No. He is telling you a fact, which is that WS-10 is based on technologies from CFM56. And no, it isn't simple, which is why WS-10's development took 20 years. This is common knowledge, and it is the reason that when foreign media circle-jerk WS-10 is an Al-31 copy, we laugh at them for not knowing sh*t.and you think is just removing the low pressure turbine cloning the engine and that`s it...
F-110 is developed from F-101's core. CFM56 is developed from F-101's core. WS-10 is reverse engineered from CFM56's core, which is the F-101's core. No one here claimed that WS-10 is CFM56, only that WS-10 has heritage with CFM56.F-101 is a bomber engine, which means is not a fighter engine, the F-110 is a fighter engine true, but it is far harder to turn the basic CFM56 into a high performance fighter engine like Al-31.
Whether you believe or not isn't going to alter the truth.What you are saying is China cloned the basic compressor/combustor of CFM56 and later turned into the WS-10, this is not even believeable, to do it you requiered to know the basic F-101 technologies and have the needed tooling to make it, which China lacked, the only engine available was Al-31, in fact the WS-10 is still uncapable to fill the role of Al-31 that new batches of Al-31 were bought.
China got CFM56 before Al-31. Design work of the WS-10 also precede the acquisition of Al-31. Thus, WS-10 being a copy of Al-31 is actually illogical.For the Chinese copying the Al-31 was something logic, first they have the engine since 1992, the WS-10 engine needs to substitute the Al-31 in jets that use it , for that reason china is looking for US tech, why they were shopping for an F-16 engine as popular mechanics quote? the reason is they lack information and technology to match even the basic Al-31.