Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
American Super 80 Fleet Converted To RR Tay?  
User currently offlineSkaggs From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 144 posts, RR: 2
Posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6453 times:

I have it on pretty good account that AA is seriously considering converting their entire MD-80 fleet to a far more fuel efficient version on the Rolls Royce Tay.....The predicted payoff in fuel savings would be less than 3 years and the converted A/C would be more efficient than a 737NG.

Anyone else heard this rumor?

Mike

http://www.mikeskaggs.com/



[Edited 2004-11-22 07:18:35]


It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man.
40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6401 times:

Is the pay back based on the current US$50+/barrel of oil? If so, does anyone (let alone AA) have confidence in fuel forecasts? Fuel price estimates have a HUGE impact on the ROI calculation.

More importantly, how will a RR Tay M80 compare to the 738 in terms of efficiency including the eventual amortized replacement cost? IE, even a re-engined M80 will still need replacing before the 738 fleet since the airframe will still be older.

Im sure Boeing would not be pleased with a Tay M80, so if the numbers look good, look for some wheeling and deadling on a massive 738 order!





Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineSkaggs From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 144 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6375 times:

I also hear that American is 'creatively' playing both sides. Evidently P&W is giving them some prety sweet deals on parts while Im sure RR is pulling out all the stops to re-engine 300 some odd aircraft.

Mike

http://www.mikeskaggs.com/



It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man.
User currently offlineNorthStarDC4M From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 3035 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6369 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Im suprised RR is pushing the tay for this...

The tay is older technology, basically a Spey core with a new fan and combustor.

Seems to me the BR71x family would be a better choice? Especially since AA has retired its Tay powered F100s?



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26537 posts, RR: 75
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6365 times:

Well, the MD-80 probably is more efficient right now than the 738, as it is lighter, but does not have the capability with cargo, speed or range. A Tay conversion would do them well though, maybe even allow an MD-83 to do close to Transcons. I honestly don't see Boeing as getting too upset, as they still make money on the support of MD-80s, and they have to understand that 334 aircraft are not going anywhere any time soon.


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineSkaggs From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 144 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6350 times:

Noth Star,
You may be right...My AA pilot friend and I speculated Tay because that is all we know.....You are probably right....Heck, my Dad flew RR Spey Engined F-4 Phantoms as a test pilot back in the late 60's. Surely they have a new design......Spey/Tey is like the ford mustand chassis.....Old, but still works...


Mike

http://www.mikeskaggs.com/



It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man.
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5196 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6339 times:

Interesting rumour, but...

(1) Fuel prices are on the way back down.

(2) AA would/should be looking to cut capital costs as much as possible at the moment.

I don't think that this is likely to be happening any time soon. I am also suspicious about the suggestion of the Tay. It was a good replacement on the 727, but why not go for more modern technology like the engine on the MD90 or the 717?

All the best,

Bill


User currently offlineSkaggs From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 144 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6329 times:

I will revamp my rumor to a retrofit of a RR plant of some type.....But definetly Rolls Royce.

Mike

http://www.mikeskaggs.com/



It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man.
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6326 times:

Seems like a V2500 or BR71x would be a good choice...the V2500 is on the MD-90 and the BR71x on the 717. Although not the same aircraft, it seems like there would be a lot of general knowledge that could go back and forth, especially with thhe V2500.

User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26537 posts, RR: 75
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6319 times:

>I don't think that this is likely to be happening any time soon. I am also suspicious about the suggestion of the Tay. It was a good replacement on the 727, but why not go for more modern technology like the engine on the MD90 or the 717?<

The MD-80 itself is not built for a larger engine. One of the reasons for the MD-90s failure is that it was a bit overengined with the IAE V2500. While the BR-715, if they could find a way to integrate it onto the MD-80, would be in the right power range and very efficient, it would be a lot more expensive than the RR Tay. The Tay and the PW's on the MD-80 are very similarly designed engines, with similar profiles. Remember, the 727 and the MD-80 have the same engine on them to start with, so the Tay is proven to work



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2935 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6292 times:

The MD-80 and 727 do not have the same engines. The MD-80 has JT8D-200s, the 727 has JT8D-15/17s at best (not counting the re-engined ones with -200 series outboard engines). The only models re-engined with Tays were the old JT8D-5/7 powered 721s.

Can the Tay actually put out the power that an MD-80 needs? We're talking in the 20,000 pound thrust range. The most the 727 ever had to put out was around 14,000 each engine.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineBigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 54
Reply 11, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6250 times:

uhhh.... what's a tay?


Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26537 posts, RR: 75
Reply 12, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6222 times:

Well, the Tay 651 on the 721 puts out 15,400 pounds. The MD-81, which would likely be first for conversion, puts out 18,500, while the other MD-80 series put out an even 20,000. I am thinking that RR already has a way to make the Tay put out the thrust needed, or AA would not be taking any interest. Also, they already have Tay trained mechanics from the F100 that they just retired and they lean toward RR as their engine supplier


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5988 times:

An airline that I worked for looked into converting their DC-9's from JT8D's to Tay's in order to meet stage 3 noise requirements back in the late 1980's.
The engine mount spacing is considerable different between the two engine families requiring an extensive structural modification with a resultant weight increase. The cost of the modification would have been over $20M. In addition, the calculated coast down performance of the airplane with an engine out would have been worse with the Tay and would have prevented the Tay DC-9 from operating over the higher portions of the Rockies.

