EGHHWizard From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 87 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 9 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7758 times:
I was just wondering if the engines powering the A380 will be more powerful than the engines on the B777. Also will the A380 take the medal away from the tripple seven for having the largest engines. I was told once that you could quite easily put the fuselage of a B737 into the engine nacelle of the B777. Surely you cannot get bigger than that?
Darkblue From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 233 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (10 years 9 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7687 times:
Depends on what you mean by the "largest engines".
Will the A380 engines be more powerful that the 777 engines? No, the 777 engine thrust range is 75k to 115k depending on the engine and rating. The A380 engines will have takeoff thrusts in the range of 70k to 80k depending on the engine and rating.
Now, fan size is a different question. Both RR and the GE/PW alliance are using bypass ratios that are higher than that used previously. The fans on these new engines will be just as big as those on the 777 (with the exception of the GE90). Here's a comparison of fan diameter.
On the 777:
Vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 11483 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7317 times:
Also, just to clear this up, you could not fit a 737 fuselage into a 777 engine (even a GE90). The diameter of a GE90 is 134 or 135 inches, depending on which variant. The 737's fuselage diameter is 148 inches. Such a shame...
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
BOEING747400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6451 times:
Is it hard to believe that the power of the A380 engine is only 70K lbs. thrust when its' fan diameter is 116 inches (by contrast, the 744ER's engine is rated at 62K lbs. thrust with a fan diameter of 93 inches). You would easily expect a much higher level of power when the engine looks huge? Maybe there's an explanation for the lack of positive correlation between fan diameter and total power??
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1080 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6443 times:
. I was told once that you could quite easily put the fuselage of a B737 into the engine nacelle of the B777. Surely you cannot get bigger than that?
Not at all. The GE90 core is a baby compared to the massive turbines GE builds for naval application and electrical generation. We know turbine cores can be built much larger... adapt a high-bypass fan, ect and in theory a 150k powerplant could be built!
Granted there is no application for such an engine, and such a large fan would require a high-wing aircraft for ground clearance...
Maybe there's an explanation for the lack of positive correlation between fan diameter and total power??
The larger bypass ratio is more fuel efficent and much quieter on take-off/landing
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 80
Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6303 times:
An engine having a diameter of 116 inches with a higher bypass ratio would easily be expected to top 80-90K lbs. thrust? 70K lbs. thrust seems kind of low for such a huge machine on A380??
As DFW already told you, larger fan size = larger bypass ratio as well as increased cold air volume with less work expended.
This means signficant enhancements in fuel efficiency and noise, which was the goal on the A380.
Sure, bigger fan output could be translated into more thrust, but it isn't necessary for this application, nor is the core designed for it. I think both engine's cores are designed to top out around 84,000 pounds with zero modification.
The GENX and Trent 1000 are expected to have 112-116 inch fans, too, to only generate a max of 72,000 pounds of thrust.