Help support TMP

"China Closes The Jet Engine Gap For Its Fighters" Topic

9 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2009-present) Message Board

Areas of Interest


Featured Hobby News Article

Featured Ruleset

Featured Workbench Article

Adam Paints the Brigadier

Adam8472 Fezian takes inspiration from Doctor Who.

Featured Profile Article

Iraq 2005

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian plays Ambush Alley at Council of Five Nations.

Current Poll

Featured Book Review

407 hits since 11 Jan 2020
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP11 Jan 2020 10:35 p.m. PST

"Ongoing difficulty in producing a high-quality indigenous jet engine remains a major issue for the PLAAF, for now

The Chinese defense industrial base is infamous for its tendency to "borrow" from foreign designs, particularly in the aerospace industry.

Almost the entirety of China's modern fighter fleet have either borrowed liberally from or directly copied foreign models…"
Main page


JMcCarroll12 Jan 2020 11:00 a.m. PST

You do when you have the latest blueprints of a Western nation's engine.

Personal logo jdginaz Supporting Member of TMP12 Jan 2020 1:14 p.m. PST

There is a big leap from having the blueprints to being able to reliably manufacture the needed parts

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP12 Jan 2020 2:51 p.m. PST



14th NJ Vol Supporting Member of TMP12 Jan 2020 2:57 p.m. PST

All they did was buy the latest commercial airliners & that gave them access to a ton of technology. As mentioned above however, copying & getting it right is a long series of trial & error. Especially the metallurgy.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP13 Jan 2020 12:44 a.m. PST

The correct term is "stolen", as in Intellectual Property theft.

"Russia insists that extensive IP protections safeguard the ALS-117 from Chinese reverse engineering".

Ha, ha, that's a good one.

I don't see why the Chinese won't be willing to "break", or surgically dismember an engine or two, so that they can get into the interior, in order to see how it is designed, if they can then copy them, and make their own.

They've clearly not been worried about doing so in the past.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP13 Jan 2020 12:02 p.m. PST



Lion in the Stars13 Jan 2020 4:15 p.m. PST

Heck, just the standard maintenance requirements will tell you a lot about how to build the engine…

arealdeadone13 Jan 2020 5:49 p.m. PST

Heck, just the standard maintenance requirements will tell you a lot about how to build the engine…

Not really. It doesn't tell you how to build those parts or metallurgical compositions. Both are key to performance. This is why up to recently Chinese jet engines had very poor lifespans (even poorer than Russians*) and poor performance.

*To be fair Soviet engines were designed with better performance than Western ones but at the expense of lifespan. Let's not forget the Soviets built aircraft on the basis they won't last long, either being superseded quickly (as happened in period 1949-79) or in war shot down very quickly.

The Russians have been extending engine lifespans for some time now as airforces don't replace aircraft for anywhere up to 40 years and large scale warfare is currently extinct.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.