China Flanker Thread II
- Thread starter sumdud
- Start date
- Status
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
??
WS-10As already equip the vast majority of J-11Bs, even if no more WS-10As are equipped on new fighters I consider it a success. The few photos of new J-16s we have also indicate them equipped with WS-10As.
WS-20 derived from WS-10 is already in its final stages of testing onboard the Il-76 testbed, if anything, the future for the Taihang series looks quite bright.
??
WS-10As already equip the vast majority of J-11Bs, even if no more WS-10As are equipped on new fighters I consider it a success. The few photos of new J-16s we have also indicate them equipped with WS-10As.
WS-20 derived from WS-10 is already in its final stages of testing onboard the Il-76 testbed, if anything, the future for the Taihang series looks quite bright.
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
Err that article gets it wrong when it says there have been plans to equip all Russian engines with WS-10A. Replacing all Al-31s with WS-10As is impossible and frankly impractical and useless.
I'm not sure what the writer was smoking, but I want some of it.
----
No one's saying the Chinese engine industry is less advanced than the US, Europe and Russia, but WS-10A is still proving a relative success in being able to equip all new build land based flankers.
Er, no, because WS-10A is already in decent numbers of service at present; all new J-11Bs and J-16s are powered by WS-10A and there seems to be no indication of that changing.
It is also unrealistic to believe Taihang can equip all PLA fighters using Al-31s, I'm not sure where you came up with that measure for WS-10's success. Maybe they can't produce enough of them, or maybe the newest Al-31 engine is simply a little bit better. The problem is that engine selection for a fighter isn't necessarily indicative of its "success" or "failure".
Err that article gets it wrong when it says there have been plans to equip all Russian engines with WS-10A. Replacing all Al-31s with WS-10As is impossible and frankly impractical and useless.
I'm not sure what the writer was smoking, but I want some of it.
----
No one's saying the Chinese engine industry is less advanced than the US, Europe and Russia, but WS-10A is still proving a relative success in being able to equip all new build land based flankers.
Er, no, because WS-10A is already in decent numbers of service at present; all new J-11Bs and J-16s are powered by WS-10A and there seems to be no indication of that changing.
It is also unrealistic to believe Taihang can equip all PLA fighters using Al-31s, I'm not sure where you came up with that measure for WS-10's success. Maybe they can't produce enough of them, or maybe the newest Al-31 engine is simply a little bit better. The problem is that engine selection for a fighter isn't necessarily indicative of its "success" or "failure".
Last edited:
Hyperwarp
Captain
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
PLAAF & PLAN continue to induct J-11B & variants powered by WS-10. WS-10 is inferior to Russian engines especially the AL-31FN series 3 in the J-10B and the "140kN" class MMPP Sulat engines in the J-20 but, if WS-10 was a "lost cause" or "total failure" PLAAF & PLAN is NOT going to risk fielding aircraft powered by WS-10. Thats way too risky in so many ways.
The only engines Russia provides "flankers" are spares for Su-27/30, J-11A. If the Russians lift the exports restrictions to SAC and the PLAAF/PLAN suddenly decided they wanted only Russian engines for J-11/J-15/J-16, then certainly YES, WS-10 can be called a lost cause because it shows a major lack of confidence by the PLAAF/PLAN towards WS-10. But that is not the case yet. Will see in 5-years time.
J-10/10B, J-20 will sport Russian engines for the foreseeable future. In fact CAC & MMPP Sulat have a close relationship.
PLAAF & PLAN continue to induct J-11B & variants powered by WS-10. WS-10 is inferior to Russian engines especially the AL-31FN series 3 in the J-10B and the "140kN" class MMPP Sulat engines in the J-20 but, if WS-10 was a "lost cause" or "total failure" PLAAF & PLAN is NOT going to risk fielding aircraft powered by WS-10. Thats way too risky in so many ways.
The only engines Russia provides "flankers" are spares for Su-27/30, J-11A. If the Russians lift the exports restrictions to SAC and the PLAAF/PLAN suddenly decided they wanted only Russian engines for J-11/J-15/J-16, then certainly YES, WS-10 can be called a lost cause because it shows a major lack of confidence by the PLAAF/PLAN towards WS-10. But that is not the case yet. Will see in 5-years time.
J-10/10B, J-20 will sport Russian engines for the foreseeable future. In fact CAC & MMPP Sulat have a close relationship.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
Just because China has a viable domestic engine alternative to Russian engines does not mean the PLA is going to change every single engine at the snap of a finger.
Engines takes a long time to build, and contracts are signed years before the final engine is delivered.
China is not going to just write off brand new engines just because a domestic alternative has become available.
In addition, China has built up vast supply chains, repair facilities and qualified technicians dedicated to Al31s. Not all of that is easily convertible to service WS10As so it makes logistical sense to keep using AL31s, maybe even to the point of buying new engines to avoid having to scrap large quantities of expensive bespoke parts and tools.
Just because China has a viable domestic engine alternative to Russian engines does not mean the PLA is going to change every single engine at the snap of a finger.
Engines takes a long time to build, and contracts are signed years before the final engine is delivered.
China is not going to just write off brand new engines just because a domestic alternative has become available.
In addition, China has built up vast supply chains, repair facilities and qualified technicians dedicated to Al31s. Not all of that is easily convertible to service WS10As so it makes logistical sense to keep using AL31s, maybe even to the point of buying new engines to avoid having to scrap large quantities of expensive bespoke parts and tools.
Schumacher
Senior Member
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
Why waste time with western sources like janes on PLA ? It's just regurgitation of ancient news on WS10 to help western fanboys sleep better especially with western, mainly usa, fighter jets and engine projects looking more like a lost cause day by day.
Why waste time with western sources like janes on PLA ? It's just regurgitation of ancient news on WS10 to help western fanboys sleep better especially with western, mainly usa, fighter jets and engine projects looking more like a lost cause day by day.
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
Because we grew up with Janes, and they continue to provide one of the more reliable sources for real information, not perfect, but far better than most historically!
Because we grew up with Janes, and they continue to provide one of the more reliable sources for real information, not perfect, but far better than most historically!
Blackstone
Brigadier
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
The argument isn't about jet engine sophistication, but their quality, dependability, and airworthiness.
Can you link some credible sources for your claim?
The argument isn't about jet engine sophistication, but their quality, dependability, and airworthiness.
So find some Chinese reports that gives different accounts to Jane's Defense. While I generally like your posts and respect your knowledge, you still need to link credible sources to counter Jane's article.
Blackstone
Brigadier
Re: Shenyang J-31 Fighter
So, what sources do you say are better? Link some recent publications from those sources for discussion and debate.
So, what sources do you say are better? Link some recent publications from those sources for discussion and debate.
asif iqbal
Banned Idiot
China's growing air power
J11B, J16 and J31 when compared
Note how small the J31 is
[SUB][/SUB]
J11B, J16 and J31 when compared
Note how small the J31 is
- Status