WZ-10 thread

[asif iqbal]

i dont know about anyone else, but i find China usually finds very basic solutions to usually very complicated problems

the lab where i did my PhD has 2 Chinese post-docs, and both of them usually used very basic concepts to solve pretty difficult issues, basic concepts which usually normaly are missed out, but that is just my experience and may not apply through a wider field

[CottageLV]

i dont know about anyone else, but i find China usually finds very basic solutions to usually very complicated problems

the lab where i did my PhD has 2 Chinese post-docs, and both of them usually used very basic concepts to solve pretty difficult issues, basic concepts which usually normaly are missed out, but that is just my experience and may not apply through a wider field

When you have no high tech or no money, sometimes these measures are the last thing you can do.

---------- Post added at 10:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 AM ----------

The new regarding WS-10A news was 3 yrs old news. Plus, it was a production prOblem rather than design problem.
I believe they have solve the problem.

Now u see why J-11B/ BS / J-16/ J-15 are flying around with domestic engine..

We are even going at 180KN thrust engine while there is not even a single news of EU going for a 10 thrust to weight ration engine.
O
As for the IL-76 transport plane, we are going for domestic Y-20 using domestic engine. Digging up old news dOes not prove anything.

3 years is nothing in those sectors. It took US and USSR decades to master producing single crystal blades. The Chinese obtained Rolls Royce Speys about 4 decades ago, and just recently did they completely copied it successful.

I believe they have solve the problem.

You can't just make claims on personal assumptions. You have to have credible backings. The story on the Spey engines were mentioned in a CCTV documentary. The Indians had countless great ambitious, jet engines been one of them, and few of the proposals were actually similar to the claim you just made. They also claimed to make 180KN level jet engines. Have they made it yet?

I'm not saying that China is not going to be able to make it. But it does take a lot of time and hard work. It's unrespectful to say that China could do this and that in just next few years. If it's that easy, then what have they been doing for the past half century? Sleeping? There is no easy path in the road towards perfect jet engines. The Russians and Americans have tried their best to kill each other for the past half century and jet engine was one of those top weapon that could do it. It is common sense that when human try to kill each other, all their inner potential get released. Even under this pressure, it took them decades to master it. China just came out with an engine that is only comparable to what Americans came out with in the 70s, you think it's possible to instantly come out with something that is comparable to American level of the late 90's?

By no means am I trying to bash China, I am Chinese myself and I'm proud to be one. But I just don't like the current netizen culture of bloating facts and overly cocky on current achievements. When you go on Chinese site, the titles of the posts are the hilarious to read. They are mostly products of wet-dreams and lack of reality.

Chinese military is advancing and the rate is accelerating. It is inevitable that China will be a major military power. But the road towards that goal is still bumpy and many obstacles lay ahead. Sweat, tears and even blood will be shed along the way. If assumptions and self-claims could produce results, India would already be the greatest nation on earth.

---------- Post added at 10:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:41 AM ----------

I just want to point out that WS-10 has been in mass production since late 2009 and has been equipping all new production J-11B/BSs and possibly J-15s since then, meaning that they sorted out their quality control problems.

Mass producing doesn't necessarily mean the problems are completely solved. A lot of times in the military sector, a lot of weapons have to be equipped even if it's not up to standard. The news about short life-span of single crystal blades was from 3 years ago, which is not that long ago. How can you assume that the problem is already solved?

Remember the thrust vectored Russian engines used in Indian Su-30 jets? Those engines only have EXPECTED (even on the manual) lifespan of 30 hours as well, which is a joke. Western counterparts usually last for at least more than 1,000 hours, some up to several thousand hours.

Of course even the sub-quality WS-10 could fly, but how long can the engines last?

As for small scale production, it is indeed easier to control the quality. But only large scale productions could quickly make engineers and technicians learn to improve quality.

[vesicles]

When you have no high tech or no money, sometimes these measures are the last thing you can do.

The simplest solution is ALWAYS the best solution, always!

I don't know what field Asif is in when he talked about his Chinese labmates, but in biology/medicine, labs in China usually have all the tools that we normally use in the States. As a matter of fact, it is the Chinese labs that have lots of money and all the high-tech equipment now. I work at a medical school in the US and we always have Chinese colleagues either coming to the lab or going back to China after visiting. they always say that Chinese universities are now loaded with money. And we also have Chinese recruiters coming to the school to recruit potential professors willing to go to China. They offer excellent start-up packages that are typically significantly higher than those offered by American universities. Note that I'm not talking about salary, but start-up funding, which is typically ~US$700-800K vs. US$550-650K we would get in the US. Of course, the problem with doing research in China is not about money, but politics, which discourages a lot of people from going.

