Guest

CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Jun 11, 2001 1:45 am

Which one of these two powerplants has had the best reliability on the Airbus A320 family?
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Jun 11, 2001 1:49 am

If spare engine availability is anything to go by CFM56. Spare IAE's are like rocking horse SH 1T
 
Guest

VC-10

Mon Jun 11, 2001 2:11 am

Being that P&W is a partner in IAE, wouldn't they have V2500 spare parts for aircraft in the USA and Rolls Royce in Europe?
 
VC-10
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Jun 11, 2001 3:28 am

All I know is that when we wanted a complete engine we always had to get a loaner until the one we removed was returned from o/haul
 
User avatar
Crosswind
Posts: 2536
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 4:34 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Jun 11, 2001 5:39 am

CFMI concede in advertisements that the IAE V2500 has lower fuel consumption, but that the CFM56 has lower maintenance costs.

Make of that what you want...
 
JT-8D
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2000 11:34 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Jun 11, 2001 11:09 am

CFM, always, CFM..JT
 
TimT
Posts: 168
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2001 1:38 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Jun 11, 2001 2:46 pm

CFM's are way too cool-- on our 319-320 fleet the manual specs 2 (two) different CFM's. Got on and need the other? Change the FADEC! There you go. Might be able to do that on the IAE too. Just don't have any experience with them.
 
Guest

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Jun 11, 2001 10:53 pm

Are there any UA engine mechanics out there that can give me their opinion on the IAE V2500 that power their A319s & A320s?
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Fri Feb 10, 2006 9:15 pm

Recently most A320 operators are changing over from V2500 equipped A320s to CFM56B operated A320s.
Is there a Technical reason for that choice or purely Marketing.
The query is because for so many years the A320s out here were choosing V2500s until a few months back.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
A/c train
Posts: 674
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 7:57 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sat Feb 11, 2006 1:19 am

from a maintenance point of view, most jobs on the V2500 are simpler than the CFM-56, there are some really crap borescope plug locations on the CFM !!! Fan arrangements etc are simpler on V25.
Spares/ engine spares, I second VC-10, it seems harder to source a V2500 than a CFM, must be a maintrol nightmare if your airline doesnt hold any serviceable spare V25's.
As far as reliability, each airline will look at that question with their own view, I havnt heard of too many AOG's involving CFM engines.
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3359
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sat Feb 11, 2006 2:18 am

We get both here. I work on a line station and in 18 years of CFM and 5 years of IAE, I have changed a starter on an IAE, and err thats it. We get about 4 a day. IAE advantage is that it doesn't use oil. I average 2 lts/day on CFM and 1 lt/week on IAE.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sat Feb 11, 2006 2:33 am

Having done the analysis on this specific subject previously I'd say the following.

The V2500 is a newer design, has a slight fuel burn advantage, and tends to degrade at a slower rate in EGT margins and consumption bias then the CFM56.

However both engines are very competitive and have gone thru several upgrades over the years, with CFM working on their latest "CFM56 Tech" package due out in 2007 which is to further reduce emissions along with a small fuel consumption improvement.

Due to the very competitive nature of the engines, operators often simply choose based on price or fleet commonality.

In my opinion, one cant loose with either choice, however I'd give the V2500 an ever so slight advantage.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:48 am

Quoting Crosswind (Reply 4):
CFMI concede in advertisements that the IAE V2500 has lower fuel consumption, but that the CFM56 has lower maintenance costs.

Make of that what you want...

An engine specialist at XFW that I spoke to was also of this opinion. That is why IAE are trying to make the V25000 more maintenance friendly and reduce the mx costs.

Quoting A/c train (Reply 9):
from a maintenance point of view, most jobs on the V2500 are simpler than the CFM-56, there are some really crap borescope plug locations on the CFM !!! Fan arrangements etc are simpler on V25.

