Bricktop
Posts: 1359
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:17 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
CFM is 50 % Safran and 50 % GE. That is a strong company.

GE itself is down the shit drain and selling off whatever sells to solve their liquidity crisis. The GE jet engine operation may be profitable, but what does that help if the whole company is loss making and in dire need of capital.

https://money.cnn.com/2017/11/20/invest ... index.html

Immelt's gone, and good riddance. Same Jack Welch tree as some clown called McNerney who may be known to readers of this board. Don't get me started on those two, and their business view. GE's new CEO Larry Culp is an outsider, and selling off everything except Power and Aviation divisions, raising lots of cash, and the stock is up about 70% in the last 3 months. I think they will be fine.

CFM will do a nice job on the NMA. Nothing crazy, just nice solid improvements. Half a generation enhancement is what I recall.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17496
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:20 pm

mxaxai wrote:
zkojq wrote:
N328KF wrote:
That's an extremely fair point, but it is obvious that GE/CFM have endured the engine manufacturer crises better than their peers.


GE/CFM has also been much better at controlling the narrative about engine problems.

I'd rather say that GE & CFM have been better at recognizing and mitigating their problems before they create operational impacts. We didn't see a fleet of gliders waiting for CFM engines nor were many GE powered birds grounded while waiting for replacement engines.

Revelation wrote:
Boeing's also saying the big push is really going to be on design and manufacturing technology, and on restructuring its relationship with the supply chain.

"restructuring"
pls gib new technology for less monies; deliver yesterday. risk is all yours. BR, Boeing


No wonder RR decided to leave. But the question is how competitive a LEAP-powered 797 can be against a LEAP-powered A321 or 737-10. Or a simple, risk-free PW1000 derivative, for that matter. And while RR's ultrafan missed the 797, it'll likely find its way onto other A or B products by end of the decade.
The 797 could end up like the A340-200/300: A unique market, an engineering marvel and yet limited by its old engines. Boeing really has to get the airframe right.

CFM was proactive in working to transfer customers back to the CFM-56 (at CFM's cost). But there are still LEAP gliders. While more were Pratt, it wasn't 2:1, more like 3:2.

There are a fleet of MAX gliders too. As I stated, CFM has better PR.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20577
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:21 pm

mxaxai wrote:
No wonder RR decided to leave. But the question is how competitive a LEAP-powered 797 can be against a LEAP-powered A321 or 737-10. Or a simple, risk-free PW1000 derivative, for that matter. And while RR's ultrafan missed the 797, it'll likely find its way onto other A or B products by end of the decade.

I'm not sure the partners investing in "LEAP 1.5" for NMA will be in a huge hurry to hurt their own investment on NMA by heavily PIPing the LEAP-1A for A320.

I'm not sure a "late next decade" RR product is that daunting a prospect in the near/mid term.

mxaxai wrote:
The 797 could end up like the A340-200/300: A unique market, an engineering marvel and yet limited by its old engines. Boeing really has to get the airframe right.

I don't think putting CFM56 onto A342/3 is a apt model.

I think LEAP 1.5 will be much more than Airbus got for CFM56 which was up-sized which required a throttle push, but had little new content.

Yet if we see NMA provide a lot of tech flow through to NSA like A340 provided to A330 and the result is a product that captures its class for many years, Boeing would be happy.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3096
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:30 pm

KFLLCFII wrote:
Good. Better to not taint the 797 with a low-bidder inferior product.



Sure because the GEnX on the 787, GE90 on the 777 & CFM Leap1B's have had no issues at all. Note the sarcasm.
 
smartplane
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 6:50 pm

RR are focussing their energies and remaining resources, and from here forward that means Airbus. Perhaps an announcement in a few weeks?
 
LDRA
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:31 pm

NMA engine is 5klb class, a class above current Leap engine. Core mass flow increase would be substantial enough GE can not reuse Leap core; Leap already has high pressure ratio, can't increase pressure ratio enough to get required mass flow. They are going to need a new design HP compressor I think
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1328
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:59 pm

Revelation wrote:
LDRA wrote:
CFM's offering has to be flawless. With sole source engine, it could drag down NMA program if there is issue.

