Chinese Engine Development

by78 said:

I've read the full paper. Nowhere does it say the engine is WS-10A, so unless your source is an insider or has access to inside information, I would be careful in attributing the reliability numbers to WS-10A.

If I'm reading the paper correctly, the MTBF of 150 hours and in-flight-shutdown (IFSD) of ≤0.1 per 1000 flight hours are the navy's reliability requirements for this engine when operating in the harsh salty environment of the subtropics/tropics. However, the paper points out that they have not been able to meet these requirements –– actual MTBF and IFSD figures are 104.4 hours and 2.01/1000hr, respectively. Furthermore, the paper states that they will not be able to meet the requirements in the short term, and so in the meantime, the navy needs to figure out the provisioning rates and quantities of the various spare parts for repairing this type of engine in order to hit their aircraft availability goal.

P.S. It's important to keep in mind that MTBF depends on the definition of what constitutes a failure, which could be as small as the % of ball bearings needing replacement being above a defined threshold.

Click to expand...

by78 said:

I've read the full paper. Nowhere does it say the engine is WS-10A, so unless your source is an insider or has access to inside information, I would be careful in attributing the reliability numbers to WS-10A.

If I'm reading the paper correctly, the MTBF of 150 hours and in-flight-shutdown (IFSD) of ≤0.1 per 1000 flight hours are the navy's reliability requirements for this engine when operating in the harsh salty environment of the subtropics/tropics. However, the paper points out that they have not been able to meet these requirements –– actual MTBF and IFSD figures are 104.4 hours and 2.01/1000hr, respectively. Furthermore, the paper states that they will not be able to meet the requirements in the short term, and so in the meantime, the navy needs to figure out the provisioning rates and quantities of the various spare parts for repairing this type of engine in order to hit their aircraft availability goal.

P.S. It's important to keep in mind that MTBF depends on the definition of what constitutes a failure, which could be as small as the % of ball bearings needing replacement being above a defined threshold.

Click to expand...

test1979 said:

In view of the fact that the paper mentions being stationed on subtropical islands and the huge number of 24 aircraft, it seems that only j-11bh and J-10h are eligible. I think the paper refers to WS-10A.

Click to expand...

siegecrossbow said:

According to the latest article by Yankee they are restarting engine development for L-15. Nothing like doing things at the last minute am I right?

Click to expand...

taxiya said:

Isn't WS-17 the engine for L-15? What does restarting mean since WS-17 is an ongoing program? Has it ever been frozen?

Click to expand...

sunnymaxi said:

View attachment 101994


View attachment 101995

actually program was put on hold coz of less important project as compared to WS-10/WS-15/WS-19 and other programs. but project is back on track last year. redesigned and related technologies have finalized in late 2021 and first prototype will appear next year.

it will be quick. won't take much time.

Click to expand...

pakje said:

I'm surprised it was put in the freezer at all, wouldn't this engine be good on drones and the like

Click to expand...

sunnymaxi said:

priorities at that time and supply of engines from Ukraine made this possible.

for drones, many small firms have appeared in last 2 years for propulsion system. they have showcase a lot UAV engines in Zhuhai air show this year. read last 30 pages of this thread.

Click to expand...

pakje said:

I'm surprised it was put in the freezer at all, wouldn't this engine be good on drones and the like

Click to expand...