Chinese Engine Development


Orthan

Junior Member
Don’t believe everything you see on the internet.
You have to understand that some people here are starved for information about china´s aircraft engine program. Its natural that they grab every piece of information that they can get.

Aircraft engine with TWR of 20 is in the works and is planned for 2030.
2030? its a long road to there. And if it comes true, probably later than that.
 

siegecrossbow

Brigadier
Staff member
Super Moderator
You have to understand that some people here are starved for information about china´s aircraft engine program. Its natural that they grab every piece of information that they can get.



2030? its a long road to there. And if it comes true, probably later than that.
It will reach the same stage achieved by the America 20 TWR engine at the year 2019 by 2030.
 

ougoah

Captain
Registered Member
You have to understand that some people here are starved for information about china´s aircraft engine program. Its natural that they grab every piece of information that they can get.



2030? its a long road to there. And if it comes true, probably later than that.
If achieved by 2030, it would be an incredible feat for China. There are two nations currently capable of such a feat - UK and USA. Joining this league even in 10 years time would be rather impressive considering this isn't the only area where China has had a need to modernise and catch up in. If it were the only focus, then yes this would be rather unimpressive. Once major barriers are overcome with high bypass turbofans, at least some level of usefulness can be achieved for domestic commercial and military aviation that use high bypass.

WS-20 and CJ-1000 are the current "first step" projects. Having this other supposed goal being presented at least show a trend is being set or planned. When it comes to China setting plans or confidently showing trends being established, usually there is a much greater hope of them being achieved (if not almost always).
 

Temstar

Junior Member
Registered Member
Who is this guy? Is he credible? Does he have a track record of accuracy? Is he an industry insider? Did you go through his channel to get an idea if this guy is a credible or a crackpot? Did you verify anything before you shared this?
I've watched Shasa a bit, he's far from reliable. In fact not long ago he was spreading rumour in a video that grandson of Deng Xiaoping and son of Jiang Zemin were arrested by Xi for planning a coup. That's getting dangerously close to FLG territory.

When the Ladakh situation was tense he reported that PLA have taken Chushul Airstrip.
 

taxiya

Colonel
Registered Member
It will reach the same stage achieved by the America 20 TWR engine at the year 2019 by 2030.
Did American reached 20 TWR at 2019, meaning an engine (prototyp at least) double the TWR of F119?

The ppt is apparently taking VAATE as a benchmark. But by reading VAATE's detail, it is more of a budgetary program that will never end (itself a revival of IHPTET from 1988), and does not guarantee a target engine. I would treat the ppt in the same manner. They are more of a wish and vision rather than concrete road-map of actual engine, therefor not saying much.

Here is
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and I quote the part concerning staged goal.
The VAATE program goal reflects these requirements, specifically, that by 2017 the military user will realize a factor of ten (“10X”) improvement in turbine engine-based propulsion system affordable capability. “Affordable capability” is defined as the ratio of propulsion system capability to cost. “Capability” in this context measures technical performance parameters including thrust, weight, and fuel consumption. “Cost” quantifies the total cost of ownership, and includes development, procurement, and life cycle maintenance cost. These improvements are to be realized relative to a baseline representative of year-2000 state-of-the-art systems.
The paper is made in 2006, by 2017 it would be 10 years in progress.
In 10 years, the Capability/Cost ratio will increase 10 fold compared with a year 2000 state-of-the-art engine (F-119 and F-135). I don't see anything today that fulfills that goal.
 

latenlazy

Colonel
Did American reached 20 TWR at 2019, meaning an engine (prototyp at least) double the TWR of F119?

The ppt is apparently taking VAATE as a benchmark. But by reading VAATE's detail, it is more of a budgetary program that will never end (itself a revival of IHPTET from 1988), and does not guarantee a target engine. I would treat the ppt in the same manner. They are more of a wish and vision rather than concrete road-map of actual engine, therefor not saying much.

Here is
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and I quote the part concerning staged goal.

The paper is made in 2006, by 2017 it would be 10 years in progress.
In 10 years, the Capability/Cost ratio will increase 10 fold compared with a year 2000 state-of-the-art engine (F-119 and F-135). I don't see anything today that fulfills that goal.
Because those goals were set as aspirational targets, not technically based projections. Science and engineering as the great unknown rather than the likely feasible.
 

gelgoog

Senior Member
Registered Member
There are engines with a thrust-to-weight ratio of 1:100 available right now. In fact there have been for decades. The problem is those are LOX/Kerosene staged combustion engines which guzzle fuel. Here.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

gelgoog

Senior Member
Registered Member
Not sure if you’re being cheeky but in case you aren’t we’re talking turbofans here ;)
A bit. To be honest hearing about thrust-to-weight ratio in a turbofan of 1:20 seems kind of mythical or nonsensical. Kinda like Intel's roadmap to having 10 GHz processors by 2010. Some kind of pie in the sky goal. That would likely require using denser fuel and an alternate engine cycle. I doubt you can achieve it with a regular turbofan. Maybe something like the SABRE engine would work. You use some sort of cryogenic fuel like liquid methane to chill incoming air to liquefy it and then you burn that. Outside of rocket engines thrust-to-weight ratios like that are unheard of.

I doubt you can get to a thrust-to-weight ratio of 20 with a turbofan. Simply too many parts. I sincerely even doubt something like that is all that useful either. Human pilots would hit G limits if the acceleration was too high.
 

Top