for all chambers. It is called the 'firing order'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firing_order

Look at it another way...Heat and mechanical actions in the automobile version of the internal combustion engine comes in pulses. Because of this, and the lower temperature in the automobile version, materials in the auto version can be less 'exotic' which means easier to manufacture.

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engines


> Ignition of the fuel in the cylinders produces temperatures of *700°C* or more.



https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/courses/ww2/projects/jet-airplanes/how.html


> Inside the typical commercial jet engine, the fuel burns in the combustion chamber at up to *2000 degrees Celsius*.



So when we combine constant heat sources with higher temperature, we can see that even though the turbine engine is conceptually easier, the turbine engine is much more difficult to engineer and manufacture due to the demands for more 'exotic' materials that can withstand the constant heat.

- Concept
- Design
- Engineering
- Operation
- Maintenance

The last three items -- regarding heat -- are literally killers of any plan for a combat type of turbine engine.

The MIG-25 and SR-71.

The MIG is famous for its ability to reach Mach 2 or even higher. But it is well known that once the engine was pushed to that performance level, it must be scrapped at mission end. Not rebuilt, but essentially sent back to the manufacturer for disposition, which always means scrap status.

The SR, on the other hand, just needs its engine oil sampled and if there are any maintenance issues involved, line maintenance can be done by high school graduates.

What this means is that we can have high performance at the cost of operation and maintenance, or operation and maintenance at the trade-off of high performance. The SR-71 got all three items -- performance, operation, and maintenance -- done. The MIG-25 does not. When I was active duty and stationed at RAF Upper Heyford, I have friends at RAF Mildenhall who were with Det 4 SR-71 operators. The SR-71 can attain speed of higher than Mach 3+. Everyone knew it then, and everyone knew it now. And the PW J58 engine does not need a rebuilt after each unofficial Mach 3+++ speed run.

Here is an excellent laymen level source to understanding the turbine engine, specifically on the difficulties of heat...

https://www.americanscientist.org/article/each-blade-a-single-crystal

The SR-71 is mentioned along with other military high performance combat aircrafts. The idea that each compressor blade is essentially a *SINGLE CONTINUOUS CRYSTAL* is mind boggling, to say the least. But this is the problem for any country trying to match the performance level of what have been accomplished by US or by anyone else.







The core would be about 1/3 down the overall length of the entire engine. That means each blade would be 1/4 the height of the man. Now imagine a blade to be a *SINGLE CONTINUOUS CRYSTAL*.

The J-20 can have the power necessary from its engines, but does the engine design itself have the durability and reliability necessary for the jet to have long term deployment? There were very few SR-71 and yet whenever the need for information, the jet always delivered. That is the level of overall performance the military want and need.

Finally...You will not see anything like what I posted above from the Chinese members here. Nothing I posted is 'classified' secret. There is not a single math equation. And yet, am willing to bet *YOUR* understanding of the difficulties of designing a high performance turbine engine, civilian and military, just increased dramatically. From this point on, any claim about the WS-15 must be taken with doubts and hold against what you learned about the turbine engine from publicly available sources.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## lmjiao



Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## CriticalThought

gambit said:


> Seriously, I explained the foundation of the turbine engine better than *ANY* of the Chinese members here can.
> 
> This is where you -- in your shortsightedness -- failed to understand. For every participating member, there is an unknown number of silent readers out there who have deeper technical interests than you and your fellow Chinese. It is they -- not you Chinese -- who I focused on. My post 593 will be the starting point about the turbine engine that none of you Chinese will ever be able to provide.



@Deino @The Eagle @WebMaster this guy is engaging in blatant trolling. In the guise of presenting 'technical knowledge' that is not needed on this particular thread, he is derailing the thread, insulting Chinese members, and starting a flame war. Kindly take notice.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## The Eagle

Would be better to stop judging each, debate with knowledge & info available, share your ideas, opinion, analysis or observations & learn; and in-case of conflict agree to disagree with respect and move-on. 

Regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## gambit

NotSoCriticalThought said:


> @Deino @The Eagle @WebMaster this guy is engaging in blatant trolling. In the guise of presenting 'technical knowledge' that is *not needed on this particular thread*, he is derailing the thread, insulting Chinese members, and starting a flame war. Kindly take notice.


How is the information presented in post 593 'not needed'? Determined as 'not needed' by whom or what committee? Can *YOU* or anyone dispute the information presented?

We have an internet translation of Chinese into English that was essentially gibberish. No fault of anyone. Mr. Fox in post 584 page 39 expressed his difficulty in understanding the technical issues involved via this seriously flawed internet translation.

It took merely 10 min to review every single post in this thread that went back one yr. The bulk of this thread is about the J-20 using a baseless speculative engine by a person looking at distorted images. Most repeated the same line about making a jet engine is difficult but not a single person explained *WHY* and *HOW* is it difficult. Interested laymen is bombarded with foreign acronyms with hardly any explanation of what those letters mean and in what context.

For example...Someone mentioned FADEC -- Full Authority Digital Engine Control. Great. If something has 'full authority', does that mean there is 'partial authority'? Has anyone from the Chinese camp made any effort to explain that? Zippo. That is a serious problem on any publicly available forum when it comes to technical issues, that usually, it is rare that someone make efforts to explain things starting from the foundation level and work that thing all the way to final product.

What I presented in post 593, if you already know, leave it alone. The info would be useful to someone else. If you can challenge the info as false, then prove yourself. I gave the interested layman something to stand upon while none of you could.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxhoundbis

gambit said:


> You are asking for the impossible. .
> ....
> And yet, am willing to bet *YOUR* understanding of the difficulties of designing a high performance turbine engine, civilian and military, just increased dramatically. From this point on, any claim about the *WS-15 must be taken with doubts* and hold against what you learned about the turbine engine from publicly available sources.



I studied in a far past mechanical engineering, nowadays I worked as java-analyst developper no one is perfect -french expression  -. I understood what U mean, however, objectively I think chinese can afford to overcome these difficulties. Maybe not presently, but in the next future, if not next year, I think they can.
Thx for your accurate explanations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

WS-15, WS-10, WZ-9...



LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 495619
> 
> J-20 WS-15





LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 495665

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Please add a short translation or at least summary.


----------



## lcloo

It is a half year report by AVIC Aero-engine company in compliance to Shanghai & Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Financial data aside, the key points that interested us is:-

The company is currently producing WS-15, WS-10 and WZ-9, basically covering the needs of almost all aircraft currently in (PLAAF, PLA Aviation & PLAN Aviation) service.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## j20blackdragon

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 496705
> 
> WS-15, WS-10, WZ-9...





lcloo said:


> It is a half year report by AVIC Aero-engine company in compliance to Shanghai & Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Financial data aside, the key points that interested us is:-
> 
> The company is currently producing WS-15, WS-10 and WZ-9, basically covering the needs of almost all aircraft currently in (PLAAF, PLA Aviation & PLAN Aviation) service.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## CriticalThought

gambit said:


> How is the information presented in post 593 'not needed'? Determined as 'not needed' by whom or what committee? Can *YOU* or anyone dispute the information presented?
> 
> We have an internet translation of Chinese into English that was essentially gibberish. No fault of anyone. Mr. Fox in post 584 page 39 expressed his difficulty in understanding the technical issues involved via this seriously flawed internet translation.
> 
> It took merely 10 min to review every single post in this thread that went back one yr. The bulk of this thread is about the J-20 using a baseless speculative engine by a person looking at distorted images. Most repeated the same line about making a jet engine is difficult but not a single person explained *WHY* and *HOW* is it difficult. Interested laymen is bombarded with foreign acronyms with hardly any explanation of what those letters mean and in what context.
> 
> For example...Someone mentioned FADEC -- Full Authority Digital Engine Control. Great. If something has 'full authority', does that mean there is 'partial authority'? Has anyone from the Chinese camp made any effort to explain that? Zippo. That is a serious problem on any publicly available forum when it comes to technical issues, that usually, it is rare that someone make efforts to explain things starting from the foundation level and work that thing all the way to final product.
> 
> What I presented in post 593, if you already know, leave it alone. The info would be useful to someone else. If you can challenge the info as false, then prove yourself. I gave the interested layman something to stand upon while none of you could.





gambit said:


> You are welcome.
> 
> Precisely because this is a publicly available forum and that not everyone is proficient in English, I stay away from overly complex technical language and if there are any acronyms, I make efforts to explain not only what the letters stands for but also any ideas behind them. Those who know -- anything about any subject of interests -- owe at least that degree of consideration for the many silent readers and interested laymen out there.
> 
> As for the J-20's engine problem...Keywords search for you: 'operational tempo'
> 
> https://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/parameters/articles/99autumn/castro.htm
> 
> China have no choice but to work on the engine until success. There is no turning back. The J-20 is essentially finished with only Propulsion as the limiting factor regarding the planned operational tempo of a J-20 squadron.
> 
> I am USAF veteran. F-111 and F-16, so I will speak on the air operations aspect of OPTEMPO.
> 
> The J-20 -- based upon best known information -- is supposed to be a long range interceptor. The engine for this platform must have durability as primary consideration.
> 
> An intercept at peace time is not the same as an intercept while on a war footing.
> 
> For starter, a peace time intercept is usually an identification and escort mission. This will require visual contact with an unknown target, establish communication, and escort the target to a different location. A peace time intercept is normally of a non hostile scenario, or to put it in legal language, innocent until proven guilty.
> 
> On the other hand, a war time intercept is always premised that the target is hostile, or to put the scenario as guilty until proven innocent.
> 
> In both scenarios, speed is important. We want to meet the target, peace time or war time, as far away from us as possible. So the apparent assumption is that the engine must be capable of Mach so-and-so. That is not true.
> 
> A low durability engine have a negative effect on OPTEMPO regardless of how fast it can make the jet go. Accidental incursions by ignorant and/or lost aircrafts are unplanned. Neither are attempts at air defense penetration by hostile air forces. In both scenarios, the low durability engine requires higher degrees of support elements such as extra whole engines, manpower, and assorted parts. If any of these elements are lacking, the interceptor will not be able to fly as much as these unplanned events occurs. An intercept that is closer to home base is better than no intercept at all. This is the reality that every squadron lived with since the beginning of air combat. The worst possibility is that the low durability engine increased the odds of combat losses because the engine may fail in-flight.
> 
> A high durability engine have less demands on support elements, the squadron's tactical utility is increased due to geographical deployment flexibility because of the lower demands on logistics, decreased preparation time for any deployment, and increased combat survivability because the pilot will not hesitate to use the engine to its maximum potential. Another benefit is that of deterrence. Since the high durability engine contributes to the higher OPTEMPO per aircraft, the squadron as a whole have a higher deterrent factor in the enemy's calculations.
> 
> *Air Dominance*. The ability of an air force to compel other air forces to rearray themselves, often into subordinate postures.
> 
> *Air Superiority*. The ability of an air force to achieve control of contested airspace, repeatedly if necessary, and if there are any losses, those losses would not pose a statistical deterrence to that ability.
> 
> *Air Supremacy*. He flies, he dies. In other words, control of airspace is absolute and unchallengeable. If the enemy flies, he dies.
> 
> All of the above is not possible without endurance. Air superiority is not possible without persistence of presence, it means you must be able to return again and again, and you must be able to do so at your tactical convenience. Air power is more possible with persistence of presence than of attainable speed.
> 
> Most people thinks that air refueling is about extending range. But if there is enough fuel to fly longer in distance, then why not use the fuel to fly longer in time. That is persistence of presence made possible by air refueling.
> 
> An interception mission is not about flying as fast as possible to point X, shoot one or maybe a few missiles, then fly home. Even if you scared of the intruders without firing a shot, an interception mission requires your continuous presence over that area of violation for as long as your fuel can hold in order for you to determine your mission is successful. A high durability engine make this possible.
> 
> The J-20 have a very high standard to meet -- US. Not Russia, but US. If you see any Chinese boasting of how fast the J-20 can fly with WS-whatever-designator-number, ignore it. US airpower, of all branches of services, is based more upon persistence of presence, and less on speed. The PLAAF generals understand this better than the Internet Chinese.



@Deino @The Eagle @WebMaster this is repeat thread derailment. This man is making a mockery of the forum by using his perceived respectability to throw random information which is not the main topic of this thread. This information is best shared on a separate dedicated thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Figaro

lcloo said:


> It is a half year report by AVIC Aero-engine company in compliance to Shanghai & Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Financial data aside, the key points that interested us is:-
> 
> The company is currently producing WS-15, WS-10 and WZ-9, basically covering the needs of almost all aircraft currently in (PLAAF, PLA Aviation & PLAN Aviation) service.


It says major products are WS-15, WS-10, and WZ-9 ... not that they are in current production (at least the WS-15)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Figaro said:


> It says major products are WS-15, WS-10, and WZ-9 ... not that they are in current production (at least the WS-15)



No, it clearly mentioned that these types of jet engines have been utilized by the current deployed aircrafts.

No native Chinese readers can be mistaken with that.

主要产品包括涡扇-15、涡扇-10和涡轴-9等，*基本覆盖了现役全部机型*

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Paul2

gambit said:


> The core would be about 1/3 down the overall length of the entire engine. That means each blade would be 1/4 the height of the man. Now imagine a blade to be a *SINGLE CONTINUOUS CRYSTAL*.


Many engines built in eighties and on had monocrystalline blades, but kudos to P&W for having them in sixties. The next level over that is putting reinforcing mesh from some cermet, boron, or silicon carbide fibre inside the monocrystal without disrupting the crystal growth. R179 made by Soyuz had such blades, but allegedly, the price for that was very low yields.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 星海军事

lcloo said:


> It is a half year report by AVIC Aero-engine company in compliance to Shanghai & Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Financial data aside, the key points that interested us is:-
> 
> The company is currently producing WS-15, WS-10 and WZ-9, basically covering the needs of almost all aircraft currently in (PLAAF, PLA Aviation & PLAN Aviation) service.



It is the *stock analysis* of AAPC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

HO HO, Santa Claus has arrived early to our house. I have got my Christmas Present, early.

北京钢研高纳科技股份有限公司

http://www.cisri-gaona.com.cn/





CISRI-Gaona is a Chinese company that makes all kinds hi-tech superalloy products, including components for Chinese Aircraft Engines.


It has accidentally published its production projection figures for various Chinese Aircraft Engines, including the WS-15, WS-18 and WS-19.





Here is the my translation:


The national WS-15 engine is the highest priority project, future demand estimate is 5 engines per year. This is same for the WS-19 engine. The WS-15’s forged Titanium component price is 190 million Yuan each, and for the WS-19, it is 120 million Yuan. CISRI-Gaona has became a qualified supplier.

The following is the production projection figures.









Notice: the *Market* *Share* row. For 2020, the company’s market share for WS-15 and WS-19 is 20%. This means CISRI-Gaona is not the only suppliers for the same components. 

If 5 is 20% of the market share, it means, the annual total production number for WS-15 is *25*.

Strangely, though, the production estimate is the same for 2020 to 2025, yet the market share goes up from 20% to 50%.

So, I will take the market share figure with some salts.

This is the original post: https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2603525-1-1.html
Please take a quick look. I won't be surprise the Chinese Censors will delete it, soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paul2

Asoka said:


> The national WS-15 engine is the highest priority project, future demand estimate is 5 engines per year. This is same for the WS-19 engine. The WS-15’s forged Titanium component price is 190 million Yuan each, and for the WS-19, it is 120 million Yuan. CISRI-Gaona has beca


 so expensive


----------



## casual

Asoka said:


> The national WS-15 engine is the highest priority project, future demand estimate is 5 engines per year. This is same for the WS-19 engine. The WS-15’s forged Titanium component price is 190 million Yuan each, and for the WS-19, it is 120 million Yuan. CISRI-Gaona has became a qualified supplier.



whoa, is that per engine cost? that's way more then the F119


----------



## Ali_Baba

Wow!!! V.v.v expensive, esp when you consider Chinese Labour rates compared to USA labour rates. Why soo expensive ? Profiterring ?


----------



## kuge

190万元 is 1.9 million yuan
it also says ws18 encountered many issues that currently it is progressing at half pace

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

casual said:


> whoa, is that per engine cost? that's way more then the F119


Prices of forged alloy metal components for engines. A complete engine would be more.

120万 is not 120 million, it is 1.20 million Yuan or roughly 170,000 US dollar.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

The market will go from 20％ to 50％, but the production number remained same.

That's why I didn't take this report seriously, since you cannot predict the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The market will go from 20％ to 50％, but the production number remained same.
> 
> That's why I didn't take this report seriously, since you cannot predict the future.


Yeah, 10 engines in 2026 is a joke. More like 1,000.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

casual said:


> whoa, is that per engine cost? that's way more then the F119


Sorry, it's 1.9 million Yuan per component.



ZeEa5KPul said:


> Yeah, 10 engines in 2026 is a joke. More like 1,000.


I think this production/sales estimate is done by an Intern, who don't know what she/he is doing.



lcloo said:


> Prices of forged alloy metal components for engines. A complete engine would be more.
> 
> 120万 is not 120 million, it is 1.20 million Yuan or roughly 170,000 US dollar.



Thanks for the correction. I post this late at night. My brain probably was already half asleep.

I don't think this Chinese Company knows how many J-20 will be produced in the next few year. So there is no way this person, who did this sales projection table knows his company's accurate share for the WS-15 production will be even for 2021.

But 5 engines or 20% for this Company's 2020 market share for WS-15 production seems in the ball park range. 

This also indicate total production for WS-15 for 2020, will be *25 engines*, good enough for *12* *J-20*, with one spare.

This is inline with our knowledge that J-20 is still in low serial production run.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Here some details of those superalloy components for WS-10 and WS-15:








1. WS-10 Engine K4169 Alloy Bearing Inclined Plate, dimension is 860mm x 180m M^2 mm, currently it is in serial production stage, annual demand 300 units.

2. WS-15 Engine K4169 Alloy Bearing Frame, 900mm x 180m M^2 mm, low serial production test run, possible annual demand in the future, 300 units.

3. Intriguingly, it also mentioned a Fifth Generation Aircraft Engine JG4247 Alloy Turbine Rear Box, 900mm x 120m M2 mm, research stage, future annual demand, 100 units.

Note: The Chinese designated J-20 as a 4th generation fighter, corresponds to the 5th generation of SU-57 and F-22. So a 5th Generation fighter for the Chinese, must be something one generation ahead of J-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ZeEa5KPul said:


> Yeah, 10 engines in 2026 is a joke. More like 1,000.



Let's say if China has produced 25 WS-15 engines in 2020, which could equip for 10 J-20 aircraft fighters, while the rest of the 5 engines would be served as the backup.

After 5-6 years of flight, the engine should gradually become more mature hence the production would go up after 5-6 years.

And how can the production would still go down? This kind of information goes straight against the fundamental logic.

This report can only prove that the J-20 has started to equip with the WS-15 engine, but the exact production number remained unknown.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Asoka

*More Components Details for WS-10, WS-12, and WS-15:*






1. *WS-10* *Catapult* Engine K41, K424 Alloy Deflector, typical forged maximum dimension, 400 x 150mm, forecasted annual demand 50 units.

2. *WS-12* *Catapult* Engine Mar-m2 47, K640 Alloy Deflector, maximum forged dimension 380 x 80mm, forecasted annual demand 50 units.

3. *WS-15 Engine* K424, K4648 Alloy small and medium Nozzle components, maximum forged dimension 400mm x 200mm x 60 mm, forecasted annual demand 200 units.

Note: It is explicitly stated that there is a *catapult* version of the *WS-10* and *WS-12* engines. Is these two engines going to be used in the Aircrafts that will be catapulted off China’s third Aircraft Carrier, which is currently under construction?

Note: the forecasted annual demand for WS-15 K424, K4648 components is 200 Units, or 100 J-20 per year.

Note: We know China is building a third Aircraft Carrier with Electromagnetic Catapult capability, like that of the USS Ford Class Carriers. And we know Chinese Navy is developing a Carrier based 4th Generation Stealth Fighter, probably based on the J-20 fighter.

Note: So it is possible that the J-20 with WS-10 like nozzles, is probably a navalized version of the J-20 with the WS-10, WS-12 Catapult Engines, as mentioned in this report.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

*Forged Nozzle Petal Components:*






1. *WS-10 Engine* K424 Alloy Sealing plate, Adjustment plate, maximum dimension 300mm x 40mm x 1.2mm, serial production, annual demand, 300 units.

