Chinese Engine Development

SamuraiBlue said:

Not quite.
If you are going to compare engines in detail, you'll have to look at the power band since if there is not enough in the lower RPM to obtain range.
A 31% difference in weight with only 2.6% difference in power output is not promising either.

Click to expand...

Nothing is promising in the eyes of envious onlookers who don't have the innovative spirit. The engine weight is actually a small portion of the aircraft weight. How well can 79.9HP power the weight of the entire aircraft (including fuel, ordinance, pods, etc...)? Then, add 2.1HP (additional power of the HS-133); how well can 2.1 HP power the additional weight of the engine (19.2kg)? If 2.1HP can accelerate 19.2kg as quickly as 79.9HP can accelerate the entire weight of the aircraft package, then the additional weight/power of the HS-133 will have no negative effect on the same aircraft. If 2.1HP can accelerate 19.2kg at a greater rate than 79.9HP can accelerate the entire vehicle package, then it's actually a benefit! And do account for the fact that the extra 19.2kg comes with no additional wind resistance (assuming it doesn't require a larger fuselage to house) while the other 79.9HP must work against both the vehicle's weight and air resistance.

For reference, a Predator's max take off is over 1000kg when fully-loaded with ordinance, fuel, etc... and Wing Loong's is 1100kg.

stibyssip said:

The debate I've been engaging in is about why it's not unreasonable to expect state media to upsell the WS10. I've supported my views by citing aspects of the incentive/agency structure behind media in China, and explaining where there is high potential for conflict between objectivity and interest. Nowhere was I trying to convince anyone of any original, contentious viewpoint about WS10 specifically. Hope that clears things up.

Click to expand...

This was and is very clear to me. I know what you were saying. And as it is a common practice by many media, state or private, I did not intend to argue for or against it either.

What I do know is that "state media being unreliable than "free" media" is a very dangerous statement to drag this forum to endless and meaningless argument. Therefor, maybe all of us should avoid it?

As you can see, this has already dragged so long, another proof that all of us should avoid it.

Just found out that the 914 is a turbo charged version of the 912.

That's the problem with these sort of comparison. There is no way in hell a non turbo charged type of engine is going to beat a similar c.c. turbo charged one on the power-to-weight ratio.

Another thing is the power-to-weight ratio comes out differently using the specs in Wiki:

1.282 hp/kg

So, I wonder who's really inflating the figures, and with a turbo charged engine at that.

Double post.

stibyssip said:

Apparently CH5 is using an unconventional heavy fuel engine (HFE), other wise known as a hot bulb engine, producing 330HP.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The hot bulb engines use low compression ratios so that the air in the compression stroke doesn't achieve the temperature to ignite the fuel. That's why they need the hot bulb. Therefore they have a similar fuel consumption as gasoline engines and not much better as described in the Jane's article.

hot bulb engines???

superdog said:

So basically stibyssip has just posted a classic counter-example on how Chinese media is supposedly "gleefully optimistic" and will deliberately "upsell military capabilities". Reality testing right there.

Click to expand...

You know there's tons of examples to the contrary. The reality for Chinese media military reporting is that it doesn't fit absolutes when it comes to tone. I've always been willing to admit that the critical trend exists, but some arguing against me seemingly want to deny the optimistic trend does. To me it doesn't seem reasonable. The reality is that private media reporting on military and strategic affairs everywhere tends to cycle between insecurity and machismo in order to get clicks. The need to gain audience share exaggerates the swing of this cycle.

On the other hand I am glad you chose to read into the article and share your insights.

Quickie said:

Just found out that the 914 is a turbo charged version of the 912.

That's the problem with these sort of comparison. There is no way in hell a non turbo charged type of engine is going to beat a similar c.c. turbo charged one on the power-to-weight ratio.

Another thing is the power-to-weight ratio comes out differently using the specs in Wiki:

1.282 hp/kg

So, I wonder who's really inflating the figures, and with a turbo charged engine at that.

Click to expand...

THat's the problem. The Chinese still aren't good at building turbos

stibyssip said:

THat's the problem. The Chinese still aren't good at building turbos

Click to expand...

These are another off the cuff statement with no proof. China has highly developed automobile industry with all kind of Turbo charge engine. They have developed turbo charge engine for Automobile, Aircraft and ships


In addition, the major Chinese automotive turbocharger manufacturers e,g. Hunan Tyen Machinery, Kangyue Technology, Wuxi Weifu High-technology have also stepped up financing and capacity expansion, aggressively expanding gasoline engine turbocharger market, in an attempt to improve their competitiveness.

As the largest Chinese turbocharger manufacturer, Hunan Tyen Machinery has an annual capacity of 700,000 turbochargers, of which, gasoline engine turbocharger capacity has reached 100,000 units/a and that of the projects under construction totaled 200,000 units/a (going into operation in 2016). Currently, the company has achieved small-batch delivery to Mianyang Xinchen Engine, and will very likely supply goods in small batch to Chang'an and Great Wall in the second half of 2015.

Kangyue Technology, a major turbocharger manufacturer in China, embarked on turbocharger expansion project in 2014. Once reaching design capacity, it will see an additional capacity of 300,000 units/a. In March 2015, the company announced to construct gasoline engine turbocharger R&D and key components manufacturing technology upgrading project. It is to be put into operation in 2018, when the company will have an additional capacity of 300,000 units/a

stibyssip said:

THat's the problem. The Chinese still aren't good at building turbos

Click to expand...

Or they don't want to since turbo charged engine is inherently less long lasting and has shorter TBO than a non-turbo charged one? Furthermore, you don't have to built everything yourself. The rest of world's drones are using the same engine and you chose to gripe about the Chinese using it and not their own engine?