ferpe
Topic Author
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:25 pm

Seems GE is tuning down how much they will gain with their PIPs for the 787, IIRC the PIP2 should be on spec or better with the RR T1000 within 1% spec. Seems both are now aiming for "within 1% of original spec":


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...ains%20FAA%20Approval&channel=comm



Shall be interesting to learn the NAMS numbers for the 788.
Non French in France
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:42 pm

The 787-9 was launched with the expectation that the engines would be rated to 75,000 pounds, but if PiP2 is good for 3,000 pounds more than that, could the 787-9 be made available with 78,000 pound engines to improve field performance, or do they need 78,000 pounds now that MTOW is around 250t?
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1678
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:09 pm

Quoting ferpe (Thread starter):
Seems GE is tuning down how much they will gain with their PIPs for the 787, IIRC the PIP2 should be on spec or better with the RR T1000 within 1% spec. Seems both are now aiming for "within 1% of original spec":

Pretty sure that RR are now aiming for spec rather than 1% below.

The GEnx-1b PIP had a failure during FAA block certification that required a redesign and resulted in certification at a lower thrust level? Hadn't heard this, GE have better message control than RR.
BV
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:11 am

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 2):
Pretty sure that RR are now aiming for spec rather than 1% below.

In the article there is some pretty fancy footwork with the wording in that area - looks like GE wording being shuffled a bit. And the comparisons are being made with specifications that are not stated. Two moving attempts at two targets that are unknown and possibly different! Great.

Where is the engine man with his beam of illumination?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:29 am

Rolls put the Package B LPT on a production engine (#10025) and it put SFC to within 2% of original spec.

They put all of the Package B upgrades on a demonstrator engine and it was 0.5% better than original spec - the expected result was to be within 1% of original spec.

The 787-9 engine (Trent 1000-J) would have additional (unnamed) tweaks to reduce SFC by another 2%.

GE expected PiP 1 to bring the engine to original spec, but I don't believe it did.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 5:38 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
The 787-9 engine (Trent 1000-J) would have additional (unnamed) tweaks to reduce SFC by another 2%.

GE expected PiP 1 to bring the engine to original spec, but I don't believe it did.

Engine performance seems even more a mystery than OEW is!! Do you know Stitch if that -J ver was with XWB type mods or are they yet to come? Presumably, that would be a -K??
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1678
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:48 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
They put all of the Package B upgrades on a demonstrator engine and it was 0.5% better than original spec - the expected result was to be within 1% of original spec.

LOL love it, "within 1% of original spec" but actually 0.5% better than original spec... but what about this high power stall on the GEnx, any more information?

I do remember reading in one of Mr Lightsabers long explanations of engine design something about a reverse pressure gradient margin (to prevent stalls) that can be eroded to get more engine efficiency but is very hard to design in if you don't have it maybe this is what happened to the GEnx?
BV
 
328JET
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:16 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:33 am

Both engines are a disappointment.

Imagine that we have three years after original planned EIS of the B787 and both still have not reached the original target. Not to mention an improvement above the requested figures, as some would have expected after additional three years development time.

These two engines programs did not perform as good as, for instance, the GE90-110/115, which showed better than expected results.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:41 am

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 6):
I do remember reading in one of Mr Lightsabers long explanations of engine design something about a reverse pressure gradient margin (to prevent stalls) that can be eroded to get more engine efficiency but is very hard to design in if you don't have it maybe this is what happened to the GEnx?

I don't remember that one, but in a recent thread on the TXWB he did comment on the RR report that they had found a better surge margin on the TXWB than was expected and he commented on the implications flowing (yep a pun) from that!

That thead also had bits about pulling XWB features back into the T1000. And I think the GEnx also got discussed.

But do not ask me how to find thread that are as recent as that one. About 2 or 3 months ago?????
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:54 am

Quoting 328JET (Reply 7):
Both engines are a disappointment.

I think that could have something to do with the high levels of expectation put upon them. GE90B wasn't expected to be such a game changer.
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4821
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:05 am

Quoting 328JET (Reply 7):
Both engines are a disappointment.

Imagine that we have three years after original planned EIS of the B787 and both still have not reached the original target. Not to mention an improvement above the requested figures, as some would have expected after additional three years development time.

These two engines programs did not perform as good as, for instance, the GE90-110/115, which showed better than expected results.

I'm not sure I agree with the conclusions you seem to have reached.

Since neither GE nor RR have quite made it (even after being gifted three more years to try), my assumption is that the target was perhaps just too ambitious.

If, on the other hand, the GE90 was set a less challenging target, then showing "better than expected results" may not mean much.

In other words, what GE and RR have achieved on the GEnx and Trent 1000 may actually be more deserving of praise than what GE did with the GE90. What you achieve does rather depend on how ambitious you were in the first place.
 
328JET
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:16 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:05 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 9):
I think that could have something to do with the high levels of expectation put upon them. GE90B wasn't expected to be such a game changer.

For sure the expectations were high, but we are talking about additional three years time for both producers, which is 50 percent of a regular development time for a complete new engine and not some small improvements only.
 
User avatar
Ncfc99
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 2:42 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:16 am

Quoting 328JET (Reply 7):
Both engines are a disappointment.

Imagine that we have three years after original planned EIS of the B787 and both still have not reached the original target. Not to mention an improvement above the requested figures, as some would have expected after additional three years development time.

Does anyone think that both companies have slowed development of the engine programs due to 3 years of lost sales. Surely both companies woulkd have had a fair bit of income from the engine sales to fund the ongoing development and improvement of the engines. Alot is said of Airbus & boeings 'lost opportunities due to delays', surely this applies to RR & GE aswell.

Does anyone know if RR & GE get anyform of compensation from Boeing and Airbus as they could have supplied working engines ontime on both the 787 & 380(albeit with a higher SFC)?
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1678
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 9:21 am

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
I don't remember that one, but in a recent thread on the TXWB he did comment on the RR report that they had found a better surge margin on the TXWB than was expected and he commented on the implications flowing (yep a pun) from that!

Yep, it was in that thread (probably that post) that he made the point that it was difficult to get the surge margin back if the original design did not have it but if you had a better margin than anticipated then you could trade it for better SFC down the line.
BV
 
parapente
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 9:27 am

What I do believe this article / thread shows is that 2 of the Worlds most advanced enginering companies are bumping their head on the ceiling of what is humanly technically possible (within the constraints of a "standard" direct drive fanned engine).

It is a phenominal achievement by both of them. They have clearly both worked their proverbials off to make it to "spec".I am sure RR is finding the same on the XWB but at least they have all the learnings of the Trent 1000 to fall back on.

Hence in many ways GTF and OR technologies. A major departure is now required to find further meaningful efficiencies I feel.
 
ferpe
Topic Author
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 10:23 am

The article to me explains why it had gone a bit quiet around the GEnx, before the flight trials GE was very vocal about having better SFC then RR. Then since about 1 year it has been rather benign talking from both sides      .

Nothing as pleasant as when others join the trouble (R perspective)   .

The RR civil engine head said at Paris that both manufacturers extrapolated recent LPT gains to far for the 787 engines and made to simple and to light LPT designs. Both had to back out with redesigns.

RR have the advantage they have made one similar design since (TXWB) where they seems to have learned a lot. GE has been working on their LeapX, not quite the same class of engine but the hot section works seems interesting. They should now put all this to work on the GE90X but as Lightsaber said it needs a big redesign as it lack among other things contra-rotation.





[Edited 2011-08-23 03:27:06]
Non French in France
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6678
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 10:24 am

Quoting PM (Reply 10):
Since neither GE nor RR have quite made it (even after being gifted three more years to try), my assumption is that the target was perhaps just too ambitious.

Ambitious to/by whom, the OEM and their customers or the engine companies agreeing to such targets?
Easy for us to say or even give praise for what they have achieved, but this is a economic business and not hitting targets puts them and the OEM at risk of penalities.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 10:55 am

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 13):
Yep, it was in that thread (probably that post) that he made the point that it was difficult to get the surge margin back if the original design did not have it but if you had a better margin than anticipated then you could trade it for better SFC down the line

Yes that is close to what I remember. He was really interested in what could be done with the extra margin.

Quoting parapente (Reply 14):
What I do believe this article / thread shows is that 2 of the Worlds most advanced engineering companies are bumping their head on the ceiling of what is humanly technically possible (within the constraints of a "standard" direct drive fanned engine).

You might want to wait until the authority speaks on that. I think the XWB shows there is still a way to go. Between CFD and blisks, the innards are in for a shake up, ceramics, and there seem to be more fancy things you can do with fans other than go to GTF or OR (must stop repeating myself myself!).
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 1:52 pm

Quoting 328JET (Reply 7):
Both engines are a disappointment.

In PR terms, sure, but compared to how far they came from their predecessors they're huge achievements. The mistake was in setting the goals too far ahead, not in creating a disappointing engine. Both the Trent1000 and GEnX are huge jumps beyond their predecessors.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 7):
These two engines programs did not perform as good as, for instance, the GE90-110/115, which showed better than expected results.

The GE90-110/115 was a derivative engine with a much less aggressive target...it's a lot easier to make the goal when the posts are closer.

Tom.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11822
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:07 pm

I'm disapointed to see the aggresive promises of the 787 engines not being delivered. Oh well, this just implies more PIPs.  

From the OP link:
"The event led to the decision to certify the baseline PIP1 at 70,000 lb thrust and to redesign the high pressure turbine nozzle."

Redesign the turbine inlet nozzle blades?    Talk about making tough work sound trivial...

[

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
They put all of the Package B upgrades on a demonstrator engine and it was 0.5% better than original spec - the expected result was to be within 1% of original spec.

Sounds like RR is keeping a little margin. By only promising within 1% of original spec, RR keeps from paying penalty (usually the first 1% miss of fuel burn is at the airline's risk).

Quoting parapente (Reply 14):
What I do believe this article / thread shows is that 2 of the Worlds most advanced enginering companies are bumping their head on the ceiling of what is humanly technically possible (within the constraints of a "standard" direct drive fanned engine).

Both learned the hard way how to make a better LPT. While disapointing, one learns more from mistakes...

Also, as others noted, the new CMC high turbines from GE will be a big improvement. I wonder if GE can retrofit them?

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
The RR civil engine head said at Paris that both manufacturers extrapolated recent LPT gains to far for the 787 engines and made to simple and to light LPT designs. Both had to back out with redesigns.

   A costly lesson, but both GE and RR learned valuable information on low turbines.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
They should now put all this to work on the GE90X but as Lightsaber said it needs a big redesign as it lack among other things contra-rotation.

   I'm amused I'm already in the conversation.    (Please quote me, I'm just amused.)

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 18):
In PR terms, sure, but compared to how far they came from their predecessors they're huge achievements.

  

But for the 787 (and 748I) to be 'game changers,' they needed to eventually beat initial promise.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
Between CFD and blisks, the innards are in for a shake up, ceramics, and there seem to be more fancy things you can do with fans other than go to GTF or OR (must stop repeating myself myself!).

I'm shocked more hasn't been done with BLISKs (Integrated blade rotor compressor blades) on the two 787 engines. I suspect the compressors are due for one un-announced PIP (or two...).

New thermal coatings are coming out too. Some of their capability will be required just for the 789 thrust levels. But there should be further fuel burn reduction.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 18):
The GE90-110/115 was a derivative engine with a much less aggressive target...

Much less agressive external target. The fact that GE nailed the internal target is impressive. The low EIS fuel burn of the GE-90-115 helped make the 77W.


Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:16 pm

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
The RR civil engine head said at Paris that both manufacturers extrapolated recent LPT gains too far for the 787 engines and made to simple and to light LPT designs. Both had to back out with redesigns.

GE was really bit by this. They reduced the LPT blade count by 30% compared to the GE90, but this proved to be far too aggressive so PiP1 reduces the count by only 10%.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 15):
RR have the advantage they have made one similar design since (TXWB) where they seems to have learned a lot.

Finally adding a second IPT stage must have made some very big improvements alone. An extra 6 inches of fan diameter helps as well.  

Yet even this engine is said to be having problems at the upper-end and will require her own sub-variant to properly operate in the highest-thrust regimes.
 
babybus
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 5:07 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:19 pm

It seemed from the start that it was the engine that was the main feature of the 787 aircraft. Is it not possible for Boeing to look at weight savings, or something like that, to enhance the efficiency of the engines?
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:50 pm

Quoting Babybus (Reply 21):
It seemed from the start that it was the engine that was the main feature of the 787 aircraft. Is it not possible for Boeing to look at weight savings, or something like that, to enhance the efficiency of the engines?

Engines were always going to be the largest efficiency driver on the 787, but other items like the CFRP construction and bleedless architecture all contribute their part to improve overall efficiency.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1494
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:18 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 20):
GE was really bit by this. They reduced the LPT blade count by 30% compared to the GE90, but this proved to be far too aggressive so PiP1 reduces the count by only 10%.
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 19):
Both learned the hard way how to make a better LPT. While disapointing, one learns more from mistakes...

Funny that. Didn't PW also make the same mistake on the ill-fated PW6000? Why so much concentration on the compressor?

Faro
The chalice not my son
 
ferpe
Topic Author
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:00 pm

Quoting faro (Reply 23):
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 19):
Both learned the hard way how to make a better LPT. While disapointing, one learns more from mistakes...


LPT = Low Pressure Turbine.

