RR Powered 787’s limited to 60 Minutes from a suitable airport

The Trent hasn't been a very good engine from what I've seen in service, and I'm not quite sure why airlines are still buying it. Of course, the GEnx had its teething pains as well, but it seems that the Trent has had some more issues relating to the fundamental design of it. Hopefully they can come up with some design fixes. If they can figure out something relating to the hot section that may not be too awful to implement... only take a couple years.
 
labbadabba said:
Odd, I thought the 787 used the new GE 9-series engines...
Click to expand...

With most airliners there are multiple engine options. You have some sole-source engine aircraft (like the 737, Embraer E-170/190, Bombardier CRJ, etc.) but most of them have offerings from GE, P&W, and RR, or at least 2 out of the 3. A lot of this comes down to business negotiations between engine manufacturers, aircraft manufacturers, and airlines. For example, some airlines prefer having engines from one particular engine manufacturer for whichever reasons (being built locally, better deals, etc.). And each engine is a little different in terms of its specific fuel consumption, weight, etc., so there are some legitimate reasons to choose one over the other from a mission profile. Sometimes there's not enough volume to support multiple engine manufacturers even if the aircraft company wants multiple options, so either the engine manufacturer will opt out entirely, or will negotiate being a sole source engine.

In the case of the 787, you have options for a GEnx or a RR Trent. The GE9X is going on the 777-8 and -9. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777X
 
As Ted says, engines, avionics are some other big ticket items are bought separately from the OEM’s. Boeing AirBus and others certified the combinations based on negotiation with the buyers, airlines or lease companies, depending on demand or availability.

The buyers then negotiate the price/performance/warranty with the OEM’s, and tell the Airframer to deliver same. The Airframers also offer a couple or more complete packages with standard parts lists for smaller outfits who might not have negotiating power.

Cheers
 
kgruber said:
I seem to recall some new jet that was being sold with used engines.
Click to expand...
Semantics fun I have with customers..... Within seconds after driving that new car or truck off the dealer's lot, you now own a collection of used auto or truck parts.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The Trent hasn't been a very good engine from what I've seen in service, and I'm not quite sure why airlines are still buying it. Of course, the GEnx had its teething pains as well, but it seems that the Trent has had some more issues relating to the fundamental design of it. Hopefully they can come up with some design fixes. If they can figure out something relating to the hot section that may not be too awful to implement... only take a couple years.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many times you've typed the words "hot section" in recent months? :D
 
While the article says the 26 April AD amendment limits 87's with specific Trent models to (sic) "60 minutes from a suitable airport" the AD itself lists the specific conditions under which the 60-minute limitation applies, and conditions under which it does *not* apply.

It is a significant issue, but not quite as represented in the article.

Nauga,
with no AD-blocker
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top