User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 12636
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Fri May 05, 2017 4:10 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Who's up for betting that PW gets shut out of any bidding for this, relatively sooner than later?


P&W started working on the second generation GTF several years ago and aims to have it ready by 2025. They need an application for that engine.

I would love to see a Pratt. But...

Many customers of Boeing's will ask for a CFM.
RR appears to have lined up customers...

Neither Boeing or Airbus will ever offer three engines again. The added costs for three engines never pay off.

So sadly, mostly due to a poor PW1100G on wing time issues (yes, issues), Pratt will be locked out.

But indications are RR is willing to have Pratt as a junior partner. Sadly, the earlier Pratt accepts this offer, the better for them. RR has been investigating GTFs for years. Heck, Whittle proposed the idea.

Waaaaa!! I hate it when rational logic excludes my favorite. :(

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Fri May 05, 2017 7:25 pm

Devilfish wrote:
OA940 wrote:
So Boeing are looking into a 757 replacement... :hyper: :bouncy:

:shakehead: No.....a replacement for this..... ;) .....

Image
http://www.aviationexplorer.com/Various ... 67-238.jpg




Not if they are talking 40-45k thrust, that's 753 size...
 
User avatar
OA940
Posts: 468
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Fri May 05, 2017 9:51 pm

SCAT15F wrote:
Devilfish wrote:
OA940 wrote:
So Boeing are looking into a 757 replacement... :hyper: :bouncy:

:shakehead: No.....a replacement for this..... ;) .....

Image
http://www.aviationexplorer.com/Various ... 67-238.jpg




Not if they are talking 40-45k thrust, that's 753 size...


Yeah, but modern engines/materials could allow 762 sized planes.
A350/CSeries = bae
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 9870
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Tue May 09, 2017 7:54 am

Revelation wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
If I remember correctly the 787 was touted as a 757/767 replacement and its grown into a 77E replacement.

It may have been back in the 7E7 days, but by the time they were cutting metal / baking plastic it was bigger than the 767-400 and pretty much over lapping the A330 family members ( but with an eXtra wide body allowing for 9X seating in Y ). Also the thrust and MTOW ranges always made it a long range plane.



Before the 7E7 days, I expected the 787 and A350 to be MoM's.

200-250 seat aircraft in the 3000 -5000 Nm range. Longer N/S Americas stretches, North Atlantic flights, intra Asia flights etc. are growing as is demand for short range high capacity aircraft.

http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=142541

Incorrectly obvisously :shy:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20407
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Wed May 10, 2017 7:31 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Who's up for betting that PW gets shut out of any bidding for this, relatively sooner than later?


Gee, whyever? It's not as if they have managed to screw up everything BUT the gearbox (the rotor, the casing, the combustor, the oil system) on the PW1000.

It's getting harder and harder to be a PW fanboy these days.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 8540
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Wed May 10, 2017 7:37 pm

DocLightning wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Who's up for betting that PW gets shut out of any bidding for this, relatively sooner than later?

Gee, whyever? It's not as if they have managed to screw up everything BUT the gearbox (the rotor, the casing, the combustor, the oil system) on the PW1000.

...and the PW4092
......and the PW4098
.........and the PW4173
............and.... ;)
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 23585
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Thu May 11, 2017 1:12 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Who's up for betting that PW gets shut out of any bidding for this, relatively sooner than later?

P&W started working on the second generation GTF several years ago and aims to have it ready by 2025. They need an application for that engine.

Sure, but that doesn't mean they'll get one, at least in a commercial application; especially if they don't have Boeing/Airbus' confidence for reliability.


Of course, you just made it sound like P&W will give up quickly. I'm convinced they will try really hard at Boeing.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 8540
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Thu May 11, 2017 5:22 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
P&W started working on the second generation GTF several years ago and aims to have it ready by 2025. They need an application for that engine.

Sure, but that doesn't mean they'll get one, at least in a commercial application; especially if they don't have Boeing/Airbus' confidence for reliability.

Of course, you just made it sound like P&W will give up quickly. I'm convinced they will try really hard at Boeing.

I never said anything about them not trying.

