WS-10 isn't completely reliable either, it seems. But at least it seems to be more reliable than AL-31 variants.
PLA Air Force news, pics and videos
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
WS-10 isn't completely reliable either, it seems. But at least it seems to be more reliable than AL-31 variants.
Certainly does not reflect well on WS-10, PLAAF maintenance, or both. We hardly ever hear of engine (or other hardware) failure leading to losses in western airforces. Although we can't expect things to be already perfect now, all these losses including AL-31 caused, reveals there exist some serious problems.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
That is not true there are engine problem too in western fighter. Early in development there are 2 crashes of F16 attributed to engine failure. I can dig it But anyway here is Henri K take on the accident. Accident do happen and this is the first time involving WS10 We just have to wait for the detail. RIP
A young fighter pilot of the Chinese Air Force died in an accident of his jet fighter J-11B in early November in Xinjiang Province. The incident came to light thanks to a report from the local press in his hometown, Li County, north of Hunan Province, which followed the ceremony of returning the body in the traditional way.
As no official statement has been issued for two weeks by the Chinese authorities, so we still don't know some details of this incident a priori ranked level 1, which means the irreparable loss of the aircraft and the death of the crew under 48 hours after the accident.
A heavyweight single-seat fighter jet of the Chinese Air Force
The HUANG driver and his wife
Two PLAAF lieutenant colonels attend the funeral rite.
The cemetery where HUANG rests, the young J-11B pilot.
The funeral ceremony
Captain HUANG Peng (黄鹏), 30, was one of the squadron leaders of the 111th Brigade, an elite unit of the Western Operational Theater Command based in Korla, in the province of Xinjiang. At the time of the fatal accident, he and the other J-11B aircraft of his unit were in rotational training and stationed at Hotan, which is home to one of the largest air bases in western China and bordering the disputed area of Jammu and Kashmir.
We unfortunately know very little about what really happened. Rumors speak of the failure on one of the two Chinese J-11B WS-10 engines and the pilot reportedly attempted to bring the aircraft back to the ground, but that remains to be confirmed. We only know that the HUANG J-11B crash occurred on November 7 in the afternoon during a combat patrol over the Tarim Basin.
This last point is consistent with a message to aircrafts (NOTAM) which indicates the presence of a no-fly zone, that day, within a radius of 280 km around the Hotan Air Base. HUANG's deadly accident should therefore take place between 12:00 and 20:50 Beijing time, by gathering the elements disseminated by the local press and the content of this NOTAM.
A3363 / 17
Q) ZWUQ / QRTLP / IV / BO / W /
000/331 / A) ZWUQ B) 1711070200 C) 1711071250
D) 0200-0730 1110-1250
E) AREA WITHIN A CIRCLE CENTERED TO HOTAN VOR 'HTN' WITH
RADIUS OF 280KM CLSD AT 10100M AND BELOW (EXCEPT ATS RTE W187, B215 AND A364).
F) FL000 G) FL331
An area of 280 km around Hotan Air Base had been closed to any access on November 7 for military activities (Image: East Pendulum)
Note that the 111th Brigade where the young J-11B fighter pilot served has just won a gold helmet and third place at the "Sky Hawk" Cup, two annual competitions of the Chinese Air Force. to select his best pilots for aerial combat.
And the fatal crash of HUANG does not seem to have affected the maneuvers of the PLAAF in Hotan, since, still according to the NOTAM (A3506 / 17), a new zone is closed again today within a radius of 300 km around the Chinese air base, indicating that the military air activities in the base were not stopped.
Henri K.
Aww man, that's sad and bad news...! Maybe it was a combination of Engine failure and Human Error, while trying to salvage the Aircraft? I thought the second Engine on the Flankers should give it enough power to at least get to safe ground. Well, I'm sure the PLAAF will take this incident seriously and maybe more details will be available soon.
Has a very young and pretty wife too... I feel so bad for him and his family.
They need to seriously curtail the "aircraft saving" culture in PLAAF. Losing a potential ACE pilot is way worse than even losing a multi-million dollar aircraft.
RIP pilot. Thankfully steered away from civilians?
I know there are problems with western engines too especially in early days. This doesn't take away from the fact WS-10 is far from perfect. I know none of us really expected it to be a 100% product given it is early days for China's turbofan industry. Just sad to know about loss of life, J-11b, and problem with WS-10.
China aims to be without these kinds of problems eventually and it's certainly been making progress and hopefully continues to. Comparing deficiencies shouldn't be the way China deals with problems. It also thankfully isn't.
I know there are problems with western engines too especially in early days. This doesn't take away from the fact WS-10 is far from perfect. I know none of us really expected it to be a 100% product given it is early days for China's turbofan industry. Just sad to know about loss of life, J-11b, and problem with WS-10.
China aims to be without these kinds of problems eventually and it's certainly been making progress and hopefully continues to. Comparing deficiencies shouldn't be the way China deals with problems. It also thankfully isn't.
Do we know if Russian losses of flankers are at a similar rate adjusted for flanker population/ training hours? It seems to me like they don't suffer from many losses at all although I could be wrong. Comparing J-10's AL-31 failures to Russian fighter AL-31 failures seems like they are doing a better job maintaining them or building them better for RuAF. Yes twin engined Su-27 variants are going to have fewer losses compared to single engined J-10s and this is the first we've heard of modernised WS-10 failure leading to loss. So comparing the two engines, I wonder what the loss rate could be if WS-10 powered single engine J-10. Perhaps an important factor why CAC and PLAAF did not go with WS-10 for J-10. So more likely there are deficiencies with the actual engine itself rather than maintenance since we know well trained maintenance crew for China wouldn't cost nearly as much compared to others and maintenance would also be done to a more than decent enough level for PLAAF.
Equation
Lieutenant General
One single WS-10 engine lost power for the first time and you already getting dramatic about it and some how made up your mind that it is therefore deficient, meanwhile you disregard the history of other countries jet engines that had failed every year from all over the world as well?
Like I mentioned in case people misinterpret my words as China bashing, this incident is NOT some grand revelation and confirmation of weak Chinese engine manufacturing. It is however a revelation that either there might be some flaw with WS-10 (they will probably need to investigate and possibly correct if confirmed) and/or something up with maintenance. Likely one and/or the other. It could also be nothing serious at all given the rarity of WS-10 failure. Following on from the first possibility, perhaps this should add weight to the speculation that J-10 does not use WS-10 due to some possible problems or less than ideal reliability for single engine fighter. Who cares if the reality is WS-10 is rubbish and hugely flawed. Even if that were the case, it represents a great achievement and does not take away the tools China now has to get on top of things eventually. They are definitely doing that and almost certainly will achieve all it wants to. Save the explanations for people who actually believe in the real anti-Chinese rhetoric.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
The loss of 1 J-11B, even if confirmed to be due to WS-10A malfunction has no implications at all on the design or reliability of the engine. We draw conclusions from trends (higher crash rate, failure rate, etc...), not singular events. Singular events can be caused by any number of things including pilot error, maintenance error, system errors leading to engine failure (ie. electrical issue), one-off manufacturing error, etc...
A couple of years back, there was some discussion about how WS-10A was such a reliable design that it never failed because there were no reports of WS-10A-engined crashed. But since it was mounted primarily on twin-engined aircraft, that is not actually determinable since the loss of 1 engine would not necessarily result in a crash. Based on this (lack of) data, there really isn't any way to conclude how reliable the WS-10A is, compared to any design including the AL-31. The best I can give is perhaps to say that WS-10A does not seem to be exceptionally unreliable since this is the first time in many years of operation that a failure was known to the public. The uncertainty in that statement would be whether or not or how many engine-outs had occurred unreported because the aircraft was safely landed. Only 1 thing is certain: there are no engines in the world that never fail.
A couple of years back, there was some discussion about how WS-10A was such a reliable design that it never failed because there were no reports of WS-10A-engined crashed. But since it was mounted primarily on twin-engined aircraft, that is not actually determinable since the loss of 1 engine would not necessarily result in a crash. Based on this (lack of) data, there really isn't any way to conclude how reliable the WS-10A is, compared to any design including the AL-31. The best I can give is perhaps to say that WS-10A does not seem to be exceptionally unreliable since this is the first time in many years of operation that a failure was known to the public. The uncertainty in that statement would be whether or not or how many engine-outs had occurred unreported because the aircraft was safely landed. Only 1 thing is certain: there are no engines in the world that never fail.