PM
Topic Author
Posts: 4818
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!

Tue May 09, 2006 1:43 am

More sad hours spent on Excel reveals that RR came out well ahead of PW on the DC-10/MD-11/L-1011.

In so far as I had thought much about it, I suppose I had assumed that RR would be in third place. (Their habitual position, it seemed, prior to the launch of the Trent series.) In fact, there were 896 Trijets built (including the KC-10s for the USAF). Of these...

522 had GE (58%)
250 had RR (28%)
124 had PW (14%)

Perhaps more to the point, the clear winner was, of course, GE.
 
flyabr
Posts: 746
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

RE: RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!

Tue May 09, 2006 2:02 am

well, i don't think a rolls powerplant ever flew on a mad dog trijet, did it? and weren't all tristars built with rolls power...?
 
PM
Topic Author
Posts: 4818
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!

Tue May 09, 2006 2:03 am

Quoting Flyabr (Reply 1):
well, i don't think a rolls powerplant ever flew on a mad dog trijet, did it? and weren't all tristars built with rolls power...?

Correct.
 
flyabr
Posts: 746
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

RE: RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!

Tue May 09, 2006 2:12 am

well, i guess then my point was, who cares? if all trijets had been offered with ge, pratt and rolls, then maybe this stat would have been more interesting. what i do find interesting is that ge clobbered pratt on the mad dogs!
 
PanAm747
Posts: 4713
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 4:46 am

RE: RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!

Tue May 09, 2006 2:16 am

Lockheed nearly went out of business on the L-1011 because of Rolls-Royce.

While Boeing and MD both made the 747 and DC-10's with engine choices, Lockheed decided that Rolls-Royce would be the ONLY supplier of engines for the L-1011.

When development costs ran over, Rolls-Royce filed for bankruptcy. The British government had to step in, and although the problems were overcome, Lockheed was sweating bullets for a LONG time.

Ironic that Pratt & Whitney, originally the premiere jet engine manufacturer, has almost completely lost the entire market.
Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
 
PM
Topic Author
Posts: 4818
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!

Tue May 09, 2006 4:06 am

Quoting PanAm747 (Reply 4):
While Boeing and MD both made the 747 and DC-10's with engine choices

Initially the 747 had no choice - just JT9Ds. GE and RR options came later. Nor am I sure that PW was an option on the DC-10 right from the start. If it was then they did miserably, gaining just two customers and 42 sales out of 446.
 
acidradio
Crew
Posts: 1595
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 3:19 pm

RE: RR Outsold PW 2:1 On Widebody Trijets?!

Tue May 09, 2006 6:30 am

PW was a later option on the DC-10. The aircraft only came with the GE CF6 as an option. NW and JAL essentially had MD custom-make a "DC-10-20" (kind of midway in size between a -15 and -30), call it a DC-10-40 and equip it with PW JT9D engines.

NW has extensive maintenance contracts with PW, which is one reason they tend to purchase PW engines. From what was also explained to me, the CF6 had a bunch of issues in the beginning, and NW and JAL felt that PW would be a superior powerplant. It turns out that by the time NW got their PW-powered DC-10, most, if not, all of the issues in the GE-powered DC-10's were resolved and that became the superior airframe of the two.

Ironically, NW purchased a bunch of second-hand, GE-powered DC10's for trans-Atlantic expansion, which all still fly today, while all the custom ordered PW DC10's have been in the scrapyard for a few years.
Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 57echo, asqx, Baidu [Spider], doulasc, ericaasen, flyDTW1992, haydenschool, hoons90, jimbo737, legacyins, predling, sassiciai, SaUL, SFOA380, william, Yahoo [Bot], YLWbased and 200 guests