Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5686740/

Topic: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Tristan7977
Posted 2013-02-10 13:54:31 and read 19295 times.

I've noticed there are very few 757's that have the Pratt & Whitney engine option. What were the airlines that had P&W powered 757's? I'm new to Airliners.net so pardon me if this is a commonly answered question.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: CF-CPI
Posted 2013-02-10 13:58:25 and read 19290 times.

Big ones are Delta and United(pre-merger).

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: skymiler
Posted 2013-02-10 13:59:58 and read 19292 times.

All of DL's have P&W -- and it is one of the largest fleets! They took the former TWA 752's from AA as they were oddballs in AA's RR powered fleet, and are not afraid to add PW powered 752's on an opportunistic basis

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: EireRock
Posted 2013-02-10 14:00:08 and read 19257 times.

Air Italy also operated a few PW2000 powered 757's

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Tristan7977
Posted 2013-02-10 14:05:04 and read 19216 times.

Delta of course, United pre-merger of course, and Air Force One 757 I think.

I never knew Air Italy had PW 757's. Any others? Or is that it.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Tristan7977
Posted 2013-02-10 14:08:10 and read 19180 times.

FedEx has a few PW 757's I believe, but it was mostly RR.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: hotplane
Posted 2013-02-10 14:12:44 and read 19135 times.

Ethiopian, UPS, Uzbekistan.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-02-10 14:23:06 and read 19055 times.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Thread starter):
I've noticed there are very few 757's that have the Pratt & Whitney engine option. What were the airlines that had P&W powered 757's?

From Boeing orders/deliveries data, original 757 customers with P&W engines (number of aircraft in parentheses):

Condor (17 752s; their 13 753s are R-R)
Delta (116)
Ethiopian (5)
Far Eastern Air Transport (Taiwan) (7)
ILFC (Leasing company) (38; also 44 R-R)
Northwest (72)
Shanghai Airlines (13)
TWA (14)
United (98)
UPS (first 35; last 40 are R-R)
USAF (4)
Uzbekistan Airlines (3)

That's 40% of all 757s built. I don't consider that "very few".

[Edited 2013-02-10 14:26:21]

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: akelley728
Posted 2013-02-10 14:35:12 and read 18970 times.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Thread starter):
I've noticed there are very few 757's that have the Pratt & Whitney engine option

432 out of 1089 757s produced (40%) had the PW2000 series engine.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Thread starter):
What were the airlines that had P&W powered 757's?

These were the airlines that ordered P&W 757s:

AWAS  (Ireland) 20
Delta Air Lines  (USA) 116
Ethiopian Airlines  (Ethiopia) 5
Far Eastern Air Transport  (Taiwan) 7
ILFC  (USA) 38
Mid East Jet  (Saudi Arabia) 1
Northwest Airlines  (USA) 72
Royal Air Maroc  (Morocco) 2
Shanghai Airlines  (China) 13
Singapore Airlines  (Singapore) 4
TWA  (USA) 14
United Air Lines  (USA) 133
US Air Force  (USA) 4
Uzbekistan Airways  (Uzbekistan) 3

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: PM
Posted 2013-02-10 14:43:50 and read 18917 times.

This comes up every year or two. I always enjoy it when it does.   

1049 produced

617 (59%) with RR

432 (41%) with PW


56 original customers

4 (AWAS, ILFC, Condor, UPS) bought both PW and RR

40 chose RR (77%)

12 chose PW (23%)

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: JohnClipper
Posted 2013-02-10 14:58:41 and read 18829 times.

how much of a difference in the engine performance?

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: hotplane
Posted 2013-02-10 15:14:20 and read 18764 times.

Early Eastern frames had their original RRs replaced with the later version.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: shuttle9juliet
Posted 2013-02-10 15:18:51 and read 18738 times.

Quoting hotplane (Reply 11):

BA bought all if not most of Easterns RB211 535c s

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-02-10 15:24:05 and read 18695 times.

NW was a Pratt 757 operator too. United, Delta and Northwest Orient were the 3 big P and W airlines.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: platinumfoota
Posted 2013-02-10 15:35:17 and read 18641 times.

What about preformance numbers?? Also I have noticed that the RR engines are much louder that the P&W, they sound like old vacuums (figures) ... well at least on the ramp.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: CF-CPI
Posted 2013-02-10 15:39:49 and read 18618 times.

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 10):
how much of a difference in the engine performance?

AA went with RR since they guaranteed enough t/o thrust to go MEX-ORD nonstop with a full load. At the time (80s), the P&W 2037 was having higher than advertised fuel burn as well, but I understand the maintenance costs for the Pratts are a bit lower. Of course, all of this was at one time, and things might have changed. It would be great to hear from someone who has flown both and worked on both.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: beachbum1970
Posted 2013-02-10 15:52:08 and read 18552 times.

Quoting platinumfoota (Reply 14):
Also I have noticed that the RR engines are much louder that the P&W, they sound like old vacuums (figures) ... well at least on the ramp.

I noticed this too. You really notice it working on the ramp. The P&W engines are much quieter. I've never flown on a RR 757 before. Can anyone verify if the RR's are also noisier in the cabin?

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: DL_Mech
Posted 2013-02-10 16:23:20 and read 18410 times.

Quoting akelley728 (Reply 8):
United Air Lines (USA) 133

That number includes both PW and RR frames.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: rwy04lga
Posted 2013-02-10 16:33:45 and read 18360 times.

Welcome to Airliners.net

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: MCOflyer
Posted 2013-02-10 16:37:56 and read 18346 times.

Quoting beachbum1970 (Reply 16):

Somewhat louder by a few decibles. I noticed that the t/o was quieter than the RR. Because of the demand of the 757, it is common to find mixed engine fleets. ET flies three RR examples in addition to their PW birds. FX and UPS both fly PW and RR examples.

KH

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: rwy04lga
Posted 2013-02-10 16:44:31 and read 18303 times.

Quoting platinumfoota (Reply 14):
What about preformance numbers?? Also I have noticed that the RR engines are much louder that the P&W, they sound like old vacuums (figures) ... well at least on the ramp.

They always think the new guy doesn't know anything. As a new hire with less than a month at Delta, I was deep inside the bin of a MadDog when I heard a plane taking off. I yelled to my coworker at the belt loader 'American 757' and pointed in its direction. I gained quite a bit of 'ramp credibility' from that.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: raddek
Posted 2013-02-10 17:54:02 and read 18074 times.

I personally loved the sound that the Pratt's have on the 757. I could always tell it was the plane I was going to work just by the sound it made taxi'ing down the ramp  

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Tristan7977
Posted 2013-02-10 19:14:02 and read 17832 times.

I'm suprised how many P&W 757's there are, but there's still mostly RR's. Great to get a lot of answers from you guys! I'll be asking more sooner or later.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: sparky35805
Posted 2013-02-10 20:44:59 and read 17709 times.

It is not well known,but GE engines were originally offered on 757s.Americans original 757 order was to have been GE powered.A few others were a;so interested.When American cancelled their original order and trimed their original 767-200 order in the early 80s,Ge stopped development of the engine.
Sparky

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: mah584jr
Posted 2013-02-10 21:15:21 and read 17372 times.

Quoting beachbum1970 (Reply 16):
I noticed this too. You really notice it working on the ramp. The P&W engines are much quieter. I've never flown on a RR 757 before. Can anyone verify if the RR's are also noisier in the cabin?

It's interesting you ask! I've actually made a video comparing the two and I agree that the RR's are much louder. Feel free to check it out!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVD2NQbthgE

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: SDF880
Posted 2013-02-10 21:22:04 and read 18378 times.

We have both types here and pretty equally matched. The only thing that stands out to me a bit is the Pratt burns less fuel. Hour leg maybe 300 to 500 pounds less for the Pratt. A M.84 flight to the west coast SDF to west coast may be a difference of 3000 to 4000 pounds fuel burn difference. A few differences noted in MEL items as well but nothing major.

SDF880

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: seabosdca
Posted 2013-02-10 21:28:49 and read 18461 times.

The performance differences can be summed up as follows:

P&W: better fuel burn, better total maintenance costs, quieter
RR: marginally better T/O thrust and climb, better dispatch reliability

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: LH707330
Posted 2013-02-10 22:01:24 and read 18333 times.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 28):
The performance differences can be summed up as follows:

P&W: better fuel burn, better total maintenance costs, quieter
RR: marginally better T/O thrust and climb, better dispatch reliability

Early on the RR also had a huge MTBO advantage, the Pratts were really new at the time and needed more attention until they matured.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: goosebayguy
Posted 2013-02-11 00:45:33 and read 17090 times.

One of the main reasons RR did so well on the 757 was an overall weight saving of 3 tons compared against the PW. Quite a substantial difference.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Yukon880
Posted 2013-02-11 01:40:11 and read 16504 times.