And with the typical funding opportunity, here in the States, NIH is giving out less and less money. We have to work our butt off and still can't get enough funding. the funding % with NIH is now merely 7-8%. In China, however, people can get loads of money with only a couple pages of proposal. We have many professors in the department who collaborate with Chinese labs. So what I have said is fact.

So the comments about "no money no tools" no longer applies to China's scientific research.

[asif iqbal]

Vesicles what field are you in, I did my PhD in biophysical applications in molecular biology, basically using single molecule FRET to look at dynamics of molecules, the pioneer of this technique is Steve Chu from Stanford University who i met in 2007 at the ACS in Chicago

Hes also the energy secretary now and also won the Noble prize in Physics for his work in 1997, he's a Chinese American


My supervisor also last year got a grant from the Chinese Academy of sciences for work here in the UK, a very rare occurance

[vesicles]

Vesicles what field are you in, I did my PhD in biophysical applications in molecular biology, basically using single molecule FRET to look at dynamics of molecules, the pioneer of this technique is Steve Chu from Stanford University who i met in 2007 at the ACS in Chicago

Hes also the energy secretary now and also won the Noble prize in Physics for his work in 1997, he's a Chinese American


My supervisor also last year got a grant from the Chinese Academy of sciences for work here in the UK, a very rare occurance

Hey, another fellow biochemist/biophysicist!

I did my PhD in membrane biophysics and biomechanics at Rice University. I was mainly using micropipette aspiration to measure the ability of biological amphiphiles to alter phospholipid membrane mechanical and electrostatic properties. My current focus is spatiotemporal organization of proteins, or lipid rafts, on the plasma membrane.

I was at the 2006 ACS in San Fransisco, but I normally go to the biophysical society and FASEB meetings.

My projects also involve FRET heavily. I am currently using FLIM-FRET to study the stability of protein nanoclusters in the plasma membrane. Unfortunately, no smFRET yet. My main technique is electron microscopy combined with spatial mapping to quantify the dynamics of protein nanoclusters.

[Bltizo]

Mass producing doesn't necessarily mean the problems are completely solved. A lot of times in the military sector, a lot of weapons have to be equipped even if it's not up to standard. The news about short life-span of single crystal blades was from 3 years ago, which is not that long ago. How can you assume that the problem is already solved?

I think the logic is usually that if mass production continues after a delay, that the issues are solved. It is rare to assume otherwise in these situations (just think about production recalls and fixes in every other industry from electronics to toys or food. if there's a delay because of an issue the assumption is that once production resumes, the issue has been dealt with. There is no reason to think differently here, and there's been nothing for us since then to believe otherwise)

Remember the thrust vectored Russian engines used in Indian Su-30 jets? Those engines only have EXPECTED (even on the manual) lifespan of 30 hours as well, which is a joke. Western counterparts usually last for at least more than 1,000 hours, some up to several thousand hours.

Of course even the sub-quality WS-10 could fly, but how long can the engines last?

First of all, I want to say that the 30 hour MTBO number for WS-10 was originally quoted by the washington post. The washington post. And it has been quoted by almost no one else. Yes I am implying that that number shouldn't be taken seriously because it's coming from a not even unreputable source, considering that the MTBO of an engine is no trivial number. (I'd also like to see the 30 hour MTBO for the Al-31 TVC engines on the MKIs, if you have a link)

Second, you need to listen to yourself. Your argument basically boils down to "we've heard nothing of much credibility but because engines are difficult to master and the russians still have troubles with it then we should assume the chinese haven't mastered it either". It's been a while since I did my critical thinking paper but I'm quite sure that's a fallacy of some sort.

As for small scale production, it is indeed easier to control the quality. But only large scale productions could quickly make engineers and technicians learn to improve quality.

Well that basically contradicts what you said earlier, that implied small scale production had equal or more issues than large scale production in quality control

"These things [quality issues] are not easy to solve, both polar bear and uncle yankee struggled for decades before they fully resolved the problems. And this coupled with mass scale production. With China current production scale, it will be even harder with such small production batches"

[Franklin]

Perhabs Lion and Blitzo are too optimistic, engines is a weakness in China's defence industry and should be recognised as such. The big planes like the C-919 passenger jet and the big transporter Y-20 will first use foreign engines and when the domestic engines will be available only god knows. And whether the WS-15 (180kN) will be mass produced in 10 years time remains to be seen.

However i also think that CottageLV is too pessimestic he said that the engines of the Type 052C and the Type 054A are all imported engines. That is partially true, infact the engines of the Type 052C the MTU Friedrichshafen diesels (Germany) and the DN-80 gas turbines (Ukraine) and the SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC diesels (France) of the Type 054A are all being produced in China under licence legally or illegally. And that also goes for the Rolls Royce Spey Mk202 (UK) for the Xi'an JH-7A. All these deals are based on technology transfer and the technology has been transferred. Infact the only engines that China are directly importing are the AL-31F (J-10/J-11), NPO Saturn D-30KP-2 turbofan (H-6K) and the RD-93 (JF-17, used only by Pakistan). These are the ones i know there maybe others i don't know of. All the other engines are produced in China domestically either through own R&D or through licence production. So when it comes to engines China is much more independent than you think.

Interesting note about the WZ-10 the helicopter has been tested with the Ukrainian build Klimov TV3-117VMA turboshaft, (1636 kW 2194 shp) the same engine that powers the Mi-28 Havoc and it was very succesful. And there was another Russian and Canadian engine in play. All of them were more powerful and reliable than the domestic WZ-9 turboshaft (1000kw 1340shp). But China rejected them all in favour of the domestic engine. This is a political decision. First China wants to be less dependent on foreign engines in her military and the second to give China's turboshaft industry and boost. And i don't know the exact details of the China France cooperation on the WZ-16 (1500kw 1700+shp) it supposed to be a 50/50 deal. If China can produce the WZ-16 on mass after 2014 this will open a new horizon for China's helicopter industry as China now can start designing and building 10 to 15 tons helicopters aka Apache and Black Hawk types that is now so lacking and needed.

[asif iqbal]

Hey, another fellow biochemist/biophysicist!

I did my PhD in membrane biophysics and biomechanics at Rice University. I was mainly using micropipette aspiration to measure the ability of biological amphiphiles to alter phospholipid membrane mechanical and electrostatic properties. My current focus is spatiotemporal organization of proteins, or lipid rafts, on the plasma membrane.

I was at the 2006 ACS in San Fransisco, but I normally go to the biophysical society and FASEB meetings.

My projects also involve FRET heavily. I am currently using FLIM-FRET to study the stability of protein nanoclusters in the plasma membrane. Unfortunately, no smFRET yet. My main technique is electron microscopy combined with spatial mapping to quantify the dynamics of protein nanoclusters.

OMG!! so simiar

my work is with Nucleic Acids, and the effects of the orientation of the dipoles on FRET efficiency, I published a paper in the National Academy of Sciences in 2008 with Taekjip Ha, who was Steven Chu's PhD student, it was the highlight of my PhD

I cant add in as Pdf its telling me my limit is exceeded so here it is


Orientation dependence in fluorescent energy transfer between Cy3 and Cy5 terminally attached to double-stranded nucleic acids

Orientation dependence in fluoresce... [Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI PMID:21889452

do u know Bob Clegg? he does FLIM and hes was external examiner

[vesicles]

OMG!! so simiar

my work is with Nucleic Acids, and the effects of the orientation of the dipoles on FRET efficiency, I published a paper in the National Academy of Sciences in 2008 with Taekjip Ha, who was Steven Chu's PhD student, it was the highlight of my PhD

I cant add in as Pdf its telling me my limit is exceeded so here it is


Orientation dependence in fluorescent energy transfer between Cy3 and Cy5 terminally attached to double-stranded nucleic acids

Orientation dependence in fluoresce... [Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008] - PubMed - NCBI PMID:21889452

do u know Bob Clegg? he does FLIM and hes was external examiner

Cool stuff! Congratulations on the PNAS publication! Unfortunately, I don't know Bob Clegg. Glad to have another fellow biophysicist on the forum!

[CottageLV]

Perhabs Lion and Blitzo are too optimistic, engines is a weakness in China's defence industry and should be recognised as such. The big planes like the C-919 passenger jet and the big transporter Y-20 will first use foreign engines and when the domestic engines will be available only god knows. And whether the WS-15 (180kN) will be mass produced in 10 years time remains to be seen.

