Those "cheap, lower quality engines" are the widest spread in the industry those days (maybe the JT
-8 is about the same) and Boeing uses them as well on the 737NG. I don't know why OA
had to "replace" (scrap?) two engines. There are a couple of problems on the CFM56 when it comes to bearing failures, but there are fixes available that are supposed to improve this weakness. Nevertheless, may I remind you that PW
also has it's share of troubles on the 4000 with the high pressure compressor surge issues that led the FAA to issue an AD
to have them modified (on the CFM56 is no comparable major AD
engines, I really don't see how you see them to have many problems. The Trent500 as used on the A340NG has no serious problems yet since it entered service. As far as I heard from RR
, the Trent900 to be used on the A380 is on track in its development schedule and no major problems are known.
You say your post was motivated by a few incidents at OA
. How "few"? Just be aware, that if the authorities see a serious problem with an engine (accumulation of inflight shutdowns, airturnbacks and so on) they immediately require the manufacturer to act and fix the problem. If the manufacturer doesn't comply, the type certificate will be ceased which means a grounding of all planes powered by this type of engine.
So, I really don't think that there is or was any large operational problem on the CFM56 which is by no means a "cheap low quality engine". By the way, the core engine is manufactured by GE
and identical with the military version which is used on the F-16 fighter.......