User avatar
rotating14
Topic Author
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:54 pm

Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 3:21 am

I ran across this article about the powerplants of the B787-9. Thought I'd share it.

http://m.heraldnet.com/heraldnet/pm_...entdetail.htm?contentguid=ffZaWF4U
 
United727
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:26 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 7:34 am

Are these package C engines are going to be "derated" on the -8's??
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 7:50 am

Are these better than spec on sfc? GE has a third PIP that will bring sfc better than spec planned I read somewhere, the PIP2 is near spec or even better.
 
imiakhtar
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 3:35 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 9:18 am

Quoting United727 (Reply 1):
Are these package C engines are going to be "derated" on the -8's??

Yes. The Package C will become the latest build standard for 787-8/9 variants. The level of de-rate on the 787-8 is a customer choice. They could haver the full 74k if they wanted it. More details below:

'Rolls-Royce has revealed it completed the first ground tests of the Trent 1000 package C version, which is to be employed on the Boeing 787-9 next year.

The ground runs began in Derby last month and will continue over the next eight weeks, before a three-month flight test programme begins on the UK manufacturer's Boeing 747-200 testbed in the summer.

Two engines are currently in production for the flight tests.

The upgraded powerplant will provide 74,000lb of thrust and should deliver a 1% fuel burn improvement over the package B engine standard, according to Rolls-Royce.

It features a new turbine case cooling system, which should improve efficiency.

The package C variant will not only be used for the larger 787-9, which is scheduled to enter service with Air New Zealand in 2014, but will also become available for the baseline 787-8 model later that year.

Flight tests for the 787-9 are due to begin in 2013.'


http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...tests-787-9-engine-variant-371559/

Rolls-Royce Achieves New Trent 1000 Milestone

Quoting sweair (Reply 2):
Are these better than spec on sfc?

I would think Package C will bring the RR fuel burn onto the original spec. How that compares to GEnX and the various performance upgrades, I do not know.
Whatever happened to Leon Trotsky?
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 2:34 pm

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 3):
The level of de-rate on the 787-8 is a customer choice. They could haver the full 74k if they wanted it.

Although the level of derate is a customer choice, I doubt they'll be able to choose 74k (they can get 64k or 70k right now). 74k is not a certified rating on the 787-8 and I doubt it will be. 70k is plenty for almost all conditions and certifying the higher rating would require a new and fairly intensive flight program (decreased thrusts are a easier to certify than increased since you don't have to redo Vmcg or Vmca).

Tom.
 
imiakhtar
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 3:35 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 2:55 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Although the level of derate is a customer choice, I doubt they'll be able to choose 74k (they can get 64k or 70k right now). 74k is not a certified rating on the 787-8 and I doubt it will be

I was going by the tcds here which mentions the 74k certification here:

787-8, Transport Category, Approved August 26, 2011

Perhaps I misread it.
Whatever happened to Leon Trotsky?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 3:49 pm

Only if Boeing decides to come out with a 787-8LR using the 787-9's maximum weights would the plane need 74K.

[Edited 2012-05-09 09:32:08]
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 3:55 pm

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 5):
I was going by the tcds here which mentions the 74k certification here:

787-8, Transport Category, Approved August 26, 2011

You need to go to note 10 (called out in the engines table). 74k is an overboost takeoff rating that's available for 5 minutes (or 10 minutes in the event of an engine failure). This option is available on several other aircraft and you typically don't specify the installed thrust by the overboost rating.

Tom.
 
imiakhtar
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 3:35 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Wed May 09, 2012 5:05 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 7):
You need to go to note 10 (called out in the engines table). 74k is an overboost takeoff rating that's available for 5 minutes (or 10 minutes in the event of an engine failure). This option is available on several other aircraft and you typically don't specify the installed thrust by the overboost rating.

I'm aware that some aircraft engine combinations have overboost options a la 737, A32x and GE-90 B777.

I've read the data sheets from EASA and the FAA for both the engine and the airframe/engine combo on the 787. There is no mention of an overboost option for the Trent 1000 anywhere. The 74k rating is as far as I can tell the default max thrust rating (5min for TO or 10min if OEI).

Do you have any sources that corroborate with your post?

[Edited 2012-05-09 10:09:24]
Whatever happened to Leon Trotsky?
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Thu May 10, 2012 12:54 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Although the level of derate is a customer choice, I doubt they'll be able to choose 74k (they can get 64k or 70k right now). 74k is not a certified rating on the 787-8 and I doubt it will be.

What, no 757 power to weight option? 
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Thu May 10, 2012 3:00 am

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 8):

I've read the data sheets from EASA and the FAA for both the engine and the airframe/engine combo on the 787. There is no mention of an overboost option for the Trent 1000 anywhere.

That's what Note 10 of the 787-8 FAA TCDS says.

Quoting imiakhtar (Reply 8):
The 74k rating is as far as I can tell the default max thrust rating (5min for TO or 10min if OEI).

Do you have any sources that corroborate with your post?

Yes. The TCDS is the best place to start; it lists the 787-8 as certified with the Trent 1000-A or Trent 1000-C. The -A is the 64k rating, the -C is the 70k rating. There is currently no third rating for the 787-8 that would correspond to 74k.

The TCDS also references the FAA approved Aircraft Flight Manual for engine limits; the 787-8 AFM has entries for 64k and 70k (and the now defunct 53k that was destined for the 787-3) but nothing for 74k.

The Boeing performance software for the 787-8 comes in 64k and 70k versions; no 74k.

Or you can go with the 787-8 FCOM, which contains Performance Dispatch and Performance Inflight data for 64k and 70k but not 74k.

Tom.
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: Boeing 787-9 Developments!

Thu May 10, 2012 6:54 pm

A 74k engine would turn it into a rocket