2. *WS-12/13 Engine* K424 Alloy Adjustment Plate, maximum dimension 300mm x 40mm x 1.2mm, annual demand 300 units.

3. *WS-15 Engine *JG4246A Alloy *Thrust Vector Control (TVC)* Nozzle Petals, each engine has 12 units, typical largest forged dimension 500mm x 40mm x 1.2mm, currently it is under testing stage, after serial production began, annual demand, 200 units.

Note: So, there is a version of the* WS-15* *TVC* Engine, currently under testing, that has 12 Nozzle Petals. 

So look for a Chinese TVC Engine with *12 nozzle petals*. This could be the future serial production version of WS-15 TVC Engine, with a large production volume of 200 units per year.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

If this is all from the same source with the retarded 5 WS-15s in 2026, then the whole thing is suspect.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

*The New WS-15 3D TVC Engine*










*The New WS-15 3D TVC Engine*





*The New WS-15 has 12 Nozzle Petals*

*



* *



* 
*The New WS-15 has 12 fuel nozzles in its Annular Afterburner Flameholder*

*



* 
*The New WS-15 under going testing and evaluation.*

1. In *Nov 8, 2018*, a new video appeared in the Chinese internet showing a new Jet Engine with a stunning 3D Thrust Vectoring Nozzle (TVC). 

2. This video *did* *not* disclosed the model name for this Engine, and this has led to many people speculating that this is the latest version of the mysterious WS-15 engine intended for the J-20 stealth fighter.

3. We can see that this very modern looking, state of the art, innovative, high quality build Engine has three layers of nozzle petals, which is unseen in any of the previous Chinese, Russian, or American engines.

4. It also has *12 Nozzle petals*, capable of pivoting in 3D.

5. Furthermore, it has *12 fuel nozzles* in its Annular Afterburner Flameholder. The Russian AL-31 Engine has 11, and the Chinese WS-10 has 10. 

6. This innovative Engine *has* *not* been spotted in any of the J-20 stealth fighter, yet.

7. The current WS-15 engine, which has been powering the J-20, since the beginning of the test flights in Jan 2011, has 11 Nozzle petals and 11 fuel nozzles in the afterburner flameholder. 

8. Although, it looks like the Russian *AL-31* engine, but it has been clearly shown in more than one picture that it is a *3D* TVC Engine.

9. With such innovative *WS-15 3D TVC Engine* in development and testing, it is no wonder that the PLAAF has decided to keep the current J-20 in low serial trial production run. 

10. They are probably waiting for this new Engine for the large production serial run, in the range of *100* *J-20* aircraft per year.

11. This is the video link showing the new WS-15 3D TVC Engine.








ZeEa5KPul said:


> If this is all from the same source with the retarded 5 WS-15s in 2026, then the whole thing is suspect.



This 5 engine forecast from 2020-2026 is for this company's *20%* market share of the WS-15 production. This new company was formed in 2006. It is not the only company which will supply the same components.

This indicate the current total production is 25 engines, which is inline with our knowledge that J-20 is is still in low serial production run.

I don't think the analyst who produced the sales forecast report knows the PLAAF High Command's plan's actual production figure for 2026. So, it is a good idea to take low number of 5 engines for 2026, with generous amount of salts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

Asoka said:


> This 5 engine forecast from 2020-2026 is for this company's *20%* market share of the WS-15 production. This new company was formed in 2006. It is not the only company which will supply the same components.
> 
> This indicate the current total production is 25 engines, which is inline with our knowledge that J-20 is is still in low serial production run.
> 
> I don't think the analyst who produced the sales forecast report knows the PLAAF High Command's plan's actual production figure for 2026. So, it is a good idea to take low number of 5 engines for 2026, with generous amount of salts.


It's even dumber than I thought. The company projects that it'll keep making 5 engines/year from now until 2026, but its share will climb from 20% to 50%. That means the *total* number of WS-15s being produced will go down. That "projection" is worthless. You don't need to take it with a generous amount of salt, you need to take it with a salt mine

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

But it is safe to say 5 engines for this Company in 2020, is a good estimate.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

The sheer detailedness of this report question its very credibility. Typically, credible leaks come only from vague or metaphorical releases .... not highly detailed reports.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

ZeEa5KPul said:


> It's even dumber than I thought. The company projects that it'll keep making 5 engines/year from now until 2026, but its share will climb from 20% to 50%. That means the *total* number of WS-15s being produced will go down. That "projection" is worthless. You don't need to take it with a generous amount of salt, you need to take it with a salt mine
> 
> I have already pointed that the forecast for 2020-2026 and its market share of 20-50% do not make much sense.
> 
> But is safe to say, this company is making components for WS-15, and many other Chinese Engines, and that WS-15 is now in low serial production run, not in testing/development stage.



I have already pointed that the forecast for 2020-2026 and its market share of 20-50% do not make much sense.

But is safe to say, this company is making components for WS-15, and many other Chinese Engines, and that WS-15 is now in low serial production run, not in testing/development stage.



Figaro said:


> The sheer detailedness of this report question its very credibility. Typically, credible leaks come only from vague or metaphorical releases .... not highly detailed reports.



It is not a deliberate leak. This report was quickly deleted in the company's website, and replaced with a report that do not include military engines, such as WS-10, WS-15.

But this original report was spotted by some enthusiasts and posted in a Forum.

This is one more nail into the coffin that WS-15 is still years away from flying with J-20.

I have been claiming that an early version of WS-15 has been flying with J-20, since the beginning of the testing program in Jan, 2011. And that this early WS-15 Engine with its *AL-31-like* nozzle has 3D TVC capability, with minimal 210Kn thrust.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> ...
> I have been claiming that an early version of WS-15 has been flying with J-20, since the beginning of the testing program in Jan, 2011. And that this early WS-15 Engine with its *AL-31-like* nozzle has 3D TVC capability, with minimal 210Kn thrust.




Oh please ... not that BS again.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Oh please ... not that BS again.


Back to 2-1/2 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> Back to 2-1/2 years ago



A Wise Chinese Sage said: "You can only bring the Ox to the water hole, but you can't make it drink the water, if it doesn't want to." 

That is, you can't fix stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

The document that we are looking at is 公司公告 or Corporate Announcement, which is a document every public listed company is obliged to publish whenever there is an event that will affect its financial standing.

This is a strict requirement imposed by almost every Stock Exchange around the World. The purpose being to inform investors and potential investors on activities that will affect their investment.

Thus this corporate announcement should not be taken as a affirmative document when we view it with regard to military development.

The number of forged alloy component sets is an estimation as clearly printed on this document thus is not confirmed as such, and what is not stated is whether these components are for test engines or serial production engines, or for engines of certain variants as in variant-A, or B, C D etc.

The person preparing this document is from corporate finance of a public company and not a military source, thus we should reserve some doubt on its accuracy with regard to military development.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

lcloo said:


> The document that we are looking at is 公司公告 or Corporate Announcement, which is a document every public listed company is obliged to publish whenever there is an event that will affect its financial standing.
> 
> This is a strict requirement imposed by almost every Stock Exchange around the World. The purpose being to inform investors and potential investors on activities that will affect their investment.
> 
> Thus this corporate announcement should not be taken as a affirmative document when we view it with regard to military development.
> 
> The number of forged alloy component sets is an estimation as clearly printed on this document thus is not confirmed as such, and what is not stated is whether these components are for test engines or serial production engines, or for engines of certain variants as in variant-A, or B, C D etc.
> 
> The person preparing this document is from corporate finance of a public company and not a military source, thus we should reserve some doubt on its accuracy with regard to military development.



This is totally B.S.

This is clearly an internal production projection document intended for internal circulation, only, that got accidentally released.

It is fine to release civilians engine production figures, but to release military engine figures, with very specific part names and dimensions, is clearly a very severe violation of security protocol.

Somebody will be severely punished for this lapse.

A competent Aviation Engineer with CAD/CAM tools could reproduce a whole engine, with those specific part names and dimensions and arrive at at fair estimates of its overall dimensions and power rating.

This is a leak of the most severe category.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

Asoka said:


> This is totally B.S.
> 
> This is clearly an internal production projection document intended for internal circulation, only, that got accidentally released.
> 
> It is fine to release civilians engine production figures, but to release military engine figures, with very specific part names and dimensions, is clearly a very severe violation of security protocol.
> 
> Somebody will be severely punished for this lapse.
> 
> A competent Aviation Engineer with CAD/CAM tools could reproduce a whole engine, with those specific part names and dimensions and arrive at at fair estimates of its overall dimensions and power rating.
> 
> This is a leak of the most severe category.


Obviously you do not understand the meaning of 公司公告。 Just go to their official website, these 公司公告 is for public viewing. And have you invested in public listed shares? Go to any website of the stock exchange or share investment sections of a commercial bank or a stock broker, these type of public announcement is available for all to see.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

lcloo said:


> Obviously you do not understand the meaning of 公司公告。 Just go to their official website, these 公司公告 is for public viewing. And have you invested in public listed shares? Go to any website of the stock exchange or share investment sections of a commercial bank or a stock broker, these type of public announcement is available for all to see.



The original report with the military engine figures was quickly deleted and replaced by a report with civilian engine figures only.

This indicates the original report was released accidentally.

But luckily for us and CIA/NSA/MI6, somebody has posted the original report on a Forum, before it got deleted. They should thank me, for this free intelligence scoop of the decade. I have always thought the secrecy concerning WS-15 is too excessive.

And if the report was intended for "stock exchange or share investment sections of a commercial bank or a stock broker", *they are obliged to tell the truth*. 

*It is not a license to lie*, if the report was "public announcement " intended for the public consumption.

Somebody in China is going to have a *very* *hot* New Year.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## lcloo

Asoka said:


> The original report with the military engine figures was quickly deleted and replaced by a report with civilian engine figures only.
> 
> This indicates the original report was released accidentally.
> 
> But luckily for us and CIA/NSA/MI6, somebody has posted the original report on a Forum, before it got deleted. They should thank me, for this free intelligence scoop of the decade. I have always thought the secrecy concerning WS-15 is too excessive.
> 
> And if the report was intended for "stock exchange or share investment sections of a commercial bank or a stock broker", *they are obliged to tell the truth*.
> 
> *It is not a license to lie*, if the report was "public announcement " intended for the public consumption.
> 
> Somebody in China is going to have a *very* *hot* New Year.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Asoka

lcloo said:


> View attachment 595616
> View attachment 595617
> View attachment 595618
> View attachment 595619



yes, but does those reports mention anything about WS-10, WS-15 and other military engines, or they are just civilian engines?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## lcloo

Asoka said:


> yes, but does those reports mention anything about WS-10, WS-15 and other military engines, or they are just civilian engines?


This is the "internal document" you said, and I just downloaded it within minutes.

I try to upload here but the forum rule prohibited it because the file is too large (5.14MB), why not you just go to their website to find out instead of me posting some more disclosure.

It is a long PDF document, you may search its content, who knows may be they have deleted the sensitive part? I assumed you can read Chinese?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

I have told you that the original document containing the WS-10 and WS-15 has been deleted. 
Show me, in your downloaded document, that still has the WS-15 figures.

You can search for the "XS-15" keyword.

You obviously haven't read the report you said you have downloaded, otherwise, you will notice it is a report on "河北钢研德凯科技有限公司, 铝镁钛轻质合金精铸件项目, 可行性研究报告"

中国联合工程有限公司 2 0 19 年 6 月

It is not about production forecast for the coming years.

It is an Engineering feasibility study on some light weight *Aluminum-magnesium-titanium alloy* forged components (铝镁钛轻质合金精铸件).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## lcloo

Asoka said:


> I have told you that the original document containing the WS-10 and WS-15 has been deleted.
> Show me, in your downloaded document, that still has the WS-15 figures.
> 
> You can search for the "XS-15" keyword.
> 
> You obviously haven't read the report you said you have downloaded, otherwise, you will notice it is a report on "河北钢研德凯科技有限公司, 铝镁钛轻质合金精铸件项目, 可行性研究报告"
> 
> 中国联合工程有限公司 2 0 19 年 6 月
> 
> It is not about production forecast for the coming years.
> 
> It is an Engineering feasibility study on some light weight *Aluminum-magnesium-titanium alloy* forged components (铝镁钛轻质合金精铸件).


My friend, 公司公告 means Corporate Public Announcement as in 公司公共报告。Internal document would be 公司內部通告/某某部门通告。

After all these publicity on the internet for more like week now, the authority would have the sensitive military part deleted but not the document. Deleting a part of document does not mean the whole document is deleted.

Internal document very seldom go up to 267 pages (your post #617), it will be a extremely rare find. Most of the company internal document seldom have more than 5 pages, check your own company's internal document, i.e. if you are a working adult.

Sign off now for lunch.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

You are a member of the *Emergency Damage Control Team*, from the PLA's Counter Intelligence, aren't you?

I don't envy your job, right now.

This is a major leak of first order magnitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> You are a member of the *Emergency Damage Control Team*, from the PLA's Counter Intelligence, aren't you?
> 
> I don't envy your job, right now.
> 
> This is a major leak of first order magnitude.



Yes ... and in Your opinion it once again confirms that all J-20s are flying from day one with +210kN thrust pre-serial WS-15 engines.... we all know.

I must admit as @Figaro stated, seems as if it is some sort of 'deja vu' and we are again back on square one.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Yes ... and in Your opinion it once again confirms that all J-20s are flying from day one with +210kN thrust pre-serial WS-15 engines.... we all know.
> 
> I must admit as @Figaro stated, seems as if it is some sort of 'deja vu' and we are again back on square one.



Yes, Truth don't go away. They like stick around "if it is some sort of 'deja vu' "
This, I don't agreed with you.

The new 3D TVC WS-15, with 3 layers of saw-tooth nozzle petals, is an industrial engineering marvel to behold.

No wonder that PLAAF is willing to wait for this new Marvel, keep the J-20 at low production, with the current WS-15 engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Silicon0000

5 could be MOQ (minimum order quantity) for one batch ........ May be


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> Yes, Truth don't go away. They like stick around "if it is some sort of 'deja vu' "
> This, I don't agreed with you.
> 
> The new 3D TVC WS-15, with 3 layers of saw-tooth nozzle petals, is an industrial engineering marvel to behold.
> 
> No wonder that PLAAF is willing to wait for this new Marvel, keep the J-20 at low production, with the current WS-15 engine.




You are funny ... on the ne suds you claim the WS-15 is already operational from day one, in parallel you jump the waggon "is willing to wait for this new Marvel", while at the same time fully ignore thaf the currently produced J-20s are using a WS-10C.... 

Your whe theory simply does not fit!


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> You are funny ... on the ne suds you claim the WS-15 is already operational from day one, in parallel you jump the waggon "is willing to wait for this new Marvel", while at the same time fully ignore thaf the currently produced J-20s are using a WS-10C....
> 
> Your whe theory simply does not fit!



The Chinese have a saying that says: "You can't wait up a person who is pretending to be sleeping."

I have already said a hundred times before that the WS-15 engine that J-20 have flown with, since day one, is an early version. They have changed the Engine around 2015, that is shorter and have an entirely different sound, which sounds like the howling of a dragon, as some Chinese said. This is the interim model in low serial production of *25* *engines* per year.

Now, a new version with *3 layers* of nozzle petals is under development. 

This is probably the mass production model that will produce *200 units* per year, or 100 J-20 per years, beginning in the middle of 2020's.


They have at least 3 versions now, according to an earlier leak, which an award was given to a design who improved a third Patch of the Engines.

Now, the mystery of WS-10/12, with saw-tooth nozzles, on J-20 is solved. These two engines are for the navalized version of J-20 to be used on China's future Aircraft Carriers, with Electromagnetic Catapult.

These WS-10 engines will *synchronize* their power output with the EM Catapult, which could adjust the power output level, depending on the weight of the aircraft, to be launched. In this way, the maximum g-force load on the pilot and the aircraft is greatly reduced, and lessen the damages on the pilot's spine and delicate electronic equipment.

But there is no need to knock down those WS-10/12 engines with stealthy saw-tooth nozzle petals. We don't know the maximum thrust are. They could be a giant leap above the WS-10A.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> The Chinese have a saying that says: "You can't wait up a person who is pretending to be sleeping."
> 
> I have already said a hundred times before that the WS-15 engine that J-20 have flown with, since day one, is an early version. They have changed the Engine around 2015, that is shorter and have an entirely different sound, which sounds like the howling of a dragon, as some Chinese said. This is the interim model in low serial production of *25* *engines* per year.
> 
> Now, a new version with *3 layers* of nozzle petals is under development.
> 
> This is probably the mass production model that will produce *200 units* per year, or 100 J-20 per years, beginning in the middle of 2020's.
> 
> 
> They have at least 3 versions now, according to an earlier leak, which an award was given to a design who improved a third Patch of the Engines.
> 
> Now, the mystery of WS-10/12, with saw-tooth nozzles, on J-20 is solved. These two engines are for the navalized version of J-20 to be used on China's future Aircraft Carriers, with Electromagnetic Catapult.
> 
> These WS-10 engines will *synchronize* their power output with the EM Catapult, which could adjust the power output level, depending on the weight of the aircraft, to be launched. In this way, the maximum g-force load on the pilot and the aircraft is greatly reduced, and lessen the damages on the pilot's spine and delicate electronic equipment.
> 
> But there is no need to knock down those WS-10/12 engines with stealthy saw-tooth nozzle petals. We don't know the maximum thrust are. They could be a giant leap above the WS-10A.



You should really chance your medicine... WS-10C = WS-12 for a so far hnknown naval J-20 that has no catapult gear and no-one even mentioned.

You are a genius ... 

And why do they change to the lower-powerful WS-10 if already the WS-15 is sooooo great?

But you genious will surely explain ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> You should really chance your medicine... WS-10C = WS-12 for a so far hnknown naval J-20 that has no catapult gear and no-one even mentioned.
> 
> You are a genius ...
> 
> And why do they change to the lower-powerful WS-10 if already the WS-15 is sooooo great?
> 
> But you genious will surely explain ...



*"J-20 that has no catapult gear and no-one even mentioned."*

That's because the Aircraft Carriers with EM Catapult haven't been built yet. No need for J-20 to have catapult gear and the hook, for now. It will be years before the third Carrier with EM catapult could be commissioned.

*"And why do they change to the lower-powerful WS-10 if already the WS-15 is sooooo great?"*

The fact is, no one knows how powerful this WS-10/12 with captapult capability is. It is a mystery why PLAAF won't stick with a navalized version of the WS-15, but got two versions of the WS-10/12.

What is the matter, Herr Deino?

Are you still clinging to your pet theory that J-20 is still flying with Al-31, like a drowning man, clinging to a straw?

*"You are a genius ... "*

Thank you, very much, for this very nice and flattering complement.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Asoka said:


> The Chinese have a saying that says: "You can't wait up a person who is pretending to be sleeping."
> 
> I have already said a hundred times before that the WS-15 engine that J-20 have flown with, since day one, is an early version. They have changed the Engine around 2015, that is shorter and have an entirely different sound, which sounds like the howling of a dragon, as some Chinese said. This is the interim model in low serial production of *25* *engines* per year.
> 
> Now, a new version with *3 layers* of nozzle petals is under development.
> 
> This is probably the mass production model that will produce *200 units* per year, or 100 J-20 per years, beginning in the middle of 2020's.
> 
> 
> They have at least 3 versions now, according to an earlier leak, which an award was given to a design who improved a third Patch of the Engines.
> 
> Now, the mystery of WS-10/12, with saw-tooth nozzles, on J-20 is solved. These two engines are for the navalized version of J-20 to be used on China's future Aircraft Carriers, with Electromagnetic Catapult.
> 
> These WS-10 engines will *synchronize* their power output with the EM Catapult, which could adjust the power output level, depending on the weight of the aircraft, to be launched. In this way, the maximum g-force load on the pilot and the aircraft is greatly reduced, and lessen the damages on the pilot's spine and delicate electronic equipment.
> 
> But there is no need to knock down those WS-10/12 engines with stealthy saw-tooth nozzle petals. We don't know the maximum thrust are. They could be a giant leap above the WS-10A.



Are you 遥远7900 on CJDBY by any chance?