From talking to an AC mech, he said that they prefered doing maintenace on the CFM (compared to the IAE on the jetBlue a/c they did). This might of course be that they were used to the CFM from years on the the AC fleet. Also the thrust reverse mechanism on the CFM is simpler than on the IAE.
(A320tech - before you say anything, go blame Dale!)
 
dl757md
Posts: 1482
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 9:32 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sat Feb 11, 2006 11:57 am

Quoting A/c train (Reply 9):
Fan arrangements etc are simpler on V25.

I've done many fan blade lubes on both engines. The V2500 may have a slightly simpler fan design but the removal and installation on the CFM56-7 is far easier and quicker.

DL757Md
757 Most beautiful airliner in the sky!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sat Feb 11, 2006 2:47 pm

Here is a timely article on the V2500 series engine.

http://www.aviationindustrygroup.com...iaev2500adominantpow-1137-1143.pdf
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
A/c train
Posts: 674
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 7:57 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:51 pm

DL757MD, You've obviously never had to apply the baked on coating to the fan blades on a CFM ?
its wide chord blades all the way for me!
 
dl757md
Posts: 1482
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 9:32 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:35 am

Quoting A/c train (Reply 15):
its wide chord blades all the way for me!

The CFM56-7 (which is what I was referring to) on the next generation 737 has 24 wide chord blades just like the V2500. I wouldn't compare a CFM56-3 engine with 36 blades to the V2500. They're two different generations of powerplant. The only fair comparison of the V2500 to a CFM56 is to the -7 series.

DL757Md
757 Most beautiful airliner in the sky!
 
A/c train
Posts: 674
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 7:57 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:32 am

My bad, I was comparing the older CFM with midspan shrouds
 
320tech
Posts: 489
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 11:38 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:10 pm

(A320tech - before you say anything, go blame Dale!)

Hey, I haven't even said anything yet.  Smile

My impression, based on limited V2500 experience and lots of CFM, is that CFM's are easier to maintain. I have heard from others that V2500's are cheaper to buy. It seems likely to me that the difference is not significant enough to make a real difference, and so the deciding factor will be (as mentioned) fleet commonality and similar factors.

My airline seems happy with the CFM's, jetBlue seems happy with the V2500's.

In short, beats me.
The primary function of the design engineer is to make things difficult for the manufacturer and impossible for the AME.
 
Molykote
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:21 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:00 pm

Quoting TimT (Reply 6):
CFM's are way too cool-- on our 319-320 fleet the manual specs 2 (two) different CFM's. Got on and need the other? Change the FADEC! There you go. Might be able to do that on the IAE too. Just don't have any experience with them.

My understanding:

The two 'different' CFM56-5B engines for the A320 family include a "/P" series and a series not designated with the "/P" suffix. I believe the /P suffix indicates that some of the high pressure rotors employ a more efficient "3-D" (misnomer) airfoil section that non-/P engines lack. This is an actual hardware difference on the rotors and is of course independent of the FADEC installed. If you are familiar with the AMM (and it looks like you might be) the /P engine sometimes has different serviceable limits than the non-P counterpart.

- Each engine serial number has an "N1 modifier" associated with it. This N1 modifier is a measure of how a given engine performed in a test cell. When engines are moved between aircraft and may require a different thrust installation this N1 modifier is used in calculations to uprate or derate a given engine at an appropriate level.

- The thrust level of an engine is changed (perhaps more accurately "programmed") by installing a "data plug" that screws onto the ECU and conveys program information that sets the engine thrust output to the level desired by the operator. A given spare engine may have multiple data plugs tailored to its specific engine serial number and kept on standby for a later date if/when a change in thrust or new installation is desired for the engine.

- Each engine has an Engine Data Plate
This data plate is required for flight per FAR. Following a thrust level change as per above or the running of an engine in a test cell at any time the observed N1 modifier status and current thrust configuration are stamped onto the data plate.

Aside from the /P and non-/P difference between CFM56-5Bs, the only hardware difference (if you don't count the programmed thrust plug) is an additional sense line installed on the A319 (CFM56-5B6 or -5B6/P). This sense line is not installed on the A320 (CFM56-5B4) or A321 (CFM56-5B3) variants of the engine.

So.......
As far as hardware similarity is concerned (within a /P or non-/P family), the A320 and A321 have the same engine with exception of different thrust plug programming. The A319 configuration has an extra sense line installed. Both configurations can be achieved from the same engine serial number with no more than a couple hours of work to remove or install the sense line depending on which way you wish to go. No change (apart from screwing in a different thrust plug) is necessary to go A320<-->A321

Quoting Dl757md (Reply 13):
Quoting A/c train (Reply 9):
Fan arrangements etc are simpler on V25.

I've done many fan blade lubes on both engines. The V2500 may have a slightly simpler fan design but the removal and installation on the CFM56-7 is far easier and quicker.

CFM56-5B is the relevant model if we are talking about an apples-apples narrowbus comparison.

Quoting Dl757md (Reply 16):
The CFM56-7 (which is what I was referring to) on the next generation 737 has 24 wide chord blades just like the V2500. I wouldn't compare a CFM56-3 engine with 36 blades to the V2500. They're two different generations of powerplant. The only fair comparison of the V2500 to a CFM56 is to the -7 series.

In my opinion the only fair comparison is the -5B to the V2500. The V2500 is not available for comparison to a -7 due to the fact that the engines can't be installed on a common airframe for evaluation. I do understand where you are going with the similar appearance of the -7 and V2500 blades but no market competition exists between the -7 and V2500.
Speedtape - The aspirin of aviation!
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:56 pm

Quoting 320tech (Reply 18):
(A320tech - before you say anything, go blame Dale!)

Hey, I haven't even said anything yet.

It was my pre-emptive strike refering to what I remembered hearing in YWG!  Smile

I was wondering - what kind of effect does the non-circular inlet have on the 737 CFM's due to the lower landing gear?
Surely you have some performance reduction compared to the fully circular ones, as the air flow will be disturbed by it?
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Feb 13, 2006 2:02 pm

Quoting A319XFW (Reply 12):
That is why IAE are trying to make the V2500 more maintenance friendly and reduce the mx costs.

What Mods.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Tue Feb 14, 2006 5:53 am

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 21):
What Mods.

Don't know. All I heard was they were improving the maintenance costs for it.
Sorry.
 
scarebus03
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:14 pm

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Tue Feb 14, 2006 6:55 am

Having a considerable amount of experience maintaining both types of engines my runaway favourite is the CFM56-5. I still have nightmares about the early V2500-A1s they were real heartbreakers. The A5 series is a much better engine than the A1 but I have had much more in-service V2500s fail borescope inspections than CFMs. The V2500 is quieter, uses less fuel, has way lower oil consumption and has better acceleration than the CFM. The CFM is easier to work on, has better on wing time between overhauls but is more expensive to choose as an option for the A32F (or used to be anyway). I can't wait to see a new V2500!

Brgds

SB03
No faults found......................
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Tue Feb 14, 2006 4:03 pm

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 21):
What Mods.
regds
MEL

Here you go, straight from IAE themselves.

http://www.i-a-e.com/select/index.shtm
 
anxebla
Posts: 1696
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 8:31 am

RE: CFM56 Or IAE V2500

Mon Feb 27, 2006 12:42 pm

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 8):
Recently most A320 operators are changing over from V2500 equipped A320s to CFM56B operated A320s.

did you say most? What airlines are they?

Quoting Scarebus03 (Reply 23):
The V2500 is quieter, uses less fuel, has way lower oil consumption and has better acceleration than the CFM.

Do you know what engine type is a better seller on the A320 family? So far I know it is IAE. Am I wrong? Thanks in advance  Smile
AIRBUS 320 The world's most advanced single-aisle aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests