CX747
Topic Author
Posts: 5566
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

757 Engine Choices.

Sun Oct 24, 1999 8:50 am

I was wondering what the pros and cons are to operating P&Ws on the 757 and operating the RB 211 on them?
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
ducker
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 1999 12:45 am

RE: 757 Engine Choices.

Sun Oct 24, 1999 8:55 am

Probably the price offered to the airlines by either manufacturer for each engine type was the deciding factor. Mechanics who are familiar with either or both can advise which may be more reliable, but I think that both will do the job/
 
Guest

RE: 757 Engine Choices.

Sun Oct 24, 1999 1:54 pm

All UK airlines chose Rolls-Royce engined 757s (and most other types as well) because in addition to being reliable and efficient the prestigious name is a tremendous reassurance to passengers and is often promoted in airline literature. Eg fly to .... on our modern fleet of Rolls Royce powered 757s - it is a sense of national pride - very few UK airlines chose another engine type where RR is available!
 
Boeing757/767
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

RE: 757 Engine Choices.

Mon Oct 25, 1999 8:46 am

I live in Connecticut, home of Pratt & Whitney, and I won't get into an us vs. them discussion.

The fact is, both engines have the same reliability. It comes down to cost and service agreements.

I'd say folks are proud to see the Pratt Eagle on the engines! Although RR has outsold the PW2000 overall, some of the largest 757 operators -- Delta, United and Northwest -- are P&W customers. American operates the RB211.
Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
jim
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 1999 8:12 am

RE: 757 Engine Choices.

Mon Oct 25, 1999 1:48 pm

Sorry to burst your bubble B757/767, but they do not have anywhere near the same reliablity! The PW2000 series has some serious problems. We at Delta had a real problem in the early 90's keeping them on the wing. They have some type of vibration problem which we haven't licked, but it is causing us major pylon fatigue problems. I've heard that RR 757s don't have this problem.

The way it was explained to me, Delta went with the PW for 2 reasons. First, we had had real problems with the RRs on the L1011, so we shied away. But the RB211 on the 757 is derated to about 80% of the thrust used by the L10, so it just purrs along.

Second, PW made some serious promises about fuel economy, which they are still paying Delta for! The engine is a dog. It is so unreliable the FAA was considering removing it fromthe ETOPS list! That's one of the reasons that ATA sold Delta its PW ETOPS 757s and bought (guess) RR powered ones. UAL was very upset with us at Delta 'cause it could have cost them their ETOPS rating.
 
Boeing757/767
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

RE: 757 Engine Choices.

Mon Oct 25, 1999 9:23 pm

If the reliability rate is so bad compared with other airlines, you could blame the airline, since it does much of the maintenance.

I know Delta's record with the PW2000 is horrible, but others have rates similar to the RB211.

I amend my previous posting by saying USUALLY the engines have GENERALLY the same reliability rates.
Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
ducker
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 1999 12:45 am

RE: 757 Engine Choices.

Mon Oct 25, 1999 11:44 pm

Still, I think the choice of RR or P&W is based on financial considerations for the most part. Two examples come to mind:
1) AA. The airline chose the -535 for their 757's when the order was anounced in 1988, AA had chosen the F100, with RR Tay's. AA probably was able to negotiate lower prices per engine with RR, for purchasing a much larger amount of engines in total. It was a smart move. In 1981, AA had announced options for 757's with PW2037's, but did not order the planes.
2) UPS. They ordered 30 757PF's with PW2040 engines. Their follow-on order for 757's had RR -535. UPS, however, was also purchasing RR Tay's for their 727 re-engining. Again, a lower price to UPS for purchasing a larger total of engines? UPS must get the best deal, because they don't seem purchase only for engine type commonality (767 freighters with CF6-80, A300-600 with PW4158, RR and PW 757's).
As for BA, I'm sure the RB211-535 was a deciding factor in their launch order of the 757 in 1978. Their predecesor, BOAC, ordered their earliest 707's in the late 1950's because Boeing decided to offer the RR Conway on the 707, which the UK govt. might have insisted on? The later 707-320 ordered by BOAC had JT3D-7 engines. I, too, live in Connecticut, and hope that P&W does well, but they have to compete.
 
Navion
Posts: 1052
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:52 am

RE: 757 Engine Choices.

Tue Oct 26, 1999 5:34 am

I remember reading (about 5 years ago) an article in Air Transport World which showed the PW engine didn't have the experience of the RR and in fact had suffered some teething problems early on in it's career. However, they went on to show the PW engine was lighter and in fact allowed more payload to be carried if you were going transatlantic (for example). I know Finnair flies over me here in Ft. Lauderdale during the season rather dependably and that's quite a long haul. I know companies like United, Delta and Northwest continue (or have continued) to buy the PW powerplant on their 757's so they must be pretty good.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 76er, 777klm, Achtstein, azz767, Baidu [Spider], BI777, deltal1011man, DexSwart, Google [Bot], KarelXWB, MAH4546, nz2, qf789, RickNRoll, sassiciai, SCQ83, SelandiaBaru and 233 guests