Just that I'd wager any amount against their success as an exclusive provider; and to a lesser extent, being included at all.
Too many f#ckups, on too many platforms, too recently/consistently. The risk to Boeing would be incredible.

But I will say this:
if by some fluke they did succeed, then I'd give anything to read the performance guarantees+penalties in THAT contract!! :eek:
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 12636
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Mon May 15, 2017 2:20 pm

reidar76 wrote:
TP313 wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
If the engine requirements for the MOM really is between 40,000 to 45,000 lbf, then the MOM would have a MTOW somewhere around 120 and 135 t?


How do you get to these numbers? Using latest technology example (787), for 40,000 lbf I get an MTOW from 134 to 143t.


It's just an assumption based on MTOW and engine trust requirements for the nearest sized aircraft.

Thrust per 1000 kg (1 ton) .
A321LR, MTOW 97,000 kg / 35,000 lbf = 2.77 (under-winged)
787-8, MTOW 228,000 kg / 64,000 lbf = 3.56 (over-winged)

Doing the same for the A300/A310 and the 767, gives us a thrust per 1000 kg on average between 2.8 and 3.1. For the 757, 2.6 to 2.8. Bombardier CS-300, 2.91. For the larger, ultra-long range widebodies, about 3.35 on average. The latter is the number that you used.

I made a conservative assumption of 3 t per 1,000 lbf, taking into account that this aircraft should be capable of flying into smaller airports, just like the narrowbodies, considering the folding wingtips and C-gate compatibility.

I don't think there is a right or wrong here. I don't think even Boeing have decided yet. :-)

Excellent post.

Due to folding wingtips and CFRP wings, I expect the ratio of MTOW/Thrust to start beliw 3.0 and work up with MTOW increases. I fully expect a later stretch.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Mon May 15, 2017 5:13 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Who's up for betting that PW gets shut out of any bidding for this, relatively sooner than later?

Gee, whyever? It's not as if they have managed to screw up everything BUT the gearbox (the rotor, the casing, the combustor, the oil system) on the PW1000.

...and the PW4092
......and the PW4098
.........and the PW4173
............and.... ;)



Out of curiosity, what did happen to the 4073?
 
LH707330
Posts: 1687
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Mon May 15, 2017 11:10 pm

SCAT15F wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
Gee, whyever? It's not as if they have managed to screw up everything BUT the gearbox (the rotor, the casing, the combustor, the oil system) on the PW1000.

...and the PW4092
......and the PW4098
.........and the PW4173
............and.... ;)



Out of curiosity, what did happen to the 4073?

The 4173 required more titanium in some parts to deal with the higher temps, and PW didn't want to commit to making that change.

viewtopic.php?t=759305
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Tue May 16, 2017 1:12 am

Hmm. Too bad, might have been a good engine for the higher gross weight 332/333...
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 12636
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Tue May 16, 2017 2:58 am

LH707330 wrote:
SCAT15F wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
...and the PW4092
......and the PW4098
.........and the PW4173
............and.... ;)



Out of curiosity, what did happen to the 4073?

The 4173 required more titanium in some parts to deal with the higher temps, and PW didn't want to commit to making that change.

viewtopic.php?t=759305

More specifically, Pratt had to retrofit USAir's entire A330 fleet at Pratt's cost with the new parts, so that contract severely limited what Pratt was willing to change it. Sigh... My neighbor worked the PW4175! It was always intended to be the highest thrust A330 engine, but failed on compressor bleed overtemping the nacelle. Sigh...

I'm not aware of the PW4092, I know the PW4098 issues and that the PW4084 was brought up to 90k.

Let's leave the history to the actual impressive list of failures. :(

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 8540
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing discussing 40-50 klbs MoM engines with OEM's

Tue May 16, 2017 9:05 am

lightsaber wrote:
I'm not aware of the PW4092, I know the PW4098 issues and that the PW4084 was brought up to 90k.

IINM, they wanted to bring it up to 92k, but couldn't pass NOx... hence having it artificially limited within the USA. Main reason UA's PW 77Es are capped at 648K MTOWs.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos