Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
GP7000 Could Become Genx Alternative For A350XWB  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9293 times:

As discussed last week GE & the A350XWB(-1000) don't get along real good http://www.airliners.net/discussions...eneral_aviation/read.main/3434937/ and as expected (hoped) PW might be making some phone calls to both GE & Airbus.


Prospects may be increasing for a potential Engine Alliance bid to power the Airbus A350XWB, as talks have stalled between the aircraft maker and General Electric over a powerplant offering.

The move comes while Airbus is revealing other A350 details, including a highly aggressive production plan, which signals that it is banking on an order rate not unlike the strong uptake Boeing has seen with the rival 787.

Rolls-Royce is the only committed engine maker, with the TrentXWB, offering a thrust range up to 90,000-95,000-lb. to power the planned A350-1000 version.



GE concedes negotiations with Airbus have reached "a stalemate," but adds the offer is "still not dead" for 75,000-lb.- and 80,000-lb.-thrust-class GEnx variants for the A350-800 and -900, respectively. GE has consistently declined to offer an engine for the -1000 because it competes directly with Boeing's longer-range 777-200LR/300ER variants, which it powers exclusively with the GE90-110/115B.

The Alliance has also expressed interest in powering twins. A new-generation, 90,000-lb.-thrust engine for the A350-1000 would provide Airbus with a suitable power source for the proposed A380-900 stretch, as well.

Although the Engine Alliance applied for, and was granted, European Union antitrust permission to offer the "GP" engine for a proposed long-range derivative of the 767-400ER in the late 1990s, this development never took place. Any new approach to Airbus, says GE, can only occur "if GE is done, and we and Airbus part ways." It would also require a change of the joint venture's charter.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...20A350%20Order%20Book&channel=comm


GP7200

[Edited 2007-06-11 10:08:26]

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9217 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
but adds the offer is "still not dead" for 75,000-lb.- and 80,000-lb.-thrust-class GEnx variants for the A350-800 and -900, respectively



Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
A new-generation, 90,000-lb.-thrust engine for the A350-1000 would provide Airbus with a suitable power source for the proposed A380-900 stretch, as well.

This would be a great solution IMHO. GE powers the -800 and -900, and GP the -1000. It gives EA enough time to develop the new generation GP engine, and it allows GE to share the development costs, as well as offer PW a new entry in the widebody market.

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
A new-generation, 90,000-lb.-thrust engine for the A350-1000 would provide Airbus with a suitable power source for the proposed A380-900 stretch, as well.

I assumes they mean the a350-900R? Looking at the graph, that falls in the same thrust category as the -1000.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 9102 times:

Quoting Kappel (Reply 1):
This would be a great solution IMHO. GE powers the -800 and -900, and GP the -1000

I think from a airline perspective a sole engine family for all types would be preffered. So a GP7000 for -800, -900, 1000, -900R, -900F and whatever they come up with..

I think the Gp7000 is a good engine, efficient, silent ect. but I guess some new technology should be included to optimize it for introduction from 2013.

From it's inception to IES would be ~13 yrs. It;'s basicly a GE90 core evolution with a PW4000 cold engine and new fan. GE is very much in the GP7000 as is the GE90 / link to the Boeings 777..

New materials, combuster technology etc. have moved on.

I wonder how P&W feels now on its GP alliance with GE.


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 9013 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 2):
From it's inception to IES would be ~13 yrs. It;'s basicly a GE90 core evolution with a PW4000 cold engine and new fan. GE is very much in the GP7000 as is the GE90 / link to the Boeings 777..

It could still work well, both the GEnx and Trent 1000 are derived from existing engines also. As long as a new derivative of the GP could compete with the Trent XWBs SFC than I cant see why it should not happen.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 8889 times:

EA having an engine for the 350-1000 is fascinating and welcome, but how is GE 50% competing with itself any more acceptable than just competing 100% with itself?

It may well all come to pass, but if the GP engines do power that version, it rather suggests that some of the original reasons for not having a 95ish k version of the GEnx might not have been correct???


User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4763 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8688 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Baroque (Reply 4):
but how is GE 50% competing with itself any more acceptable than just competing 100% with itself?

the reality is there will be a A350-1000, and if GE aren't on board they will all be RR powered and their absence on the -1000 may send more customers to RR for the -800. -900, so GE can still have some o fthe market without totally abndoning its 777/GE90 commitment or taking as much risk on the A350 project.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 970 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 8490 times:

So I guess this means that the EU will waive their demand that the GP7000 is to be restricted to quadjets now that Airbus needs it for their latest twin....

User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 8461 times:

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 5):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 4):
but how is GE 50% competing with itself any more acceptable than just competing 100% with itself?

the reality is there will be a A350-1000, and if GE aren't on board they will all be RR powered and their absence on the -1000 may send more customers to RR for the -800. -900, so GE can still have some of the market without totally abandoning its 777/GE90 commitment or taking as much risk on the A350 project.

True indeed. But if I was GE, I would do that by putting a GEnx derivative on and having 100% of that share, rather than 50%. And the other problem is that if there is a problem with the agreement with Boeing associated offering the GEnx for a T7 competitor, then the EA option might not solve the problem.

Or putting it round the other way, if it does solve the problem it is a much different one from that which has been set out in other threads in a.net.

None of which is to say you might not be correct Trex8.

[Edited 2007-06-11 16:45:59]

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 8423 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 6):
So I guess this means that the EU will waive their demand that the GP7000 is to be restricted to quadjets now that Airbus needs it for their latest twin....

Well for a start it will need to be improved, so it might not even be called the GP7000. Whether or not that would affect the quad rule I dont know.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30910 posts, RR: 87
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8303 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
Any new approach to Airbus, says GE, can only occur "if GE is done, and we and Airbus part ways." It would also require a change of the joint venture's charter.

I'm confused by this statement. Is GE saying they will only support an EA powerplant for the A350 if they decide not to produce a GEnx model or are they saying they will leave the EA and then P&W by itself can proceed?

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 6):
So I guess this means that the EU will waive their demand that the GP7000 is to be restricted to quadjets now that Airbus needs it for their latest twin....

Since the article states the EA was given permission to power the 767-400ER, I can only imagine it would be assured that they would be given permission to power the A350.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8304 times:

Emirates is "threatening" to order 100 A350. They indicated they are mainly interested in bigger aircraft (e.g. 787-10, A350-1000) http://www.airliners.net/discussions...eneral_aviation/read.main/3452047/

Now if I'm not wrong these folks already ordered 170 GP7200 engines, are building a testcel with GE etc..

Maybe Tim Clark did call GE to ask if they could do the GP7000 also on their A350s. Commonality, in-house capabilities..

If they say no, that's 200 engines to RR, after last weeks Qatar's 160.

How hot is the 777? Time to get creative..

http://www.geae.com/engines/commercial/gp7000/index.html


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8005 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8295 times:

I wouldn't be surprised that the Engine Alliance GP7000 series engine is offered on the A350XWB, especially when EK could buy 100+ planes and that could mean as many as 240+ engines sold to EK.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30910 posts, RR: 87
Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8295 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

How high can the GP7000 scale? The top-end model can only power the A350-800 so they'd need to get at least another 4,000lbs for the A350-900 and some 14,000lbs for the A350-1000 and other HGW variants.

User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8271 times:

Perhaps GE is using these negotiations to open the door to a joint venture for future projects, without any restriction, with Pratt & Whitney? And yes, I believe the business case for the A350-1000XWB is certainly there. I just can't understand GE's tactics here. I used to think that they wanted to stick Airbus with the development costs, but maybe there is another (ulterior) motive?


"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30910 posts, RR: 87
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8212 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 13):
Perhaps GE is using these negotiations to open the door to a joint venture for future projects, without any restriction, with Pratt & Whitney?

Anybody know what, exactly, Pratt was offering on their 787 engine? Was it going to use a GTF, as well?

If so, then perhaps indeed GE and PW seek to build a GTF-based engine family that can support both the 737RS and A320RS as well as the 787, A350 and Y3?


User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 7865 times:

"f so, then perhaps indeed GE and PW seek to build a GTF-based engine family that can support both the 737RS and A320RS as well as the 787, A350 and Y3?"

Excellent point Stitch. That would be a cool joint venture. It would poor some life back into PW's commercial business as well as keep GE's sales way up.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12503 posts, RR: 46
Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7377 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm actually struggling to see how this could pan out.

GE currently won't offer an engine for the A350-1000 because that plane will compete with the 777-300ER. If that's the only basis for their decision, I don't see why they would give the go-ahead for EA to offer a version of the GP7000 for the same plane. I assume, given the nature of EA, that either partner can veto any developments of the engine it doesn't like.

Re the EU rules requiring GP7000s in "sets of four", I have a high level of confidence that if Airbus really wanted it for the A350, that the rule would be revoked.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineBaron95 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1335 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 7094 times:

P&W is done long term from big engines. GE is holding out for 3 reasons. 1 - Give the 77W/77L/77F more time to caputure big orders. 2 - Waiting for Boeing definition on the 787-10/10ER to see what thrust level they need to scale to on the GEnx. 3 - Wanting airbus to face enough customer presure that they will FUND part of GE's development effort.

In the end most A350 orders will be RR; Most 787 orders will be GE; but there will be a choice.

Airbus, on the other hand, seeing that lack of engine choice did not hurt the 77W/77L, is holding out.



Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6703 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
Since the article states the EA was given permission to power the 767-400ER, I can only imagine it would be assured that they would be given permission to power the A350.



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 16):
Re the EU rules requiring GP7000s in "sets of four", I have a high level of confidence that if Airbus really wanted it for the A350, that the rule would be revoked.

Like Stitch quoted the ruling isn´t as hard as many have assumed here for yrs, 764ER was already yrs ago. About capasity the core of the GP7200 is the GE90 core so should be able to handle 90.000lb, the cold section is PW that also powers 777´s and a new fan. I think 90.000lb is doable without to drastic redesign.



Quoting Baron95 (Reply 17):
In the end most A350 orders will be RR; Most 787 orders will be GE; but there will be a choice.

Airbus, on the other hand, seeing that lack of engine choice did not hurt the 77W/77L, is holding out.

I think RR is doing ok on the 787. They have sold to major customers (ANA, NWA) and other RR customers still have to decide (SQ, VS).

I don´t think GE is aiming at sharing the 787 market with RR & leave the XWB to RR. That seems a price to high to pay for the Boeing 777 market position.

RR might be sweetening up its offerings & ramping up production to take advantage right now. GE is simply in no position to lean back.


Trent1000

I expect action from GE pretty soon.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10008 posts, RR: 96
Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6589 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
How high can the GP7000 scale?

I think it would be difficult for the GP7000 to exceed 80 000lb by much efficiently.
(Maybe enough for the A350XWB-900 without too many probs)
It's smaller than the Trent XWB, (which RR themselves are having to do clever things to to get 95 000lb) and slightly older tech.
Surely an A350XWB-1000 engine would have to be a derivative of sorts......

Quoting Keesje (Reply 18):

You put some fabulous photos on this site, Keesje, and the engine shots are no exception.  thumbsup 

Regards


User currently offlineGlideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1612 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6560 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
If so, then perhaps indeed GE and PW seek to build a GTF-based engine family that can support both the 737RS and A320RS as well as the 787, A350 and Y3?

A wise person this one is.  checkmark 



To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30910 posts, RR: 87
Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6515 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 19):
I think it would be difficult for the GP7000 to exceed 80 000lb by much efficiently.

So that puts it in the same hole the GEnx is in - it can power the A350-800, but that is it.

So it looks like GE is going to have to go back and improve the GE90 with GEnx technology to get the desired thrust levels. On the plus side, this would make the 777 better, but a 123" fan is going to probably be too big for any 787 model since it is a full foot wider then the GEnx and Trent 1000.

So GE is probably in the same boat as RR was - having to come out with an A350-specific fan size around 116-118". And that fan size might not be large enough to power Y3. Now, if GE can get to ~85,000lbs with the current GEnx, that should cover the HGW 787s to ~600,000lbs which should be enough even for the 787-11ER.

I would not be surprised if GE isn't currently hamstrung by what direction Boeing intends to go with. If Boeing goes for Y3, then GE can build the GEnxXWF (Xtra-Wide Fan) and use a smaller fan diameter for the A350 (ala the GEnx on the 747-8I) and a wider fan on the 777 and Y3. If Boeing decides to go with the HGW 787s and GE can get the GEnx to power them, then GE may very well decide it's not worth the investment to build an A350 engine without direct Airbus support, as has been suggested by a number of members.


User currently offlineSv11 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 161 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6515 times:

I think PW should seize the moment and offer a 75-95K engine for the A350. I think they have a good engine on the A330 and this would be a good moment for them to get back into the widebody game.

sv11


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 5929 times:

I think it is clear RR is building on the -900 and 1000 engines and various research program to build the Trent XWB. Preliminairy desuign phase should be completed next years together with the A350XWB.

I can imagine the people engaged in the development of the new variant are all up to speed and eager to implement lessons learned from the previous projects.



Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
So that puts it in the same hole the GEnx is in - it can power the A350-800, but that is it.


Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 19):
I think it would be difficult for the GP7000 to exceed 80 000lb by much efficiently.

So that puts it in the same hole the GEnx is in - it can power the A350-800, but that is it.

The GP7000 is build on 409kN (92,000lb) General Electric GE90-92Bs and or 436kN (98,000lb) PW-4098s technology.

Therefor a GP7000 at 90.000lb doesn´t seem impossible to me.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 21):
I would not be surprised if GE isn't currently hamstrung by what direction Boeing intends to go with. If Boeing goes for Y3, then GE can build the GEnxXWF (Xtra-Wide Fan) and use a smaller fan diameter for the A350 (ala the GEnx on the 747-8I) and a wider fan on the 777 and Y3

I think GE banking on the B777 and Y3 solely might put their >80.000lb business at unacceptable risk for the next 5 yrs..

Not everybody might be sure the GE90 is good enough for that period.


[Edited 2007-06-12 01:18:55]

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 5777 times:

I still don't buy that airbus will be able to get more range, more efficiency, same cruise speed and nearly the same capacity (pax/cargo) in the A350-1000 with 90k engines while the 77W requires 115k engines. 100k engines, maybe, but the A350-1000, the more I see it thrown around, seems to be a plane that Airbus will fall short on in a few areas. Either the range will decrease, or the efficiency will decrease, or it will be slower and have less payload than currently offered.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 DfwRevolution : Airbus has already (quietly) revised the A350 range targets downward from when the "XWB" was announced at Farnborough 2006. At the time, the A350-800
26 PM : I think it's still a bit early to make that prediction. There's a long way still to go. VS have ordered RR on their A380s but it's streching a point
27 Stitch : I disagree. Over the next five years the 77F, 77L and 77W should all continue to see strong demand (especially the 77W), unless the A350 sells poorly
28 Ikramerica : That chart about range and efficiency against the 77W seems to be old. For one thing, the 77W has a current new build range of: 7,930 nautical miles
29 Post contains images DfwRevolution : I'm sure there are some ardent A350 supports who would tell you that the -1000 has indeed been "launched" by QR, but with nearly a decade to EIS we s
30 Ikramerica : I kind of agree there. It's just too far away to consider it a real launch. It's just "planned planes in the family" at this point. Or, "offered for
31 Shenzhen : Wow, those are some pretty aggresive numbers Airbus are touting. If the A350-1 cost 25 percent less to operate then the 777-3, then it must be 40 - 5
32 Post contains images Astuteman : Don't know where you get this from. It been reduced so quietly that even Airbus don't know. The specified range of the A350XWB-1000 is 15 400km, or 8
33 Spink : If we are to take the fact that an aircraft that has firm contracts in place for 20 units is launched, with a grain of salt, presumably this also app
34 Post contains links and images Lightsaber : The GP7000 could be easily scaled to the thrusts required. That is not an issue. Its more the Alliance structure and... The issue with the GP7000 is i
35 Post contains images Ikramerica : Well pardon me for misunderstanding, but the GP7000 mentioned above in the article is a "90,000" not a 95,000, and the RR mentioned will have "90,000
36 Post contains images WingedMigrator : No, they mean A380-900 just like it says in the article. By sheer coincidence the thrust ranges for the A350 and A380 overlap, much as the 767 and 74
37 Ikramerica : Sure looks like 8000 nm to me. But what do I know. Again, the table Keesje showed was old, as it didn't have the 77W or the 35X accurately depicted.
38 Post contains links Keesje : Pratt & Whitney unit could play a role in developing a second engine for the Airbus A350 despite the project's challenges, Pratt & Whitney President
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...
Austrian Airlines Could Become Lufthansa (again) posted Sun Oct 14 2001 17:05:52 by Rickster
Could A A340-313X Work For Continental? posted Sun Aug 26 2001 16:27:14 by Boeing757fan
SIA Could Buy GE 777LRs posted Thu Jul 19 2001 00:41:14 by Singapore_Air
Why No GE Engines For 757? posted Sat Mar 10 2001 04:11:45 by FlagshipAZ
Smaller Airports In Canada That Could Become Big posted Wed Mar 29 2000 02:45:54 by Airliners rule
Skymarshalls - Could Be Mistaken For Terrorists? posted Thu Nov 15 2001 18:15:28 by 777kicksass
Could Someone Give Me The Site For.. posted Tue Oct 9 2001 01:48:10 by Nwafirstclass
Anyone Work For GE Aircraft Engines? posted Wed Aug 15 2001 21:21:38 by Sunken_Lunken
National Airlines Could Be Sold For $40 Million posted Wed Apr 25 2001 19:09:04 by Defunctairline
Will HNL Become A Hub For... posted Sat Feb 24 2001 03:29:02 by Air Taiwan