Chengdu J-20 5th Generation Aircraft News & Discussions

[ChineseTiger1986]

you said its a hybird b/w WS-10X WS-15 but @Asok insisting its a final and pure version of WS15

Saying the current J-20 engine is the final version of WS-15 might be too much.

Many reliable info pointed out that the final version of the WS-15 got the engine blade that can withstand 2.2K Celsius and being more than twice as durable as the F119.

Although the current J-20 engine is a beast, but not an unstoppable juggernaut like the finalized WS-15.

Most Chinese military pundits believe the current J-20 engine is outstanding, but it is not the finalized WS-15.

 

[Asoka]

I do remember that China's new titanium alloy for the engine blade is about 3 times the lifespan of that on the F119, but I just forgot the link.

Could someone help me to find the link of that article?

Saying the current J-20 engine is the final version of WS-15 might be too much.

Many reliable info pointed out that the final version of the WS-15 got the engine blade that can withstand 2.2K Celsius and being more than twice as durable as the F119.

Although the current J-20 engine is a beast, but not an unstoppable juggernaut like the finalized WS-15.

Most Chinese military pundits believe the current J-20 engine is outstanding, but it is not the finalized WS-15.

I have never insisted the current engine on J-20 is a final/finished/complete/done version. There is no such thing. All engines are continuous improvement of previous engine. Sometimes they just given a new alphabet(A,B,C. . . .), some times a new number(10,15, 20, , , ) I have insisted that the engine core is WS-15's core mated with mature WS-10X and AL-31Fn technology. China has 20-30 years working experiences with these two engines. It's hard to imagine that there is nothing engineers don't find useful to be incorporated in the new WS-15.

I don't believe WS-15 was started from a clean sheet as Deino has suggested. No need to, and way too much risk. Remember engineers have very tight deadlines to meet tough performance requirements.

Well, the pure WS-15 is under testing, but the current J-20 engine is good enough to match the F119.

@Asok wasn't entirely wrong either.

To say J-20's engine matched F119 instantly ruled out WS-10X and AL-Fn, because both's max. thrust is around 120-145kN, while F199 max thrust is rated as 156kN. The actual figure is classified, probably 10-15% higher.

 

[Deino]

....
I don't believe WS-15 was started from a clean sheet as Deino has suggested. No need to, and way too much risk. Remember engineers have very tight deadlines to meet tough performance requirements.
...

And therefore they are so stupid to take the core of an engine even more than 30 years old !!! Do You even know what You are claiming ????

http://www.leteckemotory.cz/motory/r-79/index.php?en

 

[Asoka]

Saying the current J-20 engine is the final version of WS-15 might be too much.

Many reliable info pointed out that the final version of the WS-15 got the engine blade that can withstand 2.2K Celsius and being more than twice as durable as the F119.

Although the current J-20 engine is a beast, but not an unstoppable juggernaut like the finalized WS-15.

Most Chinese military pundits believe the current J-20 engine is outstanding, but it is not the finalized WS-15.

I agreed the current J-20 engine is far more powerful than people are willing to give credit for. And it can not be that outstanding if its WS-10X and AL-31FN. We all know what they can do, since they are in service for 20-30 years. No Supersonic Cruise capability on any of the planes: J-10, J-11, J-15, J-16, Su-27, Su-30.

"but it is not the finalized WS-15" Of course not, as soon as a new higher temperature alloy or manufacturing is discovered, WS-15 will be given an extension or boost of life.

I have been saying WS-10X and AL-31FN are not powerful enough to give J-20 Supersonic Cruise capability, because those planes already used them can't do it.

If no Supersonic Cruise capability, J-20 is not yet a 5th generation fighter with the 4S capability. Just a big 4th Gen. plane with Stealth and good sensors.

Under such circumstances, can anyone imagine the PLAAF Commander find its performance entirely satisfactory and induct it into service, and start mass production?

And therefore they are so stupid to take the core of an engine even more than 30 years old !!! Do You even know what You are claiming ????

http://www.leteckemotory.cz/motory/r-79/index.php?en

The design might be 30 years old, there is no natural laws preventing Chinese and Russian engineers improve it with new Titanium alloy and manufacturing processes that was developed in the last 30 years.

