Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Egerton
Topic Author
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sat Sep 17, 2016 3:53 pm

According to the FT, Pratt will be short of deliveries of the new engines. Instead of 200 in 2016, maybe 50 short, more or less. 350-400 in 2017, instead of 400. About five parts are causing them pain, including the fan blade. Affects Bombardier (we already knew this) and Airbus. Engine production continues, but fan-less, with many uncompleted engines piling up at Connecticut plant. Cash flow issues will result at Pratt. Oh dear.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27029
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sat Sep 17, 2016 4:24 pm

And yet at the same time they are saying they're having a hard time hiring in engineering as well as in production:

http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut ... story.html

The president of Pratt & Whitney said Friday morning that the company is committed to Connecticut and is looking ahead to an expansion that is expected to include filling 8,000 jobs during the next decade.

"Right now we have the biggest backlog since World War II," said Robert Leduc. "We have about $1 trillion of business in our backlog, and we've been able to do that through innovation."

He said Pratt & Whitney will hire 25,000 people worldwide in the next decade – partly to replace 18,000 expected retirements – and about a third of the hires will work in Connecticut. Meanwhile, the workforce expansion includes an expected hiring of 1,000 engineers in Connecticut in the next year and more than 1,000 in the manufacturing sector.

"We can't hire fast enough," Leduc said. "The thing that keeps us up at night is 'are we going to have enough people and are they going to have the right skill set.'"


It makes me wonder if there isn't a good buying opportunity for UTC at some point. They're in a crunch now, but they have a huge backlog to produce going forward.
 
Flyglobal
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:25 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sat Sep 17, 2016 9:02 pm

Hmmm, typically you can acellerate your hiring if you offer higher salaries.

Flyglobal
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27029
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sat Sep 17, 2016 10:41 pm

No offense to Connecticut (I was born and bred there, and am a UConn grad, so I owe a lot to the CT taxpayers) but it isn't really a hot bed of high tech, and has fairly high cost of living (the CEO himself mentions that less senior people can't afford to live there) and high taxes. I wouldn't mind living there again but looked at what they had on offer and didn't find anything that appealed (even though they had 700 eng'g openings listed).
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14316
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sat Sep 17, 2016 11:26 pm

Nice. This is exactly the sorta thing that'll get them back into the widebody biz..... :?
 
User avatar
PacificBeach88
Posts: 756
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:42 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sat Sep 17, 2016 11:35 pm

Jesus! When is the last time Pratt actually delivered on-time, on-budget, and on-specification, for a new engine project? People wonder why GE with their "inferior" A320 engine options sold at all. Go figure...Pratt has screwed the pooch yet again. This is what? The 5th or 6th engine in a row?
 
dc10lover
Posts: 1678
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:11 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:57 am

Maybe everyone should dump P&W and just go with GE.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3646
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sun Sep 18, 2016 1:03 am

With such an engine shortage, this will have a long term impact. I wonder how airlines are getting spare engines. Most airlines want about 1 spare for every 10 - 15 engines. We know these engines already in service will likely need to be removed at some point in the next couple of years for upgrades. With the financial pressure from Airbus and Bombardier wanting to deliver already built airplanes ASAP, I wonder if PW will be adequately able to support the fleet.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 23102
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sun Sep 18, 2016 1:25 am

I'm glad to finally see this admitted and quantified. 50 engines is a loss if 300 engine sales once delivery slots over years are assumed.

This will hurt Bombardier far more than Airbus with 3 engine alternatives.

The issue is the MAX. This delay reduced the EIS advantage by a year. Only now is Pratt delivering in quantity on two programs.

Bad management on Pratt's part to have their two major customers ramping at the same time.

CFM has done well on everything but fuel burn (and probably durability). I might have to increase my estimate on how many airframes will be impacted by the mis-match low compressor. Only as CFM is delivering so many engines.

The issue for CFM is certification of the updates for the MAX prior to EIS. As well as the massive combined ramp.

I cannot wait for NEO Pratt vs. CFM payload/range charts.

The salaries aren't enough to get me to move back to CT.

