GalebG4
Topic Author
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:49 pm

Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 5:55 pm

Many Airbus a330ceo customers have ordered or operate 787. Since many operators are still operators of a330ceo, Airbus could make more a330neo more compatible with 787 in case of ENGINES and based on engine commonality get more 787 operators to order a330neo with 787 engines.

Engine commonalities:
Trent 7000(a330), Trent 1000(787),GEnx(787)
Length:
188in, 186,5in, 184,7in
Diameter:
112in, 112in, 111,1in
Weight:
6445kg, ~6120kg, 6147kg

operators of 787 and a330 including orders:
Etihad: 787=71, a330=24
American: 787=67, a330=24
Qatar: 787=60, a330=28
Singapore: 787=47, a330=20
IAG: 787=42, a330=38
Air Canada: 787=37, a330=12
Turkish: 787=25, a330=65
AF, KLM: 787=25, a330=28
Qantas: 787=25, a330=28
Virgin Atl: 787=17, a330=14
Avianca: 787=16, a330=20
Air Europa: 787=15, a330=12
Oman: 787=14, a330=10
Saudia: 787=13, a330=43
Korean: 787=11, a330=29
*no Chinese operators since they are probably going to operate a330neo and 787.
*no operators under 10 787 or a330.

Many of this operators already have published that they are going to retire a330ceo, but based on their fleet age and a330 efficiency on shoter sectors Airbus could put more pressure Boeing with 787 engines on a330.
TRENT 7000 IS BASED ON TRENT 1000 and probably re-engineering of a330neo for 787 engines would probably be stupid decision since Trent 7000 is more efficient then Trent 1000 or GEnx. Decision to use same engines could be good decision in case of bigger a330ceo operators with 787 but it would probably show a330 frame inefficiency and probably would not pressure Boeing as it should. Airbus already did similar blunder with a300(747 engines). Since Airbus has already lost bigger customers we are probably not going to see a330neo with 787 engines.

What do you think?
 
RB211trent
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 11:35 am

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:06 pm

Basically the T7000 is a T1000 with cabin bleed.
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:08 pm

The Trent 7000 IS the T1000ten.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17355
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:21 pm

The A330NEO is powered by the T7000 which is the T1000 but with bleed air. This was the lowest cost solution to re-engine the A330NEO. So there is already enough engine (but not nacelle) compatibility with the T1000 for major parts (but not engine swaps). What was lost is the massive generator that powers 787 subsystems in the T1000.

RR also has a contractual exclusive on the A330NEO.

How is the T7000 more efficient than the T1000 when the major components are shared? Now the intermediate turbine is probably different (no generator), but is it? I actually do not know...

The plan was keep as much common as possible with the A330CEO to ease the transition. The issue is the A330 cross section.

DL wanted 8 across for TATL as they generate about a 11% premium in coach over their competition. So they need to cater to their customers.
AirAsia has very price sensitive customers who will tolerate A330 9-across Y.

For most other airlines, they cannot generate enough of a Y premium nor will their customers accept 9-across in an A330, so it is 9-across 787 vs. 8-across A330 and in that situation, the 787 wins. Airbus bet 787 production would be constrained. Instead, Boeing fixed the logjam and is in the process of increasing 787 production. Airbus also bet Boeing couldn't drop 787 pricing as much as they have. Boeing is expected to cut 787 production costs $3 to $4 million per plane in 2019 vs. 2018 costs. Over half the cost savings is 3D pringing https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nors ... SKBN17C264

Yes, Airbus can 3D print too. Good luck getting the machines. Boeing went early and has created a 30 month long waiting list for Aerospace grade 3D printers. :( (I work for a competitor who is in that long line.)

A link to 787 financial viability. All that matters is Boeing can sell due to good cash flow (today, not the past) and has near term production slots to sell. This has handicapped A330NEO sales.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/420046 ... -per-month


So we already have the A330NEO with 787 engines. They just had to be significantly modified. I see no business case for Airbus to invest about $1.5 billion in the A330NEO for electric subsystem. For that is what you are proposing with a T1000/GEnX. But that would also require Airbus to reimburse RR for every bit of T7000 expense they incurred to date which should be a few billion USD/Euro. I fail to see that business case.

What we need is the new Airbus CEO (person, not A320CEO or A330CEO) ;) to sell more widebodies. Boeing is always an aggressive competitor. I didn't expect the ramp to 14/month starting January 2019. Did anyone else? That changed the competitive game for the A330NEO. So Airbus *must* figure out how to get $5 to $10 million of cost out of each A330NEO IMHO.

Lightsaber

Ps Do not take this thread off track with differed production costs. That has derailed every A330NEO/787 discussion thread and is OFF topic for this discussion. Start a new thread if you need to discuss program accounting. You may discuss 787 being competitive or not competitive, but only directly related to A330NEO sales.

Please keep this thread from going A vs. B.
You know nothing John Snow.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:37 pm

The problem Airbus has stems from the initial belief that an A350-8 would 'cut it' in this market.This was highly flawed thinking.The 330neo is a band aid solution.As above it does work in specific cases ( high yield and low yield) But struggles in the middle.However it may well be attractive to some existing 330 operators as there are very low costs of transferring to the new model.
This situation will pertain for the next couple of years imho.By then the 797 situation will be resolved and they can plan a proper response in the the middle widebodied marketplace.
 
smartplane
Posts: 905
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:40 pm

More likely RR will be dropped from the 787, than the 787 configured RR engine will appear on the A330.

RR engine issues on the 787 have almost certainly created the perfect storm, which would allow Boeing to terminate the relationship at little or no cost, paving the way for them to acquire GE, and for Airbus to acquire RR.

Other than airlines with inhouse engine maintenance, operating as profit centres, engine selection with lifetime (for the duration of flying with that customer) OEM fixed price support (not necessarily flat line plus inflation), means engine choice is less of an issue than a decade or more ago. Now it's about lifetime ownership cost and performance guarantees (in particular decay).
 
GalebG4
Topic Author
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 7:08 pm

lightsaber wrote:
The A330NEO is powered by the T7000 which is the T1000 but with bleed air. This was the lowest cost solution to re-engine the A330NEO. So there is already enough engine (but not nacelle) compatibility with the T1000 for major parts (but not engine swaps). What was lost is the massive generator that powers 787 subsystems in the T1000.

RR also has a contractual exclusive on the A330NEO.

How is the T7000 more efficient than the T1000 when the major components are shared? Now the intermediate turbine is probably different (no generator), but is it? I actually do not know...

The plan was keep as much common as possible with the A330CEO to ease the transition.

The reason why I posted this topic is because I thought that Trent 7000 is more modern version of Trent 1000, not subversion of Trent 1000 with bleed air.

lightsaber wrote:
The issue is the A330 cross section.

DL wanted 8 across for TATL as they generate about a 11% premium in coach over their competition. So they need to cater to their customers.
AirAsia has very price sensitive customers who will tolerate A330 9-across Y.

For most other airlines, they cannot generate enough of a Y premium nor will their customers accept 9-across in an A330, so it is 9-across 787 vs. 8-across A330 and in that situation, the 787 wins.

A330 cross section makes me mad, because many airlines that have said they are not going to fly A330neo because of cross section actually fly 777 with 10 abreast. :banghead: :hissyfit: (KLM, Air New Zeland, British...) :bomb:


lightsaber wrote:
Airbus bet 787 production would be constrained. Instead, Boeing fixed the logjam and is in the process of increasing 787 production. Airbus also bet Boeing couldn't drop 787 pricing as much as they have. Boeing is expected to cut 787 production costs $3 to $4 million per plane in 2019 vs. 2018 costs. Over half the cost savings is 3D pringing https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nors ... SKBN17C264

Yes, Airbus can 3D print too. Good luck getting the machines. Boeing went early and has created a 30 month long waiting list for Aerospace grade 3D printers. :( (I work for a competitor who is in that long line.)

A link to 787 financial viability. All that matters is Boeing can sell due to good cash flow (today, not the past) and has near term production slots to sell. This has handicapped A330NEO sales.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/420046 ... -per-month

3-4 mil. that is a lot plus lower A330neo production rate. Uhhh,but a330 probably shares many components with a320 family so even with lower production rate I think a330neo can be price competitive.


lightsaber wrote:
So we already have the A330NEO with 787 engines. They just had to be significantly modified. I see no business case for Airbus to invest about $1.5 billion in the A330NEO for electric subsystem. For that is what you are proposing with a T1000/GEnX. But that would also require Airbus to reimburse RR for every bit of T7000 expense they incurred to date which should be a few billion USD/Euro. I fail to see that business case.

