Alfa, you need help. Firstly, China makes its own ships; China is the world's largest ship builder (sometimes Korea). Secondly, 2 engine designs are different. You don't just make WS-10A smaller and get WS-13. They are different in design and take time. It seems you need to do a whole lot of research before you talk about professional things.
well
A) Largest Shipbuilder cant design AC? Do they ? China the largest shipbuilder bought 2 AC to study Design cant able to start building /design its own AC
India the smallest ship-builder can design and built own AC.
here i am telling not in capability of producing , your No.1 status cant design you AC. Got it.
WS-10A has higher thrust. I don't know the engine life and neither do you but I hope you're not stupid enough to think that since 2009, China has not made significant improvement. I don't owe it to you to find these things. If you have time, find a recent (2012) source with WS-10A engine life and tell me what it is as compared the 1,500-3,000 hours of the AL-31 (different sources provide different figures so I dunno for sure). If you can't find it, don't just assume it's less. You are just pulling shiiaat out of your a55 now so you don't have to admit that China has made a successful engine.
The truth is operational Chinese aircraft fly with it and there have been no reported crashes. If you just wanna assume that crashes happened, but the government covered them up, then that is more shiiat you're pulling out of your a55. I could assume India wrecked 30 Su-30MKI last year but covered it all up.
Well everyone knows who has the capacity of cover ups and who control the internet media. But do tell quoting your technical website /Govt Website providing real figures or Natural party to claim? Russian engines test by many countries , if tomorrow Russia claims that its Al-31 produces 3000 KN who gonna believe until you don't provide them to natural counties to try them and backup your claims.
moreover your Designers from 2009 ,didn't claim and tell that engine is not at par of Russian engine. if you have any interview of your designers then show?
or else 2009 stand is clearly state that the engine still on developing state and problem is not resolved and that why designers didnt came and made news of completion of the same.
Till then you are only assuming thing that that thing happened in 2009 , now its 2012 things have done till now, but in actually its not.
India dont even consider engine which not meet standards , unlike Chinese which proud of sub standard engine.
In India this type of sub-standard engine is considered as developing one and not finished product.
Let me remind you that you are comparing a Chinese and Russian engine, not an Indian engine. Your pride is something another nation sold you, not your invention. Indian engines are without a doubt far behind the WS-10A because they don't fly and they even don't taxi a prototype.
Earlier you said Kaveri produces 80kN and is targeting 100. The problem is, you jumped into the thread without reading the original document that started it, which, from an Indian source, clearly states that Kaveri only produces 70kN but was targeting 81. So the 80, 100 are just numbers you made up cus you want them to be true. To your embarrassment, you even said that Kaveri was as powerful as the engine (RD-93 or WS-13) that powers the JF-17 while it is about 11-16kN inferior. You made fun of China's 80+kN (86kN from wiki, not sure if that's true) prototype WS-13 without knowing that that was what India wanted but failed to achieve while China was not happy with the thrust, so decided hold off production to continue to develop it into a 100kN engine. You got it the other way around. Embarrassing!!
Well buddy if you read correctly the Afterburner(wet) is produced low thrust , which can be rectified but the DRY THRUST is meet respectively. Only wet thrust required little fine tuning.
RD-93 has 50KN Dry Thrust ,
Kavari already achieved 49.2 =50KN, only wet thrust need little fine tuning. if your engine expect that you know DRY thrust is more important then wet thrust.
Your WS-13 is design for 51KN (Dry Thrust)
Dont make fun of yourself ...in the end.
You guys hold China and India to completely different standards, don't you? I show you a Chinese jet not only flying, but in service and production with a Chinese engine and I get, "Probably, the quality was lowered" "Probably, it has less thrust" "Oh, it has more thrust? Then probably it's service life is less" "Find me proof of its service life!" And when it comes to India's drone, I see an article that says India intends to develop this drone and I see the word, "Confirmed" in the title. LOLOL
Well i showed you the quality link , now you prove that quality is increased from 2009?
B) Regarding WS10 "
The WS-10 project had it roots in the earlier WS-6 turbofan, which was abandoned at the start of the 1980s. Development of the WS-10 started in 1987 by Shenyang Aeroengine Research Institute (606 Institute) of the China Aviation Industry Corporation and was based upon the core of CFM International CFM56 engines imported from the United States in 1982. This core itself deriving from the F16's GE F101 engines.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 2002.
WS13 :
China began development of the Taishan in 2000 to replace the Klimov RD-93 turbofan, which had been selected in the 1990s to power the JF-17 light-weight fighter. It is designed to have a life span of 2,200 hours and an improved version, providing around 100 kN (22,450 lb) of thrust with afterburner, is under development.
The WS-13 Taishan was certified in 2007 and serial production began in 2009..
The 18 March 2010 edition of the HKB report stated that a FC-1 equipped with the
WS-13 completed its first successful runway taxi test.
Officials at the Farnborough International Airshow in
August 2010 stated that a JF-17 development aircraft is flying with a Chinese engine, which is most likely to be the WS-13.
I already proved that in 2009 , your own engg claims that , WS10 have shorter life and performance issue and not able to match Russian engines. Till now that Engg didnt claim that engine is perfected to russian level.
Its only you assuming that everything is all right. you cant able to tell engine life service life etc ....
Regarding: WS13: Certified for serial production and start taxing long after that and still engine is non-show even after serial production began......
india first test happen then certification happen, no unlike china where serial production/certification start then test.