Lightsaber
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 14316
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sun Sep 18, 2016 4:41 am

dc10lover wrote:
Maybe everyone should dump P&W and just go with GE.

Boeing essentially already has.

737NG: CFM (GE partnership) only
737MAX: CFM only
777LR: GE only
777X: GE only
748: GE only

....787 is the only modern offering they have that has an option entirely separate from GE.

***************************

Airbus isn't nearly so exclusive, but their newest most modern widebody offerings do have a noticeable slant toward RR.

A330NEO: RR only
A350XWB: RR only
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3646
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sun Sep 18, 2016 11:21 am

lightsaber wrote:
I'm glad to finally see this admitted and quantified. 50 engines is a loss if 300 engine sales once delivery slots over years are assumed.

This will hurt Bombardier far more than Airbus with 3 engine alternatives.

The issue is the MAX. This delay reduced the EIS advantage by a year. Only now is Pratt delivering in quantity on two programs.

Bad management on Pratt's part to have their two major customers ramping at the same time.

CFM has done well on everything but fuel burn (and probably durability). I might have to increase my estimate on how many airframes will be impacted by the mis-match low compressor. Only as CFM is delivering so many engines.

The issue for CFM is certification of the updates for the MAX prior to EIS. As well as the massive combined ramp.

I cannot wait for NEO Pratt vs. CFM payload/range charts.

The salaries aren't enough to get me to move back to CT.

Lightsaber


I have heard rumors for about ten years that the PW GTF design was going to have problems. Most assumed that the problems were going to be reliability based. I don't think I had heard predictions about manufacturing components like blades.

I think this may result in CFM Leap engine gaining more market share. If the PW1000 has some reliability problems to go along with the start issue and production issue, airlines are facing a lot of risk with their brand new CSeries or NEOs getting grounded. Few things would get an airline CEO angrier than having a brand new airplane grounded for weeks because it needed an engine change and there is no spare available.

I hate to say it, but I have a feeling (not based in fact just a gut feeling knowing how complicated the latest generation of engines are) that there will be some more reliability problems coming up in the future and with the lack of staff PW is talking about, how will PW respond?
 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sun Sep 18, 2016 3:45 pm

P&W seems to operate on the idea that airlines and commercial airframe makers are like their military contracts: they can have delays and overruns and the customer just has to bend over and take it. Let's see where P&W is when the The Next Big Thing in airliners or engine tech is announced. Who will order from a company with a consistent record for delays and shortfalls in supply?
 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Sun Sep 18, 2016 3:48 pm

Flyglobal wrote:
Hmmm, typically you can acellerate your hiring if you offer higher salaries.

Flyglobal


Your comment, along with other comments here, about it not being worth moving back to CT, makes me think that P&W themselves can no longer afford to live in CT.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Mon Sep 26, 2016 12:45 pm

Looks like the fan blade learning curve has not been met yet.

“There are about 800 parts on the [GTF] engine,” Hayes explained. “There are about five parts that are causing us pain this year … There’s one in particular, which is the fan blade, where we’re still struggling to come down the learning curve to get the number of blades we need … We’ve just struggled because of the technology involved in these blades and the precision in these blades to come down the learning curve. Today it takes us about 60 days to build a blade through the shop. It needs to get to 30 days.


Article
http://atwonline.com/engines/utc-ceo-pr ... ning-curve
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Mon Sep 26, 2016 6:35 pm

Pratt is in a world of hurt and it doesn't look like it's going to get any better soon. They have already had 2 major setbacks with the GTF, which have caused delays at BBD and Airbus. Those were issues with the core. Now, they are claiming issues with the fan. That pretty much adds up to the entire engine...with the exception of the gearbox.

It seems in their zeal to perfect the gearbox, they neglected some other key ingredients of their new engine design. Considering that one of the stated advantages of the gearbox was that it allowed Pratt to use somewhat less exotic and untried materials in the core to achieve the GTF advantages, it seems ominous to me that Pratt is having problems with what would otherwise be relatively conventional constructions materials and techniques.

What the boffins at Pratt are saying is that they are STILL having pretty basic engineering and design issues with their GTF production engines. This at a time when the worst news coming out of GE is that the LEAP might not be quite as efficient as planned right out of the box, but there seem to be no concerns so far about reliability.

This is very bad news for GTF powered aircraft makers and their customers. Pratt is openly predicting that they won't be able to produce enough engines for at least another year and a half...which pretty much wipes out any neo advantage the GTF currently has over the LEAP.

It also makes the CSeries sales jobs at BBD a whole lot tougher.

My, based on nothing more than feelings, guess is that weight is an issue. Their use of lighter materials just isn't working out like hoped and production models will end up being heavier than planned.

I won't be surprised if many, if not most, of undecided neo engine customers choose GE and some current GTF customers switch, (I'm looking at you, Qatar). A small efficiency advantage quickly disappears if the plane isn't flying.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5399
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:02 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Looks like the fan blade learning curve has not been met yet.

“There are about 800 parts on the [GTF] engine,” Hayes explained. “There are about five parts that are causing us pain this year … There’s one in particular, which is the fan blade, where we’re still struggling to come down the learning curve to get the number of blades we need … We’ve just struggled because of the technology involved in these blades and the precision in these blades to come down the learning curve. Today it takes us about 60 days to build a blade through the shop. It needs to get to 30 days.


Article
http://atwonline.com/engines/utc-ceo-pr ... ning-curve

Didn't they have issues with the fan blades on the PW2000s in the late 90s/early 00s?


Such a shame, it seems like this is a never ending story with Pratt. They either have supply issues or just completely flop on engines i.e. PW4170 and PW4098.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:29 pm

That is a similar article to one I read (link below) that told the fan story. Apparently it isn't an issue with the blade itself, it is down to scaling up production as it's new territory for PW. The payoff will be that PW gets a blade technology that is lighter than even GE's carbon fibre blades being fitted into the CFM LEAP

Flightglobal indicate that the engine shortfall could go as high as 100 units

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... in-429520/
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Tue Sep 27, 2016 1:29 pm

deltal1011man wrote:
Such a shame, it seems like this is a never ending story with Pratt. They either have supply issues or just completely flop on engines i.e. PW4170 and PW4098.


It's a production ramp-up issue, not an issue with the blade itself. It's just a matter of sorting things out to allow higher production rates.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27029
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:03 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
Pratt is in a world of hurt and it doesn't look like it's going to get any better soon. They have already had 2 major setbacks with the GTF, which have caused delays at BBD and Airbus. Those were issues with the core. Now, they are claiming issues with the fan. That pretty much adds up to the entire engine...with the exception of the gearbox.


It seems to me you're taking a symptom of a problem, such as a headache, and calling it a brain problem. To me that seems to be misleading. Let's wait a bit and see what the actual brain problem is. In the case of the shaft bowing, the fix was a few changes to bearings and seals along with some procedural changes, nothing more.

That being said, it does seem that CFM is a lot more pro-active with regard to ramping up the supply chain. Pratt hasn't been the sole producer of a high volume commercial jet engine in a very long time, and it shows. I was in CT with relatives this weekend and they all agree that Pratt is going to have a hard time finding all the new employees it needs, given the cost of living. Apparently there is a popular bumper sticker that says "FLEE CT"...

KarelXWB wrote:
It's a production ramp-up issue, not an issue with the blade itself. It's just a matter of sorting things out to allow higher production rates.


I hope so, but we all know nine pregnant ladies can't produce a baby in one month, so...
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14573
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:35 pm

WesternDC6B wrote:
Flyglobal wrote:
Hmmm, typically you can acellerate your hiring if you offer higher salaries.

Flyglobal


Your comment, along with other comments here, about it not being worth moving back to CT, makes me think that P&W themselves can no longer afford to live in CT.


Yes Connecticut has a high cost of living, but it also has one of the best public school systems in the Country. You get what you paid for. That is a huge selling point.
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:58 pm

I was at P&W's GTF fanblade manufacturing facility Official Opening in Singapore on February 15th this year. Not sure whether there are other plant/plants doing the same work but probably there are elsewhere. It is quite big at 180,000 sq ft or 16,000 sq m but only half of the space was operational. I was told the empty half is slated for the making of the GTF turbine blades at a later date. During the conducted tour, I witnessed the slow and elaborate automated process of milling each blade from a block of aluminum alloy. It certainly is time consuming. They will need to add more machines and manpower if they had not done so already.

Image
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 23102
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Tue Sep 27, 2016 6:11 pm

Revelation wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
Pratt is in a world of hurt and it doesn't look like it's going to get any better soon. They have already had 2 major setbacks with the GTF, which have caused delays at BBD and Airbus. Those were issues with the core. Now, they are claiming issues with the fan. That pretty much adds up to the entire engine...with the exception of the gearbox.


It seems to me you're taking a symptom of a problem, such as a headache, and calling it a brain problem. To me that seems to be misleading. Let's wait a bit and see what the actual brain problem is. In the case of the shaft bowing, the fix was a few changes to bearings and seals along with some procedural changes, nothing more.

That being said, it does seem that CFM is a lot more pro-active with regard to ramping up the supply chain. Pratt hasn't been the sole producer of a high volume commercial jet engine in a very long time, and it shows. I was in CT with relatives this weekend and they all agree that Pratt is going to have a hard time finding all the new employees it needs, given the cost of living. Apparently there is a popular bumper sticker that says "FLEE CT"...

KarelXWB wrote:
It's a production ramp-up issue, not an issue with the blade itself. It's just a matter of sorting things out to allow higher production rates.


I hope so, but we all know nine pregnant ladies can't produce a baby in one month, so...

CFM is far more proactive. They will pay for early delivery to ensure parts are available. CFM also requires demonstration production runs that produce actual production parts.

Pratt will sort this out. The end result is a lighter engine.

Lightsaber
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:10 am

An update on the fan blades:

At the beginning of this year, the Lansing and Singapore facilities were spending 100-105 days to manufacture each blade, of which 20 are needed for each PW1100G engine. Only about 30% of the blades survived a first-pass quality inspection, Hayes says. Manufacturing speed and quality have improved over the year, with the production cycle declining to about 55 days per blade and a 70% inspection approval rate, he adds.


Two more factories will be opened to support production ramp-up:

In January, P&W’s Japan-based supplier IHI plans to open a third fan blade factory for the geared turbofan engine, Hayes says. Production capacity also will get a boost in April when P&W opens a supplementary plant near the existing facility in Michigan, he adds.

“You’re going to see step-changes in fan blade deliveries really through the first half next year,” Hayes says


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... es-430722/
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Wed Oct 26, 2016 12:58 pm

I'd rather be in P&W's position than CFMs to be honest.

You have a product that beats performance expectations and "only" need to refine the build process to pump them out quicker.

Whereas, for CFM, you have a product that would seem to be lagging its competitor in current performance and have a harder development path to obtain future improvements.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Wed Oct 26, 2016 1:15 pm

MTU have also opened a production line and started delivering the PurePower engine to Airbus from the German factory in Munich

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ne-430607/
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 2072
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Re: United Technologies chief: P&W 50 engines short

Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:00 pm

At the beginning of this year, the Lansing and Singapore facilities were spending 100-105 days to manufacture each blade, of which 20 are needed for each PW1100G engine. Only about 30% of the blades survived a first-pass quality inspection, Hayes says. Manufacturing speed and quality have improved over the year, with the production cycle declining to about 55 days per blade and a 70% inspection approval rate, he adds.

Hayes compared the manufacturing issues with similar challenges P&W experienced with the hollow titanium blades on the PW4000 turbofan engine. “Today it’s not an issue stamping them out. It will be the same on this fan blade,” he says.


Thats just not right, if I was Airbus or Bombardier that would make me scream. Clearly P&W have (again!!) failed to clear manufacturing and materials programs into production, RR and GE work through strategic 10 year plans to mature items to production standards, Hayes says no biggie we screwed up in exactly the same way we screwed up before.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos