What's new

China Could Make 5th Gen Engines By 2021

DARKY

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Apr 24, 2011
Messages
2,007
Reaction score
0
China Defense Blog posted this interesting report on the future of Chinese figther engine production — something PLA officials publicly acknowledge is the major “bottleneck” in the development of China’s 21st Century fighters.

Basically, the report by China Sign Post says that China will be able to mass produce high-quality, “top-notch” fighter engines capable of powering a modern tacair fleet in five to ten years. That coincides nicely with the amount of time it will likely take to start mass producing its first wave of stealth fighters like the J-20.

Still, all of this is hampered by a decentralized engine manufacturing sector and even if Chinese fighter engine tech gets to the point where the U.S. engine sector was in the early 1990s, its engines will support its rise as a REGIONAL military power, not a superpower, according to the report.

This is one of the greatest aerospace engineering challenges, however, one that only a small handful of corporations worldwide have truly mastered. This should not be surprising: an engine is effectively an aircraft’s cardiovascular system; it can be transplanted but not easily modified. Unlike a human system, it can be designed and developed independently, but faces temperature, pressure, and G-force challenges that only the most advanced materials, properly machined and operated as an efficient system, can handle. While China has made progress in recent years with materials and fabrication, it appears to remain limited with respect to components and systems design, integration, and management—the keys to optimizing engine performance in practice—and to making logistical and operational plans at the force level based on reliable estimates thereof.
Based on available open source evidence, Chinese progress in this critical area remains uneven and the whole remains “less than the some of the parts.” Given the overall capabilities inherent in China’s defense industrial base and the resources likely being applied to this problem, we expect that China will make significant strides, but barring major setbacks or loss of mission focus, it will take ~2–3 years before it achieves comprehensive capabilities commensurate with the aggregate inputs in this sector and ~5–10 years before it is able to consistently mass produce top-notch turbofan engines for a 5th generation-type fighter. When it does, however, the results will have profound strategic significance, as China will have entered an exclusive club of top producers in this area and eliminated one of the few remaining areas in which it relies on Russia technologically.


Some of the most interesting points raised by the analysis is the fact that Russia may be unable or unwilling to provide China with large numbers of quality jet engines due to the fact that the Kremlin is going to be undertaking a major military modernization of its own for which it will need high-performance fighter motors. Not only does this mean China will need its own engines to power its jets but also any that it intends to sell on the international market, according to the report.

Click through the jump to read the report and get it’s take on the status of China’s jet engine manufacturing ability.

China SignPost 39 China Tactical Aircraft Jet Engine Deep Dive 20110626

http://www.chinasignpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/China-jet-engine-needs-chart-300x225.jpg
 
Source: Defense Manufacturing Technology, USCC, China SignPost™

To put these weaknesses into context, they suggest that in some areas Chinese engine makers are roughly three decades behind their U.S. peers. Technical reports by U.S. manufacturers discussing challenges of actually making hollow fan blades that date back to 1977, implying that Chinese engine fabricators could be three decades behind the state-of-the-art curve at present.[13]

Abstracts of P&W technical papers from 1976 discuss using nickel superalloy powders to forge turbine discs for the F100 engine.[14] In contrast, as mentioned above, researchers from the China Gas Turbine Establishment cite powder metallurgy for turbine disc production as an enduring weak spot for China’s jet engine industry.[15]Of course, this may represent an attempt to secure additional funding, as opposed to a true reflection of current status; when did the U.S. Air Force (USAF) ever run out of update programs for its fighters?

One cautionary point here is that Chinese jet engine makers have a latecomer advantage, which allows them to learn from other engine makers’ successes and failures and potentially to shave years from their own research-development-production sequence. To put matters in perspective, the P&W F119 engine that powers the F-22 Raptor was developed and refined in the 1980s and ’90s, so China does not necessarily need to attain the current 2011 state-of-the-art in tactical jet engine technology to field formidable propulsion systems that could give the J-20 true 5thgeneration fighter performance characteristics.

What China must achieve, however, is a methodology akin to Six Sigma or Total Quality Management (TQM) to ensure quality control and sufficient organizational honesty to ensure that actual problems are reported and that figures are not doctored. Otherwise, standardization and integration may be the one in which the costs of China’s ad hoc, eclectic approach to strategic technology development truly manifest themselves. The Soviet defense industrial base failed in precisely this area: talented designers and technicians presided over balkanized design bureaus and irregularly-linked production facilities; lack of standardization and quality control rendered it “less than the sum of the parts.”

Where-China-has-problems-with-hi-performance-tac-aircraft-engines-300x225.jpg
 
I hope Russia will not provide the advanced engine, so China will have pressure and momentum developed a reliable engine.
 
Strong and Weak Points of China’s Jet Engine Industry

High performance jet engines are exceedingly hard to produce, as they can contain tens of thousands of parts that must be made of durable exotic materials machined to tolerances measured in microns. In addition, jet engines used in tactical fighter and strike aircraft must be able to operate reliably under extreme conditions including high temperatures, high speeds, intensive maneuvering, and frequent throttle changes. Jet engine compressor blades, for instance, can experience centrifugal forces as high as 20,000 times the force of gravity during flight.[6] The challenge that a turbofan blade faces in performing without significant deflection despite being exposed to heat that exceeds the melting point of most metals, and consequent materials and metallurgical requirements, has been likened to stirring hot soup with a spoon made of ice.

Chinese design capabilities remain uncertain, though manufacturing capabilities are clearly improving. To reach the pinnacle of aeroengine development and performance, China must model, refine, and optimize the total system, which can only be done with top-level total lifecycle tools, software, and cradle-to-grave support. Even in a less complex machine such as an automobile, for instance, it is relatively easy to manufacture a crankshaft, but relatively difficult to make the system perform well as a unified whole and to understand the complex interaction of its components under different conditions.

To consider an aeroengine-specific example, for optimum aerodynamics, it is necessary to model the airflow implications of a turbofan blade changing slightly. A high-pressure turbine might be strengthened, but if its thermal characteristics change, then it might not expand in the same way, and the resulting discontinuity in surface geometry could lead to a failure that destroys the engine. Important areas to design for and model therefore include airflow, fatigue, and reliability.

The most important aeroengine performance metrics include mean time between failure (MTBM)—i.e., how long an engine lasts; and mean time before overhaul (MTBO)—i.e., how often an engine must be serviced fully. This, in turn, is linked to the degradation pattern/structure, which is vital to managing engine maintenance and anticipating performance. “Hitting the wall,” or experiencing a sudden and marked decline in engine performance, is particularly hazardous in military aviation, where even slight deviation from optimum performance parameters can be highly problematic. Unpredictable dynamics, or lack of knowledge of existing patterns, can be make it much more difficult to make the best use of engines—even in training, but especially in combat.

Compensating for shortcomings in either of these areas might require factoring in a substantial margin of error by dedicating additional engines and airframes; were the need great enough, something like 200 Flankers might be needed to ensure the mission fulfillment capabilities of roughly 100 F-15s. Other important metrics include acceleration/deceleration patterns, foreign object damage (FOD) resistance (Russian engines have historically fallen significantly short in this regard), and cold/hot temperature starts (the former is usually more difficult than the latter, but the amount of difference varies by engine model).

In short, an aeroengine system is only as good as its design, monitoring, and lifecycle management. This may be an area of particular weakness for China, as it has traditionally relied heavily on copying and emulating foreign designs. This approach does not confer ability to design and manage aeroengines; on the contrary, it can impose path-dependent limitations that lead to dead ends or substandard, poorly integrated systems that are costly and difficult to alter and thus remain “less than the sum of their parts.”

While this systemic component of Chinese turbofans remains uncertain, however, the techniques and processes to support their manufacture are clearly improving. Chinese gas turbine experts say the country’s aerospace industry has improved its jet engine manufacturing abilities in key areas, including:[7]

–Precision cutting, welding, and machining, e.g., five-axis milling for production of turbine blades.

–Special materials blade production. China’s largest turbine blade production facility, located at Xi’an Aero-Engine, can now undertake mass-production of turbine blades made from superalloys, titanium alloys, cobalt alloys, and stainless steel. The turbine blade quality rate is now said to exceed 95%.

–Hollow fan blade production. China is entering the nascent stages of being able to produce hollow fan blades. Hollow titanium fan blades are 15-20% lighter than their equivalents and make an engine more fuel efficient. They also reduce rotating mass and allow a tactical aircraft engine to spool up more quickly during maneuvers.[8]

–Greater automation. This improves standardization and efficiency.

–Process modeling. Computer-aided process modeling help manufacturers anticipate problems with materials, welds, and behavior of parts under heat stress. Flagging potential trouble spots before machines are started helps save time and money and also ultimately helps produce a higher quality, more durable engine.[9]

–Enhanced ability to use numerically-controlled milling machines to produce turbine disks.

–Better ability to produce high-quality, standardized spare parts. Reliable access to such parts is essential to supporting aircraft performance, particularly at the high and unpredictable operational tempo inherent in many operational scenarios. Spare parts have traditionally represented an area of weakness in China’s aviation industry.

Still unclear, however, are key design, system, software, and reliability aspects of engine systems and components. Vibration testing of components is important (e.g., under high-G forces for military engines). It is difficult to determine China’s stage of development for Fully Automatic Digital Engine Control (FADEC), or the capability of the engine to communicate with the cockpit; and for Engine Control Units (ECU), the “brain” of the engine, which helps it to regulate itself.

Many of the Chinese jet engine industry’s recent improvements center on turbine blade production, which is logical given turbines’ location at the heart of any jet engine. However, a comprehensive analysis by experts from the China Gas Turbine Establishment, which played a major role in designing the WS-10 engine, does not discuss improvements in engine reliability. Thus, better blade manufacturing and machining may still not have brought about commensurate improvements in quality control and engine reliability. The WS-10A is now said to be flying in the PLAAF’s J-11B, and as engines accumulate flight hours it will be telling to see how powerful and efficient they are, how they hold up, and how frequently they require overhaul. The PLA is notably opaque about aircraft losses, but occasional reports do slip through, providing a barometer of reliability to watch as domestically-made engines spend more time in the air.
 
What challenges do Chinese military jet engine makers continue to face?

China’s attempts to mass produce P&W F100-class jet engines and develop an engine powerful enough to give the J-20 true 5th generation performance levels face a range of technical and process challenges. On the technical side, Chinese gas turbine researchers say weaknesses remain in turbine casting, powder metallurgy for creating turbine disks, and molding hollow titanium parts.[10] Many of these areas were named as ones in which substantial progress has taken place in recent years. Nonetheless, progress may be from a very low baseline, making the claims that problems remain while progress has occurred compatible with each other.

Chinese engine makers likewise need to create advanced production lines to ensure effective logistical support for domestically-made engines and must also automate their production facilities to a greater extent. Part of the technical challenge stems from the fact that machining the tough superalloys used in jet engines requires twice the cutting force of other types of machining and that cutting tools may have to be changed up to 10 times more often than when machining softer materials like those used for making auto parts.[11]

While this necessitates highly specialized production lines, however, a given engine needs to be produced on the same line to ensure economies of scale and quality consistency. Once systems are optimized, separating production into different lines should be avoided, as a stand alone approach could disrupt or crack the system. It is one thing to make a single turbofan blade in a laboratory, and another entirely to ramp up to mass production of several thousand (a single engine contains 400-500 blades in up to two dozen stages of 2-3 dozen blades each) blades of standardized, reliable quality. This requires mastering both the metallurgy grade and mastering the industrial process to reliably produce a high-quality product.

In the very limited publicly available discussions of China’s jet engine manufacturing weaknesses, local experts focus heavily on process weaknesses as major constraints on China’s ability to produce high-performance turbofans of consistently good quality. Chinese analysts cite the need to better integrate the research and manufacturing segments of the industry, creating databases to save knowledge that can be used to make construction more effective, reducing the boundaries between the jet engine design, materials, and fabrication sectors, and doing a better job training new technical and engineering staff.
 
I hope Russia will not provide the advanced engine, so China will have pressure and momentum developed a reliable engine.

Don't worry, Russia itself can't even develop a F-119 equivalent class engine.
 
I hope Russia will not provide the advanced engine, so China will have pressure and momentum developed a reliable engine.

Estimated Total Chinese Demand for Non-Russian Military Turbofans (2011-20)

China-jet-engine-needs-chart.jpg


---------- Post added at 02:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:03 PM ----------

I hope Russia will not provide the advanced engine, so China will have pressure and momentum developed a reliable engine.

Estimated Total Chinese Demand for Non-Russian Military Turbofans (2011-20)

China-jet-engine-needs-chart.jpg
 
Don't worry, Russia itself can't even develop a F-119 equivalent class engine.

Rather than posting any significant reply you started trolling..........:hitwall:
I guess that's why Chinese are still buying engines from Russia.
 
Where China’s Military Jet Engine Makers Continue to Experience Problems

Where-China-has-problems-with-hi-performance-tac-aircraft-engines.jpg


:coffee:
 
Other Environmental Factors

Vibration resistance is another key determinant of engine performance. If an engine sucks in a small stone, for instance, it can nick a plate, thereby producing a small vibration, which in turn can lead to performance degradation and even failure. Environmental factors that can have negative impact include high/hot airfields (H&H), “sandy” air, salt-water corrosion, and FOD.
 
Structural Challenges

China’s military jet engine sector faces a number of critical structural problems. Many of these are human and bureaucratic issues that can be much more difficult to resolve successfully than technical problems are. Two vulnerabilities stand out.

First, China’s defense officials will have to deal with single source contractor risks. China’s domestic military jet engine production all lies under the control of Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), a state-owned aerospace conglomerate. AVIC’s jet engine production facilities at Shenyang, Xi’an, and Guizhou compete to some extent, but we suspect that the competitive and innovative pressures are not as acute as those which companies like P&W and GE Aviation face. When present in moderation, competitive pressure helps produce innovative engines, lowers costs, speeds up development, and tends to incentivize better aftermarket service. In the late 1970s and early ’80s, the behavior of P&W, then a single-source supplier that the USAF felt was not being responsive to its concerns, prompted the government to foster competition between GE and P&W in the military jet engine sector. The resulting “Great Engine War” helped create architecture whereby U.S. combat aircraft can be designed around a range of powerplants produced by two competing firms. This organizational structure appears to work well. In China’s case, by contrast, there may be less “competition” at the macro level but more at the micro level. This may allow for localized bargaining and patronage that leads to duplication of effort, mismanagement of resources, and an increase in time to market. Here it will be necessary to determine how the “system” of organizations involved in Chinese aeroengine development and production actually work in practice, and whether and to what degree they are “more than the sum of the parts” in practice.

Second, analyses of jet engine development and production in the U.S. credit inter-service cooperation, management stability in both the companies and government, and the use of small teams that were allowed to take risks with a minimum of red tape helped foment jet engine development and production breakthroughs.[20]

Of these two areas, China is likely to struggle most deeply with issues of inter-service cooperation, since service chiefs in China likely view themselves as competitors for slices of the pie in any given budgetary period. Resource constraints will pose less of a challenge since military jet engines typically cost between US$2.5 million and US$5 million apiece. Supporting a very aggressive tactical aircraft buildout by producing 500 tactical turbofans per year would account for only about 2% of China’s total 2011 defense spending. Overall, structural issues pose major challenges, but can be dealt with incrementally once a country masters the basic technology and metallurgy of jet engine making.
 
Going by such reports......one sees not so bright path in the development of J-20 aircraft......whose fullscale induction in PLAAF could be pushed beyond 2022....due to serious snags in the development of WS-15 engine.

:pop:
 
Don't worry, Russia itself can't even develop a F-119 equivalent class engine.

LOL they already have, have you read the news lately I guess not, your too busy with the Mighty Dragon.


More on the

Russia's " Second Phase” Engine or called Type 30 has reportedly have 24,054 lb. dry thrust, and 39,566 lb with afterburners. Which is already more powerful then the F-119, and that means the PAK FA will have a higher super cruse speed then the F-22, and on top of that they are already testing it on the second Prototype.:D:D
 
LOL they already have, have you read the news lately I guess not, your too busy with the Mighty Dragon.


More on the

Russia's " Second Phase” Engine or called Type 30 has reportedly have 24,054 lb. dry thrust, and 39,566 lb with afterburners. Which is already more powerful then the F-119, and that means the PAK FA will have a higher super cruse speed then the F-22, and on top of that they are already testing it on the second Prototype.:D:D

Plus higher T/W ratio in excess of 1.4+...............giving it very high aerodynamic performance...........way way.....better than any fighter ever had.
 
China has already tested its 5th generation engine WS-15 in 2010, and the results were very close to their goal. The test thrust was already larger than that of the F-119 used on the F-22.

If the J-20 does enter service 2015-2017 then that is when I expect the 5th generation engine to enter mass production.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom