Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!  
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6926 posts, RR: 63
Posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1776 times:

More sad hours spent on Excel reveals that RR came out well ahead of PW on the DC-10/MD-11/L-1011.

In so far as I had thought much about it, I suppose I had assumed that RR would be in third place. (Their habitual position, it seemed, prior to the launch of the Trent series.) In fact, there were 896 Trijets built (including the KC-10s for the USAF). Of these...

522 had GE (58%)
250 had RR (28%)
124 had PW (14%)

Perhaps more to the point, the clear winner was, of course, GE.

6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFlyabr From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1758 times:

well, i don't think a rolls powerplant ever flew on a mad dog trijet, did it? and weren't all tristars built with rolls power...?

User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6926 posts, RR: 63
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1752 times:

Quoting Flyabr (Reply 1):
well, i don't think a rolls powerplant ever flew on a mad dog trijet, did it? and weren't all tristars built with rolls power...?

Correct.


User currently offlineFlyABR From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1733 times:

well, i guess then my point was, who cares? if all trijets had been offered with ge, pratt and rolls, then maybe this stat would have been more interesting. what i do find interesting is that ge clobbered pratt on the mad dogs!

User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1726 times:

Lockheed nearly went out of business on the L-1011 because of Rolls-Royce.

While Boeing and MD both made the 747 and DC-10's with engine choices, Lockheed decided that Rolls-Royce would be the ONLY supplier of engines for the L-1011.

When development costs ran over, Rolls-Royce filed for bankruptcy. The British government had to step in, and although the problems were overcome, Lockheed was sweating bullets for a LONG time.

Ironic that Pratt & Whitney, originally the premiere jet engine manufacturer, has almost completely lost the entire market.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6926 posts, RR: 63
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1659 times:

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 4):
While Boeing and MD both made the 747 and DC-10's with engine choices

Initially the 747 had no choice - just JT9Ds. GE and RR options came later. Nor am I sure that PW was an option on the DC-10 right from the start. If it was then they did miserably, gaining just two customers and 42 sales out of 446.


User currently offlineAcidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1874 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1611 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

PW was a later option on the DC-10. The aircraft only came with the GE CF6 as an option. NW and JAL essentially had MD custom-make a "DC-10-20" (kind of midway in size between a -15 and -30), call it a DC-10-40 and equip it with PW JT9D engines.

NW has extensive maintenance contracts with PW, which is one reason they tend to purchase PW engines. From what was also explained to me, the CF6 had a bunch of issues in the beginning, and NW and JAL felt that PW would be a superior powerplant. It turns out that by the time NW got their PW-powered DC-10, most, if not, all of the issues in the GE-powered DC-10's were resolved and that became the superior airframe of the two.

Ironically, NW purchased a bunch of second-hand, GE-powered DC10's for trans-Atlantic expansion, which all still fly today, while all the custom ordered PW DC10's have been in the scrapyard for a few years.



Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
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...
RR Vs. PW On 757 posted Tue Dec 19 2000 08:43:57 by L-1011-500
PHX-Nashville On A Widebody, Can It Be Done? posted Sat Aug 5 2006 20:20:29 by 747hogg
Boeing Preferred GE Over PW On The 757? posted Fri Aug 12 2005 18:56:20 by PM
PW On The A350? posted Sat Feb 26 2005 20:24:17 by ConcordeBoy
Winglets On Widebody Aircraft posted Sat Oct 2 2004 23:56:35 by Jetpixx
Kerry's 757: RR Or PW Power? posted Tue Jul 6 2004 21:11:35 by Eg777er
Shortest Flight On A Widebody? posted Thu Apr 1 2004 21:56:13 by Flybhx764
Tail Mounted Engines On A Widebody posted Mon Mar 29 2004 01:49:51 by Bohica
AA 757 W/ RR Or PW Engines? posted Sun Sep 29 2002 20:27:28 by AA61hvy
RR Ore P&W On UPS B757 ? posted Thu Aug 26 1999 12:52:08 by AirNR