----------



## Asoka

Akasa said:


> Are you 遥远7900 on CJDBY by any chance?



no, i don't have an account on CJDBY, which i can post. But I did got this leak from that site.

I think someone in CIJBY and in that Chinese Engine Company is in serious trouble right now.

The Chinese censor is probably going to shut CIJBY down at least for couple of days, just for warning.

It took *only* *one* *day* for the Chinese Censors to scrub all Chinese Internet Websites clean and pluck this leak.

I couldn't find this leak anywhere else, now.

I will probably got a warning, soon in my email, like last time.

As I have said, this leak is of first order in seriousness. 

With the precise dimensions and part names, any competent Jet Engine Engineer with a CAD/CAM software could reproduce the full dimensions of WS-10/12/13, WS-15 and many other engines such as WS-18, WS-19 in 3D, and derive their power rating or maximum thrust.

We know the WS-18 is a turbofan engine for the large transporter.

I haven't heard of the WS-19. I suspect is for the H-20 stealth bomber.

Again, the part names and dimensions of this WS-19 has been leaked, Jet Engine Engineers could reproduce this Engine in 3D and derive its power and thrust, and then derive the maximum speed, and range of H-20, once this Chinese stealth bomber is made public or capture in satellite photos.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *"J-20 that has no catapult gear and no-one even mentioned."*
> 
> That's because the Aircraft Carriers with EM Catapult haven't been built yet. No need for J-20 to have catapult gear and the hook, for now. It will be years before the third Carrier with EM catapult could be commissioned.
> 
> *"And why do they change to the lower-powerful WS-10 if already the WS-15 is sooooo great?"*
> 
> The fact is, no one knows how powerful this WS-10/12 with captapult capability is. It is a mystery why PLAAF won't stick with a navalized version of the WS-15, but got two versions of the WS-10/12.
> 
> What is the matter, Herr Deino?
> 
> Are you still clinging to your pet theory that J-20 is still flying with Al-31, like a drowning man, clinging to a straw?
> 
> *"You are a genius ... "*
> 
> Thank you, very much, for this very nice and flattering complement.



Do you have any evidence, any proof for that theory? Can you explain, why no-one else but you "knows" this or is so genious to come to this conclusion?

It sounds like some sort of fairy tale no-one tells but you. No-one in any other forum comes to that abstruse theory....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Do you have any evidence, any proof for that theory? Can you explain, why no-one else but you "knows" this or is so genious to come to this conclusion?
> 
> It sounds like some sort of fairy tale no-one tells but you. No-one in any other forum comes to that abstruse theory....



This theory of an Engine built to specificly synchronize with the EM Captapult, is something I haven't heard of before. It just dawn to me, when I came across this Leak.

I do know the EM Catapult has a huge advantage over Steam Catapult that it could be programmed to release its tremendous power according to the weight of the Aircraft, therefore to greatly reduce maximum g-force load on the pilot's spine and on the aircraft.

Shooting off the deck of a Carrier, with a Catapult, is an experience you can never forget. Not even an experienced pilot, with hundreds of launches like this, one little bit.

So it makes a lot of sense to synchronize the output of your engine with the Catapult launch, to make the powerful jolt on the spine, much less severe.

I seriously doubt the Chinese were the first to get this idea. This probably copy this EM catapult idea and an Engine synchronized to the Catapult from the Americans, since they were the pioneers in EM Catapult, with the USS Ford, already commissioned in 2017.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> ...
> I haven't heard of the WS-19. I suspect is for the H-20 stealth bomber.
> ...




Ahhhmmm ... everyone knows, WS-19 is the new medium-thrust turbofan.


----------



## Asoka

It is no secret now, that the third Chinese Carriers will have a Catapult. They have studied the steam catapult and EM catapult. And they have determined the benefits of EM catapult outweighs risk of EM catapult. Since they never have operated the Steam catapult either, the risk of EM is no greater.

It is still an official secret as to the version of the Stealth Aircraft that will be launched off from the deck of the future Chinese Aircrafts.

With the WS-10/12 engines spotted on J-20, and with this Leak confirming WS-10/12 has catapult capability, it is reasonable to assume a navalized variant of J-20 will be the main strike force for future Chinese Carrier Task Group.

*"Ahhhmmm ... everyone knows, WS-19 is the new medium-thrust turbofan."*

May be, I have never paid attention this WS-19 before. I probably ignored it, even If I did read it somewhere.

Anyway, if WS-19 were not the right engine for H-20. An engine for the H-20 is somewhere hidden in this leak.

This is a massive leak. This internal reports contains hundreds of pages, specifically documented the state of Chinese engine development of *DOZENS* of both the civilian and military types.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## clibra

Paul2 said:


> so expensive



buddy, pay attention to the money unit. can't you read Chinese text? shame on you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 52051

To be fair, its highly likely J-20 will use WS-10 variants for a long time, sure the supersonic performance of J-20 will be comprised, but the range of J-20 with WS-10 is likely to be better than these with WS-15 due to the difference in bypass ratio, so they have both pros and cons and can serve different purposes, anyway the most important aspect of 5th gen is stealth and battlefield-awareness, so with WS-15 or not wont be a huge problem for J-20.

It is not uncommon for fighters enter mass production phase before their preferred engines are ready, especially in cold-war era, like F-14 and MiG-23.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> HO HO, Santa Claus has arrived early to our house. I have got my Christmas Present, early.
> 
> 北京钢研高纳科技股份有限公司
> 
> http://www.cisri-gaona.com.cn/
> 
> View attachment 595413
> 
> CISRI-Gaona is a Chinese company that makes all kinds hi-tech superalloy products, including components for Chinese Aircraft Engines.
> 
> 
> It has accidentally published its production projection figures for various Chinese Aircraft Engines, including the WS-15, WS-18 and WS-19.
> 
> View attachment 595411
> 
> Here is the my translation:
> 
> 
> The national WS-15 engine is the highest priority project, future demand estimate is 5 engines per year. This is same for the WS-19 engine. The WS-15’s forged Titanium component price is 190 million Yuan each, and for the WS-19, it is 120 million Yuan. CISRI-Gaona has became a qualified supplier.
> 
> The following is the production projection figures.
> 
> View attachment 595411
> View attachment 595412
> 
> 
> Notice: the *Market* *Share* row. For 2020, the company’s market share for WS-15 and WS-19 is 20%. This means CISRI-Gaona is not the only suppliers for the same components.
> 
> If 5 is 20% of the market share, it means, the annual total production number for WS-15 is *25*.
> 
> Strangely, though, the production estimate is the same for 2020 to 2025, yet the market share goes up from 20% to 50%.
> 
> So, I will take the market share figure with some salts.
> 
> This is the original post: https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2603525-1-1.html
> Please take a quick look. I won't be surprise the Chinese Censors will delete it, soon.


If this report is true, which most indications say otherwise, then it is quite troublesome for the Chinese aviation industry.


----------



## GiantPanda

Figaro said:


> If this report is true, which most indications say otherwise, then it is quite troublesome for the Chinese aviation industry.



There are many elements in the report that suggests it is probably real.

It is not at all troublesome and in fact indicates pretty intense progress.

1) the WS-15 in limited series product already, I think people were taken in by the idiot Minnie Chan story that the WS-15 was expected at Zhuhai 2018. For that engine with those specs (180kN, 11:1 TWR) to be in LSP is a massive achievement. I don't understand what people are expecting if they found this to be troublesome.

2) The WS-19 is in limited series production. Who has even heard of the WS-19 just two years ago? Now there is an advanced medium engine for the FC-31 in LSP. Again, a very significant development and a great surprise to be perfectly honest. 

3) The WS-10 is in full blown production with 320 a year and up 450 by 2026. You talking about a theoretical 125 J-20s, J-16s, J-15s, etc. and 100 J-10s per year and still leave 100 engines for spares. This is a massive, massive success story for the industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ZeEa5KPul

GiantPanda said:


> There are many elements in the report that suggests it is probably real.
> 
> It is not at all troublesome and in fact indicates pretty intense progress.
> 
> 1) the WS-15 in limited series product already, I think people were taken in by the idiot Minnie Chan story that the WS-15 was expected at Zhuhai 2018. For that engine with those specs (180kN, 11:1 TWR) to be in LSP is a massive achievement. I don't understand what people are expecting if they found this to be troublesome.
> 
> 2) The WS-19 is in limited series production. Who has even heard of the WS-19 just two years ago? Now there is an advanced medium engine for the FC-31 in LSP. Again, a very significant development and a great surprise to be perfectly honest.
> 
> 3) The WS-10 is in full blown production with 320 a year and up 450 by 2026. You talking about a theoretical 125 J-20s, J-16s, J-15s, etc. and 100 J-10s per year and still leave 100 engines for spares. This is a massive, massive success story for the industry.


That these engines are in LSP now is great. That they'll stay in LSP without any increase for *six years* is deeply problematic.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> If this report is true, which most indications say otherwise, then it is quite troublesome for the Chinese aviation industry.



LOL.

What are your "*most* *indications*" that says otherwise?

It simply explains a lot what we have seen in the last few years. It confirms that the Chinese jet Engine development is very active. 

They have multiple engine development programs for J-20, including two for the PLAN Navy with Catapult capability, and beside the current WS-15 in low serial production, they have one WS-15 engine that has 3D TVC 12 nozzle petals. 

This indicates PLA is developing multiple variants of J-20 for different missions.

This will be "*quite* *troublesome*" for any country intend to make an enemy out of China. IMHO.



ZeEa5KPul said:


> That these engines are in LSP now is great. That they'll stay in LSP without any increase for *six years* is deeply problematic.



These are sales/production projection by a company, which was just qualified to make parts for the WS-15. 

The "*intern*" who did those projections don't know everything. He/She certainly don't know what will PLAAF's production in 2026 will be, IMHO.

Why am I suspect it was an "*Intern*" who did those projections? Because, anyone who has been in that company for a while, would not have posted this sensitive document on the Investor Relations section of the company's website.

Reactions: Like Like:
 3


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> LOL.
> 
> What are your "*most* *indications*" that says otherwise?
> 
> It simply explains a lot what we have seen in the last few years. It confirms that the Chinese jet Engine development is very active.
> 
> They have multiple engine development programs for J-20, including two for the PLAN Navy with Catapult capability, and beside the current WS-15 in low serial production, they have one WS-15 engine that has 3D TVC 12 nozzle petals.
> 
> This indicates PLA is developing multiple variants of J-20 for different missions.
> 
> This will be "*quite* *troublesome*" for any country intend to make an enemy out of China. IMHO.
> 
> 
> 
> These are sales/production projection by a company, which was just qualified to make parts for the WS-15.
> 
> The "*intern*" who did those projections don't know everything. He/She certainly don't know what will PLAAF's production in 2026 will be, IMHO.
> 
> Why am I suspect it was an "*Intern*" who did those projections? Because, anyone who has been in that company for a while, would not have posted this sensitive document on the Investor Relations section of the company's website.


I was referring to the WS-15 production rates your source stated ... rates that are quite low.



ZeEa5KPul said:


> That these engines are in LSP now is great. That they'll stay in LSP without any increase for *six years* is deeply problematic.


If I'm not mistaken, Oedosoldier stated these are just financial forecasts and the company in question is not involved in the WS-15 component production but rather WS-10 production. Even so, I doubt these forecasts are accurate since it wouldn't make sense for the production rate not to increase despite considerable testing during that time frame ... especially as long as 6 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> I was referring to the WS-15 production rates your source stated ... rates that are quite low.
> 
> 
> If I'm not mistaken, Oedosoldier stated these are just financial forecasts and the company in question is not involved in the WS-15 component production but rather WS-10 production. Even so, I doubt these forecasts are accurate since it wouldn't make sense for the production rate not to increase despite considerable testing during that time frame ... especially as long as 6 years.



*"I was referring to the WS-15 production rates your source stated ... rates that are quite low."*

As I have said, this Report's writer do not know what is PLAAF's production plans are for the next few years. The 5 WS-15 engines for 2026 is obviously absurdly low, even just for this company.

*"If I'm not mistaken, Oedosoldier stated these are just financial forecasts and the company in question is not involved in the WS-15 component production but rather WS-10 production.'*

I beg to differ. 

This company seems to be involved in the components production for every type of PLAAF engines and Chinese civilian engine.

Beside the WS-10, there is WS-10/12 *Catapult* Engines, low serial production WS-15, testing/development WS-15 with 12 nozzle petals, and the Engine for the next generation of fighter beyond J-20, currently under testing and development.

As I have said, since we have seen pictures of J-20 equipped with two engines with WS-10 like nozzles, and this Report has stated that there are two WS-10, WS-12 engines customized to Catapult launch, it is highly likely that a navalized version of J-20, will be PLAAF's main strike force for the newer Aircraft carriers with Electro-magnetic Catapult.

If I were the F/A-18 and F-35 pilots, I would stay away from this navalized J-20 beast.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *"I was referring to the WS-15 production rates your source stated ... rates that are quite low."*
> 
> As I have said, this Report's writer do not know what is PLAAF's production plans are for the next few years. The 5 WS-15 engines for 2026 is obviously absurdly low, even just for this company.
> 
> *"If I'm not mistaken, Oedosoldier stated these are just financial forecasts and the company in question is not involved in the WS-15 component production but rather WS-10 production.'*
> 
> I beg to differ.
> 
> This company seems to be involved in the components production for every type of PLAAF engines and Chinese civilian engine.
> 
> Beside the WS-10, there is WS-10/12 *Catapult* Engines, low serial production WS-15, testing/development WS-15 with 12 nozzle petals, and the Engine for the next generation of fighter beyond J-20, currently under testing and development.
> 
> As I have said, since we have seen pictures of J-20 equipped with two engines with WS-10 like nozzles, and this Report has stated that there are two WS-10, WS-12 engines customized to Catapult launch, it is highly likely that a navalized version of J-20, will be PLAAF's main strike force for the newer Aircraft carriers with Electro-magnetic Catapult.
> 
> If I were the F/A-18 and F-35 pilots, I would stay away from this navalized J-20 beast.


There are no WS-12 never heard of it, only WS-13 and in development WS-19 are known


----------



## Deino

seven0seven said:


> There are no WS-12 never heard of it, only WS-13 and in development WS-19 are known



But that's again his usual habit: over-interpret some files, mix it with invented so called data, spin a fancy theory and hype it: Yes, there are so many black holes in his theory, that it even sometimes would be funny, but not here in a serious thread. 

- there is no WS-12 catapult engine
- there is no carrier variant of the J-20
- why should a fighter currently already flying with two different engines (original AL-31FN based one for Batch 1 and WS-10C for Batch 2) and ready to fit a third one (WS-15 in the future) now be developed, tested and certified with a forth one only for carrier-operations? 
- this long report filled with some data and endless numbers is in no way as he claimed a detailed report so that any foreign company can deduct the detailed CAD plans and therefore performances of any engine (that's impossible)
- ... and so on.

In the end, nothing but BS and as usual all again without any proof, without any explanation, ... pure imagination.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> But that's again his usual habit: over-interpret some files, mix it with invented so called data, spin a fancy theory and hype it: Yes, there are so many black holes in his theory, that it even sometimes would be funny, but not here in a serious thread.
> 
> - there is no WS-12 catapult engine
> - there is no carrier variant of the J-20
> - why should a fighter currently already flying with two different engines (original AL-31FN based one for Batch 1 and WS-10C for Batch 2) and ready to fit a third one (WS-15 in the future) now be developed, tested and certified with a forth one only for carrier-operations?
> - this long report filled with some data and endless numbers is in no way as he claimed a detailed report so that any foreign company can deduct the detailed CAD plans and therefore performances of any engine (that's impossible)
> - ... and so on.
> 
> In the end, nothing but BS and as usual all again without any proof, without any explanation, ... pure imagination.



*1. "there is no WS-12 catapult engine
*
We have seen pictures of two J-20 equipped with WS-10 like saw-tooth nozzles.
This Report stated that there are two WS-10/12 Catapult engines under limited production.

Naturally, this could indicates J-20 is being testing with these two WS-10/12 engines, and since only a carrier based aircraft needs to be catapult. 

Thus, we can assume a navalized version of J-20 is under development.

*2. - there is no carrier variant of the J-20*

Yes, that is true, we haven't seen a J-20 with folded wing, landing hook, dual front wheels, taking off or landing on a Chinese Aircraft. 

But this does not mean PLAAN is not development a navalized version of J-20.

*3. - why should a fighter currently already flying with two different engines (original AL-31FN based one for Batch 1 and WS-10C for Batch 2) and ready to fit a third one (WS-15 in the future) now be developed, tested and certified with a forth one only for carrier-operations?*

AL-31FN was *never* tested with J-20. This was a mistaken assumption. That was an early version of WS-15, all along, since the day one of the testing program. This early WS-15 engine's nozzlealthough has a superficial resemblance to the AL-31, actually has a 3D TVC, which was shown in several photos.

Yes, I do believe a newer WS-15 with 3D TVC and 12 nozzle petals are under development. This is probably the mass serial production version.

The current WS-15 is the low serial production version.

I don't know why there are two WS-10/12 CATAPULT engines. But we did have seen pictures of J-20 with two different WS-10/12 engine, in the last several years.

*4. "- this long report filled with some data and endless numbers is in no way as he claimed a detailed report so that any foreign company can deduct the detailed CAD plans and therefore performances of any engine (that's impossible)
- ... and so on."*

Yes, this Report was several hundred pages long, and was filled with all kinds of production data for the aircraft engines component, before it was deleted by the censor. 

Only a few pages was leaked.

*5*. "*any foreign company can deduct the detailed CAD plans and therefore performances of any engine (that's impossible)
- ... and so on."
*
I have said, if a foreign company got hold of this report, which contains numerous part names and precise dimension, a competent engineer could reproduce the engines, and deduce the power rating or thrust.

This is how serious, I think this is leak was.

It took only one day for the Chinese Censor to spring into action, and scrub clean all references to this leak in Chinese internet.

Here is the only place, you could still see this leak, thanks to me.

And you are very welcome, Herr Dieno.

*
*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *1. "there is no WS-12 catapult engine
> *
> We have seen pictures of two J-20 equipped with WS-10 like saw-tooth nozzles.
> This Report stated that there are two WS-10/12 Catapult engines under limited production.
> 
> Naturally, this could indicates J-20 is being testing with these two WS-10/12 engines, and since only a carrier based aircraft needs to be catapult.
> 
> Thus, we can assume a navalized version of J-20 is under development.
> 
> *2. - there is no carrier variant of the J-20*
> 
> Yes, that is true, we haven't seen a J-20 with folded wing, landing hook, dual front wheels, taking off or landing on a Chinese Aircraft.
> 
> But this does not mean PLAAN is not development a navalized version of J-20.
> 
> *3. - why should a fighter currently already flying with two different engines (original AL-31FN based one for Batch 1 and WS-10C for Batch 2) and ready to fit a third one (WS-15 in the future) now be developed, tested and certified with a forth one only for carrier-operations?*
> 
> AL-31FN was *never* tested with J-20. This was a mistaken assumption. That was an early version of WS-15, all along, since the day one of the testing program. This early WS-15 engine's nozzlealthough has a superficial resemblance to the AL-31, actually has a 3D TVC, which was shown in several photos.
> 
> Yes, I do believe a newer WS-15 with 3D TVC and 12 nozzle petals are under development. This is probably the mass serial production version.
> 
> The current WS-15 is the low serial production version.
> 
> I don't know why there are two WS-10/12 CATAPULT engines. But we did have seen pictures of J-20 with two different WS-10/12 engine, in the last several years.
> 
> *4. "- this long report filled with some data and endless numbers is in no way as he claimed a detailed report so that any foreign company can deduct the detailed CAD plans and therefore performances of any engine (that's impossible)
> - ... and so on."*
> 
> Yes, this Report was several hundred pages long, and was filled with all kinds of production data for the aircraft engines component, before it was deleted by the censor.
> 
> Only a few pages was leaked.
> 
> *5*. "*any foreign company can deduct the detailed CAD plans and therefore performances of any engine (that's impossible)
> - ... and so on."
> *
> I have said, if a foreign company got hold of this report, which contains numerous part names and precise dimension, a competent engineer could reproduce the engines, and deduce the power rating or thrust.
> 
> This is how serious, I think this is leak was.
> 
> It took only one day for the Chinese Censor to spring into action, and scrub clean all references to this leak in Chinese internet.
> 
> Here is the only place, you could still see this leak, thanks to me.
> 
> And you are very welcome, Herr Dieno.


Bro don't troll or gives us the evidence, there are no proof that early J-20 using WS-15 we consider this your baseless assumptions, and there is no WS-12 *CATAPULT ENGINE, * most Navies of the world those have Aircraft carrier are using standard land based fighter jet engine for carrier use like F18 b/c using F-404 same engine is used by Spain/Kuwait for their land based jet, same goes to RAFALE, which have standard engine for RAFALE B/C and for their NAVAL RAFALE M, There is no WS-12 *CATAPULT ENGINE*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

seven0seven said:


> Bro don't troll or gives us the evidence, there are no proof that early J-20 using WS-15 we consider this your baseless assumptions, and there is no WS-12 *CATAPULT ENGINE, * most Navies of the world those have Aircraft carrier are using standard land based fighter jet engine for carrier use like F18 b/c using F-404 same engine is used by Spain/Kuwait for their land based jet, same goes to RAFALE, which have standard engine for RAFALE B/C and for their NAVAL RAFALE M, There is no WS-12 *CATAPULT ENGINE*


I have heard of a WS-12 somewhere ... I don't remember anything about a catapult engine but I'm sure the WS-12 is an actual engine.



Asoka said:


> *3. - why should a fighter currently already flying with two different engines (original AL-31FN based one for Batch 1 and WS-10C for Batch 2) and ready to fit a third one (WS-15 in the future) now be developed, tested and certified with a forth one only for carrier-operations?*
> 
> AL-31FN was *never* tested with J-20. This was a mistaken assumption. That was an early version of WS-15, all along, since the day one of the testing program. This early WS-15 engine's nozzlealthough has a superficial resemblance to the AL-31, actually has a 3D TVC, which was shown in several photos.
> 
> Yes, I do believe a newer WS-15 with 3D TVC and 12 nozzle petals are under development. This is probably the mass serial production version.


Are you for real? And I thought you finally came to the realization that the J-20 was not initially tested with the 240kN+ WS-15 after all these years ...


----------



## Ultima Thule

Figaro said:


> I have heard of a WS-12 somewhere ... I don't remember anything about a catapult engine but I'm sure the WS-12 is an actual engine.


Sorry sir i never heard about WS-12 may be you read somewhere WP-12 which was turbojet not turbofan, even @Deino sir not heard about WS-12

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

Interesting to find WS-12 engine discussion. According to this article in 2017, WS-12 development project was halted in 1993, and in its place a new project WS-13 took over using some of research data of WS-12.

Note that WS-12 engine project is not related to WS-10 engine.

So, WS-12 engine *development project* did exist, but it was cancelled and replaced by WS-13. Thus there never was any (completed) WS-12 engine in physical form, just R&D works.


*中国夭折了一款涡扇-12发动机后 涡扇-13借壳重生！歼-31靠它了！*
1080军事台

发布时间：17-11-0113:55鼎盛互联（北京）文化传播有限公司

　　前两天聊了一下WS12和高推的故事，到了1993年，他们受到中俄航空技术合作协议的影响，都终止了。WS12的技术一部分转移到后续的WP13大推力改型的上，另外一部分转为课题研究缓慢的继续。






　　中俄航空技术合作让我们有机会时隔40年以后重新接收苏式设备和技术，航空发动机方面，俄罗斯有大量的成熟的工程型号可以供选择和参考，由于中国引进苏27和苏联解体后俄罗斯经济困难，特别是米格29的长期滞销，我国在花费较少的情况下获得了RD33的一系列资料。但是，中国此时已经没有能使用这种发动机的飞机了，所以，引进技术和资料都基本以纯研究和学术方式进行。

　　1998年，中国和巴基斯坦联合研发的FC1战斗机确定使用俄罗斯RD93发动机，这是一个极佳的机会，它大概会消费总计200台发动机，原本俄罗斯鉴于和印度的军贸关系，一直不太愿意提供，而他们又确实不想放弃这笔巨额交易，结果，走了一个折衷的路线，向中国出口100台RD93发动机，并不管中国将这种产品外销还是自用。中国负责这批产品的后续保养维修。由于需要从中国输出，那么这台发动机获得一个国内的发动机编号WS-13.

　　RD33是俄罗斯在70年代设计的一种小涵道比涡扇发动机，性能稳定，工作泼辣，有较大的喘振裕度，但是因为设计年代较早，一些技术相对保守和陈旧，WS12的研发基本都在80年代，元器件水平比RD33要高出一个层级，两者推力差不多，循环参数，流量，尺寸都很接近，因此，624和贵阳黎明想借此平台，用单元零件更换的方式，进行小步快跑，实现WS12的技术向实用化转移，最终让以前的心血不白费，换取一台全新的，先进的中推发动机。

　　首先进行的是用原为WS12配套的三级风扇替换RD33的4级风扇，RD33的4级风扇虽然采用了无凸肩叶片，但是展弦比较大，风扇叶片强度偏低，耐杂物和鸟撞性能很差，迫使米格29必须采用复杂笨重的进气道挡板，即便如此，RD33风扇还是很脆弱，麻雀大小的鸟就会让其风扇碎裂，这和后期的发动机差距明显。

　　新三级风扇第一级采用宽弦无凸肩叶片，比原风扇第一级耐冲击强度提高了10倍以上，可耐受鸟类冲击直接达到最新的标准。新风扇使发动机长度减少了44毫米，考虑到发动机本身安装架构问题，并没有调整发动机外壳尺度，但风扇前的4片固定支撑轴的导向叶片就变成前掠的了，这是一个识别特征。新风扇压比稍高于原风扇，喘振裕度接近，流量高了6KG，不加力推力从49.4KN提高到54KN，加力推力88.94KN，实验从1996年开始，1998年通过第一次试车。

　　细心一点我们可以发现，这个发动机推力和目前克里莫夫配置在米格29K和米格35上的RD33MK基本一致，但两者实现的技术途径是不一样的，克里莫夫是通过调整原RD33的4级风扇性能实现的，而WS13则是通过更换风扇实现的。原本计划安排WS13以这个新风扇的模式通过定型，但因为是纯外销型号，100%国产化过程非常缓慢，定型工作从90年代末期一直拖到2015年。





　　虽然定型工作因为国产化比例问题不顺利，但是对发动机的研究并没有停下来，第二步工作是采用一个与俄罗斯合作全新设计的低压涡轮，新的低压涡轮工作温度可以提高70度，工作效率也比原涡轮高，使用这个涡轮可以进一步发挥新三级风扇的潜力，据悉，这个涡轮其实也是克里莫夫现在应用在RD33MK上的，更换了新低压涡轮以后，发动机最大推力进步到91.1KN，发动机实验2002年开始。

　　这个实验何时完成的，目前没有公开报道，但是中航为了努力让FC1成为替换强5的中国空军轻型多用途战斗机，于2004年送报的的资料中，FC1的性能是外挂5.5吨，发动机推力91.1KN。由于作战思想和需求的变化，中国空军转用JH7替代强5，原规划的轻型多用途战斗机取消。中航技随后向海外用户推销这个方案，巴基斯坦同意接受这个方案，但是不愿意为此投资进行研究，他们更愿意把有限的经费放到航电系统的升级上去，作为阶段化升级，FC1仅在目前阶段将外挂从3.8提高到4.5吨。

　　由于是研发合作，克里莫夫实际上接受了中国的方案，因此也采纳了三级风扇方案，推出了RD33MKM，目前尚未有装机对象，但是可以随时供客户选择，搭配在米格35上。接下来的改进要涉及核心机了，难度倍增，最先计划改进的是燃烧室，原RD33的燃烧室设计太古老，贫油富燃到最后燃烧时效率偏低，因此一直有比较浓的黑烟，这已经成为RD33的标志，新设计的燃烧室能彻底改变这个问题，并让燃气温度分布更加稳定均匀，燃烧室的修改并不能提升推力，但是可以大幅度改善油耗和发动机寿命。

　　于此同时，单晶涡轮叶片替代原定向凝固的涡轮叶片，这允许涡轮工作温度提高50-70度，发动机推力可以达到93-94KN，这其中燃烧室的工作在中国完成，高压涡轮的工作在俄罗斯完成，首台推力达到94KN的发动机在2008年进行台架试车，这个推力的型号克里莫夫命名为RD93MKN。

　　我国在2014年的珠海航展上展出了FC31隐身战斗机，其希望搭配的发动机就是推力9500KG的中等推力发动机，这个发动机的信心基础便是来源于WS13和RD33之间往来不断的持续研发。

　　仅仅走到这里，浴火重生之路才走了一半，1996年，624重新设计了中推的高压压气机，将7级压气机减少一级，变为6级压气机，核心机转速从14000转提高到17000转，压气机不仅性能没有下降，反而还有提升，重新设计的轴系改变了远RD33落后的架构，发动机变得更短，总长度会减小到4米以内，同时核心机引气流量增大，使用单晶叶片的高压涡轮冷却方案也有所改变，冷却能力从350度提高到480度，涡轮前从1600K提高到1800K。

　　搭配重新设计的加力燃烧段，至此，整台发动机从头到尾都和原来的RD33没有一点相似之处了，发动机完完全全成为一种全新的发动机，发动机推力从96KN到111KN之间可选，发动机推重比也从最初RD33的6.6提高到8.6，这部分的实验目前还处于保密阶段，合作对象也从克里莫夫增加了一个伙伴，乌克兰的进步设计局。





　　尽管没有明确的装机对象，中等推力发动机对我国的重要性还是异常的高，未来一大批无人飞行器都需要这个推力级别的发动机，而WS12到WS13这样艰难的发展路线，也是为我国发展航空发动机提供了一个新的发展思路，我国航发最缺乏的是从技术研究转为工程应用这个环节，而克里莫夫的合作，其实是在教育和引导我国航发如何实现工程化和实用化，这对我国目前的现状能起到决定性的作用，WS13整个项目国家投入经费非常少，如果能借鸡下蛋，借壳重生，所有运筹帷幄的人堪称国之英杰。但是，路行百里半九十，WS13到现在还远远称不上成功了，真的能把它一步一步走完，走踏实，走出一个结果来，才是真正的涅盘。

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> I have heard of a WS-12 somewhere ... I don't remember anything about a catapult engine but I'm sure the WS-12 is an actual engine.
> 
> 
> Are you for real? And I thought you finally came to the realization that the J-20 was not initially tested with the 240kN+ WS-15 after all these years ...








*1. "I have heard of a WS-12 somewhere ... I don't remember anything about a catapult engine but I'm sure the WS-12 is an actual engine."*

In this picture, it clearly stated "*XS-10 弹用发动机*", and "*XS-12 弹用发动*" . "*弹用*" means Catapult.

It also mentioned a "*XS-13E 发动机", *but no mention of Catapult. I don't know what is that.

Prior to this leak, I don't even know there is are WS-12/13 engines. I just saw the pictures of J-20 equipped with two different WS-10 like engines. 

Neither do I realize J-20 was testing two engines designed to be catapult off an Aircraft Carrier.

Why PLAAF needs two engines for the PLAAN's J-20, I have no idea. And I have no idea, why China won't stick with WS-15 and just navalized it.

I suspect the pictures of the J-20 with WS-10/12 engines are actually quite old, at least, several years old, but they have just leaked them in 2018. And the two WS-10/12 engines are improvements.


*2. Are you for real? And I thought you finally came to the realization that the J-20 was not initially tested with the 240kN+ WS-15 after all these years. *

I did not contradicted myself.

I have said J-20 was flying with an early version of WS-15 from day one, and this engine, with AL-31 like nozzle petals, has 3D TVC and at least *210kn* of thrust.

Now, from this Leak, we know China is also developing a newer WS-15 engine, with 12 nozzle petals. It is probably the mass production version. 

This Engine has the status of "*少量批试制*", "*low* *number* *testing* *production*".










As for Maximum Thrust, I won't be surprised that it has *240KN*. There is something amazing about this newer WS-15 engine, that PLAAF is willing to wait for it, before commencing mass production of J-20.

Could it be the engine with the code name "*珠峰*" or *Mt. Everest*, that we talked about 2 years ago?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> I have said J-20 was flying with an early version of WS-15 from day one, and this engine, with AL-31 like nozzle petals, has 3D TVC and at least *210kn* of thrust.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> *1. "I have heard of a WS-12 somewhere ... I don't remember anything about a catapult engine but I'm sure the WS-12 is an actual engine."*
> 
> In this picture, it clearly stated "*XS-10 弹用发动机*", and "*XS-12 弹用发动*" . "*弹用*" means Catapult.
> 
> It also mentioned a "*XS-13E 发动机", *but no mention of Catapult. I don't know what is that.
> 
> Prior to this leak, I don't even know there is are WS-12/13 engines. I just saw the pictures of J-20 equipped with two different WS-10 like engines.
> 
> Neither do I realize J-20 was testing two engines designed to be catapult off an Aircraft Carrier.
> 
> Why PLAAF needs two engines for the PLAAN's J-20, I have no idea. And I have no idea, why China won't stick with WS-15 and just navalized it.
> 
> I suspect the pictures of the J-20 with WS-10/12 engines are actually quite old, at least, several years old, but they have just leaked them in 2018. And the two WS-10/12 engines are improvements.
> 
> 
> *2. Are you for real? And I thought you finally came to the realization that the J-20 was not initially tested with the 240kN+ WS-15 after all these years. *
> 
> I did not contradicted myself.
> 
> I have said J-20 was flying with an early version of WS-15 from day one, and this engine, with AL-31 like nozzle petals, has 3D TVC and at least *210kn* of thrust.
> 
> Now, from this Leak, we know China is also developing a newer WS-15 engine, with 12 nozzle petals. It is probably the mass production version.
> 
> This Engine has the status of "*少量批试制*", "*low* *number* *testing* *production*".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for Maximum Thrust, I won't be surprised that it has *240KN*. There is something amazing about this newer WS-15 engine, that PLAAF is willing to wait for it, before commencing mass production of J-20.
> 
> Could it be the engine with the code name "*珠峰*" or *Mt. Everest*, that we talked about 2 years ago?


Stop it your fantasy of yours may be you are confusing with catapult system with jet engine, we want a solid proof not some screenshots by you, and there is no evidence that J-20 is flying with WS-15 from day one and its thrust of 240 kn you need to know balance in between thrust and weight for J-20, if this not necessary according to you then why Chinese engineers and scientists not consider Chinese rocket engine from CZ-5 with thrust of 77000 lbs for J-20, get out of your falsehood kid


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


>



Yes, keep banging your head on the wall. The Truth is not going away.

It is more than absurd that J-20 was flying with an AL-31 engine, and still is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> Yes, keep banging your head on the wall. The Truth is not going away.
> 
> It is more than absurd that J-20 was flying with an AL-31 engine, and still is.



Yes we all believes early J-20 was flying with AL-31 and now WS-10 but not WS-15, if you provide concrete proofs/sources/links none believes you here, and engine development fields is not that easy that you thinks, and China is quite new in development on engine from scratch, stop your nonsense screen shot presentation please


----------



## Deino

seven0seven said:


> Yes we all believes early J-20 was flying with AL-31 and now WS-10 but not WS-15, if you provide concrete proofs/sources/links none believes you here, and engine development fields is not that easy that you thinks, and China is quite new in development on engine from scratch, stop your nonsense screen shot presentation please



You exactly nailed it: in his eyes we are all only stupid "believers" since he is the only one, who "knows".


----------



## Asoka

OrientalGamer said:


> Clearly ws15 is in testing, far from entering service. Ws19 would follow the ws15.



Correction.

The current (second) version of WS-15 on J-20 is in low serial production, just like the J-20.
The newer (third) WS-15 with three layers of nozzle petals is in the testing phase. This is the mass production version, I believe.

*"since he is the only one, who "knows". "*

That nails it, Mr. Deino.

Thanks for your (back-hand) compliment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GeHAC

Asoka said:


> *1. "I have heard of a WS-12 somewhere ... I don't remember anything about a catapult engine but I'm sure the WS-12 is an actual engine."*
> 
> In this picture, it clearly stated "*XS-10 弹用发动机*", and "*XS-12 弹用发动*" . "*弹用*" means Catapult.
> 
> It also mentioned a "*XS-13E 发动机", *but no mention of Catapult. I don't know what is that.
> 
> Prior to this leak, I don't even know there is are WS-12/13 engines. I just saw the pictures of J-20 equipped with two different WS-10 like engines.
> 
> Neither do I realize J-20 was testing two engines designed to be catapult off an Aircraft Carrier.
> 
> Why PLAAF needs two engines for the PLAAN's J-20, I have no idea. And I have no idea, why China won't stick with WS-15 and just navalized it.
> 
> I suspect the pictures of the J-20 with WS-10/12 engines are actually quite old, at least, several years old, but they have just leaked them in 2018. And the two WS-10/12 engines are improvements.
> 
> 
> *2. Are you for real? And I thought you finally came to the realization that the J-20 was not initially tested with the 240kN+ WS-15 after all these years. *
> 
> I did not contradicted myself.
> 
> I have said J-20 was flying with an early version of WS-15 from day one, and this engine, with AL-31 like nozzle petals, has 3D TVC and at least *210kn* of thrust.
> 
> Now, from this Leak, we know China is also developing a newer WS-15 engine, with 12 nozzle petals. It is probably the mass production version.
> 
> This Engine has the status of "*少量批试制*", "*low* *number* *testing* *production*".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for Maximum Thrust, I won't be surprised that it has *240KN*. There is something amazing about this newer WS-15 engine, that PLAAF is willing to wait for it, before commencing mass production of J-20.
> 
> Could it be the engine with the code name "*珠峰*" or *Mt. Everest*, that we talked about 2 years ago?



*弹用 means 'ammunition used', not catapult*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

GeHAC said:


> *弹用 means 'ammunition used', not catapult*



So much on a carrier-capable J-20 powered by WS-12 catapult engines

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

GeHAC said:


> *弹用 means 'ammunition used', not catapult*



What a joke!
You need get beyond pre-schooler reading comprehension.
What in the world does a Jet Engine has anything to do with "ammunition"?
"*弹用" is obviously short for "弹射用", "for catapult use"

*

You need smarter supporters, Mr. Deino.

for your long bankrupted and silly theory that J-20 was flying with an AL-31 engine, and still is.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> What a joke!
> You need get beyond pre-schooler reading comprehension.
> What in the world does a Jet Engine has anything to do with "ammunition"?
> "*弹用" is obviously short for "弹射用", "for catapult use"
> 
> *
> 
> You need smarter supporters, Mr. Deino.
> 
> for your long bankrupted and silly theory that J-20 was flying with an AL-31 engine, and still is.



What bankrupted theory? It is in the meantime widely accepted - maybe you missed that the world is still turning while you are spinning your theories in small dark cellars - so that even international respected scholars agree.

But as You wish ... keep on dreaming.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> What bankrupted theory? It is in the meantime widely accepted - maybe you missed that the world is still turning while you are spinning your theories in small dark cellars - so that even international respected scholars agree.
> 
> But as You wish ... keep on dreaming.



Yes, that is true. "It is in the meantime widely accepted . . ." *by the ignoramus*.

"so that even international respected [*and ignorant*] scholars agree. " True too.

*"No. "弹用" is short for "导弹用"/"for missile use" and XS-10/XS-12 are not WS-10/WS-12."*

XS-10, XS-12, XS-13, XS-15, XS-19, XS-19 . . . . are all obscured versions of "*WS*" to confuse potential spies. 

This is a standard Chinese smoke and mirror counter-intelligence technique. It won't fool anybody, except the most ignorant and stupid people, though. 

WS-10/12 are for missiles use? 

I could accept that China has large turbofan engines specifically designed for high-speed stealth combat drone. 

But for missiles? That must be a huge and very expensive missile. 

LOL.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> Yes, that is true. "It is in the meantime widely accepted . . ." *by the ignoramus*.
> 
> "so that even international respected [*and ignorant*] scholars agree. " True too.
> 
> *..*.



Indeed amazing ... You are surrounded by idiots, all ignorant propaganda-believer and You the only, the chosen one to understand.

What other discoveries no-one else can only dream for are you currently working on? A so far unnoticed secret Moon- or even Mars-station? 

Did You ever ask yourself, why no-one here or in any other forum follows this truth? Don't you think if it would be indeed a moment of HEUREKA - as when Archimedes discovered the same principle or when Galileo Galilee made his discoveries - at least a few would follow you and praise you for your brilliance!? But nothing ... silence. No-one follows you and still you think you are the greatest. 

Sorry to say so, but it seems as if you are telling me to eat (your) shit only since flies cannot be wrong. Unfortunately no-one else here agrees ... so I think I must eat your shit alone.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> Indeed amazing ... You are surrounded by idiots, all ignorant propaganda-believer and You the only, the chosen one to understand.
> 
> What other discoveries no-one else can only dream for are you currently working on? A so far unnoticed secret Moon- or even Mars-station?
> 
> Did You ever ask yourself, why no-one here or in any other forum follows this truth? Don't you think if it would be indeed a moment of HEUREKA - as when Archimedes discovered the same principle or when Galileo Galilee made his discoveries - at least a few would follow you and praise you for your brilliance!? But nothing ... silence. No-one follows you and still you think you are the greatest.
> 
> Sorry to say so, but it seems as if you are telling me to eat (your) shit only since flies cannot be wrong. Unfortunately no-one else here agrees ... so I think I must eat your shit alone.



*"Indeed amazing ... You are surrounded by idiots, all ignorant propaganda-believer and You the only, the chosen one to understand."
*
I am the One-Eye man, in the Land of the Blinds. I am the only one who can see, and that carries a heavy burden, unfortunately.

Not many people believes, what I have told them.

*"What other discoveries no-one else can only dream for are you currently working on? A so far unnoticed secret Moon- or even Mars-station?"*

A lot. 

I was busy with my own research projects, in the last two years, and taking care of my son, Amadeus, who is now TWO, and my daughter, Persephone, who will be 6, in 3 weeks.

I can't tell you much about my research projects, yet, but they are beyond, but not very far from today's technology.

Thank you for asking.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> *"Indeed amazing ... You are surrounded by idiots, all ignorant propaganda-believer and You the only, the chosen one to understand."
> *
> I am the One-Eye man, in the Land of the Blinds. I am the only one who can see, and that carries a heavy burden, unfortunately.
> 
> Not many people believes, what I have told them.
> 
> *"What other discoveries no-one else can only dream for are you currently working on? A so far unnoticed secret Moon- or even Mars-station?"*
> 
> A lot.
> 
> I was busy with my own research projects, in the last two years, and taking care of my son, Amadeus, who is now TWO, and my daughter, Persephone, who will be 6, in 3 weeks.
> 
> I can't tell you much about my research projects, yet, but they are beyond, but not very far from today's technology.
> 
> Thank you for asking.


How could you be the "One-Eye man in the Land of the Blinds" if you live in Arizona ... surely someone living in China would have better information about their own military right? Either way the statement sounds ridiculous.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Han Patriot

GeHAC said:


> *弹用 means 'ammunition used', not catapult*


Could be both bomb or catapult/spring, but in the sentence means bomb engine.


----------



## Asoka

Figaro said:


> How could you be the "One-Eye man in the Land of the Blinds" if you live in Arizona ... surely someone living in China would have better information about their own military right? Either way the statement sounds ridiculous.



It's a figure of speech, mr. cat. I am sure you understand.

I didn't say I am the only one-eye man, in the Land of the Blinds. I am sure there could be other one-eye man, in China, who already knew the truth, but they are not allow to speak out, otherwise, the Chinese State Security would take them in, in no time.



Han Patriot said:


> Could be both bomb or catapult/spring, but in the sentence means bomb engine.



*"Could be both bomb or catapult/spring, but in the sentence means bomb engine."*

very funny. LOL.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

Asoka said:


> It's a figure of speech, mr. cat. I am sure you understand.
> 
> I didn't say I am the only one-eye man, in the Land of the Blinds. I am sure there could be other one-eye man, in China, who already knew the truth, but they are not allow to speak out, otherwise, the Chinese State Security would take them in, in no time.
> 
> 
> 
> *"Could be both bomb or catapult/spring, but in the sentence means bomb engine."*
> 
> very funny. LOL.


Calm down hero, the word *弹用 means missile/bomb. So in this case it means missile propulsion. But it could also mean catapult used engine, the problem is you don't need a special engine for catapult use. It's the hook and frame mechanism which changes not the engine. *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Han Patriot said:


> Calm down hero, the word *弹用 means missile/bomb. So in this case it means missile propulsion. But it could also mean catapult used engine, the problem is you don't need a special engine for catapult use. It's the hook and frame mechanism which changes not the engine. *



"the word *弹用 means missile/bomb. So in this case it means missile propulsion."
*
Oh really?

Do Pray tell *what* *benefits* there are to strap a large 2m x 4m long WS-10/12 TurboFan Jet engine, on an expendable, one time use only Bomb or Missile?

If you are member of the Chinese Counter-Intelligence Team, doing damage control on PDF, you need to come up with something better, my friend.

*"the problem is you don't need a special engine for catapult use. "*

You don't.

But the pilot would the better like the experience of catapult off the carrier deck, at over 200 miles per hour, and don't experience a very sharp g-force load on their spines and airframes, which could lead to long term spinal damage, for a carrier pilot, and decrease the life of the airframes.

I have never heard of an engine built specifically to synchronize with an Electromagnetic Catapult launch before.

So this is an important innovation, if my guess is right.

Electromagnetic Catapult has this unique capability of programming the release of its EM force according to the weight of the aircraft and smooth out the g-force load, over the entire launch, instead of *one* *sharp* *jolt*, at the beginning.
*
https://engineering.eckovation.com/electromagnetic-catapult/
*
"Its main advantage is that it accelerates aircraft more smoothly, putting less stress on their airframes, [and pilot]. "
*


*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Han Patriot

Asoka said:


> "the word *弹用 means missile/bomb. So in this case it means missile propulsion."
> *
> Oh really?
> 
> Do Pray tell *what* *benefits* there are to strap a large 2m x 4m long WS-10/12 TurboFan Jet engine, on an expendable, one time use only Bomb or Missile?
> 
> If you are member of the Chinese Counter-Intelligence Team, doing damage control on PDF, you need to come up with something better, my friend.
> 
> *"the problem is you don't need a special engine for catapult use. "*
> 
> You don't.
> 
> But the pilot would the better like the experience of catapult off the carrier deck, at over 200 miles per hour, and don't experience a very sharp g-force load on their spines and airframes, which could lead to long term spinal damage, for a carrier pilot, and decrease the life of the airframes.
> 
> I have never heard of an engine built specifically to synchronize with an Electromagnetic Catapult launch before.
> 
> So this is an important innovation, if my guess is right.
> 
> Electromagnetic Catapult has this unique capability of programming the release of its EM force according to the weight of the aircraft and smooth out the g-force load, over the entire launch, instead of *one* *sharp* *jolt*, at the beginning.
> *
> https://engineering.eckovation.com/electromagnetic-catapult/
> *
> "Its main advantage is that it accelerates aircraft more smoothly, putting less stress on their airframes, [and pilot]. "
> *
> 
> *


The engine is X... Not WS and I don't comphrehend you, are you saying there is a special engine for carrier aircrafts or otherwise. You need to calm down and I doubt you are Chinese btw. Normally Chinese don't talk like you. 

I am saying there is no special engine for carrier versions hence there the catapult term does not apply for thr engine.


----------



## Figaro

Han Patriot said:


> The engine is X... Not WS and I don't comphrehend you, are you saying there is a special engine for carrier aircrafts or otherwise. You need to calm down and I doubt you are Chinese btw. Normally Chinese don't talk like you.
> 
> I am saying there is no special engine for carrier versions hence there the catapult term does not apply for thr engine.


I'm pretty sure he is Chinese but just has a rather poor command of the language in some instances ...


----------



## Asoka

*1. "The engine is X... Not WS "
*
I have already explained that "XS" stands for "WS". Obscuring certain names or use code word is common technique to confuse potential spies.
*
2. "Normally Chinese don't talk like you."
*
No, they don't.

My wife keep telling me, I am "special" (not in a compliment way) that she has never meet any Chinese like me.
*
3. "You need to calm down"*

I think somebody is getting nervous because I don't shut up.

*4. " I am saying there is no special engine for carrier versions hence there the catapult term does not apply for thr engine."*

Excuse me, I beg to differ.

It seems the Chinese Counter-Intelligence Damage Control Team is active at PDF, here, tonight.

This low grade disinformation does not work for me.

Why don't you tell your Boss's Boss to post the *entire*, *unaltered* *Report* of that engine company, here at PDF, so we could examine it, leisurely.

If that Report is not real, as Mr. Figaro stated, then no harm is done.

I would love to see what else is in that juicy Report.

*5. I'm pretty sure he is Chinese but just has a rather poor command of the language in some instances ...*

My Chinese is better than the Chinese Counter-intelligence Damage Control Team, here at PDF, doing their usual trick of spreading disinformation to control a leak.

Thank you for your concern, Mr. Figaro.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Asoka said:


> *1. "The engine is X... Not WS "
> *
> I have already explained that "XS" stands for "WS". Obscuring certain names or use code word is common technique to confuse potential spies.
> *
> 2. "Normally Chinese don't talk like you."
> *
> No, they don't.
> 
> My wife keep telling me, I am "special" (not in a compliment way) that she has never meet any Chinese like me.
> *
> 3. "You need to calm down"*
> 
> I think somebody is getting nervous because I don't shut up.
> 
> *4. " I am saying there is no special engine for carrier versions hence there the catapult term does not apply for thr engine."*
> 
> Excuse me, I beg to differ.
> 
> It seems the Chinese Counter-Intelligence Damage Control Team is active at PDF, here, tonight.
> 
> This low grade disinformation does not work for me.
> 
> Why don't you tell your Boss's Boss to post the *entire*, *unaltered* *Report* of that engine company, here at PDF, so we could examine it, leisurely.
> 
> If that Report is not real, as Mr. Figaro stated, then no harm is done.
> 
> I would love to see what else is in that juicy Report.
> 
> *5. I'm pretty sure he is Chinese but just has a rather poor command of the language in some instances ...*
> 
> My Chinese is better than the Chinese Counter-intelligence Damage Control Team, here at PDF, doing their usual trick of spreading disinformation to control a leak.
> 
> Thank you for your concern, Mr. Figaro.


Clearly the other Chinese members here have interpreted it differently than u ... why not just accept that and drop it? Besides, a "cataput" engine doesnt really make sense anyway. Im sure such engines are referred to navalized engines by the Chinese.



Asoka said:


> It's a figure of speech, mr. cat. I am sure you understand.
> 
> I didn't say I am the only one-eye man, in the Land of the Blinds. I am sure there could be other one-eye man, in China, who already knew the truth, but they are not allow to speak out, otherwise, the Chinese State Security would take them in, in no time.
> 
> 
> 
> *"Could be both bomb or catapult/spring, but in the sentence means bomb engine."*
> 
> very funny. LOL.


So youre saying that youre information is so credible that if a Chinese poster presented it, they would be taken in? You cant be serious ...


----------



## Asoka

*1. "Clearly the other Chinese members here have interpreted it differently than u ... why not just accept that and drop it? "*

I am still waiting for an answer from the Chinese Counter-Intelligence Damage Control Team to explain, why would anyone want to strap a large and expensive multi-million dollars TurboFan Engine WS-10/12 on an expendable, one time use only, Bomb or Missile.

Someone please explain that sh*t to me. I am pleading ignorance, here.

2. "*Besides, a "cataput" engine doesnt really make sense anyway. "
*
Well, may be not to Mr. Figaro.

It makes a whole of sense to me, to make an engine that could *synchronize* with the Electromagnetic catapult, to have a far smooth launch. 

Remember, you can't do that with a Steam Catapult. All the steam would just let go at once, when the valve is opened.

*"3. Im sure such engines are referred to navalized engines by the Chinese."*

Yup, it seems China testing WS-10/12 on a J-20, for the last few years, and it has specifically designed to use with an Electromagnetic Catapult, on the upcoming Chinese Aircraft Carriers.

And our Chinese Counter-Intelligence Damage Control Team here on PDF, is focused on protecting this secret that a navalized version of J-20 will be the main strike force of the future Chinese Carriers.

I bet the debate whether China will use J-20 or the cheap crap FC-31 on the new carriers, is just smokescreens.

*6. "So youre saying that youre information is so credible that if a Chinese poster presented it, they would be taken in? You cant be serious ..."*

I am not sure, what are you talking about.

This Leak has been scrubbed clean from all Chinese websites by censors, just after one day.

If anyone still post it in China, he will be taken in by Chinese State Security, I am sure.

This Leak is most serious.

The Chinese are clearly not ready to let the world know what 4th generation fighters will be catapult off the new aircraft carriers.

This is still highly classified information.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kuge

well, let give a benefit of doubt to asoka, will ya?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

kuge said:


> well, let give a benefit of doubt to asoka, will ya?



No, ... even more why? If any of the reliable, respected members here like @LKJ86 or @*星海军事 *or others would agree, I would indeed become skeptical, but so fan none of his claims was correct, was proven with real evidence or was accepted in other places. Theories like +240kN thrust pre-serial WS-15s from day one, already now an 3D-axis-symmetrical TVC-system operational on all J-20, a WS-12 catapult engine ... none of these theories bears any credibility or "benefit of doubt".

IMO he is probably one of the least reliable and trustworthy members of the PDF and surely not a Chinese secretly living in the USA who constantly fears that the Chinese Internet Security or the secret service will hunt him ... IMO he's nothing but a troll

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

*1. "he is probably one of the least reliable and trustworthy members of the PDF "*

LOL.

I am here for the Truth and Mr. Deino can't handle the Truth.

He would just love to live in his delusional pet theory that J-20 has been flying with the AL-31 engine from day one, and still is, even J-20 is already under low serial production.

*2. "who constantly fears that the Chinese Internet Security or the secret service will hunt him ... "
*
I live in the US, and I post only information I have got the open source, that is why I can speak out, whereas, people in China can't.

Sometimes, I got the feeling Mr. Deino is the best helper for Chinese Counter-Intelligence to squelch/suppress the truth, using his position as Moderator on PDF.
*
3. "IMO he's nothing but a troll"
*
LMAO

The Truth don't go away.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *1. *I am here for the Truth and Mr. Deino can't handle the Truth.
> 
> *2. *Sometimes, I got the feeling Mr. Deino is the best helper for Chinese Counter-Intelligence to squelch/suppress the truth, using his position as Moderator on PDF.
> *
> 3. *The Truth don't go away.



1. "Mais non, bien au contraire" ... exactly to the contrary: As a man from nature science I can easily handle the truth. In fact I only stick to facts and in cases where facts are barely known I tend to accept the most probable option as the one, closest to the truth until more, better or even contradicting evidence is given. What I cannot accept are theories, that are more a brain-fart, ideas which are completely unfounded and in contradiction to other opinions. 

2. Ohhh well, yet another theory. Sorry, but unfortunately I'm not paid by the Chinese Counter-Intelligence.

So like the following points:



Asoka said:


> *1. *I have already explained that "XS" stands for "WS". Obscuring certain names or use code word is common technique to confuse potential spies.
> *
> 2. *My wife keep telling me, I am "special" (not in a compliment way) that she has never meet any Chinese like me.
> *
> ...*



1. Sorry, but I must contradict: By scientific standard you did not explain, you only said. For an explanation we are all waiting ... but, No. We are not waiting for another long theory.

2. Maybe this is her polite way to admit, You are simply crazy?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

*1. "As a man from nature science I can easily handle the truth."*

Not really, "Science" is a cult, just like Christianity and other ancient cults. New Truths will be rejected flat-out, if new evidences do not fit its existing dogmas.

Many "scientists" behaves exactly like cult-members".

You are in this "cult" that China could not have developed WS-15 engine, before 2011, and flown with J-20, since day one.

*"2. In fact, I only stick to facts"*

No, you don't. You stick with your dogmas, and reject any new evidences that do not fit your strongly held dogmas.

*"3. and in cases, where facts are barely known I tend to accept the most probable option as the one, closest to the truth until more, better or even contradicting evidence is given. "*

Yes, that might be true, if other "*experts*" agree already with that.

That is the problem. Most "experts" don't know or is not in the loop. The state of WS-15 engine development is a strongly guarded Chinese state secret.

*4. "What I cannot accept are theories, that are more a brain-fart, ideas which are completely unfounded and in contradiction to other opinions."*

That is a wise and prudent thing to do, if those theories are "brain-fart" with no evidences to back them up.

I have done my own extensive researches, and came up with strong evidences that J-20 have been flying with WS-15 since day one, and it has 3D TVC nozzle, and at least, 210kN of maximum thrust.
*
5. Sorry, but unfortunately, I'm not paid by the Chinese Counter-Intelligence.
*
No, you are not. I don't believe so. You are NOT an Chinese intelligence agent. Far from it.

I have always wonder why the military forums like Pakistan Defense Forum, Indian Defense Forum, Sino Defense Forum, and many others *do* *have* *no* *ads*, or charge a membership fee, to support themselves. 

I thought they were run by volunteers, only, so they don't need much money. 

But that still need to pay for web-hosting, the servers, the softwares, and many other expenses, associated with running a busy website.

Then, someone told me, CIA has an extensive open-source web-based intelligence collection program. That explains it. 
*
https://www.cia.gov/news-informatio...d-story-archive/open-source-intelligence.html
*
"Information does not have to be secret to be valuable. . . The Intelligence Community generally refers to this information as *Open* *Source* *Intelligence* (*OSINT*). OSINT plays an essential role in giving the national security community as a whole insight and context at a relatively low cost."

I am *not* accusing anyone associated with those Forums are CIA agents or employees. 

They might not know, who they actually work for.

I will know the truth, if this post got promptly deleted or I got banned again.
*
2. Maybe this is her polite way to admit, You are simply crazy?
*
No, I don't think, she think I am crazy, but I am "*strange*" in more than one ways.

This is probably I am a "rooster" in Chinese horoscope. Roosters are known to be strange, opinionated, argumentative, and have a pioneering spirit. 

They simply have no regard to other's opinions, expert or not, if they don't like it, or don't think its the Truth.



Correction:

"I have always wonder why the military forums like Pakistan Defense Forum, Indian Defense Forum, Sino Defense Forum, and many others *do* *[NOT]* *have* *no* *ads*, or charge a membership fee, to support themselves."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Asoka said:


> *1. *Not really, "Science" is a cult, just like Christianity and other ancient cults. New Truths will be rejected flat-out, if new evidences do not fit its existing dogmas.
> 
> *"3. *Yes, that might be true, if other "*experts*" agree already with that.



1. If this is your attitude, then there is indeed no basis to discuss this further.

3. Great, but there are simply NONE. No-one here agrees, at least no expert.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

*弹用*发动机 = Microturbo engine for UAV and cruise missiles.

There is no such thing as catapult engine for aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Asoka

lcloo said:


> 弹用发动机 = Microturbo engine for UAV and cruise missiles.
> 
> View attachment 598549
> View attachment 598550
> View attachment 598551
> 
> 
> View attachment 598554



Those are small or micro-fan engine for cruise missiles. They are *not large and expensive* WS-10/12 Turbofan engines. I am well aware that cruise missiles uses a small turbo engine to power itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

Asoka said:


> Those are small or micro-fan engine for cruise missiles. They are *not large and expensive* WS-10/12 Turbofan engines. I am well aware that cruise missiles uses a small turbo engine to power itself.


There is no WS-12 aircraft engine, its development was cancelled in 1999.

弹用发动机 = engines for cruise missiles. (also suitable for use on UAV)

XS-12 engine is not WS-12 engine. And neither is xs-10 = WS-10.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

lcloo said:


> There is no WS-12 aircraft engine, its development was cancelled in 1999.
> 
> 弹用发动机 = engines for cruise missiles.
> 
> XS-12 engine is not WS-12 engine. And neither is xs-10 = WS-10.












There is an XS-10 弹用发动机, or WS-10 弹用发动机, if I am not mistaken.



Deino said:


> 1. If this is your attitude, then there is indeed no basis to discuss this further.
> 
> 3. Great, but there are simply NONE. No-one here agrees, at least no expert.



*"1. If this is your attitude, then there is indeed no basis to discuss this further."*

Yes, it is sad to see someone insisted living in a fantastical delusion, despite all the evidences around him.

