Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
I L F C Orders Trent 1000s For 40 787s  
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5309 times:

Just reported in Flight:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...0-ilfc-boeing-787-dreamliners.html
40 aircraft of 72.

Note the timing of the deliveries, 2010 through 2017....

[Edited 2007-07-07 15:31:37]


"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5235 times:

How interesting. ILFC have 95 A330s on order and their preferred engine is the RR Trent. Does this suggest that the 787 will go the same way?

So far ILFC have placed 9 787s.

Aeromexico (3) and Air Seychelles (2) have taken GE.
Fluglobespan (2) have gone for RR.
Royal Jordanian (2) haven't yet chosen an engine.

So ILFC are putting their money on RR? Is this because GECAS are about to order a significant number of 787s with (yawn) GE?


User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5169 times:

I guess most carriers deal with both ILFC and GECAS, but GECAS preference for GE powerplants (I wonder if GECAS gets a good deal from GEAE?) could imply that ILFC favours RR.
My two paise only!



A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5044 times:

Quoting Cricket (Reply 2):
I guess most carriers deal with both ILFC and GECAS, but GECAS preference for GE powerplants (I wonder if GECAS gets a good deal from GEAE?) could imply that ILFC favours RR.

The GECAS preference for GE engines presumably means that those wanting Pratt or RR means that they will be herded off to the other lease companies. Given that the P and R engines are reasonable, that presumably results in the other leasing companies having a preponderance of P and R engines or am I missing something?

Presumably it is a closed data set.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4943 times:

Quoting Baroque (Reply 3):
or am I missing something?

Not to be flip, but there is a reason why GECAS is the second largest lessor of commercial aircraft in the world. I suspect they know what they're doing.  Wink 60 A320s at Le Bourget last month is not a small order. Didn't the head of GECAS remark that they didn't order aircraft "speculatively"? We can only speculate as to what their plans for the 787 are....

Quoting Baroque (Reply 3):
that presumably results in the other leasing companies having a preponderance of P and R engines

Unless, the customers demand CFM / GE!



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12434 posts, RR: 100
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4759 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PM (Reply 1):
How interesting. ILFC have 95 A330s on order and their preferred engine is the RR Trent. Does this suggest that the 787 will go the same way?

RR nailed the A330 engine. Pratt did too.. on the PW4168. Ugh... you don't know how frustrated the engineers were on the PW4172! We would have had the best fuel burn.  hissyfit 

But that doesn't stop me from appreciating how well RR did on that airframe.  bigthumbsup 

I find it very interesting ILFC went pure RR... This is going to drive quite a few of their customers to the Trent 1000... so quite a win for RR.  Smile Both lease companies are very smart... don't bet *against* either.

With this order, RR will have "economy of scale" in maintenance of the Trent 1000... that's very important. Why? Until 400+ engines are out there, it isn't worth it to invest in engineering upgrade kits. Customers, leasing companies, and most engineers in the propulsion market know about this "rule of thumb." So now RR can turn a profit doing improvements on the engine.  Smile (Yes... GE is there too...) These economies of scale are one reason that once GE fell behind on the A330, they couldn't catch up. So the 787 will have an engine horse race for a long time.  Smile

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4656 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 4):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 3):
that presumably results in the other leasing companies having a preponderance of P and R engines

Unless, the customers demand CFM / GE!

But presumably in % terms, most those who wish the CFM/GE are going to go to GECAS leaving the others with other leasing companies.

It does not mean that some might not lease through GECAS but the non GE folks are surely going to sell more engines through non-GECAS avenues.

Looking at it another way, does GMAC lease many Fords?


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4620 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
Why? Until 400+ engines are out there, it isn't worth it to invest in engineering upgrade kits.

The 400 is magic without your knowledge. However, the concept you outline is fascinating but its inverse is a bit puzzling. I can see that at some number (400 is as good as any) they would have more money to upgrade. However you would think that if they could not manage the magic number there was even more reason to improve the engine so that it sells better.

The concept outlined almost suggest if you spend to launch an engine, and then if it does not reach X sales, then you more or less cut it adrift. I find that puzzling. I can see why sinking money into a loser is not a great idea, but it would have been a bit early to have considered either of the 787 engines a loser.  worried 


User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12434 posts, RR: 100
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4588 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Baroque (Reply 7):
However you would think that if they could not manage the magic number there was even more reason to improve the engine so that it sells better.

GE did the upgrade without the numbers to justify it on the GE-90. So you are correct; there are exceptions.

However, with 400+ engines in the field, airlines *refurbishing* their engines will make the upgrade kits profitable for the engine maker *without* additional orders.  Smile

So it is a business decision. For example, I think Pratt was stupid not pursuing the PW4172 more.  cry  I also thought it was crazy for GE to invest so much in the GE-90... but it turned out to be "crazy like a fox."  Wink

Neither 787 engine is a loser. Both are achieving economy of scale. Both will sell for years in the future. I do see clear markets where one is better than the other (hence this thread). However, I expect the 789 engines to receive quite a bit of upgrade. Yes, the most modern engines on the planet *must* be upgraded to stay competitive! I love it!  bigthumbsup  (if one upgrades and the other doesn't... the orders will shift to the upgraded engine).

