What's new

China latest fighter engine is here, WS10TVC Thrust Vector Control turbofan engine official unveil

The British Empire is a different subject and should not be invoked to create a Flame War here in this thread. Those you have tagged should see this post.

You can report posts or tag Mods to check posts that seem to be in violation of Forum Rules. You have done this before.

WE appreciate Chinese contributions to Pakistani defenses. Is there a need to re-emphasize this part again and again on a Pakistani platform?

Chinese members need to understand that there should be room for legitimate questions about (and constructive criticism of) Chinese hardware on Pakistani platforms. This should not be mistaken for Anti-China sentiments.

Pakistani Public have the right to question Pakistani armed forces for their procurement choices. This is about money being spent well on the matters of national security. Better this than being embarassed in the battlefield followed by cover-ups.

Calm down and be friendly.


Didn't they?
Question is one thing. But malicious lies and slander when asked for evidence which they can't provide , are not acceptable in my opinion.

How is that constructive when they have nothing to back their words but purely on stereotyping?

Finally, those questioning, are not Pakistan public but flying British flag and holding UK passport. By your theory, Sunak (PM of UK) is an Indian national, is it?
 
.
Not really catching up, I doubt their pace is quicker than the US's pace. I wonder how the NGAD looks.
A lot of US programs get build and ditched, so a lot of time was wasted during the GWOT. Sure NGAD is in prototype phase with a variable cycle engine, advanced comms, stealth that doesn’t require as much maintenance, AI enable situational awareness and decision making, and directed energy weapons.

Other then the engines and the build quality of the actual jets, the rest seems like it could be developed by any highly advanced team around the world.
 
.
No - that implication is incorrect - for all we know and quite probably - China is swapping out engines after only a few hundreds hours of usage for new engines compared to thousands you would expect from a western engine.

Saying there have been no crashes does not equate to reliability without knowing the service life, maintenance and MTBO intervals of the chinese engines.



PAF accepted the Fantan jets, whose airframe had to be stripped apart and put together again at under 200hrs of flying .... PAF accepts what it needs and accepts the constraints which come with the platform. Was the Fantan jet "advanced or reliable?" because PAF accepted them?

PAF will retire F7s before much older Mirage III/Vs will be retired. Does the induction of F7's makie them advanced and reliable aswell just because PAF accepted them?

PAF accepts what it needs and accepts the constraints which come with the platform.

PAF purchased J10CE's after waiting for many years for more F16s and finally concluding that the era of the F16 will come to an end in the PAF and that no new F16s will join the PAF ..

Chinese engines will only become adavanced and reliable when the "figures" for procurement costs, fuel consumption rates, thrust, service life, maintenance and MTBO intervals of the chinese engines are comparable to western engines.. China has not published these values for its engines - you have to wonder - why ???????? It is because they compare poorly with western engines otherwise the Chinese would be shouting about them from the roof tops now....

By ur own logic, their engines should atleast be better than russians because replacing engines quickly would reduce the availability rate. And i think they r not that stupid to put an engine that is not better than the current one they use. If their engines are better than russians and weaker than western then i think that is a great achievement and nothing can stop them from overtaking western engines in near future.
 
.
I am having a blast reading some of the comments by engine experts on PDF LOL

If I had this much knowledge about engines and if I could predict and compare engines without actually seeing them I would start my own engine company. World's largest engine companies should start hiring some engine experts at PDF.

"Saaaaaaaar. Hold my caaaffeeeeee! I am about to start my engane campany!!!!"
 
Last edited:
.
So you decide that Chinese engines are not reliable? what is the standard of reliability? F-35 crashed one plane every years in recent years, do you count their engine reliable? if China's engines are not reliable, how stupid China must be to fly all planes with Chinese engines in Zhuhai airshow, crashes could happen anytime and embarrass China live right in front of the whole world, do you really think any country can be this stupid? Chinese airshow didn't have crashes, some other country's did yesterday.
it's not China's engine not reliable, it's your bias and stereotype always at work.
Do you have problems with comprehension?? or are you simply unable to understand anything? Read my post again and again and again till you understand what I am saying. Iam not going to spoon feed you. Your drivel needs to stop and you need to understand what is being said.
A
 
.
Lol...the american are good with their loud mouth only...
You complained about lack of constructive debate to me in this thread. Now this is your idea of a constructive debate?

American technological prowess is NOT NEWS to the world at large. It is rather self-explanatory. American technology is in use inside your "gadgets."

China have learned much from Western countries including USA and even from Russia. Do not look down upon these countries now that you have learned to develop advanced stuff. These countries are not sitting idle either but continue to develop incredibly sophisticated technologies and are globally respected for their achievements.

Russia is unable to compete due to lack of investment from OECD countries and sanctions.

WE can see that China is developing better hardware than Russia in the present. I am not surprised because European countries including UK and Germany have provided sophisticated technologies including even engine-related technologies to China. There is ample information on the web in fact.

I believe that China have managed to develop engines that match or exceed reliability of Russian AL-31F engine. This engine have MTBO of 1000 hours. This is good enough for requirements for PAF because it does NOT have GLOBAL operational commitments. PAF is limited to defense of the country.

But American? American companies have managed to develop some engines that have MTBO of 6000 hours by now. Such is the disparity between US and Russia lately.

But the american are good with their loud mouth only as per you. Do you really think that people are stupid?

I have grown to appreciate you for providing evidence of your claims but you have the unfortunate tendency to look down upon others. You set an example for constructive debates and others will respect you for your maturity.
 
.
You questioned about "reliability" , as for how good Chinese engines are stacke up against other engines, I m not an expert in this field, opinions vary from person to person.


I admit that I did say the relliable part cause now they are fitted in all Chinese planes, but who said the " best in the-world"part?
Then you should stop talking about it because you are using the word 'reliability' wrong. Why am I not surprised? :rolleyes:

China, no different than US and everyone else, has problems with building jet engines. A major problem is turbine blade composition and a major problem in that design is what is called 'creep strength'.


Materials under service conditions are required to sustain steady loads for prolonged periods of time and often undergo a time dependent deformation that is referred to as creep. Creep is the natural tendency of a material to gradually move or permanently deform as a result of mechanical stress or strain.


NIMONIC® alloy 115 (W. Nr. 2.4636) is a nickelchromium-cobalt based alloy, strengthened with additions of molybdenum, aluminum and titanium. It was developed as a creep-resisting alloy for service at temperatures up to about 1010°C, as turbine blades for aircraft gas turbines.​


Chromium brings adequate corrosion resistance and the molybdenum improves the high temperature creep properties.​

Some materials deform sooner than others. That does not mean the blade, and resulting jet engine, is unreliable. It is only when you use the jet engine beyond its rated inspection and maintenance life is when performance suffers and the particular serialized engine, not the overall design, become truly unreliable. The greater the creep strength, the harder AND longer you can fly the engine. With lesser rated creep strength, you can still fly reliably at the same intensity but your maintenance frequency will increase which means you must have more engines available if you want to maintain a certain sortie tempo. The highlighted word 'AND' is required if China want to match US.

Overall, in practice, if you cannot fly at the same sortie tempo as we can and have, and if the limiting factor is the engine, then people will use the word 'reliability' to describe 'mean time between failures' (MTBF) and 'mean time between outages' (MTBO) of your engine. Like it or not, we, not China, is the standard to match.
 
.
You complained about lack of constructive debate to me in this thread. Now this is your idea of a constructive debate?

American technological prowess is NOT NEWS to the world at large. It is rather self-explanatory. American technology is in use inside your "gadgets."

China have learned much from Western countries including USA and even from Russia. Do not look down upon these countries now that you have learned to develop advanced stuff. These countries are not sitting idle either but continue to develop incredibly sophisticated technologies and are globally respected for their achievements.

Russia is unable to compete due to lack of investment from OECD countries and sanctions.

WE can see that China is developing better hardware than Russia in the present. I am not surprised because European countries including UK and Germany have provided sophisticated technologies including even engine-related technologies to China. There is ample information on the web in fact.

I believe that China have managed to develop engines that match or exceed reliability of Russian AL-31F engine. This engine have MTBO of 1000 hours. This is good enough for requirements for PAF because it does NOT have GLOBAL operational commitments. PAF is limited to defense of the country.

But American? American companies have managed to develop some engines that have MTBO of 6000 hours by now. Such is the disparity between US and Russia lately.

But the american are good with their loud mouth only as per you. Do you really think that people are stupid?

I have grown to appreciate you for providing evidence of your claims but you have the unfortunate tendency to look down upon others. You set an example for constructive debates and others will respect you for your maturity.
And you quote my reply with nothing to do with debate about reliability of Chinese engine? I am referring to US general comment giving flip flip statement. What kind of constructive comment do u expect me to give with this kind of childish comment from so called commander air force of USA?

And you selective omitted many of my meaningful reply and constructive rebuke regards to many slander against Chinese aero engine. Well done moderator!
 
.
Do you have problems with comprehension?? or are you simply unable to understand anything? Read my post again and again and again till you understand what I am saying. Iam not going to spoon feed you. Your drivel needs to stop and you need to understand what is being said.
A
It's you who didn't try to figure out what we were discussing about before jumping in and throwing trash, we were talking about if the Chinese engines are reliable to fly with and you claimed I said they are one of the best in the world, you are surely not spoon feeding me, you are putting your words in my mouth.
 
.
And you quote my reply with nothing to do with debate about reliability of Chinese engine? I am referring to US general comment giving flip flip statement. What kind of constructive comment do u expect me to give with this kind of childish comment from so called commander air force of USA?

And you selective omitted many of my meaningful reply and constructive rebuke regards to many slander against Chinese aero engine. Well done moderator!
I have pointed out your attitudinal problem from Moderation standpoint. You complain about lack of constructive debate here but you are also found to be making bad posts. Unfortunate, isn't it?

I have also covered "engine reliability" debate in my response and pointed out that China is on par with or doing better than Russia in the present.

You need to read responses carefully. Do not be dense.
 
.
Then you should stop talking about it because you are using the word 'reliability' wrong. Why am I not surprised? :rolleyes:
So I believe the Chinese engines are reliable cause now all jets are being fitted with Chinese domestic engines in China and China is confident enough to fly various type of Chinese planes with domestic engines in one of the biggest airshows in the world, the Zhuhai airshow under the watchful eyes of the whole world.
You believe Chinese engines are not reliable? what's your reasoning on this conclusion?
 
.
So I believe the Chinese engines are reliable cause now all jets are being fitted with Chinese domestic engines in China and China is confident enough to fly various type of Chinese planes with domestic engines in one of the biggest airshows in the world, the Zhuhai airshow under the watchful eyes of the whole world.
You believe Chinese engines are not reliable? what's your reasoning on this conclusion?
See post 112. :enjoy:
 
. . .
Do you have problems with comprehension?? or are you simply unable to understand anything? Read my post again and again and again till you understand what I am saying. Iam not going to spoon feed you. Your drivel needs to stop and you need to understand what is being said.
A
I just found some indicators of the WS-10 basic model
MTBF 150h
IFSD 0.1/1000EFH
I don't know the indicators of western countries, can you make a comparison?
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom