Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
GE Revives Interest In A350 XWB  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 14672 times:

Jon, our Flightblogger, reports :

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...e-revives-interest-in-a350-xw.html

Key issue remains engining the A350-1000 & (-900R, F) that threatens the 777-300ER is which GE has invested more then just the engine.

There seems to be an opening. Probably bad times makes both put their money where their mouth is.. GE's GENX production line isn't pushing out engines as fast as projected, to state it mildly.

Maybe airlines like KLM/AF, LH and others told Airbus /GE they would prefer choice when ordering either the A350 or 787.



[Edited 2009-05-07 02:54:12]

59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 14653 times:



Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
Maybe airlines like KLM/AF, LH and others told Airbus /GE they would prefer choice when ordering either the A350 or 787.

Well LH has a huge RR engine fleet with their A346s, A333s and A380s. On the other hand their 747-8Is will have GE engines, as for AF/KL they would certainly have pushed for GE engines.
Would be interesting if Pratt will offer an engine, too.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 14571 times:



Quoting Columba (Reply 1):
Would be interesting if Pratt will offer an engine, too.

On the latest IAG podcast Pratt's VP for the GTF project said they weren't targeting the 350.



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 14573 times:

Fingers crossed they do get on board. will be the best news i've had for months if and when they do.

I've been predicting this for months - glad to see something might be happening finally.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 14424 times:



Quoting Columba (Reply 1):
Would be interesting if Pratt will offer an engine, too.

Hanging around the A350XWB during the last few years was also the Engine Alliance, a cooperation between GE and Pratt powering the A380. The GP7000 could handle the A350-1000 too.



User currently offlineEbbUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 14372 times:



Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
Key issue remains engining the A350-1000 & (-900R, F) that threatens the 777-300ER is which GE has invested more then just the engine.

It must be a lot more than just an engine that GE would not want to invest in tomorrow's technology today. Any other sound business would be looking for new revenue streams all the time. They seem happy to put all their eggs in one basket. Real astute


User currently offlineSirtoby From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 370 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 14243 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 4):
The GP7000 could handle the A350-1000 too.

No, the GP is capable of 82k, maybe it could be pushed to 85k, but to handle the A350-1000 you need a (more or less) new engine - larger fan with higher BPR and OPR to get the SFC Airbus is looking for - basically you need the GEnx core pumped up with a more efficient low spool.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 14037 times:



Quoting Sirtoby (Reply 6):
No, the GP is capable of 82k, maybe it could be pushed to 85k, but to handle the A350-1000 you need a (more or less) new engine - larger fan with higher BPR and OPR to get the SFC Airbus is looking for - basically you need the GEnx core pumped up with a more efficient low spool.

The GP7200 is dimensioned for the A380-900 and currently downrated. Its build from GE90 and PW4000 technology and I have little doubt that a 100.000lbs version could be produced if GE and PW want so. E.g. if its politically handy for GE.

GE and Airbus splitted after GE did not want to offer a suitable engine for the a350-1000. Since then the 787 production stalled (~half its engines will be RR), the GENX powered 747-8i fails to attract a lot of attention and RR sold hundreds of Trent XWB shipsets for the A350, also to loyal GE customers. The 777-200ER/LR backlog imploded.

I wonder if the GENX core can handle the 9x klbs required..

Time to review the situation and set out new lines.


User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 14007 times:

It's pretty essential they do get on at some point. For both parties i feel. It's probably going to be a big seller and Rolls Royce has just been lapping the orders up, along with their cut of the 787.

User currently offlineFrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 13976 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 7):
GE and Airbus splitted after GE did not want to offer a suitable engine for the a350-1000

I believe that's still the case. However, if for example AF/KL has a preference for the A350 to the 787, Airbus may be interested after all in GE engines for the -800 and -900 only. With all those 77W's in their fleet, AF/KL won't be interested in the A350-1000 for a quite a while anyway.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 7):
the GENX powered 747-8i fails to attract a lot of attention

Well, the 747-8F does, and with 4 engines per airframe GE won't complain too much. Same reason why RR probably won't lose much (if anything) on the Trent 500 program for the Airbus A340-600.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 13976 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well the A350-1000 isn't exactly setting the sales books on fire, and Boeing continues to land 777-300ER orders pushing back the A350-1000XWB in a 77W replacement role well into the 2020's.

So I can see why GE would prefer to concentrate on the A350-800XWB and A350-900XWB as those are more readily and easily attainable performance goals and the sales prospects for those two models is much brighter then for the A350-1000XWB at the moment and probably through the end of the next decade.

I think Airbus will blink and accept GE power only on the smaller models. Rolls certainly won't complain about sole-source power for the A350-1000XWB.  Wink


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 13923 times:



Quoting Frigatebird (Reply 9):
Well, the 747-8F does, and with 4 engines per airframe GE won't complain too much. Same reason why RR probably won't lose much (if anything) on the Trent 500 program for the Airbus A340-600.

