SinoSoldier
Colonel
According to pupu, the FC-31 is no longer an active project and instead the "J-35" has taken its place. When I asked him whether the new engine prototype is for the "J-35", he replied "I guess so".
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
According to pupu, the FC-31 is no longer an active project and instead the "J-35" has taken its place. When I asked him whether the new engine prototype is for the "J-35", he replied "I guess so".
While it's almost certain in reality that the WS-19 is developed with the priority of powering a "J-35", WS-19 could be put to use with or without the FC-31 project. It can be applied on existing JF-17 and UAVs projects already. Who knows what else can use a domestic medium thrust engine rather than continuing to rely on RD-33 variants. JF-17's export barriers would be lowered if it is equipped with WS-19 in future. PLAN may indeed have decided on "J-35" with a pair of WS-19s powering it but even when the engine's completed, on its own, it still wouldn't be total confirmation.
At the moment, airforces wishing to purchase either JF-17 or J-10 must consider the Russian element. How likely are they going to get access to spares, parts, and maintenance? How politically close to Russia are they? WS-10 orders for Sino-flanker types exceed supply. Unless J-10's get a proven performance and reliability track record of being powered by a WS-10, few airforces would consider it as an alternative to the current Al-31s. Catch 22 here. China's unlikely to expand WS-10 production line just to gamble on the off-chance another airforce purchases J-10 with WS-10 engine. Similar story with RD-33 and WS-19 except WS-13 is a licensed version of RD-33 which gives it even less autonomy.
At the moment, airforces wishing to purchase either JF-17 or J-10 must consider the Russian element. How likely are they going to get access to spares, parts, and maintenance? How politically close to Russia are they? WS-10 orders for Sino-flanker types exceed supply. Unless J-10's get a proven performance and reliability track record of being powered by a WS-10, few airforces would consider it as an alternative to the current Al-31s. Catch 22 here. China's unlikely to expand WS-10 production line just to gamble on the off-chance another airforce purchases J-10 with WS-10 engine. Similar story with RD-33 and WS-19 except WS-13 is a licensed version of RD-33 which gives it even less autonomy.
Eh. Russia sells weapons to basically anyone who pays for them.
There were some attempts to block the export of the RD-33 derived engines because they would be used to power aircraft which compete with the MiG-29.
But it never happened and the Russian government allows their export. I doubt they would stop now.
It is more likely countries won't buy Russian weapons for fear of US sanctions than because Russia isn't willing to sell.
The problem is the RD-33 derived engines haven't had the same kind of investment to improve their performance as the AL-31 family.
There were some attempts to block the export of the RD-33 derived engines because they would be used to power aircraft which compete with the MiG-29.
But it never happened and the Russian government allows their export. I doubt they would stop now.
It is more likely countries won't buy Russian weapons for fear of US sanctions than because Russia isn't willing to sell.
The problem is the RD-33 derived engines haven't had the same kind of investment to improve their performance as the AL-31 family.
Having the J-10's flying with a domestic engine has less to do with exports and more to do with weaning itself off of foreign technology in defense which is a priority. Is there any news of new orders of the AL-31FN from Russia ?
Apparently a three-year long contract for AL-31s and D-30s was signed in 2016, meaning the contract should be wrapping up this year. Given recent tensions, I think another contract will be signed to ensure a steady supply of engines to CAC because I have serious doubts 410 Factory can ramp up production of WS-10s to such an extent that would satisfy the PLA's appetite for J-10, J-20, and J-16s in the short to medium term.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
I don’t think we will ever see Chinese indigenous engine on J10 series for serial production
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
Never say never, who knows whether or not there will be a D or E model and what kind of upgrades or changes such models may have.
True, but I'd say Asif is spot on for quite a lengthy period!
I don't think it is necessary for a J10 with indigenous engine right now. How I see it, I think the whole thing is a chess game with Russia: China copied, fully indigenized, and improved on the Su-27 airframe. This already greatly hurt Russia's interest, because Russian exports relies on oil and weapons.
If China don't indigenize the Russian weapons like Su-27, Russian would have much larger leverage over China and her rivals (India, Vietnam, etc.). Russian could sell much watered downed weapons at much more expensive prices, all she needs to do is to assure these countries that "what they got is better than China's". If China only operates purely Russian made weaponry, those Russian assurances would be a lot more believable to those rival countries.
For example, India and Malaysia would be much more confident about Su-30MKI's advertised superiority over PLAAF aircrafts, if PLAAF only operates Su-30MKK and Russian made Su-27. However, with J-16, they can only speculate.
This said, it is not a good idea for China to antagonize Russia. So, the smart thing to do in combination of the full indigenization of Su-27 is first to promise to value Russian Friendship and don't export J-16 or J-11B for cash, and then allow Russian engine firms to have an engine supplying monopoly on the exportable J-10. This will make the Russian feel secure and thus not antagonize them.
Quickie
Colonel
One reason I can think of is the different sizes and weights of the engines involved. A heavier WS-10x would cause a shift in the center of gravity of the aircraft which would then affect its overall performance negatively enough for them to decide not to go ahead with the change.