I have learn a lot about how the human mind actually works.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

Asoka said:


> View attachment 598555
> 
> 
> There is an XS-10 弹用发动机, or WS-10 弹用发动机, if I am not mistaken.
> 
> 
> 
> *"1. If this is your attitude, then there is indeed no basis to discuss this further."*
> 
> Yes, it is sad to see someone insisted living in a fantastical delusion, despite all the evidences around him.
> 
> I have learn a lot about how the human mind actually works.




昔公明仪为牛弹清角之操，伏食如故。非牛不闻，不合其耳矣。转为蚊虻之声，孤犊之鸣，即掉尾奋耳，蹀躞而听。


----------



## Asoka

LOL.
This is like some Christians keep quoting scriptures to "prove" his points, but do not trying to explain what they mean.

*"XS-12 engine is not WS-12 engine. And neither is xs-10 = WS-10."*

I beg to differ.

Mr. Deino asked a very puzzling, disturbing but very valid question, why so many Chinese themselves, don't believe WS-15 is not ready, and it is not flying with J-20.

Here is a Post, I got on meyet.net asking the same question. 

This is the only website in the world that agrees with me that J-20 was already using WS-15, since day one. 

The real answer to this answer *goes* *far* *beyond* the question of WS-15 and J-20.

https://bbs.meyet.net/thread-321328-4869-1.html

"一个几年来在军坛纷纷扰扰的疑问——为什么会有毛发党？为什么会衍生太行党？为什么这些人死活不允许WS15安装在歼20的身上？

——今天，通过霉菌对这张照片的使用，我们已经看清楚了，想明白了，因为“威慑是一种实实在在可以带来战略利益的力量”，而WS15就是一种力压霉菌肥电的威慑力量！

没有WS15的歼20从根上讲就已经矮了肥电一头，其身上的光环就会暗淡许多，而其威慑力自然也就逊色十分。

装上WS15的歼20即使没有实战，也会瓦解霉菌空军地球第一的幻想及其所带来的各种战略利益，也会令二逼总统叫嚣的打击威慑力及张扬的毛衣战恐吓力瞬间化为泡沫，会令世界的走向研判出现霉国不想看到不敢看到的结论，并动摇美元的地位，打击CNN没脸蛇扭腰时报的话语霸权。

WS15其实已经成为了一种象征，象征中国已经摘取了那颗号称极顶的工业明珠，那自然就是可跟霉国比肩的强大的工业国。

这个象征是霉国，特别是CIA豢养的那群狗们无论如何都不能接受甚至不能想象的，因为那会断了它们的狗粮，令它们从此只能活在怀疑人生的自贱氛围中。"

*Note: 霉菌, 霉国 = 美国*

*Correction*:

why so many Chinese themselves, still don't believe WS-15 is ready, and it is flying with J-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Asoka

Let me be very clear that although it is very frustrating that Mr. Deino and Mr. Figaro do not believe my "outlandish" theory that J-20 has been flying with WS-15 since Day One, I do not believe they are malicious people, here to disparage the accomplishment of the Chinese people.

This is a theory that Mr. Dieno has pointed out that many Chinese people themselves do not believe. I am in a very few minority.

I believe they just want to see strong undeniable evidences. 

Unfortunately, this is not help by the fact that the state of WS-15 engine development is still highly classified and that the Chinese Counter-Intelligence is under strict order to guard this state secret by sending out and encourage various disinformations, whenever, there is a leak.

Anyway, I am back after two years of absence to do my own things.

I wish both Mr. @Deino and Mr. @Figaro and the rest of PDF member, a Happy New Year.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Silicon0000

For all the fighting champs here (on a lighter note )

On topic: Guys lets agree to disagree and move on with this endless discussion.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Asoka said:


> I have never heard of an engine built specifically to synchronize with an Electromagnetic Catapult launch before.
> 
> So this is an important innovation, if my guess is right.
> 
> Electromagnetic Catapult has this unique capability of programming the release of its EM force according to the weight of the aircraft and smooth out the g-force load, over the entire launch, instead of *one* *sharp* *jolt*, at the beginning.
> *
> https://engineering.eckovation.com/electromagnetic-catapult/
> *
> "Its main advantage is that it accelerates aircraft more smoothly, putting less stress on their airframes, [and pilot]. "


And what a nonsense you have, USA currently operating newest aircraft carrier with electromagnetic launch system but didn't test any kind of Special engines for their jets, stop your conspiracy theories
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier


Asoka said:


> I am here for the Truth and Mr. Deino can't handle the Truth.


You're living in your fantasy land kid, get out of your nonsense fairy tales, you have a ego that you're always right, and by the way tell us how reliable/respectable you're link are in you last post, its similar like that India claiming their KARVERI for Tejas has a thrust of 300 kn, mostly you're assuming baselessly

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## StormBreaker

seven0seven said:


> And what a nonsense you have, USA currently operating newest aircraft carrier with electromagnetic launch system but didn't test any kind of Special engines for their jets, stop your conspiracy theories
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier
> 
> You're living in your fantasy land kid, get out of your nonsense fairy tales, you have a ego that you're always right, and by the way tell us how reliable/respectable you're link are in you last post, its similar like that India claiming their KARVERI for Tejas has a thrust of 300 kn, mostly you're assuming baselessly


Welcome back mate

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

BY the way, do we know if any of these WS-10-powered J-20s is already painted in PLAAF grey?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

seven0seven said:


> And what a nonsense you have, USA currently operating newest aircraft carrier with electromagnetic launch system but didn't test any kind of Special engines for their jets, stop your conspiracy theories
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_R._Ford-class_aircraft_carrier
> 
> You're living in your fantasy land kid, get out of your nonsense fairy tales, you have a ego that you're always right, and by the way tell us how reliable/respectable you're link are in you last post, its similar like that India claiming their KARVERI for Tejas has a thrust of 300 kn, mostly you're assuming baselessly


I think @Asoka claims are more credible than the Kaveri claim lmao

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> I think @Asoka claims are more credible than the Kaveri claim lmao



Ok ... but I'm not sure if a claim only a bit less unrealistic makes it credible!?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StormBreaker

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 621074


Translate


----------



## LKJ86

StormBreaker said:


> Translate


My misoperation...


----------



## dbc

serenity said:


> Why will they go with canard design and ventral fins if the drag is too much compared to design advantages?





viva_zhao said:


> What he said is true. Seems you are the one has little experience and knowledge about jet. Rafale is close canard actually.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 639923



The word ‘close coupled‘ implies an interaction between the canard and the wing typically to generate lift. The Rafale and the J20 both are close coupled designs. But weirdly the J20 designers coupled the canard with a high mounted wing, while the Rafale has mid mounted wing. This design choice for the J20 further illustrates my point, the J20 is designed to carry large payload for long range undetected penetration into contested airspace. It wasn’t designed for close combat ..period.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

viva_zhao said:


> F-135 paid a price for higher thrust, which is much higher bypass ratio.
> F-135 0.56:1
> F-119 0.30:1
> F135-PW-100 dry trust 128 kN
> F119-PW-100 dry trust 116 kN
> China can sacrifice bypass ratio to improve dry trust, but is it what we need?



I think they should just investigate variable cycle. If WS15 first trial was done just when J-20 was ready and they decided to restart so many of its components then I suspect newer WS15 for 2025 or around then is variable cycle. Or I hope it is. Even if it is higher bypass ratios similar to F135/6 levels, I will be so amazed. China will have super high thrust level turbofan which is only limited by variability in bypass ratio. Even then it will hopefully become obsolete technology in coming decades.

I divide military low bypass turbofans in five thrust levels:

1. Weak - For garage enthusiasts and various experiment concept levels useless for military fighters and generally we ignore for this purpose.

2. Low thrust - Honeywell engine etc or WS-5 WS-11 etc of various low thrusts for drones and up to very small light fighters requiring two of such engines in higher end like FCK-1.

3. Medium thrust - M88, RD-33 series up to higher end of EJ200, F414, M53 - European low bypass turbofan achieve these highest thrust level but of course this doesn't mean they cannot produce higher thrust levels but there are challenges certainly and a lot of time and money to spend if they want to.

4. High thrust - AL-31, WS10, F100, F110 these are Russian, American, and Chinese now with WS10 being mature enough with over 10 years of flying service with J-11B series and now applied to J-10 and various other kinds even including thrust vectoring forms.

5. Super high thrust - F119 to higher end of F135 F136. So far only USA has this level of technology already accomplished and conquered. This is our Himalaya peak to conquer because it represent the level when we can sit side by side with the best if we achieve this before they achieve their next breakthroughs which will be variable cycle and even higher thrust than F135. Even if we can do this by around 2025, it is going to be amazing for us who just 70s years ago was struggling to feed ourselves with full bellies. WS15 hopefully considers variable cycle and I suspect the reason for total complete redesign was to incorporate variable cycle so in one leap we can get to the next stage anyway because the core design and materials for F135 is actually already there since years. For variable cycle it is not so much. About Russia's project type 30, who knows. Their latest report suggest roughly ready around 2025 as well.



dbc said:


> The word ‘close coupled‘ implies an interaction between the canard and the wing typically to generate lift. The Rafale and the J20 both are close coupled designs. But weirdly the J20 designers coupled the canard with a high mounted wing, while the Rafale has mid mounted wing. This design choice for the J20 further illustrates my point, the J20 is designed to carry large payload for long range undetected penetration into contested airspace. It wasn’t designed for close combat ..period.



Well let's finish this argument we both disagree but one thing I personally think is correct is J-20 is not designed for close combat. It doesn't even have a gun. PL-10 is must in case for close combat and is helmet guided and very high off boresight anyway. J-20 uses long arm canard we can disagree here but reality is whatever it is and one of us is right about it. Long arm canard is generally for good supersonic turning and mechanical stability. Eurofighter is also famous for supercruising and supersonic turning. F-22 is also fantastic in its own way and can use thrust vectoring to full advantage due to advanced incorporation of its thrust vectoring and flight control. J-20 hopes to get 3D thrust vectoring here so minimal canard movement is required. This can help with stealth too but right now canard movements are not as important to stealth because again it is 90% material and electromagnetic now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## laser911

dbc said:


> The word ‘close coupled‘ implies an interaction between the canard and the wing typically to generate lift. The Rafale and the J20 both are close coupled designs. But weirdly the J20 designers coupled the canard with a high mounted wing, while the Rafale has mid mounted wing. This design choice for the J20 further illustrates my point, the J20 is designed to carry large payload for long range undetected penetration into contested airspace. It wasn’t designed for close combat ..period.


Dont think J20 is close coupled design. It is developed from J10 and similar to J10, which is a mid coupled (somewhere between close coupled Rafale and far/weak coupled eurofighter). JAS39 is mid coupled too. Perhaps we can say J20 is somewhere between mid coupled and weak coupled. As the vortex from the canard interacted with strake vortex and then apply on main wing.



serenity said:


> Well let's finish this argument we both disagree but one thing I personally think is correct is J-20 is not designed for close combat. It doesn't even have a gun. PL-10 is must in case for close combat and is helmet guided and very high off boresight anyway. J-20 uses long arm canard we can disagree here but reality is whatever it is and one of us is right about it. Long arm canard is generally for good supersonic turning and mechanical stability. Eurofighter is also famous for supercruising and supersonic turning. F-22 is also fantastic in its own way and can use thrust vectoring to full advantage due to advanced incorporation of its thrust vectoring and flight control. J-20 hopes to get 3D thrust vectoring here so minimal canard movement is required. This can help with stealth too but right now canard movements are not as important to stealth because again it is 90% material and electromagnetic now.



Probably he thinks the strake is a part of the main wing, then it is a close coupled design.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dbc

serenity said:


> Eurofighter is also famous for supercruising and supersonic turning. F-22 is also fantastic in its own way and can use thrust vectoring to full advantage due to advanced incorporation of its thrust vectoring and flight control. J-20 hopes to get 3D thrust vectoring here so minimal canard movement is required. This can help with stealth too but right now canard movements are not as important to stealth because again it is 90% material and electromagnetic now.



First, the ideal material for the canard on a Mach capable jet remains titanium - specifically diffusion bonded titanium, impossible to alter the characteristics of titanium by application of material science to make it less observable to radar.
Studies of several gen 4 delta-canards revealed that the canards contribution to RCS was nearly the same as the engine inlets but even worse when the canard is actuated. And for those arguing that the J20 is not a close coupled layout - the wings of the J20 is anhedral and the canard dihedral as you can clearly see from this picture so stop arguing that the wing / canard interaction is minimal.








Deino said:


> But anyone is entitled to have its own *opinion*.



In my *opinion *you were trolling with the objective of pandering to your Chinese followers. The author of the feature you posted OWEN L SIRRS is an adjunct professor of cultural and regional studies at the University of Montana. Mr Sirrs has nothing to do with the USAF University - there is no such thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

dbc said:


> First, the ideal material for the canard on a Mach capable jet remains titanium - specifically diffusion bonded titanium, impossible to alter the characteristics of titanium by application of material science to make it less observable to radar.
> Studies of several gen 4 delta-canards revealed that the canards contribution to RCS was nearly the same as the engine inlets but even worse when the canard is actuated. And for those arguing that the J20 is not a close coupled layout - the wings of the J20 is anhedral and the canard dihedral as you can clearly see from this picture so stop arguing that the wing / canard interaction is minimal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In my *opinion *you were trolling with the objective of pandering to your Chinese followers. The author of the feature you posted OWEN L SIRRS is an adjunct professor of cultural and regional studies at the University of Montana. Mr Sirrs has nothing to do with the USAF University - there is no such thing.



Stop with this nonsense. You just know some words like anhedral and dihedral but these have nothing to do with long arm or close coupling for canards.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## dbc

serenity said:


> Stop with this nonsense. You just know some words like anhedral and dihedral but these have nothing to do with long arm or close coupling for canards.



Oh dear! Did I upset you? a dihedral canard with an anhedral wing increases canard wing interaction therefore conclusively establishing the J20 as a close coupled delta canard. You can find the relevant NASA paper on dihedral canard using google.





​


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> Oh dear! Did I upset you? a dihedral canard with an anhedral wing increases canard wing interaction therefore conclusively establishing the J20 as a close coupled delta canard. You can find the relevant NASA paper on dihedral canard using google.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​


But J-20 also have LERX in between main wings and CANARD, which change the performance completely for rest of CANARD EQUIPPED JETS LIKE EFT/RAFALE/GRIPEN/SU-30 series of jets etc etc


----------



## samsara

But WHY the author, regardless whoever he is, took the achievements of Argentina and Egypt to depict China's one? What kind of similarity of the overall postures of these three nations? 

India may still make some sense for its overall posture is relatively closer to China's. But even at the size of India, China still has five times the economic size, let alone Argentina and Egypt. Still, historically India has been showing quite dismal achievements to any significant technological project it has been engaging, thus no meaningful benchmarking against India.

When the author tried to project China's outcome from the past records made by Argentina, Egypt and India, then every one with sane mind should know it's a terrible crap worth of no further attention! Going into further details is merely a waste of time! A laughing stock really… the pdf was carried by the "Journal of Indo Pacific Affairs" Summer 2020… someone is paid to put some random writing there

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## obj 705A

dbc said:


> In my *opinion *you were trolling with the objective of pandering to your Chinese followers. The author of the feature you posted OWEN L SIRRS is an adjunct professor of cultural and regional studies at the University of Montana. Mr Sirrs has nothing to do with the USAF University - there is no such thing



@Deino , dbc thinks that as long as he derails the thread while bashing a Mod then he won't have his posts deleted or banned because that would be seen as being a case of a Mod oversteping his authority, dbc & the likes of him who are commenting on here don't really give a flying F about the J-20, they pretend they care about it or it's design or what ever just so that they can continue to talk rubbish to bash China for purely political reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with military things, these kind of posts belong in reddit or 4Chan not in here, if trolls are allowed to continue to derail this thread then their comments won't be limited to the J-20 thread, they will even start talking rubbish in every other thread in the Chinese defence section thus this entire section will become a sh*tshow.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Indos

obj 705A said:


> @Deino , dbc thinks that as long as he derails the thread while bashing a Mod then he won't have his posts deleted or banned because that would be seen as being a case of a Mod oversteping his authority, dbc & the likes of him who are commenting on here don't really give a flying F about the J-20, they pretend they care about it or it's design or what ever just so that they can continue to talk rubbish to bash China for purely political reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with military things, these kind of posts belong in reddit or 4Chan not in here, if trolls are allowed to continue to derail this thread then their comments won't be limited to the J-20 thread, they will even start talking rubbish in every other thread in the Chinese defence section thus this entire section will become a sh*tshow.



LOL critical comment is interesting since it can create debate and more information will come out. This thread is not created to promote J20 but for discussion and update. It is a defense forum any way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GiantPanda

This thread is for news, development and credible rumors if the J-20.

The "debate" BS are not useful to this thread where we get a constant stream of photos. Put debate in other threads you can create specifically to "debate."


----------



## dbc

Gomig-21 said:


> I actually brought up the dihedral positioning of the canards on this thread about a year ago or more. I think we were also talking about whether they were used as speed brakes as well, but we discussed the diherdral position of the canards on the J-20 (not focusing much at the time that the wings were anhedral) and I was actually interested in learning more about why they positioned the canards that way, regardless if it was based on a close-coupled design or not. Perhaps it doesn't matter since we know the Rafale's canards are close-coupled for the specific reason of controlling the airflow over the main wings. But the J-20's wings are anhedral like you mentioned which makes the J-20's delta/canard combination a very interesting and quite unique design. Looking at the EFT and how the canards are pushed much more forward to the nose and act much more as stabilizers than close-coupled canards, but taking a close look at them, they're also anhedral on the EFT, the opposite of the J-20's design. I think it's just all about the complex and ultimate result of aerodynamic testing for each aircraft respectively.



Dihedral canard is necessitated by the requirement to mount the wing high on the fuselage for higher payload capacity. Remember the purpose of the canard is for its vortices to re-energize the flow over the wings. The Eurofighter Typhoon canard is on a ball joint and unlike the Rafale and the J-20, the canard on the Typhoon isn't restricted to the vertical plane. Look at Typhoon images on the internet and you will notice that in flight the Typhoon's canard is sometimes highly swept and sometimes its not....often anhedral and sometimes neutral. 
The X-31 that evolved into the Typhoon is rumored to have the most complex FCS every written by NASA.

Shame the Europeans didn't get around to adding a TV nozzle on the Typhoon.








*Not swept*






*Fully Swept




*


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> Dihedral canard is necessitated by the requirement to mount the wing high on the fuselage for higher payload capacity. Remember the purpose of the canard is for its vortices to re-energize the flow over the wings. The Eurofighter Typhoon canard is on a ball joint and unlike the Rafale and the J-20, the canard on the Typhoon isn't restricted to the vertical plane. Look at Typhoon images on the internet and you will notice that in flight the Typhoon's canard is sometimes highly swept and sometimes its not....often anhedral and sometimes neutral.
> The X-31 that evolved into the Typhoon is rumored to have the most complex FCS every written by NASA.
> 
> Shame the Europeans didn't get around to adding a TV nozzle on the Typhoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Not swept*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Fully Swept
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Sir J20 has not close coupled canards like RAFALE but in between RAFALE and EFT canards

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dbc

IAU said:


> Sir J20 has not close coupled canards like RAFALE but in between RAFALE and EFT canards



Not sir, I am a women. Again the term close coupling is used to define level of the interaction between the canard and the wing. Don't take my word for it, look at videos of the Rafale, J-20 and the Typhoon in flight. Pay particular attention to the actuation of the canard and the effect on the aircraft flight particularly its AoA.


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> Not sir, I am a women. Again the term close coupling is used to define level of the interaction between the canard and the wing. Don't take my word for it, look at videos of the Rafale, J-20 and the Typhoon in flight. Pay particular attention to the actuation of the canard and the effect on the aircraft flight particularly its AoA.


sorry MADAM but J-20 CANARDS not as closed coupled as RAFALE CANARDS is , J-20 has a LERX between its main wing and its CANARDS, so J20's CANARD's performance is in between RAFALE and EFT, thank you MA'AM

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## laser911

dbc said:


> Dihedral canard is necessitated by the requirement to mount the wing high on the fuselage for higher payload capacity. Remember the purpose of the canard is for its vortices to re-energize the flow over the wings. The Eurofighter Typhoon canard is on a ball joint and unlike the Rafale and the J-20, the canard on the Typhoon isn't restricted to the vertical plane. Look at Typhoon images on the internet and you will notice that in flight the Typhoon's canard is sometimes highly swept and sometimes its not....often anhedral and sometimes neutral.
> The X-31 that evolved into the Typhoon is rumored to have the most complex FCS every written by NASA.
> 
> Shame the Europeans didn't get around to adding a TV nozzle on the Typhoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Not swept*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Fully Swept
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


The ball joint thing doesnt make sense at all...it is just the angle of canard mount/shaft and the angle of view make it looks different. it will need a gap or slop (like F14) to allow canard change swept.


----------



## dbc

laser911 said:


> The ball joint thing doesnt make sense at all...it is just the angle of canard mount/shaft and the angle of view make it looks different. it will need a gap or slop (like F14) to allow canard change swept.



I didn’t say the canard is mechanically swept like the F14 Tomcat wing. It just rotates a 180 degree_s, _making the trailing edge the leading edge. While the canard on the Typhoon is a lifting surface it does not interact in any way with it’s aeroelastic wing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> I didn’t say the canard is mechanically swept like the F14 Tomcat wing. It just rotates a 180 degree_s, _making the trailing edge the leading edge. While the canard on the Typhoon is a lifting surface it does not interact in any way with it’s aeroelastic wing.


can you have a proof that J-20 canards can rotate 180 degrees, but i would like to say 90 degrees (vertical), not any canard equipped jets in the world can rotates its canards to 180 degrees, that's includes J-20 also

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## laser911

dbc said:


> I didn’t say the canard is mechanically swept like the F14 Tomcat wing. It just rotates a 180 degree_s, _making the trailing edge the leading edge. While the canard on the Typhoon is a lifting surface it does not interact in any way with it’s aeroelastic wing.


canard rotate 180 degrees?! that makes no sense at all! It is no possible to rotate 180 in normal airspeed range not to mention the structural problem of doing so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

Wow so many stupid comments from stupid people. Please shut up you don't know anything about even the basics of mechanics don't talk about aircraft engineering. Just saying random shit to sound smart but has nothing to do with discussions. $10 Indian education engineering degrees. Just keep talking random words with no connections to distract endlessly.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## clibra

Deino said:


> Oh well a a piece of BS and as it seems you only can post such crappy dated and misinformed propaganda videos!


look at the comments under that video, Western propaganda is so powerful that produced tons of idiots. 
Russian radar technology is way ahead of China's....
Indian Air Force commander said "The Sukhoi's radar can see them, the new Chinese jets are not so invisible after all" ...... dude, turn your eyes up, look at the crotch part of J20, have you see a round little thing? That thing called Luneberg lens, J20s use this to allows you see them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## clibra

zhxy said:


> Why didn't China think of developing a single-engine version of the J-20? That was amazing



because the WS-15 is not ready


----------



## Deino

clibra said:


> because the WS-15 is not ready



Indeed, but more likely that the PLAAF does not want or need a single engined type.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Armchair

Anybody has any info on whether the canards of the j-20 harm its RCS in a way that the canard delta design is less stealthy than a conventional layout? Are there any RCS studies that proves this point?


----------



## ozranger

Armchair said:


> Anybody has any info on whether the canards of the j-20 harm its RCS in a way that the canard delta design is less stealthy than a conventional layout? Are there any RCS studies that proves this point?


There are a couple of academic papers in Chinese iterate through several defection angles with corresponding RCS test results and propose solutions for technical improvement. The conclusion is RCS has no significant increase on small angles, say <10 degree. 







Remember big canard deflection is only being used for take-off and pitch down control at high angle of attack. In latter situation the aircraft already enters dog fight so big deflection angles will not be a problem as both sides can already see each other visually.

During flight time canards mostly remain stationary. Ailavators are being used for ascending and descending. During supersonic cruise or supersonic maneuver the canards will deflect slightly to provide the nose additional lift. But the angle is much smaller than that created by elevators on a tail aft aircraft's horizontal stabilizers.


----------



## serenity

Easy. Think about why some European and Swedish independent 5th generation concepts also use canards. Also American concepts for 5th gen from Boeing used canards. Same with 5.5 gen concept drawings. If we are not experts in this field, then it is impossible to say but remember the facts many 5th gen and 5.5 gen considered using canards.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## laser911

Armchair said:


> Anybody has any info on whether the canards of the j-20 harm its RCS in a way that the canard delta design is less stealthy than a conventional layout? Are there any RCS studies that proves this point?


If you think about how the radar work, you will have a better idea about this RCS problem. The radar requires a certain accumulation of signal (in terms of strength or time) to recognise something as a target. The idea of stealth is reducing the RCS to noise level so that the radar will ignore it. During level flying, the control surface only move slightly for a very short time (less than 1 second) to adjust the aircraft, therefore the signal wont be significant and will only last a very short time. Hence it is difficult to pick up by radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## vi-va

Armchair said:


> Anybody has any info on whether the canards of the j-20 harm its RCS in a way that the canard delta design is less stealthy than a conventional layout? Are there any RCS studies that proves this point?


better RCS on 90 degree. cannard itself do NOT affect RCS.

Many academic papers, you can search around.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dbc

vi-va said:


> better RCS on 90 degree. cannard itself do NOT affect RCS.
> 
> Many academic papers, you can search around.



Sure those 'papers' will be very useful once you reveal the materials used to make the J-20 canard.
Do you know?


----------



## PeacefulWar

dbc said:


> Sure those 'papers' will be very useful once you reveal the materials used to make the J-20 canard.
> Do you know?


Your arguments really don't make sense.
The debate is about whether the canards(the design the geometry itself) will affect RCS.
Why suddenly bring material in? Stealth materials used in main wings can't be used on canards? 
Logic please.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dbc

PeacefulWar said:


> Your arguments really don't make sense.
> The debate is about whether the canards(the design the geometry itself) will affect RCS.
> Why suddenly bring material in? Stealth materials used in main wings can't be used on canards?
> Logic please.



Really? Logic? No, because carbon composites cannot withstand torsional loading experienced by the canard of a highly maneuverable Mach capable fighter jet. It is possible the but unlikely the Chinese came up with a RAS composite that can withstand the load - I have never heard of any such an application across the aerospace industry.Hence my question about the materials of J-20 canard. Do you know what it is made from? If so, please enlighten us.


----------



## vi-va

dbc said:


> Really? Logic? No, because carbon composites cannot withstand torsional loading experienced by the canard of a highly maneuverable Mach capable fighter jet. It is possible the but unlikely the Chinese came up with a RAS composite that can withstand the load - I have never heard of any such an application across the aerospace industry.Hence my question about the materials of J-20 canard. Do you know what it is made from? If so, please enlighten us.




I and many others bet on academic papers instead of yours. This is logical.
If J-20 sucks, good luck to America. They should NOT be panic as we see today.
Please stop nonsense, it's endless and meaningless. Argument is valid when you bring value to others. I don't see it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dbc

vi-va said:


> I and many others bet on academic papers instead of yours. This is logical.
> If J-20 sucks, good luck to America. They should NOT be panic as we see today.
> Please stop nonsense, it's endless and meaningless. Argument is valid when you bring value to others. I don't see it.



blah blah! pointless rambling attempt at deflection. Can you tell us the material composition of the J20 canard?


----------



## PeacefulWar

dbc said:


> Really? Logic? No, because carbon composites cannot withstand torsional loading experienced by the canard of a highly maneuverable Mach capable fighter jet. It is possible the but unlikely the Chinese came up with a RAS composite that can withstand the load - I have never heard of any such an application across the aerospace industry.Hence my question about the materials of J-20 canard. Do you know what it is made from? If so, please enlighten us.


Thanks for at least explaining your point.
Nope, I have no idea what material J-20 used for canards. 
Since you bring this topic. Please share your sources that proves your point?



dbc said:


> blah blah! pointless rambling attempt at deflection. Can you tell us the material composition of the J20 canard?


Feel free to make a point with sources or reasoning instead of one line "pointless rambling attempt at deflection".
I'm happy to learn from different point of views.
But one line trolling? Thanks, But no thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> blah blah! pointless rambling attempt at deflection. Can you tell us the material composition of the J20 canard?


Why do assume that they build of conventional materials its classified
And do you know what materials are being used in f-22 and F35????


----------



## samsara

dbc said:


> blah blah! pointless rambling attempt at deflection. Can you tell us the material composition of the J20 canard?


Stop asking thing that is not publicized! Don't flash this thread time and again with questions that you know no one knows the answer for its data is just classified! Visit SDF if you love such thing!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dbc

PeacefulWar said:


> Thanks for at least explaining your point.
> Nope, I have no idea what material J-20 used for canards.
> Since you bring this topic. Please share your sources that proves you



I don’t know and that is the point isn’t it. On the Typhoon and Rafale, the canard is made with diffusion bonded titanium- this information is provided by Airbus and Dassault respectively. But not so in the case of the J-20, it isn’t known and yet many here assume it (the canard) is made from Radar Absorbing composites.

So on all three 4.5 gen delta canard European fighter the canard is made from Titanium. It is possible the Chinese invented a material that is radar absorbing and also provides the same strength and resilience to dynamic loading forces as titanium. If such a material has been engineered by anyone it will be huge news not a state secret.


----------



## samsara

dbc said:


> I don’t know and that is the point isn’t it. On the Typhoon and Rafale, the canard is made with diffusion bonded titanium- this information is provided by Airbus and Dassault respectively. But not so in the case of the J-20, it isn’t known and yet many here assume it (the canard) is made from Radar Absorbing composites.
> 
> So on all three 4.5 gen delta canard European fighter the canard is made from Titanium. It is possible the Chinese invented a material that is radar absorbing and also provides the same strength and resilience to dynamic loading forces as titanium. If such a material has been engineered by anyone it will be huge news not a state secret.


Unlike the European makers, China does not export J-20 thus it needs not to publicize the J-20 data! I hope this simple fact makes it pretty clear to you. China has no need to divulge such data!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dbc

samsara said:


> Unlike the European makers, China does not export J-20 thus it needs not to publicize the J-20 data! I hope this simple fact makes it pretty clear to you. China has no need to divulge such data!



such a material has widespread application across many industries and it will bring billions in revenue to its inventor. Also, when it comes to composites or SCB the manufacturing technique is protected (secret) not the compositional data.


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> such a material has widespread application across many industries and it will bring billions in revenue to its inventor. Also, when it comes to composites or SCB the manufacturing technique is protected (secret) not the compositional data.


Why they spread it because they using it on j20 you want to reveal j20 secrets to world its their decision that they kept secret this or not and why want it please tell me does F35 baking composite technology is being used by in commercial industries please answer this ma'am.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dbc

IAU said:


> Why they spread it because they using it on j20 you want to reveal j20 secrets to world its their decision that they kept secret this or not and why want it please tell me does F35 baking composite technology is being used by in commercial industries please answer this ma'am.



it’s a secret please don’t share with anyone 

CYCOM 977 epoxy resin
CYCOM 5250 bismaleimide resin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> it’s a secret please don’t share with anyone
> 
> CYCOM 977 epoxy resin
> CYCOM 5250 bismaleimide resin


Not that composition that is being used in F35 ma'am


----------



## Deino

IAU said:


> Not that composition that is being used in F35 ma'am




Is there a reason why you label all members in your reply as "ma'am"?


----------



## PeacefulWar

dbc said:


> I don’t know and that is the point isn’t it. On the Typhoon and Rafale, the canard is made with diffusion bonded titanium- this information is provided by Airbus and Dassault respectively. But not so in the case of the J-20, it isn’t known and yet many here assume it (the canard) is made from Radar Absorbing composites.
> 
> So on all three 4.5 gen delta canard European fighter the canard is made from Titanium. It is possible the Chinese invented a material that is radar absorbing and also provides the same strength and resilience to dynamic loading forces as titanium. If such a material has been engineered by anyone it will be huge news not a state secret.


Would be much appreciated if you presented your view in this way in your first post!
Well,no one can confirm or deny any such thing so I guess we can only make educated guess based on reasoning.
China has been research Radar Absorbing composites from long time, I just did a rough google search and found this *paper *in Chinese. It discuss RAC for stealth fighter wings.

To me, there really isn't any solid counter arguments for the sake of this simple logic: CAC must have researched all layouts very carefully. The fact that they chose canard over conventional design indicates the canard don't affect the RCS. After all RCS is one of the most(if not THE most) important metrics for a 5G fighter. It's not that CAC can't design a conventional plane. They did it for JF-17.


----------



## lcloo

Trawl fishing in action.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## FuturePAF

PeacefulWar said:


> Would be much appreciated if you presented your view in this way in your first post!
> Well,no one can confirm or deny any such thing so I guess we can only make educated guess based on reasoning.
> China has been research Radar Absorbing composites from long time, I just did a rough google search and found this *paper *in Chinese. It discuss RAC for stealth fighter wings.
> 
> To me, there really isn't any solid counter arguments for the sake of this simple logic: CAC must have researched all layouts very carefully. The fact that they chose canard over conventional design indicates the canard don't affect the RCS. After all RCS is one of the most(if not THE most) important metrics for a 5G fighter. It's not that CAC can't design a conventional plane. They did it for JF-17.



The J-20 is more of a long range interceptor, and may rely on its weapons to do most of the turning for it. The canards, while definitely accounted for across all signatures, especially RCS, may only be a factor if the J-20 gets close to another 5th generation platform.

Once 5th generation technology is perfected on the J-20, especially the super cruising engines, there maybe a few conventional layout stealth fighters unveiled in China; a conventional layout carrier fighter, a vertical takeoff fighter for its LHDs and a mass production Air Force fighter, which might even have a pelican tail like this proposed European Stealth fighter mockup. (China may even develop two version of this pelican tail fighter; one with WS-13/19 engines for export (to compete with the F-35) and one with WS-15 engines for its Air Force)

multiple designs out of multiple factories will also allow the PLAAF and PLANAF catch up in fielding 5th gen fighters in numbers to reach parity with its adversaries on its borders.


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Is there a reason why you label all members in your reply as "ma'am"?


Is @dbc a female?


----------



## Ultima Thule

Deino said:


> Is there a reason why you label all members in your reply as "ma'am"?


Because she told me earlier in this thread

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yaseen1

it seems that in future u.s will not be able to maintain monopoly in fighter jets as Europeans and chinese are developing their own jets and europe is moving away from reliance on u.s equipment,u.s power will likely to decrease in future and there are clear signs evident of this


FuturePAF said:


> The J-20 is more of a long range interceptor, and may rely on its weapons to do most of the turning for it. The canards, while definitely accounted for across all signatures, especially RCS, may only be a factor if the J-20 gets close to another 5th generation platform.
> 
> Once 5th generation technology is perfected on the J-20, especially the super cruising engines, there maybe a few conventional layout stealth fighters unveiled in China; a conventional layout carrier fighter, a vertical takeoff fighter for its LHDs and a mass production Air Force fighter, which might even have a pelican tail like this proposed European Stealth fighter mockup. (China may even develop two version of this pelican tail fighter; one with WS-13/19 engines for export (to compete with the F-35) and one with WS-15 engines for its Air Force)
> 
> multiple designs out of multiple factories will also allow the PLAAF and PLANAF catch up in fielding 5th gen fighters in numbers to reach parity with its adversaries on its borders.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FuturePAF

Yaseen1 said:


> it seems that in future u.s will not be able to maintain monopoly in fighter jets as Europeans and chinese are developing their own jets and europe is moving away from reliance on u.s equipment,u.s power will likely to decrease in future and there are clear signs evident of this



Purely economics and the West Europeans want to maintain their quality of life. That is the most important thing for them. 

1. They don’t want to have children and import migrants to fill in the work force gaps. 
2. They won’t stop trading with China in emerging technologies so they remain competitively priced in world markets despite the potential security risks (Germany is one of the top exporters of the world despite being a population of 80 million. So it wants to maintain its relations with China)
3. Germany only spends 1.2% of GDP on defense even though its NATO requirement is 2%.
4. Germany won’t buy US fighters like the F-18 to maintain its NATO interoperability to carry the B61, and will take the slower route to integrate the B61 on the eurofighter, to keep money in German industry.
5. The Europeans still want to save the deal with Iran so that their export industries get access to Iran because the US is unwilling to sell to the Iranians. The Europeans know they can easily make deals worth over a $100 billion with Iran for Airliners and equipment to modernize Iran if they can get around the US.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

IAU said:


> Because she told me earlier in this thread




Then thanks for that info and I hope You did not take my question as an offence ... anyway I'm surprised since women are quite rare in such forums.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> Then thanks for that info and I hope You did not take my question as an offence ... anyway I'm surprised since women are quite rare in such forums.


There should be more women in these forums lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dbc

PeacefulWar said:


> Would be much appreciated if you presented your view in this way in your first post!
> .



I'm entitled to some drama.
Engineering is all about compromises, in this particular case between RCS and flight performance. 

The bulkhead, radar, canard and inlet all make a significant contribution to RCS. The radars contribution to RCS can be reduced by the use of bandstop and bandpass filter combined with emission controls techniques such as chirping. Even the FCS can be programmed in response to RWR input so control surface actuation is reduced in response to hostile radar emissions. 
I occasionally visit the J-20 thread to look at some pictures knowing full well that the Chinese will not divulge any technical information. Still, there are a few things one can conclude from pictures. Please tag me if there is an interesting revelation in the future.


----------



## Ultima Thule

dbc said:


> I'm entitled to some drama.
> Engineering is all about compromises, in this particular case between RCS and flight performance.
> 
> The bulkhead, radar, canard and inlet all make a significant contribution to RCS. The radars contribution to RCS can be reduced by the use of bandstop and bandpass filter combined with emission controls techniques such as chirping. Even the FCS can be programmed in response to RWR input so control surface actuation is reduced in response to hostile radar emissions.
> I occasionally visit the J-20 thread to look at some pictures knowing full well that the Chinese will not divulge any technical information. Still, there are a few things one can conclude from pictures. Please tag me if there is an interesting revelation in the future.


You're not aviation Expert or professional, EVEN YOUR NASA SAID THAT THEIR EXPERIMENTAL CANARD DELTA X-36 WAS EXTREMELY STEALTHY AT ALL ANGLE, SO WE ASSUME SAME FOR J-20

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

dbc said:


> I'm entitled to some drama.
> Engineering is all about compromises, in this particular case between RCS and flight performance.
> 
> The bulkhead, radar, canard and inlet all make a significant contribution to RCS. The radars contribution to RCS can be reduced by the use of bandstop and bandpass filter combined with emission controls techniques such as chirping. Even the FCS can be programmed in response to RWR input so control surface actuation is reduced in response to hostile radar emissions.
> I occasionally visit the J-20 thread to look at some pictures knowing full well that the Chinese will not divulge any technical information. Still, there are a few things one can conclude from pictures. Please tag me if there is an interesting revelation in the future.


Honestly these days the thread is pretty dead. The only exciting J-20 pictures are those equipped with the WS-10s.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dbc

IAU said:


> You're not aviation Expert or professional, EVEN YOUR NASA SAID THAT THEIR EXPERIMENTAL CANARD DELTA X-36 WAS EXTREMELY STEALTHY AT ALL ANGLE, SO WE ASSUME SAME FOR J-20



You do realize that the X-36 was a remotely piloted (19 ft) technology demonstrator restricted to 150 knots to prevent structural damage. For reference the top speed of an Airbus A380 is 500 knots.









Figaro said:


> Honestly these days the thread is pretty dead. The only exciting J-20 pictures are those equipped with the WS-10s.



I thought there was an ongoing debate about the engine? Has that debate concluded?


----------



## Figaro

dbc said:


> You do realize that the X-36 was a remotely piloted (19 ft) technology demonstrator restricted to 150 knots to prevent structural damage. For reference the top speed of an Airbus A380 is 500 knots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought there was an ongoing debate about the engine? Has that debate concluded?


What debate are you referring to? What I meant was we want more photos of grey J-20s equipped with WS-10s in combat patrol.


----------



## dbc

Figaro said:


> What debate are you referring to? What I meant was we want more photos of grey J-20s equipped with WS-10s in combat patrol.



There was an ongoing debate between a few members arguing if it was a Russian engine or the WS-10. I assume WS-10? I will have to go a few pages back to check.