747-8F: 80 ordered in 4 yrs. Some are being deferred. Worse: with the introduction of A380 and 777-300ER the market will be flooded with hundreds of capable 747-400 converted freigters selling at approxmately 1/3 of the 747-8F list price.

Then we have the 777-200LRF and upcoming 777 & A340 conversions.. No gold mine IMO.


User currently offlineBrendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 13853 times:



Quoting Keesje (Reply 7):
The GP7200 is dimensioned for the A380-900 and currently downrated. Its build from GE90 and PW4000 technology and I have little doubt that a 100.000lbs version could be produced if GE and PW want so. E.g. if its politically handy for GE.

Remember this quote Keesje?:

Quote:
"GEnx engines don't work for us at all," Leahy said. "We have no intention of putting their GEnx engine on the A350 at all. It has to be a generation beyond."

Link to source.
How on earth can the GP7200 be good enough for Airbus when they rejected the GEnX for the A350XWB? Getting the necessary reduction in fuel burn would, as Sirtoby noted, require enough improvements that it would practically be a completely new engine.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
Worse: with the introduction of A380 and 777-300ER the market will be flooded with hundreds of capable 747-400 converted freigters selling at approxmately 1/3 of the 747-8F list price.

And as others have told you before, that's not gonna happen. There is simply some things that the 747BCF cannot do that the 744F and 748F can do (higher floor loading, higher payload and nose door to mention a few). Yes, a 744BCF might be cheep, but it has its limitations. The 748F is here to stay.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 13758 times:

Brendows, I think the question will be what is a GENX and when does it become something new. GE will have to offer a competitive engine, otherwise they'll just not sell against the dedicated Trent XWB.

Quoting Brendows (Reply 12):
And as others have told you before, that's not gonna happen.

I think you are going to be very surprized then. If I look at the backlogs for conversions (like the BCF) and the build up of the current freighter fleet well.. Boeing sold 78 -8F's during the boom of the last 4 years and 0 since november 2007. That's todays reality.



[Edited 2009-05-07 08:31:59]

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 14, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 13719 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

49 747-400BCFs have been sold through this month, so the 747-8F is still more popular.

And almost - if not actually - everyone operating 747-400BCFs also operate new-build freighters, as well.

That is today's reality.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 13411 times:

What about 747-400SF's? BSF's? Did you think only Boeing (TAECO) converts 747-400s?'

Problem sofar was the limitted availability of 747-400s because airlines held on to their 747s while the A380s were delayed, as you probably know. Now more and more 747-400 are phased out of passenger service B747-400 conversions will soon right pass 747-8F orders.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...hannel=awst&id=news/aw102306p3.xml

That is the reality.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 16, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 13347 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Keesje (Reply 15):
What about 747-400SF's? BSF's? Did you think only Boeing (TAECO) converts 747-400s?'

Not at all.

Bedek had 24 orders as of the end of 2007. So adding that with the 49 BCFs, brings us up 73, which is still less then the 747-8F order book.

And even if the total is more then 78, it's not significantly more. There remains a market for new-build freighters.


User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 13252 times:

If the GE-90 can handle from 72K of thrust to 115K, why is is inconceivable that 7X,000 engine (or the core of the GEnx) could be made to handle 9X,000 or 10X,000 of thrust?

Quoting Sirtoby (Reply 6):
No, the GP is capable of 82k, maybe it could be pushed to 85k, but to handle the A350-1000 you need a (more or less) new engine - larger fan with higher BPR and OPR to get the SFC Airbus is looking for - basically you need the GEnx core pumped up with a more efficient low spool.




Sic 'em bears
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 13124 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 17):
If the GE-90 can handle from 72K of thrust to 115K, why is is inconceivable that 7X,000 engine (or the core of the GEnx) could be made to handle 9X,000 or 10X,000 of thrust?

Because the GEnx was designed around a thrust range of 53k to 75k. I am sure they left some growth in to support possibly HGW 787 models.

It might very well be possible for GE to significantly scale up the thrust of the GEnx as they did with the GE90. Rolls Royce increased the fan diameter for the Trent 2000 powering the A350XWB to 118" from the 112" the Trent 1000 engine uses, though the BPR is lower.

The GEnx has a fan diameter of 111" so GE might need to scale that up to meet the thrust needs of the A350XWB.


User currently offlineFrmrCAPCADET From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1714 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 12755 times:

The larger the plane for smaller the niche for it to fill. It really does not seem to me there is any reason why RR would not be the sole supplier for the 350-10. It is not like there would be much commonality between those engines and the ones on the two small versions. (I am guessing on this, corrections invited). As a matter of arithmetic I am interested in the following: development costs for the 10 (or the 777W for that matter) are X billion. Will enough of those engines sell that it makes sense to double the development cost simply to offer two different engines?


Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 12593 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well the GE90-11xB did turn out to be a huge win for GE, however that was driven in no small part to the 777-300ER arriving at exactly the right time to capitalize on market conditions and the availability (or lack thereof) of competitors pushing sales to near 500 frames.

History favors the A350-1000XWB being successful because the stretch of the family usually is. However, there are a large number of relatively new A340-600s and 777-300ERs in service with more (of the latter) arriving every month, so that pushes when one could expect the bulk of sales to occur later because the bulk of deliveries will be later.

Yes, the fuel-burn advantage Airbus claims for the A350-1000XWB over the 777-300ER is most impressive, and yet so was the fuel-burn advantage of the 777-300ER over the 747-400 and yet airlines did not immediately move to scrap young 747-400s for equally-expensive new 777-300ERs. So I don't see a sudden mass retirement of young 777-300ERs in favor of replacement with new A350-1000XWBs.

The sweet-spot of the replacement market coming up is the A340-300 and the 777-200ER. The 787-9 and A350-900XWB are both well-positioned to handle this replacement and that is where I believe GE would most want to play. Boeing and GE do not have an agreement that prevents GE from powering a plane the size of the A350-1000XWB, despite continued...well, to speak frankly, outright lies...that they do.

There is also debate within some inside GE Aviation Engines about just how well the A350-800XWB will actually do in terms of deliveries. Just as some believe 787-8 customers will switch to the 787-9, there is a belief that the same may happen with the A350-800XWB and customers will switch to the A350-900XWB. In such a scenario, GE would want to develop an engine that favors the thrust requirements of the A350-900XWB since that is where the bulk of their sales would go (just as the 90k engines of the 77E strongly outsold the 70k engines of the 772).


User currently offlineFrmrCAPCADET From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1714 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 12236 times:

Stitch - thanks, that was informative.

a note: while one often worries about monopoly pricing, I suspect that in the case of the largest 777 Boeing and GE had some sort of deal that the price of that exclusively supplied engine would bear some sort of relationship to the smaller engines which did face competition. And obviously GE priced it at a point at which it sold very well.



Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30906 posts, RR: 87
Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 12197 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting FrmrCAPCADET (Reply 21):
a note: while one often worries about monopoly pricing, I suspect that in the case of the largest 777 Boeing and GE had some sort of deal that the price of that exclusively supplied engine would bear some sort of relationship to the smaller engines which did face competition. And obviously GE priced it at a point at which it sold very well.

Yes. I've seen studies that suggest the GE90 (and GEnx) sell for about half of their published list prices. Of course, the real money in engines is on long-term support and spares contracts so it's quite possible for an engine to go out at a not-insignificant loss in terms of sales price with the support contract making the overall deal profitable.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 12162 times:

GE never lost interest in the A350, so not sure how it's revived. They have not changed their position: no engine for the -1000. They are just now trying to use the leverage of the 787 program (the GEnx is being hung on #5 right now, IIRC), and the reality that customers, let's say AF, may be holding off on the A350X because there are no GE engines and they don't care about the -1000, since they have new 77Ws in the fleet and more coming.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 24, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 12080 times:



Quoting Frigatebird (Reply 9):
I believe that's still the case. However, if for example AF/KL has a preference for the A350 to the 787, Airbus may be interested after all in GE engines for the -800 and -900 only. With all those 77W's in their fleet, AF/KL won't be interested in the A350-1000 for a quite a while anyway.

Just saw your reply. Didn't mean to ape you.  Smile



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 MD-90 : With the 739, 753, 764, and A346 being notable exceptions.
26 Stitch : The 737-900 family is not doing too terribly, with 299 combined orders (739 / 739BBJ / 739ER) to date.
27 PlaneInsomniac : Although many on a.net don't like to hear it, the A346 really is not doing that badly. It has currently 104 orders, which represents more than a quar
28 Stitch : Indeed. It really is a darn good plane for missions that need a lot of payload weight or operate out of less-then-ideal field conditions in terms of
29 Sirtoby : The GP7 is downrated for the A388 and designed for the A389 and A38F, but MTO rating for these would be 82.5k - currently the GP is certified for 77k
30 Danny : Tale Lion Air out and you'll get a different picture.
31 MarkC : Exactly. The 4000 started out as a 52k / 56k engine, and maxed out at 98k. They did it by adding stages to the LPC, inches to the fan dia., and tweak
32 Stitch : So? I can go back and cherry-pick out a few airlines on a few other airplane programs and make that program's numbers look worse if I wanted, but I d
33 StickShaker : My understanding is that GE contributed to the development costs of the 77W program - they became a full risk sharing partner and demanded exclusivit
34 Post contains links Stitch : The 777-X (77L/77W/77F) was always going to be a sole-source engine program. Having three suppliers for the 772 and 77E ensured none of the engine su
35 STT757 : CO will have 79 737-900/900ERs when all are delivered.
36 Post contains images Keesje : I think StickShaker & Stitch summerized the situation well. This will remain an interresting situation. If GE joins the party they will have to compet
37 Baroque : If I understood a recent thread correctly, it is not only that the TXWB differs from the T1000, but the engine for the A350-1000 is going to differen
38 Stitch : The Trent 2000 (evidently Airbus trademarked "XWB" so Rolls is said to have changed the designation) does draw from the Trent 1000, Trent 900 and Tre
39 Post contains links Trex8 : the Trent XWB baseline engine is the one for the A359, the A358s will be a downrate and the A351 (is that the correct designation these days??) is an
40 Par13del : So what is in it for GE???, better they stick with Boeing on the 777 and take the additional time to develop an new engine for their 777 replacement,
41 FrmrCAPCADET : I can see the advantages of this in any number of areas, development costs, fitting on the plane, etc. But it sounds like from a maintainance point o
42 Trex8 : are they ever going to recoup investment developing these new engines? there was that AWST article a year or two ago where GE said they wouldn't be m
43 Par13del : Hence my comment Building a/c engines is one of their primary functions, if they cannot be profitable in that business they will have to find somethi
44 Airbazar : Putting all your eggs in one basket would be stupid. Yes, the A350-1000 has not sold well but how much of that is due to the lack of a GE engine we'l
45 Par13del : The A350XWB is not yet completed, produced, flight tested or in service, the larger variant which will fully compete with the B777W has a way to go,
46 Baroque : I have read that a number of times, and it is a bit like thinking engines are like snakes teeth, which they probably are not. That is, the improvemen
47 PM : Alas, no. About 400 of those sales have gone to RR but another 10 airlines (accounting for about 100 orders) have pointedly not announced an engine c
48 KC135TopBoom : Keesje, when did the B-747-8F ever compete with the A-380 or B-777-300ER? Are you saying the B-747-8F has out sold both types in the "0" passenger ca
49 Baroque : It would be funny (not) if there was suddenly a rush on RR engines and they found themselves with a frame and no engine! Stranger things have happene
50 Trex8 : or maybe its because since deliveries aren't due for a few more years on the first A350s, there is no need to sign anything till closer to the time e
51 Keesje : I think the key of the article is Agree. GE is not a party that can sit back and decide who is allowed to buy their engines. They need to fill their
52 AirNZ : Can you explain what exactly it is you are pointing to? How can the 748F compete with the A380 when one is a freighter, the other a passenger.......o
53 XT6Wagon : Sorry its this kind of thinking that can sink even the largest companies. GE already got burned for huge $$$$$ by airbus when they switched sizes rig
54 Osiris30 : Like if I take EK out of the 380 programme??? That's an interesting question in gerenal given the cost of engine development these days. With more an
55 Stitch : GE will make a good bit of money on the GE90 program, but that is pretty much thanks solely to the GE90-11xB engine. I don't believe it is unreasonabl
56 Keesje : Obviously you are reading things nobody can see and IMO are not there. If GE looses significant marketshare because of an unsuccesfull strategy HQ wi
57 Post contains links NYC777 : Well here's another take on GE's possible interest in hanging a GEnx off the A350: http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/2009/05/14/ge-a350/
58 Baroque : " target=_blank>http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/20...a350/ GE Snub Of Airbus A350 Continues I don't think that is a sensible title but the article
59 BlueSky1976 : Honestly, do you expect a sensible title for an article written on the subject of Airbus planes from a blogger who takes every opportunity to bash Ai
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...
GE And The A350 XWB posted Tue Oct 24 2006 05:37:25 by Eaglewarrior
Aeroflot Confirms Its Interest In Buying CSA posted Wed Feb 11 2009 02:26:51 by Severnaya
A350 XWB Final Design Revealed posted Wed Jan 14 2009 03:41:09 by Bells
Airbus Completes A350 XWB Milestone 5 Review posted Fri Jan 2 2009 13:53:49 by Keesje
LH Interest In TU's A300s : posted Sat Aug 23 2008 03:59:43 by TS-IOR
Avianca Confirms MoU For 10 A350 XWB posted Thu Jul 17 2008 04:33:27 by RICARIZA
A350 XWB Development Master Schedule posted Tue Jul 8 2008 07:58:56 by Keesje
Hexcel To Supply Composite Materials For A350 XWB posted Wed Jun 4 2008 08:52:39 by Aviationbuff
Airbus On Track To Freeze A350 XWB Lines posted Wed Jun 4 2008 08:50:16 by Aviationbuff
Any Airline Pilots With No Interest In Aviation? posted Fri May 23 2008 06:25:35 by LIFFY1A