I mean this was reason why I wanted to ask people, a330neo would probably make more sense in 2008-2010 but it’s late now, I think 400 a330neo’s is going to be maximum produced because of cr929 and off course biggest customers lost. Also 797 is going to play big part in a330-800 competition, unfortunately. :hissyfit:

lightsaber wrote:
What we need is the new Airbus CEO (person, not A320CEO or A330CEO) ;) to sell more widebodies. Boeing is always an aggressive competitor. I didn't expect the ramp to 14/month starting January 2019. Did anyone else? That changed the competitive game for the A330NEO. So Airbus *must* figure out how to get $5 to $10 million of cost out of each A330NEO IMHO.

A320 family parts commonality as much as they can, sales team looking for 10 abreast 777 customers so cross section would not be that big of a deal when they ask about cross section. Seats that look bigger(17in wide) and more comfortable(like 18in wide but 17in) could also be good sales strategy and off course asking engineers to make their magic and lower production cost as much as they can to be more competitive.


lightsaber wrote:
Do not take this thread off track with differed production costs. That has derailed every A330NEO/787 discussion thread and is OFF topic for this discussion. Start a new thread if you need to discuss program accounting. You may discuss 787 being competitive or not competitive, but only directly related to A330NEO sales.

Please keep this thread from going A vs. B.


Hopefully we will be on topic track. Thank you on your answer, reason why i am on this forum is because of questions and answers like this one. :D
 
GalebG4
Topic Author
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:49 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 7:25 pm

smartplane wrote:
More likely RR will be dropped from the 787, than the 787 configured RR engine will appear on the A330.

RR engine issues on the 787 have almost certainly created the perfect storm, which would allow Boeing to terminate the relationship at little or no cost, paving the way for them to acquire GE, and for Airbus to acquire RR.

Other than airlines with inhouse engine maintenance, operating as profit centres, engine selection with lifetime (for the duration of flying with that customer) OEM fixed price support (not necessarily flat line plus inflation), means engine choice is less of an issue than a decade or more ago. Now it's about lifetime ownership cost and performance guarantees (in particular decay).

Airplane manufacturers and engine manufacturers consolidation, amazing !!! :praise: That is probably reason why DL is flying PW and GE engines on their a330’s.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 9:02 pm

The GEnx has a bleed and an electrical version, both use bleed air, the electrical one just less. The 787 has the electrical version -B1 and the 747-8 has the bleed version -B2
They are also different in size whereas the T1000ten and T7000 have the same size.

to GalebG4
the T7000 is a version of the T1000ten not T1000.
 
sciing
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:54 am

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 9:46 pm

To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:01 pm

sciing wrote:
To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!


RR got a single source deal for the engine on the A330neo. The main difference between A330neo and 787 engines is, that the A330neo engines produce more bleed air and the 787 engines more electricity. That makes them not interchangeable.
The idea that Boeing promoted with the interchangeability of the engines on the 787, the possibility of changing on a frame from RR engines to GE or vice versa, was not realized. I do not know if you can fly a 787 with a T1000 on one side and a T1000ten on the other side, but you can change from the T1000 to the T1000ten.
Last edited by mjoelnir on Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9248
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:01 pm

sciing wrote:
To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!

It was the engine makers (GE and RR) who would only do the program if they got exclusivity. I believe both viewed the A330neo as their ticket to getting the GEnx/Trent1000 programs back into profitability and wanted to avoid splitting the market like on the 787. Airbus chose RR.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 3441
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:20 pm

Do not turn this thread into Airbus vs. Boeing or off-topic personal comments. The thread will be locked if it continues.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:07 am

I think the 787 will keep being offered with both RR and GE engines. I do not believe, that aircraft manufacturers will buy the engine manufacturers in the next years. Aircraft manufacturers would just have more risk in house if one engine manufacturer falls behind the other.
There are also still quite a few engine manufacturers apart from RR and GE, as for example Safran, MTU and P&W to name just a few.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17355
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:33 am

sciing wrote:
To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!

Inconsistent... It isn't a thesis. ;). The A330NEO has the 787 engine mechanically. But the electrical subsystems provide a huge advantage to the 787.

So they are the same as much as supporting pneumatic systems allow.

And RR has an exclusive. Because the pulled power of the middle spool, there is less impact. GE would have had to offer the 748 engine.

Lightsaber
You know nothing John Snow.
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 630
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 4:36 am

The A330 Neo electrical architecture is essentially unchanged from the early 1990's with the exception of IFE upgrades. I do not see Airbus going to the expense of 787 electrical subsystem for an admittedly low cost derivative in the A330 Neo.

The OP presents an interesting idea but I do not see it happening.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 5:24 am

Airbus did stay with pneumatic power also on the A380 and A350. They do not see the advantage to go to producing electricity, to run electrical compressors, to produce compressed air. Both ways, taking compressed air directly or taking electrical power influence the SFP of the engines and I have not seen yet any numbers that put the power advantage the all electrical way, put perhaps in the promils, or parts per thousands or even the other way.
Staying with pneumatic power or bleed, does not mean that there are no advancements. If you compare the A330ceo, where you have pneumatic controlled pneumatic, you get electrical controlled pneumatic on the A333neo like in the A350 and A380.

If somebody does believe there have not been advancements in electrics or electronics since 1990 on the A330, has not followed with the upgrades, the A330 has got during the years. For example the flight computers today are not the same the A330 was equiped with in the beginning.

https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/support ... azine.html Look at FAST special edition / October 2015

The upgrades to the A330 have not all been about payload range. The above article or magazine goes through the changes done to the A330ceo. A lot of the changes have been available as upgrades to older frames
Last edited by mjoelnir on Mon Dec 03, 2018 5:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 5:34 am

lightsaber wrote:
sciing wrote:
To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!

Inconsistent... It isn't a thesis. ;). The A330NEO has the 787 engine mechanically. But the electrical subsystems provide a huge advantage to the 787.

So they are the same as much as supporting pneumatic systems allow.

And RR has an exclusive. Because the pulled power of the middle spool, there is less impact. GE would have had to offer the 748 engine.

Lightsaber


I agree with you regarding the different systems and why the engines are different on the 787 and A330neo, but I would dare you to define the huge advantage for the 787. I know it has been the hype for the 787, but I have yet to see any information that puts the advantage for the 787 at more than in the promil range for the power use of the systems. As before the main power draw, disregarding propulsion, is providing compressed air.
 
sciing
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:54 am

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 5:43 am

lightsaber wrote:
sciing wrote:
To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!

Inconsistent... It isn't a thesis. ;).

Boeing cost vs no AvsB and no Boeing cost discussion!

GE would have had to offer the 748 engine.

And why did this not happen? Did it happen?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 6:34 am

sciing wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
sciing wrote:
To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!

Inconsistent... It isn't a thesis. ;).

Boeing cost vs no AvsB and no Boeing cost discussion!

GE would have had to offer the 748 engine.

And why did this not happen? Did it happen?


The 747-8 engine would have been far to small. It would have needed the 787 engine changed to a bleed version, so a new engine version anyway.
GE did make on offer. Both GE and RR claimed exklusive rights. RR got the contract.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5390
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 11:30 am

Even without the exclusivity agreement the A330NEO is not selling well enough to justify the expense of certifying another engine. Customers are not lining up and saying “We will buy it, but only with a GE engine”.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
WIederling
Posts: 8357
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:00 pm

sciing wrote:
GE would have had to offer the 748 engine.

And why did this not happen? Did it happen?


Beyond adding bleed the GenX-2B has a smaller fan, lower BPR, less thrust and probably a higher tsfc too.
The 783 of 787 engines so to speak.
Murphy is an optimist
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3689
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Wed May 08, 2019 2:27 am

sciing wrote:
To finish this thread what was the reason for no GEnx for the neo.
Did the engines makers want a single source deal, did Airbus only want a single source to reduce certification cost?
@lightsaber: Your post is very inconsistent, maybe you realize it by yourself whats wrong!

No.. GE paid to be the sole source engine to freeze out PWA on the B777. The 787 also froze out PWA. The 797 ? with PWA having the GTF(geared turbo Fan)? It's hard to tell who will get the sole source as the KC-46 is flying the PWA engine. So I know Boeing is playing their cards "close to the Vest".
 
trex8
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon May 13, 2019 12:29 am

GEnx was launch engine for the A350 Mk1 which is effectively the early itineration of the A330neo.
 
trex8
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Airbus a330neo possible versions with GEnx and Trent 1000

Mon May 13, 2019 1:07 am

IIRC the early rumors about the A330neo being launched prior to actual acknowledgement of its existence by A had the GEnx as the engine as the pundits saw it as a way for GE to increase sales of the bleed 2B variant which was only on the 747-8 and that wasnt exactly selling like hot cakes. When Rolls was announced as the sole engine, some saw it as GE betting on B and the 787 rather than A.

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