Chinese Engine Development

superdog

Junior Member
My point was not that, my point was the Antonov company had plans to build a commercial version of the An-124 for airliner use, the An-124 can be turned into an airliner in the same way the B-747 was turned into an airliner, but it never materialized.
The D-18T is a very powerful engine, China has not such engine, the Progress D-18T has being used on a cargo aircraft, as an engine it puts Ukraine as the forth country with real large engines and the engines was put into production they built close to 200+ engines.

The claim that China is the 4th country to have such engines then is false and propaganda, they arranged the wording, by saying commercial engines, but the facts are Motorsich is the forth jet engine manufacturer to build high thrust engines.

However my point it was that you can have the engine and the aircraft, in the case of Ukraine the D-18T and the An-124, but if you have no market then you have no reason to build your engines, Ukraine will not build more An-124, Russia already is working in a 35 tonnes engine derived from the PD-14 and will built a large airliner to replace the Il-96, according to what i know Russia just anounced they Chinese that they will be building the engine for the new airliner China and Russia will build and the 35 tonnes new engine will be used to replace the D-18T build in Ukraine.

So basically D-18T will not be build any more unless Ukraine builds more An-124s.

Antonov knows that so they are concentrating on a new smaller airliner the An-148 and Motorsich is building and designing a new engine to power it, Russia will build also a new cargo aircraft once Il-476 life is used, but PD-14 will lease new life to Il-76 with a more powerful variant.
if you want to know more read this

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
You have invested a large amount of paragraphs trying to prove that the AVIC claims were “ false and propaganda”, but did you actually comprehend what the original claims were?

There were three claims from the source you quoted:
making China the third country in the world that has mass deployment of domestically-produced high-thrust engines for military use
China has become the fourth country in the world to independently design and produce large transportation aircraft
the third country to independently develop stealth fighter jets

And then you say:
The claim that China is the 4th country to have such engines then is false and propaganda
Sorry but I don't know what you're talking about
 

b787

Captain
You have invested a large amount of paragraphs trying to prove that the AVIC claims were “ false and propaganda”, but did you actually comprehend what the original claims were?

There were three claims from the source you quoted:




And then you say:

Sorry but I don't know what you're talking about

The claim that China is the forth country to have develop a jet engine for an airliner is false in terms of the engine thrust and type, it is true if you consider the D-18T made by Progress is for a cargo aircraft

D-18T has a thrust o 23,000kg there are more than 55 An-124s, that makes a total of more than 220 engines.

It is propaganda since Motorsich can build this type of engines, making it the fourth country capable of designing jet engines in the 10-24 tonnes class.

It is propaganda since France builds CFM International CFM56 in joint venture with the USA and as a jet engine more than 30,000s have been built and France builds the LEAP model and the
PowerJet SaM146 they want to imply France or Germany are behind, but the reality is China has still unproven technology and still can not have the success of even the V2500 family that has been built in more than 6000 units and powers more airliners that any Chinese engine ever had, the engine in fact is British/American/Japanese/German.

It is propaganda since these two engines are the most produces engines, the V2500-e-5 is in the range of 15000 kg of thrust, no Chinese jet engine for civilian or even Cargo aircraft has such success and producibility,

The main point was claim China can build by its own the engine but the reality is the joint venture is by far more sucessful. so it is a moot point by the Chinese article
 

b787

Captain
You have invested a large amount of paragraphs trying to prove that the AVIC claims were “ false and propaganda”, but did you actually comprehend what the original claims were?

There were three claims from the source you quoted:




And then you say:

Sorry but I don't know what you're talking about
yes my apologies you are right indeed it says only the aircraft i misread i thought it mentions the engine but still is a bit propaganda
 

supercat

Major
China establishes Aero Engine Corp. of China (AECC) with $7.5 billion capital and 96,000 employees.

China Establishes New State-Owned Aircraft-Engine Maker
Aero Engine Corp. of China aims to develop domestic jet engines, reducing the need for foreign-made parts


BEIJING—China set up a new state-owned aircraft engine maker to help fulfill ambitions to develop homegrown aerospace giants and become a major player in global aviation.



In remarks published Sunday by state media, President
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
described the creation of Aero Engine Corp. of China, or AECC, as a “strategic move” that would accelerate the development of indigenously made jet engines and thereby boost national prestige and military power.



The new company, which has 50 billion yuan ($7.5 billion) in registered capital and 96,000 employees, will focus on the design, manufacture and testing of aircraft engines, the official Xinhua News Agency said. Its investors include the Chinese government and two state-owned firms: Aviation Industry Corp. of China, an aerospace and defense conglomerate, and Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China, which produces passenger jets.