----------



## Figaro

dbc said:


> There was an ongoing debate between a few members arguing if it was a Russian engine or the WS-10. I assume WS-10? I will have to go a few pages back to check.


I believe it was last year or late 2018 when J-20 equipped WS-10s began to go into serialized production. The first WS-10 equipped J-20 appeared in September 2017 if I'm not mistaken.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indos

dbc said:


> There was an ongoing debate between a few members arguing if it was a Russian engine or the WS-10. I assume WS-10? I will have to go a few pages back to check.



You will waste your time to find debate about it. It was in 2017 just like what Figaro stated.


* China’s J-20 fighter jet may get homemade engine *
By Qu Qiuyan Source:Global Times Published: 2017/9/7 23:38:40

Most experts and netizens said they believe photos posted online of China's J-20 fighter jets show homemade Taihang engines have replaced their Russian-made counterparts. 

A report released by thepaper.cn on Wednesday said the new engine is the Taihang based on its appearance on the online photos.

The J-20 used to be outfitted with the Russia-made AL-31F engine, according to the report, but the homemade engines could be mass-produced. 

"It is necessary for the J-20 to use homemade engines. This way, the fighter jet will be completely developed and manufactured in China," Huang Jun, a professor at Beihang University, told the Global Times on Thursday. 

According to the report, the insufficient supply of the Russian engines could have led to the change, since orders for the homemade engine also come from overseas, while the price of the Russian engine has been increased from $3 million to $ 5 million each.

"The Taihang engine's performance is nearly as good as the AL-31F. However, being new, the Taihang lacks the maturity of the Russian one," said Huang.

The report added it is much more complicated to change the engine of the fourth generation of J-20s than the second and the third one due to adjustments to the fourth generation's air inlet and engine compartment, among others. 

The J-20 is expected to undergo another engine change with the homemade WS-15, which is currently being developed, said the report of thepaper.cn.

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1065401.shtml

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## PeacefulWar

dbc said:


> I'm entitled to some drama.
> Engineering is all about compromises, in this particular case between RCS and flight performance.


"Engineering is all about compromises" agreed.
"in this particular case between RCS and flight performance" I can't agree this.
I will be shocked if CAC compromise RCS for flight performance for its 5G fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dbc

PeacefulWar said:


> "Engineering is all about compromises" agreed.
> "in this particular case between RCS and flight performance" I can't agree this.
> I will be shocked if CAC compromise RCS for flight performance for its 5G fighter.



May be you are right - we don't have enough data to reach a conclusion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

PeacefulWar said:


> "Engineering is all about compromises" agreed.
> "in this particular case between RCS and flight performance" I can't agree this.
> I will be shocked if CAC compromise RCS for flight performance for its 5G fighter.



Maybe the compromise was warranted seeing how the J-20 needs a way to maintain its WVR maneuverability while waiting for the high-thrust engines.

It's all a balance of parameters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PeacefulWar

Akasa said:


> Maybe the compromise was warranted seeing how the J-20 needs a way to maintain its WVR maneuverability while waiting for the high-thrust engines.
> 
> It's all a balance of parameters.


There are just too many possibilities, we can never draw a conclusion that everyone agree with.
I think the stealthy is most important for 5G fighters, if CAC is not that stupid then it won't compromise that.
But then who knows, we human do make stupid mistakes


----------



## Deino

dbc said:


> There was an ongoing debate between a few members arguing if it was a Russian engine or the WS-10. I assume WS-10? I will have to go a few pages back to check.




The debate you are referring to was most of all a private crusade by one single member who constantly trolled and derailed the regular J-20 thread with endless pages of stupid arguments, why the J-20 is already flying from day one with a +210 kN thrust serial WS-15!  

Therefore I created a new thread as some sort of play-ground for this guy.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...arate-from-the-j-20-news.514445/#post-9800065

Otherwise - at least as I understand the situation - the discussion has been settled with the agreement by most, that all so far delivered serial ones assigned to the 176th, 172nd and 9th Air Brigades are using some sort of an AL-31FN-based engine and since last summer all are using the WS-10C with serrated nozzles. 

The point however is as @Figaro pointed out, so far we haven't seen any of these birds in PLAAF grey nor in service.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> The debate you are referring to was most of all a private crusade by one single member who constantly trolled and derailed the regular J-20 thread with endless pages of stupid arguments, why the J-20 is already flying from day one with a +210 kN thrust serial WS-15!
> 
> Therefore I created a new thread as some sort of play-ground for this guy.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...arate-from-the-j-20-news.514445/#post-9800065
> 
> Otherwise - at least as I understand the situation - the discussion has been settled with the agreement by most, that all so far delivered serial ones assigned to the 176th, 172nd and 9th Air Brigades are using some sort of an AL-31FN-based engine and since last summer all are using the WS-10C with serrated nozzles.
> 
> The point however is as @Figaro pointed out, so far we haven't seen any of these birds in PLAAF grey nor in service.


Why is @Asoka no longer posting? I enjoyed his frequent tirades ... he was very respectful in presenting his arguments however wrong he was


----------



## Deino

Figaro said:


> Why is @Asoka no longer posting? I enjoyed his frequent tirades ... he was very respectful in presenting his arguments however wrong he was




Actually i don't know, he was last seen active in January.


----------



## samsara

Deino said:


> The debate you are referring to was most of all a private crusade by one single member who constantly trolled and derailed the regular J-20 thread with endless pages of stupid arguments, why the J-20 is already flying from day one with a +210 kN thrust serial WS-15!
> 
> Therefore I created a new thread as some sort of play-ground for this guy.
> 
> https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...arate-from-the-j-20-news.514445/#post-9800065
> 
> Otherwise - at least as I understand the situation - the discussion has been settled with the agreement by most, that all so far delivered serial ones assigned to the 176th, 172nd and 9th Air Brigades are using some sort of an AL-31FN-based engine and since last summer all are using the WS-10C with serrated nozzles.
> 
> The point however is as @Figaro pointed out, so far we haven't seen any of these birds in PLAAF grey nor in service.


Deino, may you please move the latest batch of opinion posts to that particular thread:

*https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-...arate-from-the-j-20-news.514445/#post-9800065*

That extra thread should be expanded to not only cover the engine matters but other aspects that tend to trigger many subjective opinion exchanges such as RCS / stealthiness; materials and so forth.

The J-20 is a MAJOR thread within the PLA Air Force, should not be cluttered with the many opinion exchanges. Feel annoyed to have *this* thread being flashed repeatedly by the many opinions. Let such exchanges be accomplished in *that* designated, complimentary thread. Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## clibra

FuturePAF said:


> The J-20 is more of a long range interceptor, and may rely on its weapons to do most of the turning for it. The canards, while definitely accounted for across all signatures, especially RCS, may only be a factor if the J-20 gets close to another 5th generation platform.
> 
> Once 5th generation technology is perfected on the J-20, especially the super cruising engines, there maybe a few conventional layout stealth fighters unveiled in China; a conventional layout carrier fighter, a vertical takeoff fighter for its LHDs and a mass production Air Force fighter, which might even have a pelican tail like this proposed European Stealth fighter mockup. (China may even develop two version of this pelican tail fighter; one with WS-13/19 engines for export (to compete with the F-35) and one with WS-15 engines for its Air Force)
> 
> multiple designs out of multiple factories will also allow the PLAAF and PLANAF catch up in fielding 5th gen fighters in numbers to reach parity with its adversaries on its borders.



The intake looks ridiculous small, it's impossible for these 2 small holes to meet the air flow requirement of two 4-gen turbo fan engines. This mockup is a joke.


----------



## FuturePAF

clibra said:


> The intake looks ridiculous small, it's impossible for these 2 small holes to meet the air flow requirement of two 4-gen turbo fan engines. This mockup is a joke.


Looks can be deceiving. They wouldn’t have put out the mockup unless they had factored the needed airflow, presumably.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

FuturePAF said:


> The J-20 is more of a long range interceptor, and may rely on its weapons to do most of the turning for it.


No it isn't. Do some basic research besides looking at the likes of National Interest or Business Insider.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FuturePAF

Figaro said:


> No it isn't. Do some basic research besides looking at the likes of National Interest or Business Insider.



While we have a difference of opinion, please don’t resort to ads hominem statements.

IMHO, in its “current” design (although it is a continuously improving design), I think the J-20 is MORE of an interceptor then a fighter (“Offensive Counter-Air”)

It’s focus on frontal stealth (http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2011-03.html) and its presumably long range make it more suited for destroying enemy targets from BVR (in the air, on the ground, and at sea; carrier battle groups for example) from long range with its long range missiles or long range electronic weapons against enemy networks. The J-20 may also not have a gun, which could also indicate it is not intended to be used at close range, but use its WVR missiles for the closest engagements, if needed. So the J-20 can definitely be used against other fighters, but the tactics will be presumably different based upon its design strengths. 

This is not a view out of thin air, but one also expressed by officers in other air forces. Having said that, These 5th gen aircraft are more sensor/shooter platforms, as well as nodes to enable other platforms to carry out their missions.











Some References I looked at:
https://chinapower.csis.org/china-chengdu-j-20/
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-return-of-the-interceptor/
https://www.iiss.org/blogs/military-balance/2020/04/air-launched-missiles-china-plaaf-j-20-fighter

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

FuturePAF said:


> While we have a difference of opinion, please don’t resort to ads hominem statements.
> 
> IMHO, in its “current” design (although it is a continuously improving design), I think the J-20 is MORE of an interceptor then a fighter (“Offensive Counter-Air”)
> 
> It’s focus on frontal stealth (http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2011-03.html) and its presumably long range make it more suited for destroying enemy targets from BVR (in the air, on the ground, and at sea; carrier battle groups for example) from long range with its long range missiles or long range electronic weapons against enemy networks. The J-20 may also not have a gun, which could also indicate it is not intended to be used at close range, but use its WVR missiles for the closest engagements, if needed. So the J-20 can definitely be used against other fighters, but the tactics will be presumably different based upon its design strengths.
> 
> This is not a view out of thin air, but one also expressed by officers in other air forces. Having said that, These 5th gen aircraft are more sensor/shooter platforms, as well as nodes to enable other platforms to carry out their missions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some References I looked at:
> https://chinapower.csis.org/china-chengdu-j-20/
> https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-return-of-the-interceptor/
> https://www.iiss.org/blogs/military-balance/2020/04/air-launched-missiles-china-plaaf-j-20-fighter


A dedicated air superiority fighter can be a long range interceptor but a dedicated long range interceptor cannot be an air superiority fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## FuturePAF

Figaro said:


> A dedicated air superiority fighter can be a long range interceptor but a dedicated long range interceptor cannot be an air superiority fighter.
> View attachment 647021



The design of the J-20 indicates how it will try to gain air superiority; fast intercepts as shown in the placard you have attached. The J-20 will utilize Energy-manuerability principles to reach an advantageous position over its most likely opponent; the F-35. Higher speed, possibly faster acceleration, and longer range will allow the plane to Use the right tactics to engage these kinds of threats.

Per the following article, the J-20 is larger than the F-22 but the wing area of the J-20 is estimated to be 25% less than the F-22. The wing loading is estimated to be similar to that of the F-35. So in the end the maneuverability of the J-20 would be better than the F-35, on par with the J-11B.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/10/30/the_us_f-35_versus_the_prc_j-20_112550.html

The J-20 is currently under powered. When the WS-15 reaches its intended dry and wet thrusts of 125kn and 197kn (44,000lb) respectively, it will be powerful enough to enable the plane to be fitted with 2d thrust vectoring nozzles and still compensate for the added weight, and minimizing the need to use the canards (to maintain stealth) to maintain its trim. The design can then be optimized (wing shape/size) to provide all aspect stealth and maximize maneuverability.

something like the following:






Here is a more technical review. I think an evolution of the J-20 design (once the engines are ready) will be a true air superiority fighter, but all publicly available analysis say its current design is more of that of an interceptor. Which is why I think China is not going into mass production of this plane until it can get its engines ready and will then finalize a preferred design for mass production. The current design will probably see limited production for the interceptor role and to test out all of the current systems while more advanced Versions are developed for the final fighter design.

Besides, many expect a follow on air superiority fighter to be in the works for the USAF to supersede the F-22, because the F-35 won’t be enough to keep up with the fighter variant of the J-20, and a few dozen F-22 are only available in the entire IndoPacom Area.

http://www.dept.aoe.vt.edu/~mason/Mason_f/J20Spr11.pdf

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mi...etrating-counter-air-f-22-raptor-replacement/


----------



## Figaro

FuturePAF said:


> The design of the J-20 indicates how it will try to gain air superiority; *fast intercepts* as shown in the placard you have attached. The J-20 will utilize Energy-manuerability principles to reach an advantageous position over its most likely opponent; the F-35. Higher speed, possibly faster acceleration, and longer range will allow the plane to Use the right tactics to engage these kinds of threats.


Just read this article ... https://thediplomat.com/2018/12/chinas-stealth-fighter-its-time-to-discuss-j-20s-agility/. It explains the J-20s role and agility way better than I ever could. I am shocked that in 2020, there are those who still believe the J-20 is primarily a long range interceptor.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FuturePAF

Figaro said:


> Just read this article ... https://thediplomat.com/2018/12/chinas-stealth-fighter-its-time-to-discuss-j-20s-agility/



I will have a look, but I request you look into the references I have attached in the previous two posts, including the technical review from Virginia Tech (yes I notice the Indian reference at the bottom of their analysis) but look at the numbers.

When the WS-15 engines are ready then the plane can be redesigned to maximize for maneuverability, but currently it looks to be optimized for range and frontal stealth and modest maneuverability.

I will just end with that this is all just my opinion, you can take it or leave it. I just wanted to bring up a different viewpoint based on some data I have seen.


----------



## Figaro

FuturePAF said:


> I will have a look, but I request you look into the references I have attached in the previous two posts, including the technical review from Virginia Tech (yes I notice the Indian reference at the bottom of their analysis) but look at the numbers.
> 
> When the WS-15 engines are ready then the plane can be redesigned to maximize for maneuverability, but currently it looks to be optimized for range and frontal stealth and modest maneuverability.
> 
> I will just end with that this is all just my opinion, you can take it or leave it. I just wanted to bring up a different viewpoint based on some data I have seen.


The J-20 was designed with the assumption that the engine would be underpowered (i.e. no F-119 level engine). There is an excellent paper by Song Wenchong (J-10 designer) on this, which basically states why the J-20 design maximizes maneuverability.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## FuturePAF

Figaro said:


> The J-20 was designed with the assumption that the engine would be underpowered (i.e. no F-119 level engine). There is an excellent paper by Song Wenchong (J-10 designer) on this, which basically states why the J-20 design maximizes maneuverability.



I just finished reading the article. It addresses the points I raised, so I thank you for pointing me towards this article. I have always said I am a lay person and not an engineer, reading up on publicly available discussions on this plane. 

As this article states, its current performance in terms of maneuverability is that of the J-10 and only expected to be enhanced when the WS-15 engine ready.

What I don’t understand is, why hasn’t this plane then gone into serial production, considering it has under development for nearly 2 decades, but already capable enough to exceed F-35 capabilities? The Japanese are starting to field the F-35 and the US has F-35s and F-22s on Okinawa.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

FuturePAF said:


> I just finished reading the article. It addresses the points I raised, so I thank you for pointing me towards this article. I have always said I am a lay person and not an engineer, reading up on publicly available discussions on this plane.
> 
> As this article states, its current performance in terms of maneuverability is that of the J-10 and only expected to be enhanced when the WS-15 engine ready.
> 
> What I don’t understand is, why hasn’t this plane then gone into serial production, considering it has under development for nearly 2 decades, but already capable enough to exceed F-35 capabilities? The Japanese are starting to field the F-35 and the US has F-35s and F-22s on Okinawa.



J-20 is in serial production and has been since 2018.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

FuturePAF said:


> I just finished reading the article. It addresses the points I raised, so I thank you for pointing me towards this article. I have always said I am a lay person and not an engineer, reading up on publicly available discussions on this plane.
> 
> As this article states, its current performance in terms of maneuverability is that of the J-10 and only expected to be enhanced when the WS-15 engine ready.
> 
> What I don’t understand is, why hasn’t this plane then gone into serial production, considering it has under development for nearly 2 decades, but already capable enough to exceed F-35 capabilities? The Japanese are starting to field the F-35 and the US has F-35s and F-22s on Okinawa.


The J-10 itself is already a very maneuverable aircraft. But you are right. In order to reach F-22 or Su-57 super maneuverability, the J-20 needs the WS-15, which incorporates 3D TVC. As for serial production, I believe the J-20 already entered this phase in the middle of 2017.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

serenity said:


> I think they should just investigate variable cycle. If WS15 first trial was done just when J-20 was ready and they decided to restart so many of its components then I suspect newer WS15 for 2025 or around then is variable cycle. Or I hope it is. Even if it is higher bypass ratios similar to F135/6 levels, I will be so amazed. China will have super high thrust level turbofan which is only limited by variability in bypass ratio. Even then it will hopefully become obsolete technology in coming decades.
> 
> I divide military low bypass turbofans in five thrust levels:
> 
> 1. Weak - For garage enthusiasts and various experiment concept levels useless for military fighters and generally we ignore for this purpose.
> 
> 2. Low thrust - Honeywell engine etc or WS-5 WS-11 etc of various low thrusts for drones and up to very small light fighters requiring two of such engines in higher end like FCK-1.
> 
> 3. Medium thrust - M88, RD-33 series up to higher end of EJ200, F414, M53 - European low bypass turbofan achieve these highest thrust level but of course this doesn't mean they cannot produce higher thrust levels but there are challenges certainly and a lot of time and money to spend if they want to.
> 
> 4. High thrust - AL-31, WS10, F100, F110 these are Russian, American, and Chinese now with WS10 being mature enough with over 10 years of flying service with J-11B series and now applied to J-10 and various other kinds even including thrust vectoring forms.
> 
> 5. Super high thrust - F119 to higher end of F135 F136. So far only USA has this level of technology already accomplished and conquered. This is our Himalaya peak to conquer because it represent the level when we can sit side by side with the best if we achieve this before they achieve their next breakthroughs which will be variable cycle and even higher thrust than F135. Even if we can do this by around 2025, it is going to be amazing for us who just 70s years ago was struggling to feed ourselves with full bellies. WS15 hopefully considers variable cycle and I suspect the reason for total complete redesign was to incorporate variable cycle so in one leap we can get to the next stage anyway because the core design and materials for F135 is actually already there since years. For variable cycle it is not so much. About Russia's project type 30, who knows. Their latest report suggest roughly ready around 2025 as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Well let's finish this argument we both disagree but one thing I personally think is correct is J-20 is not designed for close combat. It doesn't even have a gun. PL-10 is must in case for close combat and is helmet guided and very high off boresight anyway. J-20 uses long arm canard we can disagree here but reality is whatever it is and one of us is right about it. Long arm canard is generally for good supersonic turning and mechanical stability. Eurofighter is also famous for supercruising and supersonic turning. F-22 is also fantastic in its own way and can use thrust vectoring to full advantage due to advanced incorporation of its thrust vectoring and flight control. J-20 hopes to get 3D thrust vectoring here so minimal canard movement is required. This can help with stealth too but right now canard movements are not as important to stealth because again it is 90% material and electromagnetic now.


Turning the WS-15 into a vce? I'm not sure that's feasible.


----------



## S10

A new variant of WS-10 (WS-10C?) is being installed on J-20 (J-10C too maybe?), with 14.5 tons of thrust. There is a even more powerful WS-10 (IPE?) in the works, possibly with up to 16 tons of thrust. WS-15 is still in testing and won't be ready for a few years. J-20 is likely to fly with WS-10 variants until 2025.

https://lt.cjdby.net/thread-2634840-1-1.html

According to pupu, WS-15 has met designed specifications, but the PLAAF isn't satisfied with its fuel consumption.


----------



## Figaro

S10 said:


> According to pupu, WS-15 has met designed specifications, but the PLAAF isn't satisfied with its fuel consumption.


When did Pupu say this? I don't see anything in the thread that shows Pupu stated the WS-15's fuel consumption.


----------



## S10

Figaro said:


> When did Pupu say this? I don't see anything in the thread that shows Pupu stated the WS-15's fuel consumption.


It was another thread. I didn't bother browsing for that one.


----------

