Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Perm PS-90A Engines  
User currently offlineJAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10
Posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2835 times:

The following is qutoed from The Encyclopedia of Civil Aircraft:

"The PS-90A engine marked the first time the Soviet Union had aimed at performance and efficency fully comparable with Western airline engines. Its bypass ratio is 4.8 and maximum crusie specific fuel consumption of around 0.58 lb/h/lb/st. compared with over 0.62 for typicall Western engines."

Is this comparison true? How efficent then is an Ilyushin 96 with these engines? I heard somwhere (although I may have confused something) that an Ilyushin 96 is about as efficent as a DC-10. Is this true? Ther are far more efficent Western engines that those of a DC-10. I'm a bit confused. I hope someone can clear this up for me.

Thanks, Alex


10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2757 times:

Just wanted to bring it back to the top incase anybody who has information hasn't read it.

User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2757 times:

Ahh, a subject once again after my own heart.  

The PS90A is the only solely Russian-produced high-bypass turbofan. It has about 35,000 lbs of thrust, about 10,000 more than previous Soloviev turbofans, but is considerably less powerful than, say, the RB211 on the 757. Plus the PS90A was beset by what Perm/Soloviev originally described as "teething problems." In-flight shutdowns, various malfunctions, fires, etc. To such an extent that anyone traveling to Moscow will see at least two IL96-300s with engines off the wings at any given time, sitting useless on the tarmac at Sheremet'yevo. Aeroflot and Perm struck an agreement, whereby Aeroflot would pay for the engines on the IL96-300 fleet only during such times as they were operational or being maintained according to schedule, and that Perm would be fully financially responsible for unscheduled maintenance and breakdowns, supplying working engines free of charge until the originals could be made serviceable.

Generally, Aeroflot has been quite disappointed with the less-than-promised range and abyssmal reliability of the IL96-300 engined with PS90As, regardless of performance improvement packages and Perm's promises. True, the IL96-300 has made possible non-stop flights from Moscow to San Francisco and Los Angeles, but these routes are now being operated by Boeing 767-300ER aircraft, because of their reliability and efficiency. The 767 flies the same route as the IL96-300, using 1/3 less fuel on two engines.

To say that the PS90A is comparable to Western engines is optimistic, at best. The spotty reliability and average fuel economy of the PS90A is the reason the PW2337 was chosen by Ilyushin to power the IL96M/T. Derivatives of the PS90A also power the domestic version of the Tupolev TU204, but that aircraft can also be equipped with RB211524s similar to those available on the Boeing 757. Why would Russian aircraft manufacturers choose Western engines if there is a Russian one which is just as good?

Lastly, there has been talk of Pratt & Whitney establishing a joint venture with Perm/Soloviev to produce aircraft engines. This would certainly revolutionise Russian aircraft engine manufacturing, and bring about variants which would truly be world-class.


User currently offlineDnalor From Australia, joined Mar 2000, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2753 times:

I think the engines on a 777 are about 12 or 16/1 bypass ratio, which means the huge front fan blades produce that much more thrust than the core turbine.

User currently offlineSilverstreak From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 281 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2750 times:

This topic makes me wonder about the entire Russian civil industry - how can it survive? How will the bureaus(I guess they're companies now) compete without engine technology. I can't imagine the Russians wanting to merge with Western companies and the West very unsure about working with Russians. In the meantime, one stillborn project after another comes out (except the Tu-204 and Ily-96M, but how successful will they be?). It would be a sad day to me to see another aircraftmaker go under (Fokker for instance).

User currently offlineDnalor From Australia, joined Mar 2000, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2746 times:

Yes it is a shame, I'm sure that Russia has some great aircraft designers and ideas to add to the worl of avaiation but for politics and lack of funding.

I have chatted to some Russians on ICQ and times are tough over there, seems to me that the Russian Govt has almost turned Russia into a 3rd world country with it's massive spendings in the space race, cold war and I spose to a extent, its aviation industry.


User currently offlineJAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2736 times:

So I guess the fuel consumption data provided by the book is basically false???? What Western engine (as far as fuel efficency is concerned) is the PS-90A comparable with?

User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2730 times:

Given the stats in The Vital Guide to Commercial Aircraft and Airliners, looks like it's the CFM56 powering the Airbus A340. But the thrust rating for the CFM is lower than for the PS90A.

User currently offlineJAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2725 times:

So if the Ilyushin 96-300 is less efficent than an Airbus A340 (and I assume it is) why is that. Also, if the CFM56 is as efficent as a PS90A are the A340 and Il 96-300 the same efficency. If that is so the Boeing 767 is then more efficent than an A340???

User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (14 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2718 times:

I received this tidbit in today's RusAvia News. Check it out!

*** New Aircraft Engine to Fire-up Saved Perm Plant

Perm Motors, the Soviet-era aircraft engine factory saved from bankruptcy three years ago by foreign investment, announced last week it will be ready to install its latest engine on domestic aircraft in the next two to three years.
The announcement, officials said, is another sign of the turnaround in the company's fortunes. The engine to be produced, the PS-90A2, has already won preliminary contracts from domestic airline companies and is an upgraded version of the PS-90A.

Apart from its technical upgrades, officials say the new engine is distinguished by its low maintenance costs. They estimate these costs at 40 percent lower than those of its predecessor and say orders by Russian airlines for 302 of the engines indicate confidence in the new model.
The engine was designed at Perm`s Aviadvigatel construction bureau and was produced in conjunction with the company`s American shareholder Pratt&Whitney. A further 10 foreign companies, including American firms Allied Signal and PALL, German BEHR Industrietchnik and French Auxitrol, are involved in the engine`s construction. Seventy percent of its parts will be foreign produced, according to Alexander Inozemtsev, general designer at Aviadvigatel.
Inozemtsev stressed that there will be real benefits from the deal for Perm and for Russia itself, because the 10 foreign companies involved are set to finance their shares of the project and have promised to establish production facilities for the components in Russia in the near future.
Yury Reshetnikov, general director of Perm Motors Plant, says Pratt&Whitney – which played the role of ``white knight`` to the company in 1997 – has moved its involvement in production of the PS-90A2 engine beyond technical matters. He declined, however, to specify the size of Pratt&Whitney's investment in the engine, saying an announcement will be made in the next few weeks.
Reshetnikov added that, on the domestic front, Rosavaikosmos, the Russian space agency, is also thinking of investing in the PS-90A2 project.
The engine will be 20 percent more expensive than its predecessor, the PS-90A, which costs $1.5-$2 million; but maintenance costs should be lower, the firm said.

By LYUBA PRONINA

/Russia Journal/**


User currently offlineJAT From Canada, joined Feb 2000, 1101 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (14 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2718 times:

Is the efficency or the look of the new engine supposed to be different? (if anyone knows)

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...
Peninsula Aviation 727 Engines posted Mon Nov 20 2006 02:31:50 by Jetdoctor
A Vs B/4 Engines Vs 2: Remember The 747? posted Sun Nov 19 2006 04:55:27 by Irobertson
Cathay Pacific 747 Engines posted Wed Nov 8 2006 22:41:16 by Qantas744ER
Volvo Aero Engines Service Shuts Down. posted Tue Nov 7 2006 22:16:13 by Alessandro
Spirals In Jet Engines posted Mon Oct 23 2006 18:35:04 by BRUspotter
Why No Engines At The Front? posted Mon Oct 23 2006 04:23:17 by GAIsweetGAI
EK Orders 45 GEnx Engines posted Mon Oct 16 2006 20:13:09 by NYC777
Will New Narrow Body Engines Effect Market? posted Sat Oct 14 2006 20:34:15 by Poitin
Emirates A-340 With Only Two Engines? posted Wed Oct 11 2006 22:57:18 by Jorge1812
B767 How To Tell PW Vs GE Engines? posted Mon Oct 9 2006 20:14:52 by Ned Kelly