Would a state of the art engine today, comparable in thrust to a 757's PW2000 or RB211, weigh significantly more or less?

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: RussianJet
Posted 2013-02-11 03:00:02 and read 15872 times.

Quoting mah584jr (Reply 26):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVD2NQbthgE

Interesting. Not a huge difference from inside the cabin it would seem, at least on takeoff. The RR were slightly noisier, but not a great deal more.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2013-02-11 03:48:50 and read 15513 times.

Quoting sparky35805 (Reply 25):
It is not well known,but GE engines were originally offered on 757s.Americans original 757 order was to have been GE powered.A few others were a;so interested.When American cancelled their original order and trimed their original 767-200 order in the early 80s,Ge stopped development of the engine. Sparky

Correct, had GE develope an engine for the B-757 it would have been called the CF-6-32. It would have been developed from the CF-6-50 with a smaller fan section and de-rated thrust to about 38,000 lbs.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: United_fan
Posted 2013-02-11 04:23:28 and read 15228 times.

Quoting akelley728 (Reply 8):
These were the airlines that ordered P&W 757s:

AWAS (Ireland) 20
Delta Air Lines (USA) 116
Ethiopian Airlines (Ethiopia) 5
Far Eastern Air Transport (Taiwan) 7
ILFC (USA) 38
Mid East Jet (Saudi Arabia) 1
Northwest Airlines (USA) 72
Royal Air Maroc (Morocco) 2
Shanghai Airlines (China) 13
Singapore Airlines (Singapore) 4
TWA (USA) 14
United Air Lines (USA) 133
US Air Force (USA) 4
Uzbekistan Airways (Uzbekistan) 3

There is just one RR 757 in the Air Force fleet  

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Scott Kerhaert

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: mah584jr
Posted 2013-02-11 04:28:55 and read 15089 times.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 33):
Interesting. Not a huge difference from inside the cabin it would seem, at least on takeoff. The RR were slightly noisier, but not a great deal more.

The biggest thing I've noticed is that the PW's sound seems to die off a little more quickly as one gains in altitude. Both engines are great in my opinion.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: RussianJet
Posted 2013-02-11 04:33:21 and read 14993 times.

Quoting mah584jr (Reply 36):
The biggest thing I've noticed is that the PW's sound seems to die off a little more quickly as one gains in altitude. Both engines are great in my opinion.

But then again there are potentially variables at play that we don't get to see from our seat, such as at which point the thrust is reduced and by how much etc.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Smittyone
Posted 2013-02-11 04:42:25 and read 14886 times.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Thread starter):
I've noticed there are very few 757's that have the Pratt & Whitney engine option.

Forty percent of 757s sold came with P&W powerplants...large fleets to relatively few customers.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: garpd
Posted 2013-02-11 05:09:19 and read 14736 times.

A friend of mine who deals in aircraft maintenance, sales, leases etc groans each time he's given PW powered 757s to deal with. He says that on paper it should be a better plane than the RR, but in reality the RR is by far the best in terms of payload, range, maintenance and resale value. He says the PWs on the 757 are no better than the hair dryers on the A340-300. (His words exactly! lol) It takes him forever to find new homes for PW 757s, but RR 757s barely get entered into his books they're gone that fast.

The only reason PW powered 757s have 40% of the market (In terms of total numbers built) is because two large airlines bought large fleets of them.
Without those, the split is more 80/20 for RR.

Personally, I like the look and sound of the RB211 more. That awesome buzzsaw sound on takeoff really sings to me.

[Edited 2013-02-11 05:10:03]

[Edited 2013-02-11 05:14:59]

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2013-02-11 05:25:36 and read 14495 times.

Quoting garpd (Reply 39):
but in reality the RR is by far the best in terms of payload, range, maintenance and resale value

I know that they used to be bastards operationally, but hasnt that changed to the better over time?

Is this really true regarding the range. I always thought that the PW powered 757 had the edge regarding the range, possibly up to 330 nm.

Can somebody in the know please chip in?

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Ferroviarius
Posted 2013-02-11 05:38:40 and read 14271 times.

Good afternoon,

were the Finnair 757s not P&Ws, too?

Best,
Ferroviarius

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: AY-MD11
Posted 2013-02-11 05:41:15 and read 14287 times.

Finnair has P&W engines on the 757. Anyone else noticed that the IAE is lot quieter than CFM on the A32Xs?

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: TrnsWrld
Posted 2013-02-11 05:52:54 and read 14146 times.

The OP kind of made me laugh a little saying that he noticed there are "very few" PW powered 757's, When in reality a couple of the worlds largest airlines and operators of the type are PW powered lol.

One question, I noticed in the numbers above it says TWA had 14 757's. Is that accurate?? I could have sworn they had almost 30 of them. I believe the highest tail number was N727TW and went all the way down to 706TW then 704X etc etc.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-02-11 06:11:25 and read 13968 times.

Quoting TrnsWrld (Reply 43):
One question, I noticed in the numbers above it says TWA had 14 757's. Is that accurate??

No.

Quoting TrnsWrld (Reply 43):
I could have sworn they had almost 30 of them

Yes. As you say N701TW to N703TW, N704X, N705TW to N713TW, N714P and N715TW to N727TW. So 27 in all.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: lightsaber
Posted 2013-02-11 06:35:02 and read 13807 times.

A little history.

Remember RR had *two* engine on the 757-200 where they bought all the early examples.
The 757 was launched with the RB211-535C
Pratt launched the PW2037 with a promised 8% lower fuel burn
RR developed the RB211-535E4 using a *new core.* Yes. A new engine with lower fuel burn (about 5% better).
Pratt missed promised fuel burn by 4% to 5%.
Pratt missed maintenance cycles by half! (3,750 takeoffs between overhauls, vs. 7,500 promised)
RR met their promised fuel burn target and kept improving the E4 (new engine, the one we know)
Pratt improved their fuel burn to meet promise, but so did RR (small advantage Pratt)
The E4 turned out to have a 15,000 cycle life! (RR made an error, they would have had better fuel burn designing right for the intended cycle life) which made Pratt's 3,750 cle life engines look bad.)
Pratt finally put out a PIP that improved the PW2000 cycle life over 7,500 cycles. (IIRC, about 2003. Way too late to matter.)

RR has always had the triple spools advantage in climb fuel burn. So for relatively short missions (e.g, most AA domestic feeding the hubs), there is no fuel burn advantage for Pratt.

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 10):

how much of a difference in the engine performance?

Short haul maintenance advantage RR.
Overhaul cost advantage to Pratt.
Short haul fuel burn advantage RR about 1.5%
About the same fuel burn advantage for Pratt long haul (> 2,000nm).

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 15):
At the time (80s), the P&W 2037 was having higher than advertised fuel burn as well

Quite a bit. That killed the business case as well as the short overhaul interval.

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 15):
I understand the maintenance costs for the Pratts are a bit lower.

Overhaul costs are lower. It depends on the airline mission. For missions under 2 hours, the advantage goes to RR.

Quoting garpd (Reply 39):
It takes him forever to find new homes for PW 757s,

Considering how few airlines fly the type, I'm not surprised. But it is mission dependent on costs. Hence why FedEx is willing to buy both.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 40):
Is this really true regarding the range. I always thought that the PW powered 757 had the edge regarding the range, possibly up to 330 nm.

Read the above. On long missions Pratt has the advantage in maintenance costs and fuel burn. It is all based on mission length.


Lightsaber

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Revelation
Posted 2013-02-11 07:18:25 and read 13258 times.

Quoting akelley728 (Reply 8):
432 out of 1089 757s produced (40%) had the PW2000 series engine.

Right, but P&W also sells four of them for every C-17 built, and that fleet is at 250 airframes, thus 1000+ engines right there, and more on order. Between that and the commercial sales, I think Pratt did OK with the product.

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_C-17_Globemaster_III

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 45):
On long missions Pratt has the advantage in maintenance costs and fuel burn. It is all based on mission length.

Works out well for the USAF missions.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: BlueShamu330s
Posted 2013-02-11 08:13:56 and read 12734 times.

And let's not forget, the RB211-535E4 became a world record holder on an Icelandair B757:

Quote:
RESTON, Va., May 13 /PRNewswire/ -- A Rolls-Royce aero engine has set a new world record by completing 31,000 hours on the wing of a Boeing 757 which has been in service for seven years. The RB211-535E4 on an Icelandair Boeing 757 twinjet has broken the record previously hold by a CFM56-3 by over 600 hours and is still flying. The engine is still in service operating on scheduled flights from its Iceland base to the east coast of North America, and several European destinations. David Wicks, Executive Vice President - Customer Business for Rolls-Royce plc said: "The RB211-535E4 is a tremendously reliable engine and this world record is a testament to our partnership with Icelandair, its engineers and pilots." Sigurdur Helgason, President and Chief Executive Officer, Icelandair said: "Operating from our island base, the reliability of our engines is of particular importance. We are proud and delighted to hold this record which further demonstrates that the RB211-535E4 was the right choice for our company." Renowned for its reliability and long life, the 535E4 currently averages more than 15,000 hours on wing before a first maintenance shop visit. The RB211-535 family, ranging between 37,4001b and 43,100lb thrust, has accumulated more than 18 million flying hours at the highest reliability levels in its thrust range. In June 1997, Icelandair increased its order of Boeing 757 airliners and became the first scheduled airline to order the latest 757-300. Today the carrier operates a fleet of five Boeing 757-200s with another due for delivery in 1999. Two Boeing 757-300s will be delivered in 2001 and 2002 and the airline holds a further eight options on the B757-200 with conversion rights to the stretched -300. In a relationship stretching over 40 years, Icelandair's first Rolls-Royce powered aircraft was the Viscount in 1957, followed by the CL44 and Fokker F27 in the 1960s, with the Boeing 757 coming into service in 1990.
PR Newswire
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...e-beats-world-record-77887202.html

Rgds

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: akelley728
Posted 2013-02-11 08:29:33 and read 12420 times.

Quoting DL_Mech (Reply 17):
That number includes both PW and RR frames.

Oops, I merged the United and UPS lines on my spreadsheet. Thanks for pointing that out!

AWAS (Ireland) 20
Delta Air Lines (USA) 116
Ethiopian Airlines (Ethiopia) 5
Far Eastern Air Transport (Taiwan) 7
ILFC (USA) 38
Mid East Jet (Saudi Arabia) 1
Northwest Airlines (USA) 72
Royal Air Maroc (Morocco) 2
Shanghai Airlines (China) 13
Singapore Airlines (Singapore) 4
TWA (USA) 14
United Air Lines (USA) 98
UPS (USA) 35
US Air Force (USA) 4
Uzbekistan Airways (Uzbekistan) 3

[Edited 2013-02-11 08:37:53]

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: KELPkid
Posted 2013-02-11 08:32:07 and read 12411 times.

Quoting BlueShamu330s (Reply 44):
And let's not forget, the RB211-535E4 became a world record holder on an Icelandair B757:

That's possible becuse, IIRC, the 535E4 is very underrated on a 752...the engine is capable of making a lot more thrust than it does on Iclandair's 757s.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: akelley728
Posted 2013-02-11 08:37:07 and read 12341 times.

Quoting TrnsWrld (Reply 43):
One question, I noticed in the numbers above it says TWA had 14 757's. Is that accurate??

Yes it is. These were the ones that were ordered by TWA. The rest were leased and came via ILFC.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 44):
As you say N701TW to N703TW, N704X, N705TW to N713TW, N714P and N715TW to N727TW. So 27 in all.


TWA birds: N705TW, N708TW, N711ZX, N714P, N715TW, N716TW, N717TW, N718TW, N719TW, N724TW, N720TW, N725TW, N726TW, N727TW

Note a number of these frames that were ordered by TWA wound up at Pegasus (now AWAS) who leased them back to TWA.

ILFC birds: N703TW, N712TW, N707TW, N701TW, N702TW, N704X, N706TW, N709TW, N710TW, N713TW, N723TW, N722TW, N721TW

[Edited 2013-02-11 08:45:39]

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: XEspecialist
Posted 2013-02-11 09:10:25 and read 11961 times.

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 12):
BA bought all if not most of Easterns RB211 535c

Not entirely. I had the priviledge to fly on N907AW (aka Phoenix Suns aka Barney) back in early 1998 BWI-PHX F class and experienced a flashback when I used the forward lav. It still had the EA wall treatment showing all the destinations in various fonts. Ironically USAir bought several aircraft from the EA fire sale and now the sister ships once separated were reunited (if only for a few years.

Interesting point to note:

Northwest divested itself of the RR powered Republic airframes totaling 6 at the time of purchase.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: UA735WL
Posted 2013-02-11 09:20:47 and read 11822 times.

Quoting XEspecialist (Reply 48):

Didn't all those ex-Republic birds go to HP? (at a steep discount?)

[Edited 2013-02-11 09:23:35]

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: FlyHossD
Posted 2013-02-11 09:38:06 and read 11604 times.

I didn't fly both, so no comparisons here, but my time with RB211s was enjoyable - it's a fine engine and very reliable. The only negative (if you can even call it that) was how long it took to start compared to other turbines. It takes a while to get all three spools turning.

That became even more apparent once I had started more 767 flying (with GE CF6s); those engines start quickly.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-02-11 09:40:35 and read 11579 times.

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 12):
BA bought all if not most of Easterns RB211 535c s
Quoting XEspecialist (Reply 48):
Not entirely. I had the priviledge to fly on N907AW (aka Phoenix Suns aka Barney) back in early 1998 BWI-PHX F class and experienced a flashback when I used the forward lav.

I think you may have misread what shuttle9juliet said.

BA did indeed buy some of EA's RB211 535 C engines when EA re-engined their fleet of 752s with the E4 version of the RB211 535. However BA never operated a single ex-EA 752 aircraft. Most (all?) of these engines were fitted into new frames at BFI as RR had stopped prodction of the C. However BA's plan to standardise on the C model was eclipsed by their need for new aircraft. The first 752 delivered to BA with the E4 engine was their twenty-sixth, G-BPEA.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: 135mech
Posted 2013-02-11 10:36:54 and read 10793 times.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 43):
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 45):
On long missions Pratt has the advantage in maintenance costs and fuel burn. It is all based on mission length.

Works out well for the USAF missions.



And that works out excellently for the C-32A (757) fleet (with the exception of the one RR bird). The USAF needed that fleet commonality (with the C-17;s) for the C-32A's to be that much more efficient (maintenance wise). They were given added fuel tanks in the early 2000's to extend it's range to 12+ hrs, so that would add to the long range benefit mentioned earlier of the PW's.

135Mech

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: garpd
Posted 2013-02-11 10:40:02 and read 10717 times.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 42):
Considering how few airlines fly the type, I'm not surprised. But it is mission dependent on costs. Hence why FedEx is willing to buy both.

Sorry, wrong tense used. I meant it used to take him ages. We're talking about 10 years ago, give or take (memory item, so I'm unsure). But the RR ones did shift a lot quicker than the PWs

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: XEspecialist
Posted 2013-02-11 12:01:40 and read 9935 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 51):

Thanks for the clarification! The actual scenario you describe is definitely stranger than fiction. Definitely different times with different priorities. With fuel where it is now, operators jump on PIPs and new variants as quickly as they can.

I appreciate your history lesson. Now I need to go home and see which version is outlined in my EA Ground Service and MX manual.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: aviatorcraig
Posted 2013-02-11 12:49:35 and read 9583 times.

I don't care which engine it has, when the overpowered stick insect finally leaves our skies I will miss it (it is already an endangered species in Europe), but, just in case this thread goes the way of most 757 threads, no, I don't want to see the production line re-opened!   

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: sweair
Posted 2013-02-11 12:56:38 and read 9504 times.

Yeah it has that fantastic horse kick at take off   One of a kind, most NBs now are real runway hogs.

Environmental and economy decides. I still love large engines, my latest car has over 300hp, a diesel engine. Hey I am checking out before anything bad happens  

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-02-11 13:09:36 and read 9379 times.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Thread starter):
I've noticed there are very few 757's that have the Pratt & Whitney engine option.
Quoting VV701 (Reply 51):
Most (all?) of these engines were fitted into new frames at BFI as RR had stopped prodction of the C.

If they were new frames, how did they get from RNT to BFI? The 757, like all Boeing narrowbodies (except the first 271 or so 737s) have been built at Renton, not BFI.

[Edited 2013-02-11 14:00:45]

[Edited 2013-02-11 14:02:20]

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Smittyone
Posted 2013-02-11 13:51:25 and read 9031 times.

Quoting garpd (Reply 36):
The only reason PW powered 757s have 40% of the market (In terms of total numbers built) is because two large airlines bought large fleets of them.
Without those, the split is more 80/20 for RR.

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

Either way it is not an accurate statement that "there are very few 757's that have the Pratt & Whitney engine option."

Which was my only point. RR obviously appealed to the vast majority of operators.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: CF-CPI
Posted 2013-02-11 14:38:30 and read 8823 times.

Quoting UA735WL (Reply 49):
Didn't all those ex-Republic birds go to HP? (at a steep discount?)

Yes they all went, and not very long after NW acquired them. They were at NW long enough to get painted in full NW colors (some of them, if not all), and if I'm not forgetting something, this was the only time RR engines were hung on a NW airframe.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: B757forever
Posted 2013-02-11 15:10:44 and read 8751 times.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 42):
Read the above. On long missions Pratt has the advantage in maintenance costs and fuel burn. It is all based on mission length.

It looks like the data from Aviation Partners agrees with your assessment on fuel burn on longer missions...
http://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com/products_757_200.php

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: shuttle9juliet
Posted 2013-02-11 15:42:21 and read 8646 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 51):

Sorry I should have made that a bit more clearer but thanks for clearing that up.
When flying on say G-BMRF in the morning with the 535 c up to MAN and say in the afternoon you got on G-BPED or the likes it was like night and day. The E4 was and is a powerful bugger but the C seemingly operated more efficient at cruise. That was my opinion..

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: flyabr
Posted 2013-02-11 16:03:45 and read 8639 times.

Only ever been on a RB211 powered 757 once...from PHX to LAS on America West. I was sitting in the back behind the engines, and OMG was it loud! My traveling companion even commented with a "Good Lord"! I've been in the back of a number of PW powered Delta and NW 757s and never experienced the DBs I did on that American West flight! Of course I'm talking about the noise on takeoff.  

[Edited 2013-02-11 16:06:20]

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Tristan7977
Posted 2013-02-11 17:10:57 and read 8474 times.

Yes the "very few" part you can laugh at, I'm saying most airlines ran the RR powered 757, very few P&W. It seems most P&W 757's are retired while most RR 757's are still in service.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Tristan7977
Posted 2013-02-11 17:15:08 and read 8471 times.

@Flyabr

It's so noisy at takeoff of the back of a 757 equipped w/ the RR engines. Yet it's so much nicer in the front, sounds nice too. I've been on many 757's. (PW & RR Powered) The P&W is definitley quieter.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: United1
Posted 2013-02-11 17:20:39 and read 8446 times.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Reply 63):
It seems most P&W 757's are retired while most RR 757's are still in service.

Not at all....UA, UPS and DL alone operate ~300 PW powered 757s still.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Max Q
Posted 2013-02-11 17:39:25 and read 8423 times.

I'm more than a little biased but I have nothing but the greatest respect for that beautiful RB211 on our 757's.



Smooth, powerful, reliable and you can't beat that fantastic start up noise ,especially when it's cold !

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-02-12 04:57:41 and read 7980 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 57):
If they were new frames, how did they get from RNT to BFI?

Of course they flew powered by the second-hand 211-535-C engines fitted by Boeing at RNT. My other undeliberate mistake was saying that the first twenty-six BA 752s had the C version engine when actually it was the first THIRTY-six.

Thanks. Without your correction I would not have noticed that either.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Spacepope
Posted 2013-02-12 05:47:54 and read 7886 times.

Quoting 135mech (Reply 52):
And that works out excellently for the C-32A (757) fleet (with the exception of the one RR bird).

There are actually 2 C-32Bs, c/n 25493 & 25494

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Smittyone
Posted 2013-02-12 05:49:06 and read 7900 times.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Reply 64):
The P&W is definitley quieter.


Sorry I can't hear you over the sound of this  www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtsCZHjn3XM

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: mjoelnir
Posted 2013-02-12 07:19:10 and read 7782 times.

As I understand my contact flying B 757 the RR has all the advantages today if you have the newest version of it, whatever the differences have been in the past.

More reliable, less noise cruising and similar fuel burn after the improvements in the late 1990s.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: mcg
Posted 2013-02-12 07:32:36 and read 7723 times.

Quoting United_fan (Reply 32):
There is just one RR 757 in the Air Force fleet  

Where did this airplane come from and how did it end up at the Air Force?

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: VV701
Posted 2013-02-12 08:29:52 and read 7648 times.

Quoting mcg (Reply 71):
Where did this airplane come from and how did it end up at the Air Force?

It was bought from Boeing by Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services and initially leased by AVIANCA. After return to AWAS it was sold to first Ansett Worldwide Aviation USA and then to Raytheon E-Systems who immediately sold it on to the USAF.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: 135mech
Posted 2013-02-12 10:00:59 and read 7523 times.

Quoting Spacepope (Reply 68):
Quoting 135mech (Reply 52):
And that works out excellently for the C-32A (757) fleet (with the exception of the one RR bird).

There are actually 2 C-32Bs, c/n 25493 & 25494



Thanks for the update, I don't have a current contact up there anymore and did not know they added the second.

135mech

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Spacepope
Posted 2013-02-12 11:37:50 and read 7416 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 72):
It was bought from Boeing by Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services and initially leased by AVIANCA. After return to AWAS it was sold to first Ansett Worldwide Aviation USA and then to Raytheon E-Systems who immediately sold it on to the USAF.

25494 spent time with ATA before going to the USAF.

CNs are the only way to really keep track of these two birds, they each have been through about 3 different USAF serials each. It's almost like they don't want them to be easy to keep track of...

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: mcg
Posted 2013-02-12 11:51:04 and read 7372 times.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 72):
It was bought from Boeing by Ansett Worldwide Aviation Services and initially leased by AVIANCA. After return to AWAS it was sold to first Ansett Worldwide Aviation USA and then to Raytheon E-Systems who immediately sold it on to the USAF.

thanks for the info.

Quoting Spacepope (Reply 74):
It's almost like they don't want them to be easy to keep track of...

Would I be correct in assuming this airplanes mission is VIP transport?

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: AA777
Posted 2013-02-13 05:47:51 and read 6880 times.

Quoting Tristan7977 (Reply 64):
It's so noisy at takeoff of the back of a 757 equipped w/ the RR engines. Yet it's so much nicer in the front, sounds nice too. I've been on many 757's. (PW & RR Powered) The P&W is definitley quieter.

I wouldn't say its much quieter in the front of a 757 with RR engines... the difference is that it has the very nice buzz saw sound  

Overall the PW engines are definitely quieter, no matter where you're sitting on the plane. I truly noticed the difference a lot when I was flying 757s everywhere from BOS last year, either on United to DEN/LAS/IAD, or AA to MIA/LAX.

I'm just happy to fly on a 757 at all. Truly one of the best birds in the sky.

AA777

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: flyabr
Posted 2013-02-13 20:52:11 and read 6491 times.

To me, the PW2000 engines also sound like a buzzsaw if you are sitting in front of them. maybe not as loud as the RB211, but still a buzzsaw sound nonetheless.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Revelation
Posted 2013-02-14 07:38:10 and read 6224 times.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 76):
I'm just happy to fly on a 757 at all. Truly one of the best birds in the sky.

Just did a flight on US (err AA!  ) from A319 to B757 and have to say the seats on the A319 were more comfy.

Presumably this was one of the birds that went Republic -> NW -> HP / US and could use a refresh, badly.

Sadly there are a number of tatty 757s out there giving the plane a bad name.

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: malaysia
Posted 2013-02-14 11:22:31 and read 6090 times.

I have flown on many RB211 and PW 757s in my life   I like the RB211 start up sound but the PW are cool and nice.

but when I am on RB211 757s and I have a window seat by the engine, I always pretend I am still on an L-1011 but yes the wing is not same shape, but its pretty much only way to see a single engine RB211 on the wing and imitate the Tristar much closer than anything and even with winglets to make it a Tristar-NG  

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-02-14 17:16:26 and read 5887 times.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 66):
I'm more than a little biased but I have nothing but the greatest respect for that beautiful RB211 on our 757's.

Smooth, powerful, reliable and you can't beat that fantastic start up noise ,especially when it's cold !

As a sidenote, an Icelandair 752 had one of its R-R engines fail en route from SEA to KEF last weekend, resulting in a diversion to Edmonton (YEG) and passengers having to spend the night. Following from Transport Canada occurrence summary. What is a "strut valve"?

An Icelandair Boeing 757-200 (operating as ICE680) on an IFR flight from Seattle (KSEA) to Keflavik (BIKF) declared an emergency with right engine failure. Aircraft elected to divert to Edmonton (CYEG). ARFF responded. Aircraft landed safely at 0149Z. No impact on operations.
UPDATE TSB A13W0016: The Icelandair Boeing 757-200, operating as ICE680, was enroute from Seattle to Keflavik, Iceland when the right engine (Rolls-Royce RB211-534E4, serial number 30753) failed 146 NM NE of Edmonton. After declaring an emergency, the crew diverted to Edmonton where they landed without incident. Maintenance determined that a strut valve had failed.


http://de.flightaware.com/live/fligh...0/history/20130209/2330Z/KSEA/BIKF
http://www.kirotv.com/news/news/seat...diverts-canada-due-electric/nWLLs/

Topic: RE: 757 Rolls Royce VS Pratt & Whitney
Username: FlyHossD
Posted 2013-02-15 03:14:52 and read 5668 times.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 80):
What is a "strut valve"?

I suspect that's the fuel shut-off valve. If it failed closed, it would certainly stop fuel flow to the engine, thus the engine failure.


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/