Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA 777 Rolls Royce Vs GE90  
User currently offlineDFW13L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8055 times:

I was wondering why BA has a fleet of 777s with mixed engine types, and how they route each type. The G-VII series seems to be all GE90 while the G-YMM is Rolls Royce. I don't get to London much, but try to spot their 777s when I can in various US airports. I've noticed that in IAH, which gets birds from both LGW and LHR, the LHR is frequently a Rolls Royce, whereas the LGW flights I see in DFW and IAH are usually the GE90. I spot them most frequently in DFW and have only seen the G-VII series there. Further, in DEN recently I saw G-YMMM (Rolls Royce) there from LHR.

Do they concentrate the GE90 fleet at Gatwick and the Rolls Royce out of Heathrow? I know it's not exclusive because I recently flew on G-VIIY to LHR from IAH-ORD.

Just trying to make sense out of it, so if anyone can help straighten me out, it would be apprecaited!

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3007 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8031 times:

On a side note, when I flew a roundtrip on BA last year, I asked the cabin staff what kind of engines the 777 had (KNOWING they were GE90). The cabin staff called the flight deck, and the answer was:

ROLLS ROYCE!

lol.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1844 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8023 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

When I used to work at evergreen I saw both types of 777 come in to JFK. The way it appeared to me is that they just routed all of them to all routes.

I heard that they didn't like the performance of the RR so they converted the rest of thier shipments to GE or vice versa, i don't really remember.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlineHA_DC9 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 653 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7994 times:

Here's some previous a.net threads:

http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ion/read.main/1735429/6/#ID1735429

http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ation/read.main/804772/6/#ID804772


User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7961 times:

Quoting FlyDeltaJets (Reply 2):
I heard that they didn't like the performance of the RR so they converted the rest of thier shipments to GE or vice versa, i don't really remember.

If I'm not mistaken, it actually has something to do with BA not being happy at all with the initial dispatch reliability of the GE90.

However this has obviously changed and now BA might buy even more 777s with GE90s, if they do finally order the 777-300ER.

Quoting DFW13L (Thread starter):
Do they concentrate the GE90 fleet at Gatwick and the Rolls Royce out of Heathrow? I know it's not exclusive because I recently flew on G-VIIY to LHR from IAH-ORD.

It depends. Judging from the database, most if not all of the LGW 777s have GE engines (barring aircraft substitutions or maintenance flights to LGW), while it's a mixed fleet at LHR. The LGW based 777s were ordered to replace the old BCal DC-10s on BA flights that are Bermuda II restricted, along with their leisure routes, and they might be configured differently from the LHR based ones. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13166 posts, RR: 78
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 7538 times:

BA certainly did have early issues with 777, but so did others, including UA with PW engines.
Something in all the endless threads on here about 'this new aircraft is having snags...so it sucks' is forgotten about it seems.
It's always been this way folks.

But in 1998, BA wanted more power, this was before Boeing had decided what to do in developing 777 further, (at this stage a Trident 3 style 'boost' engine-but this time in the form of an 'super' APU rather than a separate unit, was even considered).
Something else seemingly forgotten in all the 'will this aircraft design need changing' threads.

But in any case, BA wanted deliveries sooner, from early 2000, so the choice was between developments of the engines then currently available on 777.

Despite what you might have heard/will hear, the choice of engine was open to all three engine makers, it had nothing to do with cancelled BA 747-400 orders (or in thruth, not taken up options).
Because our R/R rep at this time, was certainly not confident R/R would win, he expected GE.
R/R won out through merit.

Remember BA initially brought GE for 777 in 1991, as part of a deal where GE brought out BA's engine overhaul plant in Wales.
We have had quality issues every so often in the following years, two years ago, part of the plant was shut down due oil contamination for a time, helping with the 2nd bad summer in a row BA had.

However, BA recently signed a new contract for GE for engine services, which can mean that things are much better now, or if you are a cynic, that BA have little choice, a powerplant overhaul version of 'Gate Gourmet' caterers, the only game in town, big enough for BA's needs, in the UK.
Or a bit of both perhaps.

However, despite the bad start, GE/777 did in time settle down well in BA service, the issues were well behind BA in 1998 when the new 777 engine contract was signed with R/R.
But BA resolved never to be a, or one of, the launch customers for an all new type again.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 7501 times:

Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
However, despite the bad start, GE/777 did in time settle down well in BA service, the issues were well behind BA in 1998 when the new 777 engine contract was signed with R/R.

Since this was with a previous version of the the 777 and a previous model of the the GE engine, I presume that the current GE engines for the 777 may be just as reliable as the Rolls-Royce engines. Would you agree that this is possible?


User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 7404 times:

Quoting DFW13L (Thread starter):
Further, in DEN recently I saw G-YMMM (Rolls Royce) there from LHR.

As DEN is a non-First route it will generally only receive RR 777s G-YMMA-G (if memory serves) as they are the only 777s based at LHR without and F cabin. Sometimes substitutions will be made and the F cabin will be used as a J cabin.

Currently there are no RR-powered 777s based at LGW.

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13166 posts, RR: 78
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 7393 times:

Not sure, GE would have proposed a slightly more powerful plant, or offered what was available there and then, as other customers for GE I presume were getting, AF for one.
The latter I presume since deliveries were required within 18 months of the order.
But based on the by then well proven base GE90. 777 at BA and others did not just have engine related snags at first, the engine suppilier change perhaps gave the impression that problems were still on going in 1998, when they were not.
BA did mods on their GE90's for the 'Denver Hump', to provide that bit more boost operating out of higher airfields, this was in 1997.


User currently offlinePsimpson From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 7254 times:

Quoting DFW13L (Thread starter):

LGW from my knowledge have 10 B777s based there and they are all GE powered aircraft G-VIIA/B/C/D/E/F/O/P/R and T. From time to time you will get LHR GE powered B777s going down to LGW to cover for routine maintenance of the LGW based B777 aircraft.
B777s G-VIIO/P and R have never been based at LHR, wheres the others have seen service at LHR but not for a while in the case of G-VIIA thru G-VIIF, with G-VIIT transferring from LHR sometime during late summer 2005.
BA seem to use the RR powered B777s G-YMMA thru to G-YMMP on all flights to DEN,PVG,DAC,CCU and PEK. The RR B777 G-YMM series then share with the GE B777s G-VII series,G-RAES and G-ZZZA thru G-ZZZC other routes in the BA B777 network. The G-ZZZ series normally operate to the US and Canadian East Coast, plus the Middle East.


User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1859 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 7026 times:

Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
Despite what you might have heard/will hear, the choice of engine was open to all three engine makers, it had nothing to do with cancelled BA 747-400 orders (or in thruth, not taken up options).

You have said this many times, but you're wrong on this one.

Check this Boeing press release when BA ordered the 777s in 1998:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/1998/news_release_980825a.html

Quote:

The order for 16 firm airplanes and 16 options is valued at nearly $5 billion. With this order, British Airways has ordered a total of 45 777-200s and a total of 306 Boeing airplanes. In a move intended to meet the changing demands of the airline's fleet requirements, some of these airplanes will be substituted for five firm 747-400s currently on order.

I wouldn't say the potential engine cancellation fees as the primary factor for BA's 777 engine switch, but it definitely played a role. Like you said, the availability of a higher thrust version of the Trent 800 at that time was probably the most important factor.


User currently offlineAC777LR From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 487 posts, RR: 41
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6986 times:

I mostly see the Trent powered BA777s in YYZ, the odd time you will see one of the GE90s but 9 times out of 10 its RR.


Member since April 2000
User currently offlineAircanada333 From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 471 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 6908 times:

I'm living in Montreal and BA are only bringing G-YMMA/B/C/D/E/F in town. I saw the BA T7 in YUL about 150 times and the only special thing I saw was G-ZZZB/G-YMMJ and G-VIIX(diversion).

Ben  wave 



De-icing RULZ!!!
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26361 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 6881 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 4):
If I'm not mistaken, it actually has something to do with BA not being happy at all with the initial dispatch reliability of the GE90.

Actually, the reason for the switch was multifold. First, BA wanted to replace some 744 orders with 772 orders and thus had to do something about their contract for 20 RB211s plus spares for those 744s, so they got Trents. Additionally, yes, the Trent 895 is the most powerful 772ER engine that actually gets acceptable fuel economy but hindsight being 20/20 and BA would have gotten the Trent 892. Beyond this, on most flights within the range band on which BA operates the 772ER, the weight advantage of the Trent overcomes the fuel burn advantage the GE90 has

Quoting Dynkrisolo (Reply 10):
Like you said, the availability of a higher thrust version of the Trent 800 at that time was probably the most important factor.

No, that was likely only of moderate importance since the GE90 had plenty of power.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1859 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 6667 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
the weight advantage of the Trent overcomes the fuel burn advantage the GE90 has

That's incorrect. The GE90 has better fuel burn despite being heavier.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
No, that was likely only of moderate importance since the GE90 had plenty of power.

That's incorrect again. When BA placed their 777 orders with Trent 895, GE only had the GE90-90B. The GE90-94B was later launched by Air France.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13166 posts, RR: 78
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 6497 times:

As stated, I well remember this at the time, despite a switch around of types the new 777 order entailed, our R/R people were pleasantly surprised by winning.

Of course, they and most of us, thought it was a case of BA ordering the engine they should have had in the first place.
(This feeling boosted by another Olympus back from GE in Wales, with some defect or other. But that's OK, those who did it got an in house prize for fast engine turnaround).


User currently offlineDynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1859 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 6393 times:

Quoting GDB (Reply 15):
As stated, I well remember this at the time, despite a switch around of types the new 777 order entailed, our R/R people were pleasantly surprised by winning.

The two facts were BA substituted some of the old 747 orders with new 777 orders.

Also, BA opted for the higher gross weight 772er. The Trent 895 would have better takeoff performance than the GE90-90B.

So, whatever you remember the RR people had told you would not change those two facts.


User currently onlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2943 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6239 times:

Is there a timetable for replacements of the non-ER 772s?
Granted they don't have a single widebody aircraft on order.


User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6221 times:

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 4):
If I'm not mistaken, it actually has something to do with BA not being happy at all with the initial dispatch reliability of the GE90.

....they switched from their first 777s being RR powered to their newer ones being GE, and if not mistaken, GE90 powered 777s are supposed to have amongst the best dispatch reliabilities in the industry. I know Air France-KLM and Continental have made statements praising the outstanding dispatch reliability of their GE90 powered 777 fleets.

In reality I think it had more to do with better burn rates and more take-off thrust from the GE90-94's.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineDalb777 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6211 times:

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 18):
....they switched from their first 777s being RR powered to their newer ones being GE

Incorrect, the older 777s are GE powered, and the newer 777s are RR powered.

BA's very first 777, GE powered:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Remi Dallot




Geaux Tigers! Geaux Hornets! Geaux Saints! WHO DAT!!!
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6156 times:

Where do the early "A" models fly to? Can they cross the atlantic without any payload restrictions?


it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineAircanada333 From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 471 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6135 times:

Quoting Dalb777 (Reply 19):
BA's very first 777, GE powered

What the hell was it doing in CDG???



De-icing RULZ!!!
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13166 posts, RR: 78
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 6106 times:

Dynkrisolo, well you proved my point then, Trent was picked in 1998 because it was the best choice at that time. For BA's requirements.
Not because of some orders owed to R/R, which has become some plane spotter article of faith.

GE did agressively compete, our R/R reps worked with those from Snecma, who of course had a stake in GE, they thought BA would stick to GE.
PW did compete too, not that they had much chance.

And yes I DO remember it, I was in that organisation then, were you?
Excuse me for that, an increasing disadvatage on here isn't it?


User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 6053 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 20):
Where do the early "A" models fly to? Can they cross the atlantic without any payload restrictions?

Yes, they can. UA still flies lots of 772As across the Atlantic to IAD and maybe also ORD and JFK as well. They certainly don't have as much range as the -ERs, but it was plenty enough for regular transatlantic hops.

Quoting Aircanada333 (Reply 21):
What the hell was it doing in CDG???

My guess would be crew familiarisation. Though sometimes BA sends even a 747 to CDG as an aircraft substitution or temporary upgrade due to demand.


User currently offlineTristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3977 posts, RR: 34
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5996 times:

Quoting Aircanada333 (Reply 21):
What the hell was it doing in CDG???

When the B777 were first introduced they operated a LHR CDG schedule for the first summer season for crew training purposes.
The same happened a few years earlier with the first B744.


25 Post contains images EI747SYDNEY : Might be the fact that RR are British Just a tought Rob
26 RJ111 : It might have better TSFB but it's carrying more weight. In general the Trent burns less below 4000nms and the GE burns less above this mark - when w
27 ChrisNH : I have only been on a few BA 777s, and those were several years ago. But I don't see any real pattern based on the planes I've been on: 1997: Boston t
28 Dynkrisolo : That was not what I said, and that was not what you said. I said it was a combination of factors, cancellation of RB211 powered 744s being one of the
29 GDB : Dnkrisolo Are talking at cross purposes? I NEVER said BA did not cancel some 747 orders, I alluded to it in previously, of course I knew about it, it
30 Dynkrisolo : Really? Lemme see: They were not options. They were orders for five 744s! Enough said.
31 GDB : Oh get you. OK, some ORDERS were canx. In any event, BA chose to buy some more 777's, a few less (out of an already large 747 fleet) 747's at the same
32 AA777223 : Despite the acrimonious discussion going on concerning the cause for the choice of RR vs. GE, I can't seem to understand this point. Why wasn't the G
33 Dynkrisolo : Because there would have been an unfavorable financial hit. BA couldn't just walk away from their RR commitment bound by a contract. I would agree wi
34 AirbusA6 : Indeed, at one point the GE90 looked a bit of a white elephant. I'm sure BA must have been a bit embarrassed, dumping their traditional engine suppli
35 GDB : I agree that R/R selection was not anything as like as surprising as the GE90 selection 6 years before, but it certainly surprised some commentators.
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...
BA 777&747 Vs. VS 747&A346 posted Wed Jan 21 2004 21:36:49 by ScottishLaddie
Rolls Royce VS Pratt And Whitney VS General Elec posted Mon Nov 12 2001 20:52:55 by N2805WWest
BA 777 & VS A340 @ EWR Today posted Thu Aug 10 2006 17:28:48 by Rw774477
GE/PW Vs Rolls Royce - Aircraft Engines posted Wed Apr 7 2004 18:28:53 by DIJKKIJK
Rolls Royce Introduces New Quiet 777 Engine posted Fri Dec 21 2001 03:54:00 by Ual747
Rolls-Royce Engines On BA 777er's? posted Wed Aug 15 2001 21:46:14 by US A333 PIT
Are BA's 777 Powered By GE90? posted Mon Jun 25 2001 18:13:52 by Red Panda
GE90 V Rolls Royce Help Needed! posted Wed Feb 7 2001 13:42:04 by Cenci
BA 777 Back To SEA posted Mon Oct 30 2006 03:41:45 by Suprazachair
BA 777 & 747 At MCO On 10-23? posted Tue Oct 24 2006 07:56:33 by Swatpamike