AeroPiggot From United States of America, joined May 2005, 280 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4213 times:
It seem that Rolls-Royce is in the running to join the engine offerings on the new Boeing 737 replacement aircraft currently in PD. See the link below:
LHB727230Adv From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 255 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4163 times:
Good news for RR, finally they can catch up in the short-haul market. Also, it gives airlines more options with their engine choice. Very good news indeed.
AA61Hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13975 posts, RR: 59 Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4151 times:
I wonder what will it sound like. I'm guessing somewhere between a 757 and F100. (I'm an engine freak, sorry)
And yes All engines have different sounds
DLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4142 times:
Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 1): My hunch is Rolls and GE will have an engine and it will be interchangeable.
It's already been said somewhere that Boeing will make a Pylon that is compatable to both types, so that an engine conversion can take place in one business day.
AeroPiggot From United States of America, joined May 2005, 280 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4024 times:
Quote: I'm thinking it's going to look more like a T-Tail 717/727/MD-80/90 and less like a 737
You may be on to something there "7E7", remember the 7J7, I believe we may come back to that type of configuration. I could even envision a dual isle version, but very "stubby" looking??
A scientist discovers that which exists, an engineer creates that which never was.
Boeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3959 times:
Quoting OptionsCLE (Reply 8): I'd be very surprised to see a T-tail. Look at the A320 family, longer landing gear than the 737 yet I'm sure they still handle fine on the ground.
They supposedly won't fit under a 320 wing either so we'd be talking 757 height so I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a T-Tail.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3943 times:
Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 1): My hunch is Rolls and GE will have an engine and it will be interchangeable.
no doubt.
Quoting OptionsCLE (Reply 8): I'd be very surprised to see a T-tail. Look at the A320 family, longer landing gear than the 737 yet I'm sure they still handle fine on the ground.
not handling like a car, handling for baggage, etc. The DC9/727/737 etc. design is such that you can load baggage standing on the ground, for more rural areas (very important in the 60s/70s). The A320 is designed higher off the ground for more "improved" airports and terminals.
But I would also be surprised by a T-Tail. B will find a solution that keeps the plane low (though it will be taller than now) but doesn't require a squat engine. A new wing will help.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16888 posts, RR: 51 Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3877 times:
I wonder if an engine based on the BR-700 family could potentially be that engine. I would love to see them develop a more powerful version of the BR-715, perhaps a BR-720? Or could it be a new version of the Tay?
HermansCVR580 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 494 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3533 times:
Hey its sounding like this could be the super super 727 with a two person flight deck Any concept drawings of what this plane might look like?? I'm courious about this one
The right decision at the wrong time, is still a wrong decision. "Hal Carr"
Jet-lagged From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 850 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3446 times:
Quoting AA61Hvy (Reply 3): And yes All engines have different sounds
Like rrrrrrrrrrrrr or zzzhhhhhhhhh or something? Can you describe with letters??
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, RR: 65 Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3445 times:
If you read the article it's nothing new. Boeing are going to replace the 737 one day. (Hardly news.) When they do, they'll probably offer two engine types. (Not unexpected.) Those types are likely to be from CFM and IAE. (No surprises there.) RR have a stake in IAE.
I don't see it suggesting that Rolls-Royce will have an engine on the next 737 so let's not get too carried away. It just says that both CFM and IAE will be offered. Good news for RR (and PW) but not quite what the title of this thread implies.
What is more interesting is that the source (though not one noted for its insight into the world of aerospace) repeats the rumour that RR may yet end up on the 747ADV.
Revelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 10477 posts, RR: 20 Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3137 times:
I haven't thought about it much, but why is mounting the wing on top of the fuselage out of favor for commercial aircraft? I imagine it makes supporting the landing gear more difficult and so may lead to a heavier aircraft, but I'm just guessing.
FlyBoy84 From United States of America, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 364 posts, RR: 5 Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2994 times:
From what I've heard, the 737 replacement will be built in three versions (120, 150, and 190 pax). Therefore, larger and more powerful engines might be fitted to match the planes characteristics since it appears that the engine will be used on a plane with a high degree of variation in lowest to highest capacity (even though composites will probably be extensively used). The 190 pax narrowbody would be about the size of the 757. Wouldn't a larger, more powerful engine and a slightly longer wingspan give the largest narrowbody greater "hot-and-high" performance?
I would think the new plane would stand taller for better engine clearance. I'd like to see this as the 757 is my favorite Boeing. Leave the low riders to the RJs.
Srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 16888 posts, RR: 51 Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2930 times:
Quoting Revelation (Reply 15): I haven't thought about it much, but why is mounting the wing on top of the fuselage out of favor for commercial aircraft? I imagine it makes supporting the landing gear more difficult and so may lead to a heavier aircraft, but I'm just guessing.
It really only makes sense when the operational profile for the a/c requires good short field performance, which is why the C-130, C-141, C-5, C-17, Do-228/328/328Jet, ATR-42/72, DHC Dash 7/8, Shorts 330/360, Fokker F-27, and Bae-146/Avro RJ for example have high mounted wings. In most of these a/c the landing gear are located in the fuselage like on any other a/c, with the exceptions being the DHC Dash 7 and Dash 8 (Which have main gear mounted in the engine nacelles) and the F-27 (Nacelle mounted engines).
DAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2884 times:
Quoting ACdreamliner (Reply 6): just wish PW would get back into the market....
PW is going nowhere on the commercial side anytime soon. They are going to slowly become a strictly millitary provider eventually since they lost out on A-350/787 and A-380/747 Adv. The only thing they have left is narrowbody and millitary applications. What would be interesting is if they can get the engine contract for the new USAF tanker.....
F14D4ever From United States of America, joined May 2005, 319 posts, RR: 4 Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2830 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 14): ... the source (though not one noted for its insight into the world of aerospace) repeats the rumour that RR may yet end up on the 747ADV.
By repeating this silly rumor, they pretty well solidify their reputation for lack of insight, eh?
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 26 Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2534 times:
What happens to CFM in all of this? I think CFM should pitch into the deal with GE and RR to give even more of an option...
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, RR: 65 Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2518 times:
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 21): What happens to CFM in all of this? I think CFM should pitch into the deal with GE and RR to give even more of an option...
Er, you know of course that CFM is 50% owned by GE? Just as there is very little chance of an "RR" engine on the next 737 because RR's involvement will be through IAE, there won't a "GE" engine there either because it'll be CFM.
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 26 Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2466 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 22): Er, you know of course that CFM is 50% owned by GE?
I learn something new on a daily basis, I didnt know that... thanks for that!
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10694 posts, RR: 100 Reply 25, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2329 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 20):
They did. Boeing selected them for the now defunct 100 767 deal. Might that give them an edge in the next version of this deal?
Yes. Pratt didn't get "slapped" like Boeing did. But then again, its politics.
Quoting PM (Reply 22): because RR's involvement will be through IAE,
By contract, neither RR nor Pratt can build an engine in the 27k to 35k range nor offer an de-rage/enhanced version of an existing engine *without* IAE first declining to build/offer an engine for an airframe. So RR on its own is very unlikely. All reports are IAE. GE wouldn't want to piss of AF, so they'll probably do a CFM engine; but I'm not sure on the details there.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2005, 280 posts, 
From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 255 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 515 posts, 
From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, 
, 364 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
