JoeCanuck
Topic Author
Posts: 3939
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Trent XWB V. -1000

Sun Oct 09, 2011 4:56 am

With the Trent XWB about to begin flight tests, I thought I'd post a question I've wondered about for some time. I have read here that the XWB engine is more advanced and more efficient than the T-1000 engine.

In what ways is it more advanced?

How much more efficient is it?

Which, if any, advances unique to the XWB are possible to be adapted to the T-1000?
What the...?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22927
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Trent XWB V. -1000

Sun Oct 09, 2011 12:22 pm

The biggest change is the Trent XWB is the first in the Trent family with two Intermediate Pressure Turbines, which improves pressures and the engine's overall thermodynamic efficiency. The benefit of this is lower fuel burn at cruise. The Trent XWB is also introducing BLISKs and a new single annular combustor design.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Trent XWB V. -1000

Sun Oct 09, 2011 4:36 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Thread starter):
In what ways is it more advanced?

This might help....

http://www.rolls-royce.com/civil/pro.../largeaircraft/trent_xwb/index.jsp

hit the "technology" tab for a bit more information..

Rgds

[Edited 2011-10-09 09:36:53]
 
JoeCanuck
Topic Author
Posts: 3939
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Trent XWB V. -1000

Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:11 am

Quoting astuteman (Reply 2):

I've already looked at the RR site but I can't find what technology in the XWB can be transferred to the T-1000. Except for blisks, (which I imagine could go into the t-1000...but no mention that I could find if or when they actually would), I couldn't figure out what technology is transferable.

Another question; if the XWB proves significantly more efficient than the T-1000 of a similar thrust range, might it be feasible to put that engine on the 787?
What the...?
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Trent XWB V. -1000

Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:54 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 3):
Another question; if the XWB proves significantly more efficient than the T-1000 of a similar thrust range, might it be feasible to put that engine on the 787?

It's technically possible, probably, but economically a dead end. You're talking about an entirely new flight test program, new strut, new nacelle. *Way* cheaper to just roll those design elements that make the XWB better into the 1000.

Tom.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Trent XWB V. -1000

Mon Oct 10, 2011 9:17 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4):
*Way* cheaper to just roll those design elements that make the XWB better into the 1000.

Which is what RR have said they will do both for the T1000 and the T900. But neither will get the extra IPT.

Some of the more significant gains seem to come in the compressor side of the engine and those gains should be migratable you would think. But it appears that part of the XWB may actually be simpler as well as better than the earlier engines. How much simplicity can be back migrated could be an interesting question. The XWB will also have better thermal coatings IIRC.
 
JoeCanuck
Topic Author
Posts: 3939
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Trent XWB V. -1000

Mon Oct 10, 2011 9:39 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4):

That was my basic assumption but it's good to have things confirmed.
What the...?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests