Chinese Engine Development

tanlixiang28776

Junior Member
You can have the most powerful cannon and most sophisticated electronics but without reliable engines they are all pointless.

China has come along way engine technology but still has a lot of work

Land vehicles: China is completely self sufficient in this field.

Aircraft: With the WS-10 finally equipping the j-11B in large numbers China is finally capable of producing a engine for its large fighter fleet. After this first engine future engines like the WS 13 and WS 15 will come much easier. However turboprop engines for large transport and helicopters still need much more investment.

Naval: This is the weakest link in China's engine development with even recent 052C's using german and ukrainian engines. However with mass production of this destroyer it means indigenous programs are successful as no more engines seemed to have been ordered. China is mature in nuclear engines as evidenced by the the 093, 094, and very soon to be inducted 095, and 096 nuclear submarines. The question of integration into aircraft carriers however is still an open question.

Missiles: This is strongest area as China can produce the entire range of missiles from BVR AAMS to Kinetic kill vehicle capable ballistic missiles, to SRBMs. China is also making missiles no one else has like the DF 21D ASBM.

Please discuss China's advances in engine technology both the positive and negative. Relevant articles and examples would be appreciated. As always no flaming or trolling please.
 

pugachev_diver

Banned Idiot
The problem China has with the Aero engines is not that they cannot produce it, but rather not at a price they want. Chinese are almost able to produce anything the West has, but just not as the same quality. Aero engines are almost purely consisted of blades and they have relatively low production success rate even for the Americans. For examples, if Pratt Whitney want to deliver 100 blades, they probably have to make 110-120 blades to make up for the faulty ones. The Russians probably have to do at least 130-140 and the Chinese probably have to do 150-180. When production becomes this wasteful, it is not hard to think why the Chinese would order Russian engines instead of using its own. Another reason would be the performance of the engines. If my memory serves me correctly, I have seen an article on the interview of the Chinese pilot, he said the WS10 is much more powerful on paper, but it takes a bit longer to deliver the power whereas the ALF31 is much more quicker.

In terms of the engines for the tanks, I remember they were built on purchased German technologies. They have probably completely indigneouslised the technologies.

I strongly agree with you that the naval engines are the most behind. That'll probably have to wait until the aero engines come to fruition, because both diesel and steam turbines are very similar to jet engines. After all, technology is not about blueprints and things made, it's about the technicians and the engineers ability to innovate. I believe through the R&D developments for the jet engines, China will produce talents needed for turbine technology. But this will take many many years. And as for nuclear technology, its still really just using the rods to cook the water to steam and using the steam to drive the turbines. So everything still comes down to the turbine technology China has.

If my memory serves me correctly, even till today, China still import millions of turbine shafts every year from Japan and Germany.

China still has a long way to go to even just catch up with the Russians, whose already 20 years behind the West, if not more.
 
Last edited:

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
. Another reason would be the performance of the engines. If my memory serves me correctly, I have seen an article on the interview of the Chinese pilot, he said the WS10 is much more powerful on paper, but it takes a bit longer to deliver the power whereas the ALF31 is much more quicker.
.

I believe you got mixed up spooling time and thrust. I understand the earlier WS 10 model have longer spooling time than the Russian engine But the problem have been resolve in latter batches of production. So it is not correct to say WS 10 has lower thrust.

I don't believe that Chinese blade production has lower yield than the Russian .China supplied 2nd stage blades to the like of Snecma and GE
 

kyanges

Junior Member
I believe you got mixed up spooling time and thrust. I understand the earlier WS 10 model have longer spooling time than the Russian engine But the problem have been resolve in latter batches of production. So it is not correct to say WS 10 has lower thrust.

He was saying the exact same thing. :) .
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
He was saying the exact same thing. :) .

Spooling time refer to time lag between idle and full thrust of the jet engine. The unit of spooling time is second.The unit of thrust is pound force or newton. So it is completely different unit. Of course you want as fast spool time as possible It can mean difference between life and death

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

One of the curious features about turbojet engines is the non-linearity of thrust response. You get not much more than a hot breeze from idle to say 70% RPM, and just enough to taxi with between 70-80%. From 80-90% you get good, useable thrust for steady state cruise, but anytime you want to really accelerate the airplane you’re probably talking a setting of above 95% throttle. The net effect is that a disproportionate amount of thrust is generated within the relatively narrow band of 94-98% RPM (most engines are slightly “de-tuned” to ensure that they don’t overspeed, so you rarely see 100% RPM on the gauge).

Not only is the thrust response quicker in the higher RPM band, engine response times decrease as well. Unlike a piston or radial engine prop aircraft, which gives a gratifyingly immediate and proportional response to a given throttle input, spooling a J52-P6A engine from ground idle to mil could take up to 13 seconds. This is mostly a function of shaft inertia and compressor lag, but also because fuel flow increases are carefully metered at lower power settings to avoid overtemping an engine that’s not yet up to speed. While response times are slightly faster from flight idle there is still a power band on the back side of the curve that a survival-oriented pilot would avoid if he thought he might need more power in a hurry – when he was low and slow, for example. Or in the landing pattern.
 
Last edited:

maozedong

Banned Idiot
If my memory serves me correctly, even till today, China still import millions of turbine shafts every year from Japan and Germany.

you need to update the source,China can manufacture large turbine shaft now,China doesn't need to import any shaft from foreign counties.
 

delft

Brigadier
The problem with GT turbines is the very high temperature they need for good efficiency. There's a not-ending search for new materials and new processes to produce reliably turbine blades for a still higher Turbine Inlet Temperature at an acceptable, but no doubt high, price.
Steam turbines live at very much lower temperatures, less than 1000 K. The most efficient coal burning power stations are built in China, about one a month, using the highest steam temperature.
 
Top