Chinese turbofan history goes way beyond the 1990s.
China had a long series of turbofan projects. Again from Jane’s:
Over the past three decades the Chinese aerospace industry has developed a number of turbofan aero-engines: WS5, WS6, WS6A, Number 4 Lift-fan, WS8, and WS9. While a number of these were less than successful and did not see deployment, valuable experience was gained for more current efforts.
The WS5 turbofan was developed from the WP6 turbojet by the Shenyang Aero-Engine Research Institute and the Chinese Aeronautical Establishment during the late 1960s and early 1970s to re-engine the H-5 bomber, but while apparently successfully developed to the prototype stage, did not see certification. The WS6 was a domestic design also developed by Shenyang during the 1960s. However, WS6 development was delayed by the Cultural Revolution, and while prototypes were developed in the early 1980s they did not see certification.
The WS8 was a front-fan, axial flow, two spool turbofan type with a short bypass duct developed by the Chengdu Aero-Engine Factory and Shanghai Aero-Engine Factory during the early 1970s as the proposed power plant for the domestic Y-10 heavy transport aircraft.
New machining and welding production techniques were used in its development, as was the use of titanium alloy (17 per cent of engine weight), and new surface treatments such as Ni-Cd diffused coating against corrosion at moderate temperatures, graphite varnish, and aluminising siliconizing of turbine blades against high-temperature corrosion. As the Y-10 did not reach full production, and the two prototype aircraft were powered by foreign aero-engines, the WS8 did not reach certification. However, infrastructure constructed for its development in Shanghai was retrofitted to be a standard open test bed for the thrust calibration of new aero-engines.
A major aero-engine milestone for China was the mid-1970s purchase of the manufacturing license for the Rolls-Royce Spey MK202 turbofan (developed from the commercial Spey MK511, and used on RAF F-4 Phantom fighters and US A-7 attack aircraft). This technology transfer purchase was made with the recognition of the steadily declining level of Chinese aero-engine technology by international standards. The Chinese designation for this aero-engine was WS9. It was produced by the Xi’an Aero-Engine Factory, with massive technical assistance from various sub-suppliers, institutes, colleges and universities in Shaanxi Province to produce toolings and translate technical documents (translation and copying of 420,000 pages of documentation, plus 30,000 tooling design drawings and manufacture).
China’s basic trainer. Originated from the Yak, it really isn’t one.
Read this:
http://home.earthlink.net/~yak52driver/goolsby/goolsby.html
The CJ6A was actually designed by the same team that designed China’s first jet trainer, the JJ-1.
The origins aside, the CJ6A is crazy popular among aviators. People who fly have incredible praise for it.
http://www.yakity.com/frames.asp?rurl=/oriental.shtm
While almost any year CJ-6A is a good design, certainly any aircraft manufactured after 1970 is a phenomenal example of simplistically good workmanship. It is built like the proverbial brick smoke shed, with trailing link landing gear and a pneumatic system rather than hydraulic for just about everything that moves. It has to be experienced to be believed.
…
Because the CJ6A is so aerodynamically smooth, it can enter most aerobatics maneuvers with surprisingly low energy. This factor makes any planned maneuver very graceful and recovery from those unplanned maneuvers easily accomplished. She will Hammerhead as if you are guiding the reins on a dressage horse, loop with so little energy a first time aerobatics passenger will hardly notice the “g” load, but will pull six of those “g’s” with very light pressure and turn inside of itself when you want it to. She has no inverted oil system, but then neither does the AT-6 at a price of several hundred K. If you want to travel cross-country upside-down, join the circus. The CJ, like most military trainers, will keep a normal person suspended upside-down for as long as is enjoyable.
Comparing the Yak 52 and the CJ6A:
Both are fine aircraft. The Yak 52 has a 360 hp engine with a wood and composite climb performance propeller, which cruises at 130 Kts at 18 gallons per hour for 1.3 hours; will do neat hammer-head stalls and aerobatics maneuvers at 8.0 positive and 3.0 negative “Gs”, and will climb 300 fpm faster than the CJ-6A. (The buyer must be cognizant that there are 5.0 positive “G” limited aircraft out there and this is not always indicated by the seller) The CJ-6A has an all metal constant speed combination cruise and climb propeller attached to a 285 hp engine which burns 12.5 gallons at 150 Kts cruise for a duration of 2.5 hours or with the extended range tanks, for 5.0 hours. The CJ-6A will do all military acrobatic or air-combat maneuvers at 6.5 positive and 3.0 negative “Gs” with a power to weight ratio which will allow the most beautiful, low stress, 3 “G’ loop allowing you to take novice flyers up for aerobatics which will not cause a review of their lunch.