However i also think that CottageLV is too pessimestic he said that the engines of the Type 052C and the Type 054A are all imported engines. That is partially true, infact the engines of the Type 052C the MTU Friedrichshafen diesels (Germany) and the DN-80 gas turbines (Ukraine) and the SEMT Pielstick 16 PA6 STC diesels (France) of the Type 054A are all being produced in China under licence legally or illegally. And that also goes for the Rolls Royce Spey Mk202 (UK) for the Xi'an JH-7A. All these deals are based on technology transfer and the technology has been transferred. Infact the only engines that China are directly importing are the AL-31F (J-10/J-11), NPO Saturn D-30KP-2 turbofan (H-6K) and the RD-93 (JF-17, used only by Pakistan). These are the ones i know there maybe others i don't know of. All the other engines are produced in China domestically either through own R&D or through licence production. So when it comes to engines China is much more independent than you think.

Interesting note about the WZ-10 the helicopter has been tested with the Ukrainian build Klimov TV3-117VMA turboshaft, (1636 kW 2194 shp) the same engine that powers the Mi-28 Havoc and it was very succesful. And there was another Russian and Canadian engine in play. All of them were more powerful and reliable than the domestic WZ-9 turboshaft (1000kw 1340shp). But China rejected them all in favour of the domestic engine. This is a political decision. First China wants to be less dependent on foreign engines in her military and the second to give China's turboshaft industry and boost. And i don't know the exact details of the China France cooperation on the WZ-16 (1500kw 1700+shp) it supposed to be a 50/50 deal. If China can produce the WZ-16 on mass after 2014 this will open a new horizon for China's helicopter industry as China now can start designing and building 10 to 15 tons helicopters aka Apache and Black Hawk types that is now so lacking and needed.

But the problem is that the current trend in China is wanting to claim everything to be indigenous. I do acknowledge that those engines are domestically assembled, but what's the percentage of domestic parts? Are the single crystal blades domestic? Are the core control units domestic?

I have heard of cases in the past of people buying foreign high tech parts and repack it, claiming it indigenous.

[kroko]

But the problem is that the current trend in China is wanting to claim everything to be indigenous. I do acknowledge that those engines are domestically assembled, but what's the percentage of domestic parts? Are the single crystal blades domestic? Are the core control units domestic?

I have heard of cases in the past of people buying foreign high tech parts and repack it, claiming it indigenous.

CottageLV,

You know it well that no one in this forum has reliable acess to this information. Just because we dont know for certain doesnt prove or disprove it. Why do you feel the need to always presume on the negative?

. But I just don't like the current netizen culture of bloating facts and overly cocky on current achievements.

Just because you dont like it, doesnt make it right to come to this forum and repeat the same arguments that "where is the proof that it exists?" "what is the percentage of domestic parts?" "It will take a long time". Neither you or anyone in this forum knows for sure the answer. Why do you feel the need to constantly make those questions? You are starting to sound like a troll, you know.

[AssassinsMace]

For a country in China's position where the US tries to prevent anyone selling anything advanced to China and where Russia like to play games, it would be safe to assume that China must forsee it capable of domestic production for whatever component that is needed or they wouldn't even try. Why build anything if what important component you need most cannot be made or with some level of legitimate confidence seen made in the near future domestically? Europeans would like to do a lot of high tech business with China but cannot because the US says, "No!" So if it's a sign of backwardness that all or some of whatever China says is "domestic" is actually foreign, then Europe must be backward because the US can veto any deal it has with China meaning what Europe develops "domestically" cannot be done without US technology.

[CottageLV]

CottageLV,

You know it well that no one in this forum has reliable acess to this information. Just because we dont know for certain doesnt prove or disprove it. Why do you feel the need to always presume on the negative?

Just because you dont like it, doesnt make it right to come to this forum and repeat the same arguments that "where is the proof that it exists?" "what is the percentage of domestic parts?" "It will take a long time". Neither you or anyone in this forum knows for sure the answer. Why do you feel the need to constantly make those questions? You are starting to sound like a troll, you know.

The law says all men are innocent unless proven guilty. You can't just presume something and claim it's 100% correct. I believe majority of the members in this forum are highly educated, probably mostly have at least a masters or PHD.

We all know from a scientific point of view, nothing is 100% correct unless it's proven, it still is just an educated guess. But for a lot of the messages coming out of Chinese netizens, they are simply wetdreams. If you read Chinese, I guess you probably don't, you would be amazed at how crazy the Chinese sites are at overly exaggerating the current achievements. Titles of those posts follow the trend of saying "China launching 100,000 ton nuclear aircraft carrier next year" or "China deploying fleet to Okinawa, 7th fleet backed off 1000 nautical miles", the craziest one I have seen are those claiming that China made H-8 bomber, able to reach Mach 2.5 with an airframe resembling the B-2.

As for credibility on the existence of something, J-20 is in test flights, CJ-10 was on the parade. When there's speculation on something that really exists, you can usually get some hints from here and there. You can even find leaked evidences from CCTV to prove their existence. But for WS-15 matching F119's level of performance, is that possible so soon? Don't forget that China was just able to fully copy the 60's RR Spey as recent as few years back. Now China can instantly make something as capable as F119? What are Chinese engineers fed with? Open Sesame? Or do they sleep with Aladdin's magic lamp and have the Ginni as their night light?

Do you really believe in the antiship ballistic missle? If you do, find something credible to support it.

---------- Post added at 02:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:46 PM ----------

I would be realistic and confident in knowing that my facts are true, rather than being an idiot blathering all day on baseless presumptions.

[vesicles]

The law says all men are innocent unless proven guilty. You can't just presume something and claim it's 100% correct. I believe majority of the members in this forum are highly educated, probably mostly have at least a masters or PHD.

We all know from a scientific point of view, nothing is 100% correct unless it's proven, it still is just an educated guess. But for a lot of the messages coming out of Chinese netizens, they are simply wetdreams. If you read Chinese, I guess you probably don't, you would be amazed at how crazy the Chinese sites are at overly exaggerating the current achievements. Titles of those posts follow the trend of saying "China launching 100,000 ton nuclear aircraft carrier next year" or "China deploying fleet to Okinawa, 7th fleet backed off 1000 nautical miles", the craziest one I have seen are those claiming that China made H-8 bomber, able to reach Mach 2.5 with an airframe resembling the B-2.

As for credibility on the existence of something, J-20 is in test flights, CJ-10 was on the parade. When there's speculation on something that really exists, you can usually get some hints from here and there. You can even find leaked evidences from CCTV to prove their existence. But for WS-15 matching F119's level of performance, is that possible so soon? Don't forget that China was just able to fully copy the 60's RR Spey as recent as few years back. Now China can instantly make something as capable as F119? What are Chinese engineers fed with? Open Sesame? Or do they sleep with Aladdin's magic lamp and have the Ginni as their night light?

Do you really believe in the antiship ballistic missle? If you do, find something credible to support it.

---------- Post added at 02:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:46 PM ----------

I would be realistic and confident in knowing that my facts are true, rather than being an idiot blathering all day on baseless presumptions.

Hmmm... I'm confused. So "all men are innocent unless proven guilty". If this is what you truly believe, then you should firmly believe that all Chinese products claimed by the Chinese to be 100% indigenous should be just that, 100% indigenous, until proven otherwise.

Yet, what you are arguing all this time should be "all men are guilty unless proven innocence" since, without any evidence one way or another, you assume all Chinese indigenous products have questionable origin until someone somewhere can show you otherwise.

As for the questionable speed of WS15, the learning curve for someone catching up is vastly different from someone making the initial invention. the theory has matured and experience can be learned. So the development phase can be much quicker for someone playing catch-up.

[kroko]

The law says all men are innocent unless proven guilty. You can't just presume something and claim it's 100% correct. I believe majority of the members in this forum are highly educated, probably mostly have at least a masters or PHD.

We all know from a scientific point of view, nothing is 100% correct unless it's proven, it still is just an educated guess. But for a lot of the messages coming out of Chinese netizens, they are simply wetdreams. If you read Chinese, I guess you probably don't, you would be amazed at how crazy the Chinese sites are at overly exaggerating the current achievements. Titles of those posts follow the trend of saying "China launching 100,000 ton nuclear aircraft carrier next year" or "China deploying fleet to Okinawa, 7th fleet backed off 1000 nautical miles", the craziest one I have seen are those claiming that China made H-8 bomber, able to reach Mach 2.5 with an airframe resembling the B-2.

cottage, what part of my last post you didnt get? did i ever said something presumed is 100% correct? As for chinese forums, i dont frequent them (im no chinese) so i dont know whats going on there. But if its true, then what? does that bother you? then dont frequent those forums. Simple as that. Otherwise what do you want to do? engage in a quest to convince PLA fanboys of the error of their ways? go ahead. Just dont come here and keep saying: "where is the proof that it exists?" "what is the percentage of domestic parts?" "It will take a long time". what do you gain with it? You dont know for sure, no one knows. its getting annoying.

you can usually get some hints from here and there

what kind of "hints" ? i guess rumours, isnt it? After all, even the best sources on PLA fail, you see.