acjbbj wrote:Didn't GE say that they were calling it quits if they didn't get exclusivity?
No.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ne-446993/ says:
But Joyce remains open to calls by some airline customers for Boeing to offer the NMA with a choice of two engines.
A dual-engine programme, however, “needs a market large enough to offset expenses”, Joyce says. “We have to sharpen our pencils on the size of the market before we would or wouldn’t” commit to a programme with two engine options.
But GE firmly rejects any proposal to offer the NMA with a choice of three engines. “Three is out of the question,” Joyce says, citing the engine industry’s lessons from the Airbus A330 programme, which was introduced with thee engine options.
So it seems they grudgingly accept two engine options.
texl1649 wrote:Oh, I realize, Revelation, that GE/SNECMA are expanding their contractual relationship with this new family, To 50or 55k, I should clarify my suspicion is it is, in fact, a new family. Sure, lots of LEAP stuff, but in reality a new core engine, with GE9x tech, and, curiously, not a GTF. so, same stage numbers and architecture as LEAP basically.
It's all semantics. It's clear that ti's going to be a scaled version of LEAP, with "technology insertion". I presume that means more use of CMCs so they can boost the core temps without increasing cooling flows to create higher efficiency.
So, is a scaled up core with different materials a "new core"? Depends on your point of view. To my point of view, no, because you're re-using the architecture with little/no change. To someone who has to stock the spare parts, yes, since very few parts are re-used due to different sizes and/or materials. To the person maintaining it, kinda, because the procedures will largely be the same but the parts will be different.
GoSharks wrote:Continental767 wrote:Looks like the 797 is coming soon. Very soon. Maybe even within a month, if it follows the 787 timeline. Exciting!
You don't pick winner(s) of an RFP the day they are due..
I think there's a big misunderstanding on timelines.
https://leehamnews.com/2018/03/22/ge-cf ... ng-on-nma/ said three months ago:
“We’re in lockstep with Boeing in terms of the evaluation of their product,” (GE Aviation CEO David) Joyce told the JP Morgan conference. “They’ve given us a series of milestones they want us to hit in terms of choosing engines for their airplane and we’re complying with every one of their requests.”
So, even three months ago GE had been given a sequence in milestones and were "in lockstep" with Boeing on NMA.
Just because Jon learned the date of (presumably) the last milestone and that date is very soon doesn't mean Boeing hasn't been working with all three for many months now.
Each vendor understands the timelines, and it's up to them to decide exactly what they'll put on offer given the program timelines.
StTim wrote:If the RFP's are due back this week then the question is how long does Boeing take to do a final appraisal of the responses before picking a winner (or winners)?
I suspect that is not a two week turn around.
I suspect due to the above set of milestones Boeing has a very good idea about what to expect already and it won't take them very long to evaluate the final proposals.