Alfa, I don't know if you're actually this stupid or that you KNOW China's way ahead of India, but you just wanna defend India. You don't test a design and then build it, fool. Before you build it, it doesn't exist (I hope this does not escape your logic). How would you test something that does not exist? You design it, build it, test it, then call it a success. If you haven't completed all 3 steps, it's not a success. Your argument is that if they built it, then they must have had a good design. That's not good logic. Look at the Kaveri. It's design, build, test. They designed it, built it, but it failed to meet standards on tests, so the design was a failure and afterburner was removed.
China is way ahead,Answer Few Questions:
Regarding AC:-
1) Is China designed any AC?
2) Is China build any AC?
WS-13A? OK, so you don't want to compare Kaveri to the engine that China has already successfully built? That's fine, just remember, then that WS-13A is China's second engine. WS-10A has already succeeded. We are comparing China's second engine to India's first. Find me a recent source (2012) that says WS-13A lasts only 60 hours and I will accept that it's not progressing as well as we'd hoped. (I'll assume it was a typo when you said the "production model" lasts 60 hours because clearly, if an engine only lasts 60 hours, it would not go into production. Your English is so bad, you probably don't know what "production model" means and meant to say "prototype".) But then again, how long does Kaveri last? As things are going, it doesn't even look like Kaveri will have afterburners. You are comparing India's 49kN non-afterburning engine to China's engine with higher dry thrust AND with afterburner?
WS-13 Engine:
A)
Is WS-13 flying any planes? No its total failure , as per your
logic , WS-13 is failed.
B)
Is was 13A is good engine /capable engine?
NO, not flying any aircraft till date.
WS10 Engine:
WS-10 : [B
]Failed[/B] Flying no Plane,
The original WS-10 was found to lack the performance needed for modern jet-powered fighters and was never used to power an aircraft. The design was modified and an improved version, the WS-10A, was tested on a prototype Shenyang J-11 fighter in 2002NEWS DEVELOPMENTS IN RUSSIA-CHINA MILITARY RELATIONS: A REPORT ON THE AUGUST 19-23 2003 MOSCOW AEROSPACE SALON (MAKS)
WS-10A:
1) The Chinese media also reported in
2005 that the
WS-10A had completed 4 months endurance testing and the engine was later
certified for production in 2006.
2)According to an interview publicised in
January 2007 with J-10 pilot Li Cunbao (李存宝
, the J-10 had not yet been equipped with the domestic WS-10 engine, because although the
WS-10 could match the performance of its Russian counterpart (the AL-31), there was a serious drawback; the WS-10 took longer to "spool up", i.e. there was a delay in reaching the same thrust output as the Russian engine.
3)
On 2 April 2009, the director of AVIC (Aviation Industry Corporation of China) Lin Zuoming (林左鸣, stated that there were problems with the quality control procedures on the
WS-10A production line, meaning the Taihang turbofan was still of unsatisfactory quality. He said that solving these problems would be a key step. In addition to poor build quality,
the engines suffered from poor reliability, the Chinese engines have been lasting 30 hours at a time vs 400 for the Russian originals.
Ciprofloxacin hcl 500mg side effects >>>> Lowest Prices Online Pharmacy. THE BEST PRICE!
Now can you show me a link that states that WS-10A is improved? If you not have dont use you imagination that it improved ot work done, if you have any good link which states that reliability of the engine improve ,please show the world Or else dont use imaginations or impose your imagination to the world.
Above statement proved that WS-13A : failed
Heh, yeah, I know India WANTS 100kN engine LOL. Heck, it may want 200kN engine heh heh. But it cannot even get the 81kN engine done so this is sounding overly ambitious for its current ability.
We have to SELL WS-10A to verify it by a third party? Now you are making pretty funny rules. F-22 engines will never be sold to any other country. You can say that is a failed engine too then. China is currently not even making enough WS-10A to keep up with its own demand. Why would we sell them?
Means when you sold that plane with engine to PAK then it become reliable, F-22 sold to other countries with engines. We are haring from many years that it was to be given to PAK(plane)
With LCA and JF-17 figures, I see your logic. First, you take all your information off of Wikipedia, no problem. You trust everything, from that people say to how much prototype engines output. But then you read superior figures for JF-17 than LCA and suddenly, "Oh, no Wikipedia figures are not accurate. They were manipulated by Chinese people." LOLOL JF-17 figures "broke all the rules?" That's funny. What kind of aerodynamic rules do you know that these figures have broken? And that's not an invitation to start googling articles and posting them to make yourself sound smart. You don't know anything about aviation and neither do any of the people who agree with you. You all just wanna feel good about India even though it's clearly behind China. India is trying its hardest to induct LCA block 1. That is a fact; read about it. Only in your fantasy is India rejecting block I for Block II.
buddy Wikipedia pick figures from officials PAK sites, for JF-17, Buddy on site Jf-17 claims to be superior then F-16 also, who dumb gonna buy that logic, that F-16 combat radius is small then JF-17. No one in the world other Chinese/PAK.
F-16:
Internal Fuel: 3,175 kilograms
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 NM (2,620 mi, 4,220 km) with drop tanks (5443 kilograms)
JF-17:
Internal Fuel Capacity: 2,300 kg
Combat radius: 1,352 km[17] (840 mi)
Ferry range: 3,482 km (1,880 NM[9])
LCA:-
Internal fuel capacity: 2,458 kg
Combat radius: 300 km (186 miles)
Ferry range: 3,000 km[90] (1,840 mi)
Now see, only Jf-17 is the plane on above three which carries less fuel and have maxi combat radiums beating eveyone even US. Wow
This shows that PAF fudge figures.
Why would we use JF-17 to attack Taiwan? We had J-11B, J-10A, soon to have J-20, why would we select JF-17, which is not even good enough to induct into PLAAF? The answer is 1. we prefer to integrate Taiwan naturally and economically. It will be much more beneficial than a military take-over. 2. The US is a complicating factor. If we take Taiwan by force, we must be prepared not only to defeat Taiwan's forces, but also American forces if they choose to intervene.
I'll throw your logic back at you. If you think your Indian Su-30MKI are so good, why don't you attack Pakistan and take your land back? Kashmir is partly governed by Pakistan so do something about it unless you're scared of a few F-16 and JF-17. Actions speak louder than words, right?
India never wanted to take back that part kashmir , if it want it already in 1971 when it won Over, more 1,00,000 solider surrender , world largest surrender of army in history.
Look at all this unrelated garbage that you drag up! You talk about aircraft carriers, Chinese engines, and even territorial disputes! All unrelated to the topic so you don't have to admit the this one fact that this thread is about:
Kaveri can never serve as an acceptable fighter jet engine and its wet thrust is a failure, so the Indian engineers gave up and removed the wet thrust completely to use it as a drone engine.
This is what this thread is about and this is pure fact (taken directly from the original document that started the thread). Just think about that, don't try to think about other unrelated crazy things just for the purpose of talking back to me.
Well Kaveri, Engine cannot be used because IAF want 100KN thrust engine, so the present Kaveri engine will be utilised other projects because engine is made and working.
K-10 is the project with 100KN thrust is being under development.
) JF-17 claim range/ combat radius and Hight with no weapon load, while LCA mention specification with full load.
................