What can be upgraded on them? Both GE and RR has much better IBR compressors ready. RR will probably change the fan material. (its not that hard... The 94" PW4000 went through 4 fans.) Much of the "improvement" will be optimizing what's already there. (Blade shape, cooling pattern, etc.) Every iteration of the 787 is going to restart this horse race. And I don't believe for a second that GE won't compete against the 777 on another airframe. Eventually it will be time "to eat the young" as must happen in all heavy R&D industries.  Smile I wonder if there is a non-compete clause in the 777 contact... but those clauses *always* have expiration dates.  scratchchin 

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4414 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
I find it very interesting ILFC went pure RR...

AFAIK, this is the first time. They have specified GENx on 20 others; 13 airframes still are undecided.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7258 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4352 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
I find it very interesting ILFC went pure RR...

They have not. Two of their customers have gone for GE engines:

Quoting PM (Reply 1):
Aeromexico (3) and Air Seychelles (2) have taken GE.

and, with 72 aircraft on order there are some that they have not yet committed to either RR or GE.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 5):
With this order, RR will have "economy of scale" in maintenance of the Trent 1000... that's very important. Why? Until 400 engines are out there, it isn't worth it to invest in engineering upgrade kits.

On the Rolls-Royce web site their latest Press release - their is none mentioning the ILFC order as yet - says:

'over 500 Trent 1000 engines [have been ordered] by 15 operators and three leasing companies'


User currently offlineQQflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2247 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3944 times:

I say they went with RR because those 40 frames are for AA.  stirthepot 


The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12434 posts, RR: 100
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3857 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 9):
They have specified GENx on 20 others; 13 airframes still are undecided.

Aaagh... I am corrected. Thanks.

Quoting QQflyboy (Reply 11):
I say they went with RR because those 40 frames are for AA.

Leased?

I believe AA will order the 787. Due to their route structure... the Trent 1000 would make sense. But AA likes to buy, not lease. However... "cashflow issues" might force a lease...  scratchchin 

It will be fun to find out who these are for.

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
User currently offlineDeltaAVL From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1893 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3674 times:

Did anyone else initially read this as "I L F C Orders 1000 787s"?

I almost fell out of my chair.  bouncy 



"We break, We bend, With hand in hand, When hope is gone, Just hang on." -Guster
User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3554 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 10):
'over 500 Trent 1000 engines [have been ordered] by 15 operators and three leasing companies'

Just to be a nit-picker, it was 'four' leasing companies. (ILFC, CIT, Peagus and LCAL.)

By the way, and pace some posts above, I don't see any way that ILFC would ever put all their eggs in one basket. Both GE and RR can expect continued business on the 787 from SUH.


User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12434 posts, RR: 100
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3203 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PM (Reply 14):
I don't see any way that ILFC would ever put all their eggs in one basket.

My bad.  blush 

But on the 787... it matters less. One engine one day... the other the next. How/if the engine swaps work will be very interesting.

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3152 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 15):
One engine one day... the other the next. How/if the engine swaps work will be very interesting.

I wonder if it will ever happen - or happen much. Some good ideas don't seem to work out in practice. (Remember the 777's folding wings?)

I'm thinking of the equivalent of AA taking over TWA's fleet of 757s. AA have RR. TW had PW. So they've had a mixed fleet for a while but, as far as I know, the TW/PW fleet is set to be disposed of over the coming months. Had the engine change option been available this would seem the kind of circumstance when it would happen. i.e. AA would have replaced the PW2000s with RB211s. But would they? Would the cost of acquiring the engines and hanging them have been worth it?

The other scenario is a 787 changing hands relatively early in its life and going from an operator of engine A to a big engine B fleet. Then I can see the engine switch happening. But that kind of thing doesn't happen much. Very few 777s have changed hands, for example, and I can't think of any major 777 operator who has taken odd planes into its fleet with the "wrong" engines.

I guess that leaves us with leasing companies. ILFC place a 787 with customer X for three years and then move it on to customer Y - who wants the 'other' engine. Think of the two 777s that flew for a few years with Aeroflot. Once they were built with GE90s then that's what they are going to have for all time. ILFC wouldn't be in that position on the 787.

I may be wrong (heck, it's going to have to happen some day) but I just wonder if the option to switch engines will end up being terribly significant in practice.

I suppose it will give all those GEnx customers the chance to correct their mistake...  duck 


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2741 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 16):
Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 15):
One engine one day... the other the next. How/if the engine swaps work will be very interesting.

I wonder if it will ever happen - or happen much. Some good ideas don't seem to work out in practice. (Remember the 777's folding wings?)

Well at least the easy interchange on engines has a fair chance of flying better than the folding wings!

