Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
747XQLR To Not Have Exclusive Engine  
User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (14 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1314 times:

From Aviation Week & Space Technology:

Only the 63,300 lb. thrust General Electric CF6-80C2B9F is a committed engine for the 747XQLR thus far. It is a variant of the 62,100 lb.-thrust -80C2B5F that GE offers for the 747-400 and 747-400ER.

Boeing is in talks with Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce as well, and both are expected to join the program if it is launched. Pratt will offer an adaptation of the 63,300-lb.-thrust PW4062 that it has on the -400/-400ER. Rolls would switch from the RB211-524H8-T on the 747-400ER to the Trent 600, a company official said.

Having all three engines available will be a key to the -400XQLR's acceptance, particularly in Asia, where the new version is targeted. For instance, SIA and Korean Air are Pratt & whitney customers for thier 747 fleets, while Cathay Pacific flies Trents on its 777 fleet and All Nippon Airways and Japan Airlines fly the CF6-80C.

It appears that Boeing has learned a lesson from the 777LR.

2 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 2027 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (14 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1271 times:

The 772LR/773ER are niche aircraft, not enough frames will be sold to justify 3 engine makers producing engines capabale of 100-115k lbs of thrust.

I am Rolls and PW didn't care about making a profit, they would have jumped onboard these ER 777s early just to get their engines onboard, and Boeing wouldn't only have one supplier. The "Exclusive" part of this deal is to make it sound like a huge selection process weeded out the GE as the best of the best, when really, with only one supplier viable for such a niche plane (read: not +500 orders as 744), GE was able to do it most efficent, and no one else wanted to bother to be competition.

Lots of work to get expand an engine from 90k lbs thrust to 115k. Barely any for the 744XQLR, just get a 62,000k lb engine up to 63,000. All three can do that easily, hence the competition.


They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1247 times:

Very true. I should have stated that Boeing announced the fact that all three makers will be a part of the project up front. Resulting in no additional alienation. However, I can't wonder that if all three makers had the chance to get thier hands in the 777X pie, that there would have been more interest than there currently is.


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...
How Assinine Is It To Not Have A Gate 13? posted Sat Dec 27 2003 17:31:23 by InnocuousFox
AC003 Flying To NRT With Two Engine Air Bleeds Not Working? posted Sat Nov 25 2006 03:59:50 by Ktachiya
AC Still Does NOT Have Access To BEY posted Fri Feb 6 2004 18:59:36 by FLYYUL
AF Returns To BOS After Failed Engine posted Wed Jul 22 2009 09:54:09 by IKECVN69
Why Does AA Not Have B747's? posted Sun Jan 18 2009 09:42:46 by EUROBUS
LOT Said To Not Exercise Options For 787's.. posted Fri Sep 5 2008 01:20:00 by Beaucaire
Delta Loves To Not Include Cvg On Its Website posted Fri May 23 2008 22:40:12 by SlcDeltaRUmd11
Why Does SQ Not Have Short Haul Planes? posted Mon Jan 7 2008 03:28:16 by VinnieWinnie
757 SFB To GLA On One Engine? posted Sat Jan 5 2008 21:09:43 by MaidensGator
Delta To Sign Deal With Engine-parts Supplier-WSJ posted Wed Nov 7 2007 02:13:37 by DAL767400ER