I don't think that there is a version of the Tay available with the thrust of the JT8D-200's that American uses on their MD-82's.


User currently offlineJeffDCA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5929 times:

The tay is older technology, basically a Spey core with a new fan and combustor.

You are having a laugh right? The Tay 611-8C is far from 'older technology'.

Cheers,

Jeff


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8018 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5816 times:

I think AA--who likes their Super 80 fleet--is seriously looking at buying either an uprated derivative of the Rolls-Royce Deutschland BR715 (probably designated BR720) rated at around 24,000 lb. thrust or buy the Pratt & Whitney PW6024 engine to update their fleet. We're talking a possible 1,000-plus engine order, something that either Rolls-Royce or Pratt & Whitney definitely wants.

With the new engines, the AA S80 fleet could fly till 2020.


User currently offlineCaptoveur From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4988 times:

For starters, payback period is a bad way of making budgeting decisions, but people still do it... often

Secondly, AA is not all that financially healthy so they are going to spend how many millions per almost fully depreciated airframe to save how much? And they have how many MD-80s? almost 300 if memory serves (I wanna say 283, but won't swear to it).

Yes it seems like a good idea on the surface but this really sounds like a case of spending dollars to save dimes.

Wouldn't there also be certification costs? Someone slap me or something but I don't recall ever seeing a Tay powered MD-80.


User currently offlineNorthStarDC4M From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 3035 posts, RR: 37
Reply 17, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4958 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

There would need to be an Supplemental Type Certificate application and testing yes.

I believe though it wouldnt take more than about 200 hours of test flying to certify it, maybe less... depends if they want to make any modifications beyond the engines (like upgrading the avionics).



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
User currently offlineAllessandro From Netherlands, joined Apr 2004, 60 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4778 times:

I can understand why it could be the Tay rather than the V2500 or the BR71x. The latest two are, to my knowledge, equiped with FADEC system which require huge redesign of the engine controls in the cockpit while the Tay 611 (not the -8C model which is also equipped with a FADEC), Tay 620, Tay 650 and Tay 651 are fully mechanically controlled aircraft. This would make the installation of newer engines on the MD's much easier. Introducing a FADEC controlled engine on a mature airframe and integrating the engine controls into the aircraft systems properly is very expensive

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4732 times:

For starters, payback period is a bad way of making budgeting decisions, but people still do it... often

Mmm...depends. Used in conjunction with ROI, it can be an effective measure for allocating capital. The best payback methods are using multiple or staggered paybacks for each project for comparison and then ranking them.

Secondly, AA is not all that financially healthy so they are going to spend how many millions per almost fully depreciated airframe to save how much? And they have how many MD-80s?

Might be cheaper than a massive 738 order.

The thing is, AA needs to address the M80 replacement issue NOW. Even replacing 30 MD80's a year (1 every 8-9 work days) will still take 11-12 years to occur. Hence, the MD80 will remain in the AA fleet until at least 2016 I predict.

AA should be taking delivery of 18-36 738's per year whatever their financial situation just to keep the fleet age young.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 978 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4721 times:

Secondly, AA is not all that financially healthy so they are going to spend how many millions per almost fully depreciated airframe to save how much? And they have how many MD-80s? almost 300 if memory serves (I wanna say 283, but won't swear to it).

We've seen the amazing durability of the DC-9s at NWA... and they have zero plans of retiring their fleet before 2010. The MD-80 features many of the same structural construction techniques, like the interlocking-J rivet, and likely have the same lifespan. NWA rennovated their completly depreciated DC-9s when they were 30+ years old in 1998, adding new cabins and noise supressors.

This was a very good decision on NWs part as the -9 forms the backbone of their domestic fleet, there are simply too many to replace given current market conditions. Ditto for AA, the MD-80s can't be replaced in mass for another 15 years, so they must find ways to keep them economical.

Interesting rumour, but... AA would/should be looking to cut capital costs as much as possible at the moment....Fuel prices are on the way back down.

A MD-80 re-engine would likely be a move to cut capital cost. Replacing all ~275 MD-80s in mass would cost roughly 14 billion dollars, a MD-80 refit would cost a fraction of this.

And even if fuel prices dropped to 35 dollars a barrel, every opportunity to reduce fuel consumption in a fleet of 275 aircraft should be taken. Take a 2% fuel savings and multiply it by 275.... not a insignifcant number by any means..

Im sure Boeing would not be pleased with a Tay M80, so if the numbers look good, look for some wheeling and deadling on a massive 738 order!

Well it is obvious they won't be ordering any new aircraft to replace the MD-80s, might as well make some $$ on the re-engine package. I'd imagine DL might be interested as well...

Has the CFM56-7 been considered? I'd think commonality with the 737-800 powerplant would be a plus. The -7B19/20/22 all offer simmilar thrust to the engines already mentioned...


User currently offlineD950 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 493 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4701 times:

Perhaps they are looking to expand the RR relationship, with an eye on the 717 down the road, and engine commonality (RR) with the mechanics union in mind??


Resting on your laurels is a synonym for flirting with disaster
User currently offlineN1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26537 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4567 times:

>Perhaps they are looking to expand the RR relationship, with an eye on the 717 down the road, and engine commonality (RR) with the mechanics union in mind?? <

Well, they got rid of the 717s they got from TW after the merger, in favor of keeping F100s that they got rid of 2 years later anyway. Besides, their relationship with RR is strong, with Trent powered 777s, and RB211 powered 757s (except the ex-TW ones). Then again, the hole in their service right now is a 100 seater and the 717 would serve them well

Again, isn't the CFM56-7 FADEC controlled. If it is, then you would have the same problems integrating it as you would the BR715-A1 or C1, as well as the IAE V2500. And still, if it can be had in a mechanical version, you would have to beef up the mounting structure and deal with the extra weight of the large turbofan



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16285 posts, RR: 56
Reply 23, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4523 times:

Then again, the hole in their service right now is a 100 seater and the 717 would serve them well

An AA insider on another thread reported that it is AA's intent to add a 100-seater to the mainline fleet again. No doubt some of the M80 fleet is serving former F100 routes and are perhaps too large for those routes.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineCOAmiG29 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 515 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4449 times:

why did aa retire the f100s and not the md 80s are the md80s really that much better to make up for the age difference? (the f100s did have tay engines so it would have saved money to not have to convert)


If Continental had a hub at DFW with nonstop flights I would always fly them, unfortunantely good things take time.
25 DfwRevolution : why did aa retire the f100s and not the md 80s are the md80s really that much better to make up for the age difference? (the f100s did have tay engine
26 N1120a : >This is probably better than modernizing the F100s or going to the 717 IMO.
27 Spacepope : Also don't forget that if stricter noise requirements go into effect, a BR-7XX engined aircraft would have far fewer payload/range/time restrictions o
28 BR715-A1-30 : I would think they would re-engine the S80 with the BR715-C1-30 putting out 21,000 lbs of thrust each... That would be 42,000 fuel-efficient pounds of
29 COAmiG29 : This could also be a way to finally retire the Pratt powerplants from their fleet. Does AA have a problem with prat or are RR just better?
30 N1120a : >I would think they would re-engine the S80 with the BR715-C1-30 putting out 21,000 lbs of thrust each... That would be 42,000 fuel-efficient pounds o
31 Srbmod : This idea has been floating around for a few years, there's just hadn't been too much interest in it. Rolls Royce could really use the boost to the BR
32 DfwRevolution : Just wondering... but is there any estimate to how much a typical re-engine program cost? For example, how much were the 727 re-engines per aircraft?
33 Okie : Rollers on a MD-80 - Most likely just a phishing trip. I am sure that AA/AMR is constantly looking at many alternatives for anything. This is common p
34 Ckfred : In general, the idea of putting new engines on the MD-80 fleet makes sense, but I think AA has done something rather shortsighted by deferring the 737
35 RayChuang : I think AA is probably quietly (pun not intended) talking with Rolls-Royce and Boeing about the possibility of re-engining their their Super 80 fleet
36 N1120a : >I think AA is probably quietly (pun not intended) talking with Rolls-Royce and Boeing about the possibility of re-engining their their Super 80 fleet
37 Post contains links and images DIA : Here's a Tay 651. The newer engine will probably look awfully close to this one. Any engine expert can, and hopefully will, correct/guide this opinion
38 Elwood64151 : (2) AA would/should be looking to cut capital costs as much as possible at the moment. Absolutely true, however there is nothing keeping fuel costs fr
39 N1120a : >Perhaps the BR720s could use mechanical control systems... I don't know why they would uprate the engine thrust except to get better short-field and
40 DfwRevolution : I was just thinking, if AA were to do an avionics upgrade at the same time as putting new engines on, perhaps they could install a better onboard comp
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
North American Airlines Adds B767-300ER To Fleet posted Tue Mar 28 2006 15:54:40 by Dc10heaven
AA 737's Compared To Super-80 posted Tue Oct 28 2003 22:30:31 by Fuelhog
Jetsgo To Double MD-80 Fleet posted Fri Oct 18 2002 17:51:09 by 717fan
Will The Most MD-80's Be Converted To Freighters? posted Sun Dec 24 2000 18:45:44 by AA737-800
How Many 747-400s Converted To Cargo? posted Sat Nov 25 2006 17:45:03 by DIJKKIJK
AA Won't Re-Engine MD-80 Fleet posted Fri Nov 17 2006 03:57:58 by PanAm_DC10
AA Super 80 Picture posted Fri Aug 11 2006 01:54:56 by AAden
Confirmed: MEA Fleet Evacuated To Cyprus posted Fri Jul 14 2006 01:10:12 by BA
IFE On Delta's And American's MD-80 Replacement posted Fri Jul 7 2006 17:51:44 by 1337Delta764
AA's MD-80 Fleet and its future, thoughts? posted Tue Jun 27 2006 00:48:34 by Thering