I hope I am not taken to imply that ILFC would ever buy GEs, just that with one of the opposition more or less tied to GE, it would hardly be surprising if the opposition turned up more than overall % on the ILFC planes.

Interesting lines as to where improvements are likely La. How will we know of updates? Can we ask in advance to be updated when either of the donks gets a makeover. Pretty please!  Smile  Smile


User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2666 times:

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
I hope I am not taken to imply that ILFC would ever buy GEs, just that with one of the opposition more or less tied to GE, it would hardly be surprising if the opposition turned up more than overall % on the ILFC planes.

Actually, the GE90 is by far ILFC's preferred engine on the 777.  Sad

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
donks

"donks"??  Confused


User currently onlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3930 posts, RR: 34
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2645 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 18):
"donks"??

Old British RAF slang for an aircraft engine.


User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2506 times:

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 19):

Old British RAF slang for an aircraft engine.

Huh. Never heard that one before. Thonks!


User currently offlineAmirs From Israel, joined Dec 2003, 1333 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2447 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 18):
Actually, the GE90 is by far ILFC's preferred engine on the 777

The main reason being that 77L and 77W are only available in GE. Even if a carrier orders 772ER, they will probably want to order GE so that in the future they can easily order 77W and 77L an keeping the same engines.


BTW - Are we going to hear today for who those 787 are for?


User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2416 times:

Quoting Amirs (Reply 21):
The main reason being that 77L and 77W are only available in GE.

That would make sense but it's not the reason. ILFC's preference for GE on the 777 was established before the 77W and 77L were even launched. ILFC have 33 777-200ERs with GE and most were ordered more than 10 years ago. They have 6 with PW and 4 with RR.  Sad

Out of interest, GECAS ordered 4 (!) 777-200ERs (with GE of course) compared to 33 with GE for ILFC.

In fact, in total GECAS have ordered 39 777s (all models) and all with GE. ILFC have ordered 79 777s (all models) and 61 have GE.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2227 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 22):
That would make sense but it's not the reason. ILFC's preference for GE on the 777 was established before the 77W and 77L were even launched. ILFC have 33 777-200ERs with GE and most were ordered more than 10 years ago. They have 6 with PW and 4 with RR.

I did say it would be hardly surprising if.... which allowed the odd reversal. Not training for politics but.... It was wording that our nice Mr Howard himself would have been proud of. The point still remains, that if GECAS are pulling GEs preferentially, you would expect a good chance of ILFC going another way.

Yes, you have the donkey at the front pulling. Common Aus slang too for the motor in a motor car. Never mind PM soon we will soon have you able to Ajax your carby (hope I have that correct, if not someone will sharp correct me).


User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12434 posts, RR: 100
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2077 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PM (Reply 16):

I wonder if it will ever happen - or happen much. Some good ideas don't seem to work out in practice. (Remember the 777's folding wings?)

As you noted, the engine change option will most likely be implemented by the leasing companies. How often? Not very. But it isn't unheard of for the airframe with the "wrong engine" to be worth 20% less then one with the "desired engine." That's enough, after scrapping the nacelle and engine for their part values, to easily pay for the other engine. I think it will happen... but when? How often?

Quoting PM (Reply 16):
I suppose it will give all those GEnx customers the chance to correct their mistake...

 rotfl 

I like the fact this brings the 787 back to being a true "horse race."  spin 

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 25, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2045 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 12):
I believe AA will order the 787. Due to their route structure... the Trent 1000 would make sense. But AA likes to buy, not lease. However... "cashflow issues" might force a lease... scratchchin

My guess is that these are for AA or BA, but I would like to be proven totally wrong and see them go to UA!

Both AA and BA are confronting "challenges" from their labor forces at the moment, so leasing may be preferred.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
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...
Air China Orders RR Trent 1000 For 787s posted Wed Sep 13 2006 13:58:36 by PanAm_DC10
ILFC Orders RR Trent-1000 For B787s posted Mon Jul 17 2006 11:22:58 by PanAm_DC10
Mesa Orders Additional CRJ700s For UAX posted Tue Jul 3 2007 16:03:48 by Laxintl
El Al Renews Talks For Boeing 787s posted Wed May 2 2007 13:59:05 by PanAm_DC10
CIT Orders RR Trents For A330, B787s posted Tue Apr 3 2007 11:05:46 by Flying-Tiger
GEnx Or Trent 1000 For An-225? posted Sun Feb 11 2007 02:22:08 by SCAT15F
BA Passengers Still Waiting For Their Baggage posted Wed Jan 3 2007 14:48:11 by Express1
Singapore Air Select RR For Their A330s posted Fri Nov 3 2006 10:13:41 by PanAm_DC10
Skywest Orders Crj-900s For UAL posted Wed Oct 4 2006 17:32:44 by ERAUgrad02
Qatar Airways Choses GE For Their B777s posted Mon Sep 25 2006 21:24:49 by SkepticAll