The SR-71's engine was already more than 50 years. Does any other plane come close to its performance?

The F135 engine was developed in the 1990's, already 25 years old. Is there any other production engine that match its performance?

There was a story by the chief designer of WS-10. He said "before I start engine design, I didn't know how hard is to design an engine. After I find out how hard the designing part was, I didn't know how hard is to manufacture it. After I find out how hard is to manufacture it, I find out how hard is to achieve stable quality control. After I find out how to make a quality and reliable engine, I am now an old man with grey hair and fallen teeth, and all my children have grown up."

Take it from the man who has worked 30 years on WS-10. It's not easy to come up with a stable high TWR engine. And China didn't start with a clean sheet with this engine. It has two sample core, purchased from US, to take it apart and study.

There are 8 countries who possessed nuclear weapons, but only the five UN Permanent Security Council members can produce an engine with TWR > 8.

Not even Japan, not even Germany can do it.

I agreed the current J-20 engine is far more powerful than people are willing to give credit for. And it can not be that outstanding if its WS-10X and AL-31FN. We all know what they can do, since they are in service for 20-30 years. No Supersonic Cruise capability on any of the planes: J-10, J-11, J-15, J-16, Su-27, Su-30.

"but it is not the finalized WS-15" Of course not, as soon as a new higher temperature alloy or manufacturing is discovered, WS-15 will be given an extension or boost of life.

I have been saying WS-10X and AL-31FN are not powerful enough to give J-20 Supersonic Cruise capability, because those planes already used them can't do it.

If no Supersonic Cruise capability, J-20 is not yet a 5th generation fighter with the 4S capability. Just a big 4th Gen. plane with Stealth and good sensors.

Under such circumstances, can anyone imagine the PLAAF Commander find its performance entirely satisfactory and induct it into service, and start mass production?



The design might be 30 years old, there is no natural laws preventing Chinese and Russian engineers improve it with new Titanium alloy and manufacturing processes that was developed in the last 30 years.

The SR-71's engine was already more than 50 years. Does any other plane come close to its performance?

The F135 engine was developed in the 1990's, already 25 years old. Is there any other production engine that match its performance?

There was a story by the chief designer of WS-10. He said "before I start engine design, I didn't know how hard is to design an engine. After I find out how hard the designing part was, I didn't know how hard is to manufacture it. After I find out how hard is to manufacture it, I find out how hard is to achieve stable quality control. After I find out how to make a quality and reliable engine, I am now an old man with grey hair and fallen teeth, and all my children have grown up."

Take it from the man who has worked 30 years on WS-10. It's not easy to come up with a stable high TWR engine. And China didn't start with a clean sheet with this engine. It has two sample core, purchased from US, to take it apart and study.

There are 8 countries who possessed nuclear weapons, but only the five UN Permanent Security Council members can produce an engine with TWR > 8.

Not even Japan, not even Germany can do it.

Deino, I do apologize for my argumentative manners. I have not given you enough credit for running this thread in a manner that is actually pretty good. I actually appreciate your hard work and time put into this thread and PDF forum. Please accept my apology. --Asok.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

I agreed the current J-20 engine is far more powerful than people are willing to give credit for. And it can not be that outstanding if its WS-10X and AL-31FN. We all know what they can do, since they are in service for 20-30 years. No Supersonic Cruise capability on any of the planes: J-10, J-11, J-15, J-16, Su-27, Su-30.

"but it is not the finalized WS-15" Of course not, as soon as a new higher temperature alloy or manufacturing is discovered, WS-15 will be given an extension or boost of life.

I have been saying WS-10X and AL-31FN are not powerful enough to give J-20 Supersonic Cruise capability, because those planes already used them can't do it.

If no Supersonic Cruise capability, J-20 is not yet a 5th generation fighter with the 4S capability. Just a big 4th Gen. plane with Stealth and good sensors.

Under such circumstances, can anyone imagine the PLAAF Commander find its performance entirely satisfactory and induct it into service, and start mass production?

China's turbofan engine is like its supercomputing domain, it got no superstar leading scientists like Professor Ma or Professor Pan, but it can still blow out of people's expectation.

Just look at the achievement of Taihulight, then the turbofan engine is going to do the same.

 

[Asoka]

China's turbofan engine is like its supercomputing domain, it got no superstar leading scientists like Professor Ma or Professor Pan, but it can still blow out of people's expectation.

Just look at the achievement of Taihulight, then the turbofan engine is going to do the same.

Interesting observation. There are no superstar aircraft engine designers in history, unlike airframe designers like Kelly Johnson, Yan Wei, Mikoyan-and-Gurevich, , , , Probably engine design and manufacturing is very accumulative, unlike airframe which sometimes a stroke of genius can transform the entire plane.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Interesting observation. There are no superstar aircraft engine designers in history, unlike airframe designers like Kelly Johnson, Yan Wei, Mikoyan-and-Gurevich, , , , Probably engine design and manufacturing is very accumulative, unlike airframe which sometimes a stroke of genius can transform the entire plane.

Yep, these types of domain are accumulative rather than brainstorming.

Since the US still holds these accumulative domains because decades of legacy after the cold war, but lacking those brainstorming geniuses. When you invest in the brand new technology, you need those brainstorming types of scientists.

 

[CHINA83NEWS]

Yep, these types of domain are accumulative rather than brainstorming.

Since the US still holds these accumulative domains because decades of legacy after the cold war, but lacking those brainstorming geniuses. When you invest in the brand new technology, you need those brainstorming types of scientists.

High-temperature shuttle broke through the early China.But now WS15 development is not very clear.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

The design might be 30 years old, there is no natural laws preventing Chinese and Russian engineers improve it with new Titanium alloy and manufacturing processes that was developed in the last 30 years.
The SR-71's engine was already more than 50 years. Does any other plane come close to its performance?
The F135 engine was developed in the 1990's, already 25 years old. Is there any other production engine that match its performance?

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong in adopting the core technology of a product which was based on very sound engineering and design e.g. German Dr Felix Wankel designed the rotary engine but it was the Japanese Mazda that perfected it.

Whether it is in the PW F119 or its evolved F135 or the WS-15 variants, there are no doubt that they are all heavily influenced by Russian R79-300 engine and the core technologies are drawn from it.

As for the so-called Technology Transfer from Russia to China, this was probably what happened?
We all know that both AMNTK Soyuz of Sukhoi, they are all Russia SOE and they were all cash-scrapped and needed to survive the crisis. They did not have any new fund for further development, so they were forced to and reluctantly sold off these design to both China and USA in exchange for cash.

So they probably told the Chinese: "Here are the blueprints and a finish prototype model. Take it and sort it out yourself."

So R79-300 ended up in USA as the evolved F119 and F135 and in China as the evolved WS-15 emei. Certainly NOT a bolt to nut copy as some may like to imagine.

In histories, NO developed countries have ever really transfer their technologies to other nation.

There was a story by the chief designer of WS-10. He said "before I start engine design, I didn't know how hard is to design an engine. After I find out how hard the designing part was, I didn't know how hard is to manufacture it. After I find out how hard is to manufacture it, I find out how hard is to achieve stable quality control. After I find out how to make a quality and reliable engine, I am now an old man with grey hair and fallen teeth, and all my children have grown up."
Take it from the man who has worked 30 years on WS-10. It's not easy to come up with a stable high TWR engine. And China didn't start with a clean sheet with this engine. It has two sample core, purchased from US, to take it apart and study.
There are 8 countries who possessed nuclear weapons, but only the five UN Permanent Security Council members can produce an engine with TWR > 8.
Not even Japan, not even Germany can do it.

Yes. The story by the Chief designer sums it all. Yes. Designing and building aero-engine is NO easy task.
For China it has been tedious and heartbreaking learning process. Although China has been involved in constructing aero-engine since the 1950's and it was only quite recent that they achieved breakthrough and success e.g. China is now the second nation in the world apart from USA that has successfully designed and manufactured hollow section crystal blades.

In fact the construction of aero-engine involving many related, strategic and critical technologies apart from good design and a pool of experienced aeronautical engineers, scientists, machinists, technicians, etc. example metallurgy, powder intrusion machine, high capacity forging press, etc. Mind you. No advanced nations will ever sell them to them.

The 10 storey tall 80,000-ton press forge in Deyang, Sichuan. How can any nation hope to be an aerospace nation e.g. Indonesia, etc without the related technology to build one of these very expensive machine?

 

[CHINA83NEWS]

There is absolutely NOTHING wrong in adopting the core technology of a product which was based on very sound engineering and design e.g. German Dr Felix Wankel designed the rotary engine but it was the Japanese Mazda that perfected it.

Whether it is in the PW F119 or its evolved F135 or the WS-15 variants, there are no doubt that they are all heavily influenced by Russian R79-300 engine and the core technologies are drawn from it.

As for the so-called Technology Transfer from Russia to China, this was probably what happened?
We all know that both AMNTK Soyuz of Sukhoi, they are all Russia SOE and they were all cash-scrapped and needed to survive the crisis. They did not have any new fund for further development, so they were forced to and reluctantly sold off these design to both China and USA in exchange for cash.

So they probably told the Chinese: "Here are the blueprints and a finish prototype model. Take it and sort it out yourself."

So R79-300 ended up in USA as the evolved F119 and F135 and in China as the evolved WS-15 emei. Certainly NOT a bolt to nut copy as some may like to imagine.

In histories, NO developed countries have ever really transfer their technologies to other nation.





Yes. The story by the Chief designer sums it all. Yes. Designing and building aero-engine is NO easy task.
For China it has been tedious and heartbreaking learning process. Although China has been involved in constructing aero-engine since the 1950's and it was only quite recent that they achieved breakthrough and success e.g. China is now the second nation in the world apart from USA that has successfully designed and manufactured hollow section crystal blades.

In fact the construction of aero-engine involving many related, strategic and critical technologies apart from good design and a pool of experienced aeronautical engineers, scientists, machinists, technicians, etc. example metallurgy, powder intrusion machine, high capacity forging press, etc. Mind you. No advanced nations will ever sell them to them.

The 10 storey tall 80,000-ton press forge in Deyang, Sichuan. How can any nation hope to be an aerospace nation e.g. Indonesia, etc without the related technology to build one of these very expensive machine?

Picture is a little old

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Picture is a little old

It that relevant and have they performed any improvement on it?

In fact this machine is the world's biggest. The next biggest forgecan be found in Russia, France. Alcoa from Ohio, USA operates a 50,000 tons model and has been producing component for Boeing and Airbus for decades. Alcoa supplies forged wheel and brake components for almost all U.S. military aircraft and helicopters, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the U.S. military’s newest fighter jet.

 

[samsara]

Deino, I do apologize for my argumentative manners. I have not given you enough credit for running this thread in a manner that is actually pretty good. I actually appreciate your hard work and time put into this thread and PDF forum. Please accept my apology. --Asok.

Indeed it's true! If any member here compares the mod's works by Deino with, let say, the other Eng defence forum so-called the SDF, a Tampa, FL-hosted site, see how the single-handedly managed iron-fist is applied there by one mod I think that's why PDF is more vibrant and is a more active site.... hence, my choice of stay.

And let it be that way. Thank you for every one who helps make it an enjoyable stay here.

Btw, Asok, thanks for your many interesting posts, though some truths may not be known until long in the future or may simply be never known, some of your persistent & lengthy expositions still provide the reading interests (though I ain't agree with your rants against the FC-31).
Cheers, have a nice day!

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Alcoa 50,000 tons press-forge in Ohio.

 

[CHINA83NEWS]

It that relevant and have they performed any improvement on it?

In fact this machine is the world's biggest. The next biggest forgecan be found in Russia, France. Alcoa from Ohio, USA operates a 50,000 tons model and has been producing component for Boeing and Airbus for decades. Alcoa supplies forged wheel and brake components for almost all U.S. military aircraft and helicopters, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the U.S. military’s newest fighter jet.

China's domestic equipment upgrades is very fast.

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

Deino, I do apologize for my argumentative manners. I have not given you enough credit for running this thread in a manner that is actually pretty good. I actually appreciate your hard work and time put into this thread and PDF forum. Please accept my apology. --Asok.

That is a great gesture!

To me, a forum is a venue where members share, exchange information, idea and most of all minus the trolls.

So a moderator should judiciously filtered out the unwanted elements without the perception of being biased.

Well. It is easier said than done.