Thread: JF-17 what will power it?

To indianguy4u,

I normally do not call people out; however, you simply got on my nerves by bringinging up J-10/WS-10 in every single Chinese thread even though those threads didn't even have anything to do with J-10.

Anyhow, strategypage is one of the most unreliable source for Chinese news you can find. It's almost equivalent to wikipedia. People who write about those articles are not professionals. I would find someone like Richard Fisher to be more authentic on these news. For news on J-10, even dedicated PLA sites like sinodefense and professional military news sites like JDW get news wrong all the time, how can you possible put your weight on strategypage.

Let's put it this way, the original J-10 tried to fly in 1996 (rather than 1998 as mentionned in that strategypage article). It tried to fly with WS-10, but the engine failed, so that's why China had to go with AL-31F for its first successful flight in 1998. The first AL-31FN did not come to China until the batch 54 in 2003. Note, AL-31FN did not come to China until 2003. FN is different from F, because the gearbox is situated on the bottom I think.
http://mil.jschina.com.cn/huitong/J-10_J-11_FC-1.htm
WS-10A is an evolution of WS-10

This is a Chinese article on the development of WS-10/10A.
http://news.sinopart.com.cn/newsuplo...p/10006985.htm

Of course, people tend to assume that Chinese sites lie, so I will just post more stuff below.

On WS-10's CFM-56 connection. Yes HighSea, you are right about the CFM-56 part. This is what the US national security had to say
http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/h...l/ch10bod.html
"In 1983, the PRC legally acquired two General Electric CFM-56 jet engines, ostensibly to analyze the engines for a potential civil aircraft upgrade program. In the course of the export licensing process, the Defense Department insisted on restricting the PRC's use of the engines. Under the terms of the licensing agreement:

No technical data was to be transferred with the engines; the Chinese were not to disassemble the engines; and finally, if the Trident [civil aircraft] retrofit program had not begun within 1 year of the engines' arrival, the engines were to be repurchased by the manufacturer. In addition, the Chinese offered to retrofit engines at a Shanghai commercial aircraft facility where GE personnel would be able to monitor Chinese progress.87

Defense Department officials were concerned because the CFM-56 hot sections are identical to those used in the engines that power the U.S. F-16 and B-1B military aircraft.88

The PRC later claimed that the CFM-56 engines were destroyed in a fire.89 More likely, however, is that the PRC violated the U.S. end-use conditions by reverse engineering part of the CFM-56 to develop a variant for use in combat aircraft.90"

Again, this entire incident happened before the start of the development of WS-10.

As for doubting the picture I uploaded, that's fine. I will just show you a comparison from a Chinese military magazine on the specs of WS-10 vs the other engines. Note, this is a scanned photo of the article. I attached the entire page and just the comparison table.
entire page

Just the comparison table part (with red letters for English translation, you can ask OOE to confirm that the translations are good)

The first 3 engines are WS-10A, F-110 and AL-31F respectively. You can make your own decision on which engine WS-10A is more close to.

This is another comparison table between F-100, F-110, ALF-31F and WS-10. Note, the F-110 engine here is an earlier version, so the specs are slightly lower than the preivous table

Again, if you do a careful comparison, you can see that WS-10 is the closest to F-110. The most telling part is the comparison of the core shape.
I believe that's the 16th row.
For F-100, F-110 and WS-10, they are all saying 短环形 (meaning Short ring-like using babelfish translation). AL-31F says 环形 (meaning right-like using babelfish)

I think that's talking about the shape of the core compartment?
Also, the line below talks about the shape of the afterburner compartment? In this place, the description of WS-10 and F-110 are exactly the same.

You know it as well as I do that developing a turbofan engine is not easy. Is it really believable that China can copy AL-31FN in less than 10 years, when it couldn't copy Spey for 20 years?

Anyhow, you have to understand that I have no motivation in lying about WS-10's origin. I freely admit that WS-9 is copied from Spey and that WS-13A is based on RD-93 for the most part. I personally believe that WS-10 took a lot from CFM-56 and then later probably got some help in completing the engine by studying AL-31FN. If you don't reach the same conclusion, I respect that; I would just disagree.

Just a note, I'm going to post the picture of QC-185, which is similar to the core used on WS-10A

Maybe someone more qualified can explain which this looks more similar to.