DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1004 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2739 times:
I think even the quad arrangement will begin to lose its appeal for applications under ~750,000 lb MTOW aircraft... roughly the size of the 777-300ER/200LR.
In all likelyhood the A343 will be replaced by a heavier version of the A330 twin. I don't see the A345/A346 being replaced by a twin in any way, shape, or form in the near/distant future, but as for totally-new build aircraft, twins are becoming the prefered arrangement.
Bill142 From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 8473 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2441 times:
the longer range 777's (200LR & 300ER) were orginally meant to be 3 holers but GE then found a way to make the 90's more powerfull so that the 777 would not have to be a 3 holer.
Also they seem good until the one up there needs replacing.
FoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 3017 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2353 times:
The ever-increasing reliability of modern jet engines means that virtually all new designs going forward will be twins. And for those few applications where additional redundancy may be advisable, as Gigneil pointed out, it is easier to simply hang another pair of engines on the wings (a la A340) than to (a) design and build the complex tail structure required to house a third engine on the centerline, and then (b) service the tail-mounted engine.
And when it comes to prop planes...well, I don't expect to see a Trislander lookalike anytime soon.