CCA From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2002, 889 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted
Tue Jun 9 2009 22:19:25 UTC (6 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5627 times:
Quote: The CF6-32 was intended to be a stripped-down version of the CF6-80 for the Boeing 757. It was never launched due to lack of interest from airlines following the success of the PW2000 and RB211-535 engines.
Why Did The GE CF6-32 Engine Fail? (by 1337Delta764 Mar 30 2006 in Civil Aviation) [Edited 2009-06-09 22:26:21]
C152 G115 TB10 CAP10 SR-22 Be76 PA-34 NDN-1T C500 A330-300 A340-300 -600 B747-200F -200SF -400 -400F -400BCF -400ERF -8F
EA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2838 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted
Wed Jun 10 2009 09:02:42 UTC (6 years 4 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5519 times:
I wonder if there is info available as to why the airlines showed no interest in the CF6? It would have certainly been interesting had the CF6 joined the PW2000/RB211.
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
Jetlagged From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 2606 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted
Wed Jun 10 2009 20:33:02 UTC (6 years 4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5402 times:
Quoting Sdq777 ( Thread starter): Some of the A300's, 747's, and DC-10's have them. Any feedback would be great.
Those aircraft have CF6-50 engines, not CF6-32s. The CF6-32 never went into production. I can't answer why the CF6-32 engine didn't get any orders, maybe the economics just weren't competitive.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.
Jetlife2 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 221 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted
Tue Jun 30 2009 19:05:21 UTC (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4913 times:
Oh this is a great story.
You should appeal to ex-GE or ex-RR folk to tell it.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31808 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted
Tue Jun 30 2009 23:59:27 UTC (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4848 times:
I guess the success of the P&W2000 & RB211-535 series did not require a third alternative.
Anyone aware of the theoritical details of the CF6-32 in comparism to the former two powerplants?
Think of the brighter side!