On the PW6000 Pratt simplified the Compressor to much then on the 787 engines it was the (Low) Turbines turn....
Non French in France
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11822
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Tue Aug 23, 2011 11:57 pm

Quoting faro (Reply 23):
Funny that. Didn't PW also make the same mistake on the ill-fated PW6000? Why so much concentration on the compressor?

as noted:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 24):
On the PW6000 Pratt simplified the Compressor

Pratt tried to go with a 5 stage HPC (high pressure compressor). Oops. Pratt engineers pointed out it wouldn't work and were told to go back and make it work.  

There is a drive to reduce part count. That reduces cost, improves durability, and there is some drive to efficiency (lower surface area which is alway a drag, literally, in the engine). It is just 'what is too much' as there is always a cost.


Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:29 am

Quoting Babybus (Reply 21):
It seemed from the start that it was the engine that was the main feature of the 787 aircraft.

The engine was about half of the overall efficiency gain on the 787.

Quoting Babybus (Reply 21):
Is it not possible for Boeing to look at weight savings, or something like that, to enhance the efficiency of the engines?

It is possible, and they did it...that's where the other half came from.

Tom.
 
thegeek
Posts: 1330
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:20 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:47 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 25):
Pratt tried to go with a 5 stage HPC (high pressure compressor). Oops. Pratt engineers pointed out it wouldn't work and were told to go back and make it work.

If that is the way Pratt management treats its professional employees it is unsurprising that they have seen a big decline in market share. I'd guess that it wasn't always thus.
 
ferpe
Topic Author
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 2:38 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 27):
If that is the way Pratt management treats its professional employees it is unsurprising that they have seen a big decline in market share. I'd guess that it wasn't always thus.

Reading about the failures in the 4000 and the 6000 programs it has been my reaction that there must have been something wrong in the culture inside Pratt at the time. Given that it has manifest it-selves in revenue and market share I guess the board has changed this since (and learned an expensive lesson)   .
Non French in France
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:36 am

Just a general comment, in review magazines you very seldom see comparisons of engines. You can find the entrails of the 737 v the 32x or the T7W v the 346 drawn out in excruciating detail, and time was in the far off past - scratches head and suggests about 20 or 30 years - that you could find analogous comparisons of engines. But ?since about 1995ish, they have been few and far between. I even wrote to one of them around then complaining of a dearth of engine related articles. Certainly had an effect, pretty much since then there has been none and I gave up my subscription to that mag.

Lightsaber, you produce light an information on so much about engines, can you help on why the literature is so poor in either articles on engines, or even better, comparisons of similar engines, or engines for similar purposes. Or, as is quite likely, I am simply not aware of what is there, is which case a friendly bit of finger pointing would be greatly welcomed!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:44 am

There is The Engine Yearbook that gives you general specs. Not sure who publishes it, but I have found it on the Internet via a search.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 4:20 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
There is The Engine Yearbook that gives you general specs. Not sure who publishes it, but I have found it on the Internet via a search.

Thanks for the tip.
http://www.ubmaviationnews.com/Publications/The-Engine-Yearbook
or
http://edition.pagesuite-professiona...-e2b4-4ca5-8e28-251d63ac2929&skip=
For the latest ed.

Ask and ye shall receive. Many thanks. Duly bookmarked. And goodbye for a while!!! Going to take some time to read these!
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11822
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:40 am

Quoting thegeek (Reply 27):
If that is the way Pratt management treats its professional employees it is unsurprising that they have seen a big decline in market share.

I like who I see on the organization chart now. (Good managers who have risen up.)

But there is a reason for the PW4098, PW4173 PW4170A, PW6000, PW4062 'cut stator', and ...

I have high confidence in the GTF. Pratt was turning about with the PW6000... I could name the *one* manager who created the issue. Sigh...

Quoting ferpe (Reply 28):
and learned an expensive lesson

   But there were lessons learned during the JT8D and JT9D that took *decades* to take hold. Now the same is somewhat true of GE. e.g., 'not invented here' syndrome, etc.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 29):
Lightsaber, you produce light an information on so much about engines, can you help on why the literature is so poor in either articles on engines, or even better, comparisons of similar engines, or engines for similar purposes.

I do not know. Some has to do with the PR material coming from the business office instead of the engineering office...
Some that the details to compare the engines are not shared in as much detail.

But do recall we've been in a relative dearth of new commercial engines. Now we're looking at the T1000 and GEnX-1B/2B in quick succession with Pratt following with a new engine per year in 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016!

Pratt GTF EIS: 2013, 2014, 2015, And 2016 (by lightsaber Aug 21 2011 in Civil Aviation)

LEAP-X in 2016 (C919) and 2016 with the A320NEO. Also with the 737RE in 2016 (or 2017, TBD).

After a long lull in new engine development, this feels like a flood! So I think engines will get more press. Usually the 'popular press' picks up on things at entry into service or afterward. There was some press on the 787 engines, but not much...  

Do take time on pg. 32 of your own link.   

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
simpilot459
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 9:15 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 5:47 am

Quoting Babybus (Reply 21):
Is it not possible for Boeing to look at weight savings,

They did and still are actively looking for ways to shed pounds; although they did take a weight increase for some of the features (larger windows, lower cabin pressure, etc).
Take off: Optional Landing: Mandatory
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:09 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
Do take time on pg. 32 of your own link.

Yessir, homework already done. Comprehension will take a bit longer. Bugger of a format to manage on my screen I might add. Quite clever, but tedious. Wonder if I should just print it!

I will not spoil the secret of what IS on p32, but invite others to look, p30 as well. Good treatment though.
For p32 look at:
http://edition.pagesuite-professiona...-e2b4-4ca5-8e28-251d63ac2929&skip=
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13827
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:36 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
Do take time on pg. 32 of your own link.
Quoting Baroque (Reply 34):
I will not spoil the secret of what IS on p32, but invite others to look, p30 as well.

It's engine porn, and I love it!  
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
parapente
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:40 pm

As a geberal rule (he said!) it seems to be more and more about the engines wherever you look. In truth from the 380 through the 748/777/350/787/320&737NE's.The buliders have remained "coventional" with no signs (other than fancyful photoshopping) that anything is about to change.I applaud Boeings decision to "go carbon" on the 787.But it was supposed to be much lighter and much quicker to assemble.It is neither and nor will the 350 be IMHO.

The real difference has been and is - the engines. I fully expect the next development to be a rewinged 777.Of course the wing will be a little better.But once again the real difference will be in the engines. Not only a new counterrotating one from GE but (I believe) a GTF from P&W as well. (watch out Rolls  

OR? Well the very fine link above has a good piece on that as well.If you think GTF'ing is hard - OR'ing is double trouble.It will come one day I feel as the price of oil continues to rise but we are perhaps over a decade away.

But planes in 2050 will continue to look very much like they did in the 1950/60's. The difference will be in what pushes them along!
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11822
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 2:00 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 34):
Bugger of a format to manage on my screen I might add. Quite clever, but tedious. Wonder if I should just print it!

I recommend Google Chrome's web browser. The link seems to have HTML 5 code and most web browsers have trouble with that. Safari might work too as will the latest Firefox.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 35):
It's engine porn, and I love it!

  

Quoting parapente (Reply 36):
The real difference has been and is - the engines.

For now. The 787 should have helped far more on the airframe side, but the over-weight condition needs more than Jenny Craig...

Quoting parapente (Reply 36):
But planes in 2050 will continue to look very much like they did in the 1950/60's. The difference will be in what pushes them along!

Thus I disagree with. The A380 introduced the 'lifiting nose.' You will see a transition to lifting bodies and hopefully BWB. Alas... BWB might be a long way off...  

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 2:15 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 34):
Bugger of a format to manage on my screen I might add. Quite clever, but tedious. Wonder if I should just print it!

I recommend Google Chrome's web browser. The link seems to have HTML 5 code and most web browsers have trouble with that. Safari might work too as will the latest Firefox.

It was mostly that the as loaded size text was a bit small for my aging eyes and one dab of the enlarge was too big for the screen. Also you cannot download the document, so you need to page through in the active version from the web. But a great read. Nice diagrams too. I was using Firefox. I went to use Safari and then realised this is a different computer that has not as yet got Safari!! Ooops.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 35):
It's engine porn, and I love it!

We aim to please!
 
ferpe
Topic Author
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: GEnx PIP2 Only Within 1% Of Original 787 Spec

Wed Aug 24, 2011 4:09 pm

The document works fine in Firefox 5 (the latest), you can also download the document, go to Menu > Download a PDF wait till all pages are on screen > select all > download selected. The download all command from the screen did not work for me, go the route I described and it works, nice bed-reading    .


There is also a couple of other documents worth a download:

Lightweight stuff:
- http://www.rolls-royce.com/Images/gasturbines_tcm92-4977.pdf

More heavy weight:
http://ebookee.org/Rolls-Royce-The-Jet-Engine_456828.html

Really heavy stuff:
http://ebookee.org/Jet-Engines-and-P...-Systems-for-Engineers_242599.html

there are many download sites for these books, I just listed one. Others with good links please chime in...   
Non French in France

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 9w748capt, admanager, dbo861, DC2002, DiamondFlyer, Google [Bot], jetblueguy22, johhn14, klakzky123, Kno, N62NA, ordell, tacobell101, transit and 249 guests