China has struggled to produce advanced jet engines capable of matching foreign rivals, despite significant state funding and decades of effort. Many Chinese military jets use Russian-made engines, while the country’s two homegrown passenger-jet designs rely on Western-made engines.



By setting up AECC, Beijing hopes to create a self-sufficient aerospace sector that can serve commercial and military aviation needs with homegrown technology, industry analysts say.



AECC consolidates existing aircraft-engine businesses into a single entity. In March, three listed companies announced that they were due to become part of the new company: AVIC Aviation Engine Corp., Sichuan Chengfa Aero-Science & Technology Co. and AVIC Aero-Engine Controls Co.



The move also dovetails with Beijing’s efforts to revamp its state-owned manufacturing sector, with the aim of creating high-technology industrial champions in aerospace, robotics, nuclear power and other fields.



China’s state-owned aerospace firms date back to the 1950s, when they started building Soviet-designed military and civilian aircraft under license from Moscow.


...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

delft

Brigadier
So it's yet another round of consolidating the manufacturers, but can they finally deliver a serial production model that can meet the goals?
Its a matter of giving enough talented people the resources they need. That's how it went in all other high tech industries all over the World. Have you any doubt about China having enough talented people or of its ability to provide the resources?
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
So it's yet another round of consolidating the manufacturers, but can they finally deliver a serial production model that can meet the goals?

It is easy to mock China progress in aero engine. But even Pratt& Whitney with 10 billion dollar of investment have teething problem when it introduce the new engine. Even after decades of work

This is for one single engine. Let alone China with much smaller budget and less experience in developing engine

Pratt's $10 billion jet engine stumbles in bid to dethrone GE
A Pratt & Whitney PW1000G turbofan engine sits on the wing of an Airbus A320neo aircraft in Hamburg, Germany, on Feb. 12, 2016. MUST CREDIT: Bloomberg photo by Krisztian Bocsi. (Krisztian Bocsi / Bloomberg)
Richard CloughBloomberg
It's rarely a good sign when you become the butt of jokes.

But that's what happened to Pratt & Whitney at an industry gathering recently, when John Leahy, the venerable chief salesman of Airbus Group, went on about a futuristic airplane -- with an engine that "no doubt will be delivered late."

While the audience was amused, Pratt surely wasn't. It's spent $10 billion and decades developing the quieter, more-efficient and less-polluting engine. Executives see the product as critical to catching up to rival
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in the market to power narrow-body planes, the dominant aircraft used by airlines around the world.

Instead, the engine's debut has been marred by production delays, technical issues and supply-chain foul-ups. Qatar Airways last week cited the problems while announcing plans to buy planes powered exclusively by GE turbines. Pratt was forced to cut promised deliveries this year by 25 percent, frustrating some airlines and plane manufacturers counting on them. The troubles have dinged the stock of parent
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, as Pratt's $14 billion in sales accounts for about one-quarter of its revenue.


"This is their big play to get back on single-aisles," said Cai Von Rumohr, an analyst at Cowen & Co. "This is the one that's going to have to happen if they're going to be a player in large commercial engines."

The company has characterized the production issues as "teething" problems typical to new technology. President Bob Leduc told Bloomberg in June that complaints were overblown, saying the engines in service have been reliable while meeting promises of 16 percent better fuel efficiency, 75 percent noise reduction and 50 percent less emissions.

"The engine is as we advertised, period," he said. Pratt has about 8,200 orders for the product.

Founded in 1925, Pratt has a storied history, supplying engines to early planes and later for fighters in World War II. In the 1970s Pratt was the leader in selling engines for large passenger planes. But its position slipped in the 1980s when it miscalculated the market.

By the end of that decade, Pratt engineers began work on technology to slow the engine's fan speed, which cuts noise and can improve efficiency. This year, the new engine, known as a geared turbofan, debuted in commercial service on the 180-seat Airbus A320neo (the "neo" standing for "new engine option"). Engine list price: more than $10 million apiece, say analysts.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But production issues led Pratt to revise its delivery schedule. Last month it said it would deliver only 150 engines this year, to planemakers such as Airbus and Bombardier, down from the 200 it had earlier pledged.

One of the sharpest blows came Oct. 7 when Qatar Airways made good on a threat to buy competitors to the A320neo over concerns about the delays. Chief Executive Officer Akbar Al Baker, a vocal critic of Pratt's engine issues, said his carrier would order as many as 100 Boeing Co. 737 Max jets to "mitigate our risk" on the Airbus plane. He stressed the reliability of Boeing's jet, which use engines from CFM International, a joint venture of GE and France's Safran.

Pratt's delays have forced Airbus to alter its delivery schedule, substituting 20 A320 jets with older engines in place of newer models, according to Douglas Harned, a Bernstein analyst. An Airbus representative said the company would hand over more older-version A320s this year "to make up for any shortfall on A320neo deliveries" but didn't specify the number of planes.

The engine problems "appear significant with path to resolution currently unclear," Harned wrote in a note. Pratt declined to discuss its plans to improve production processes.

Delays also forced Bombardier to halve projected 2016 deliveries of its marquee C Series jetliner. The company has a deal to use Pratt engines exclusively on the plane.

"This is very disappointing," Alain Bellemare, Bombardier's CEO, said in a speech.

But even after the various issues, Bellemare couldn't muster bad words for the engine's core technology: "I'm still very pleased that we made that choice. It's the best engine available out there today for commercial aircraft."

Pratt's rivalry with GE remains fierce. GE's Leap engine, the other option on the A320neo, debuted this year and achieves fuel savings largely through advanced materials. A320neo customers have picked GE's engine about 54 percent of the time, and Pratt the rest, according to data from Ascend Flightglobal Consultancy.

More than one-third of A320neo orders have not announced an engine choice yet, leaving plenty of sales up for grabs.

The engine's technical advances have contributed to some of the production problems. The aluminum-titanium fan blades are particularly complex, taking about 60 days to manufacture when they need to take half that time, Gregory Hayes, CEO of Farmington, Connecticut-based United Technologies, said in a presentation last month. The company is "still struggling to come down the learning curve," he said.

The introduction of new technology is bound to have glitches, experts and industry leaders say. For that reason, Hungarian low-cost carrier Wizz Air intentionally scheduled deliveries several years down the line to allow time for kinks to be worked out, according to CEO Jozsef Varadi.

"I think by the time we start taking deliveries this will all get sorted," he said in a recent interview. Wizz, which last year firmed up an order for 110 of the A321neo, targeted 2019 because "we don't want to be associated with this mess."

Pratt remains resolute, recently announcing plans to hire as many as 25,000 new workers in the next decade to work down the backlog. And joking aside, Airbus's Leahy is standing behind the company.

"I have faith that Pratt will solve" the issues, he told reporters after poking fun at the engine delays. "It is disappointing the situation we find ourselves in, but it's a good engine from everything we can see
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
It is easy to mock China progress in aero engine. But even Pratt& Whitney with 10 billion dollar of investment have teething problem when it introduce the new engine. Even after decades of work

This is for one single engine. Let alone China with much smaller budget and less experience in developing engine

It's rarely a good sign when you become the butt of jokes.

The company has characterized the production issues as "teething" problems typical to new technology. President Bob Leduc told Bloomberg in June that complaints were overblown, saying the engines in service have been reliable while meeting promises of 16 percent better fuel efficiency, 75 percent noise reduction and 50 percent less emissions.

"The engine is as we advertised, period," he said. Pratt has about 8,200 orders for the product.

By the end of that decade, Pratt engineers began work on technology to slow the engine's fan speed, which cuts noise and can improve efficiency. This year, the new engine, known as a geared turbofan, debuted in commercial service on the 180-seat Airbus A320neo (the "neo" standing for "new engine option"). Engine list price: more than $10 million apiece, say analysts.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



But even after the various issues, Bellemare couldn't muster bad words for the engine's core technology: "I'm still very pleased that we made that choice. It's the best engine available out there today for commercial aircraft."


The engine's technical advances have contributed to some of the production problems. The aluminum-titanium fan blades are particularly complex, taking about 60 days to manufacture when they need to take half that time, Gregory Hayes, CEO of Farmington, Connecticut-based United Technologies, said in a presentation last month.

Pratt remains resolute, recently announcing plans to hire as many as 25,000 new workers in the next decade to work down the backlog. And joking aside, Airbus's Leahy is standing behind the company.

"I have faith that Pratt will solve" the issues, he told reporters after poking fun at the engine delays. "It is disappointing the situation we find ourselves in, but it's a good engine from everything we can see

but if you read the specs 16% greater fuel efficiency, 75% noise reduction, and 50% fewer emissions, you have to admit the Pratt Engine is a technological marvel, don't you???

I certainly do, the problem is that they are slow at cranking them out, because quality control is so tight on this engine, it is as promised, and if you look at 16% greater range for your aircraft, with the same fuel in your tank, I would not use this as an example of a Pratt failure, in fact they are a victim of their incredible success, and not being able to keep up with demand?? that's not a bad problem to have.
 
Top