…
The 52 is two feet three inches shorter with three feet less wing-span, looks like the civilian trainer it is and has much smaller cockpits. The CJ-6A is sleek, trim, looks like a fighter and easily seats two six foot men with parachutes.
What do you think now?
You should read the CJ6A reviews, Crobato. People love this plane and they are all over the US, Australia and the rest of the West.
Owning a plane that was used to train PLAAF pilots of course is an attraction.
Acig has an interesting picture of the Peruvian Y-12 in action.
Y-12
Caption:
FAP Harbin Y-12 and AEP Mi-8 seen at Ciro Alegria, together with Peruvian Army reinforcements deployed in the area. (via Esteban Rivera)
What a nice Peruvian Y-12!
Good answer, John. Though we had said the same thing in the previous thread.
There is no such thing as a “review” clearing house for aircraft (like there is for movies.)
The best proof is a customer base with repeat users and a long tradition of exporting.
As highsea said, how funny is that, congratulations! You just adopt another god. But to me, that’s no different, u’d better say as you said, because I know u better than that anonymity , so I’ll use ur concrete logic u love to use: before you come out any concrete proof saying that WS10 is based on any Russian core engine, I won’t answer any of ur nonsense
Let’s see the WS-10 program started in the 1980s during the height of US-Chinese collaboration and according to Jane’s Aircraft and Propulsion
The Shenyang Aero-Engine Factory began the subcontract manufacture of the General Electric CF6 and CFM56 commercial turbofan
aero-engines during the early 1980s. To meet GE specifications, Shenyang put in place quality and advanced manufacturing systems to
meet US airworthiness standards. GE also provided a contract to the Xi’an Aero-Engine Company to manufacture the turbine discs for the
LM2500 naval and industry gas-turbine engine.
Perhaps China did learn a bit from the AL-31 but the core most definitely came from the CFM56 since the project started when the USSR was still an enemy.
just wonderng. how can one differentiate between J-6 and MiG-19?
The pitot tube on the starboard side on a MiG-19 is on the port side on the F-6.
If you are wondering about the picture, Vietnam never received any MiG-19s. They got MiG-21s from the USSR and the F-6 from China.
WS-10A is certified. It’s a F-110 class engine with 32,000kg of thrust. Higher than the AL-31.
And it’s certified because it’s been flying around in a J-11 for the past two years.
The J-11 flew in China and not some other country because China have the best facilities in Asia (outside possibly Japan) to test and produce its own engines.
Originally Posted by GoldenDragon
So yeah, Sean, everyone knew the official answer. But that answer made as little sense just as the explanation of the CIA goofing up the Belgrade Embassy bombing.You’re still operating on the assumption that the bombing was an accident. Officially, hell yes, you say it was a big mistake. Unofficially? Wouldn’t have suprised me if it was done on purpose. Maybe there were certain aircraft parts inside the building that nobody wanted to see delivered to Chengdu or Shenyang in the PRC. Or maybe it was really an accident. That’s one incident we’ll probably never know the full, complete story behind I think.
No, read what I said. People are operating on the assumption that the attack was deliberate and the official answer of the CIA goof-up as preposterous. Just as the explanation of the US not releasing the AMRAAMs to Taiwan to keep the situation from escalating is clearly phoney.
The reason behind not releasing the AMRAAMs is US fears that Taiwanese loyal to China will pass along an AMRAAM (just like the AIM-9 was probably passed along — in spite of equally preposterous official story of a Sidewinder getting stuck in a J-6 without exploding.)
Just kidding. Here’s a former North Vietnamese Air Force J-6.
I have an interview posted in the CDF that says that 04 has flown already.
Interesting, indeed!
GoldenDragon,
Do you have any pictures from vietnam?
Yes, I do! But wait till I get to V 😀
As pictures are worth a thousand and one words, let’s go through the highly enjoyable task of posting at least one aircraft from all the nations that was exported to!!!
Please join in if you also have pictures!
A is for Albania!
An Albanian J-5!!!
Although not considered as advance as Western counterparts, Chinese exports are well received as over 40 years of exporting shows.
For example, beginning with aircraft to Pakistan in the 1960s to Albania in the 1970s to Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in the 1980s to Egypt in the 1990s and Zimbabwe in the new millenium, Chinese aircraft occupies a growing role in arming the developing world.
Hundreds of aircraft sold over a period of four decades. Suffice it to say that there is no greater proof of customer satisfaction.