Is CFM's proposal a derivative of LEAP? Curious how they control tech risk

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ne-446993/ says:

A CFM International engine for Boeing’s New Mid-market Airplane (NMA) would be a growth version of the Leap series turbofan, suggesting a balance between a derivative and a clean-sheet design, says GE Aviation chief executive David Joyce.

It will be bigger,” Joyce told a JP Morgan investment conference on 14 March. “It’s advancing [on the Leap technology] not a full generation but a half-generation.”

This has led some to refer to the engine as "LEAP 1.5".

If GE Aviation's CEO is saying this, I think you can be pretty confident in it.

I also think it's safe to assume some if not much of the risk is being retired as GE tests GE9X on 777X.

It's being pretty widely suggested that GE's CMC technology from GE9X will flow down to the LEAP 1.5.

Keep in mind that CFM partner Safran is also a significant 777X partner ( https://www.safran-group.com/media/2014 ... e9x-engine ).

It's not a great LEAP (see what I did there) to see the same players will be involved in the NMA LEAP engine.


Safran & Boeing have formed a JV for APU's - first ones I am sure will be on the 797.

So Safran is partners with GE already, renewed with the LEAP. Safran is partners with Boeing. GE has a similar relationship on the GE-90's with Boeing.

A JV is an excellent vehicle to do the engines on the 797. A CFM & Boeing JV, actually GE, Safran, & Boeing. Boeing provides the investment capitol to develop the engines, in turn gets their share of the profits (or loss) for all initial and service sales. At the partner's preference, be Boeing exclusive or sell to Airbus etc. How much have we heard how Boeing wants a cut of the in service revenue.

RR may also be reluctant to enter a partnership where Boeing gets a cut of the in service revenue, also it is RR viewing the risk of much lower sales if 2 engines are on the NMA coupled with the Ultrafan risk of being ready on time.
 
HaulSudson
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:02 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 8:08 pm

What makes people think that CFM or PW will be able and confident to provide a mature engine within the Boeing forced time frame?
As a UTX shareholder, I hope PW pulls out ASAP.
Got enough on our plate.
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2901
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:13 pm

Maybe - hopefully IMO - this is a sign to Boeing to slow down and wait for Ultrafan or not do NMA at all.
"The last direct-drive turbofan ever launched" is a dubious project for 2025 EIS.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:34 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
But didn't Boeing say they wanted to use existing engine tech for this program? (Thereby limiting development costs and technical risk)


Oh yeah, its all supposedly existing technology for low risk.

But somehow going to be a "game changer" versus current aircraft.

Powerpoint Rangers at work.


The entire point of how Boeing plans to be a game changer with MoM (if anyone has paid attention) is in manufacturing cost and unit cost.

That said RR's announcement here makes me question if the Ultrafan project is on track as everyone likes to sing about it being. I can imagine it might have been 18 months ago before all hell truly broke loose for Rolls. I'm not sure the project timeline is still on track.

MoM will likely end up a GE and Pratt dual engine offering based on RR pulling out. Hopefully we will see a next half gen from each in the engine tech department to give us some guidance of where they are going, as unlike Rolls neither is really screaming about their future tech just yet.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
LDRA
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:42 pm

osiris30 wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
But didn't Boeing say they wanted to use existing engine tech for this program? (Thereby limiting development costs and technical risk)


Oh yeah, its all supposedly existing technology for low risk.

But somehow going to be a "game changer" versus current aircraft.

Powerpoint Rangers at work.


The entire point of how Boeing plans to be a game changer with MoM (if anyone has paid attention) is in manufacturing cost and unit cost.

That said RR's announcement here makes me question if the Ultrafan project is on track as everyone likes to sing about it being. I can imagine it might have been 18 months ago before all hell truly broke loose for Rolls. I'm not sure the project timeline is still on track.

MoM will likely end up a GE and Pratt dual engine offering based on RR pulling out. Hopefully we will see a next half gen from each in the engine tech department to give us some guidance of where they are going, as unlike Rolls neither is really screaming about their future tech just yet.


I think the issue is not necessary Ultra fan technology. The issue might be sizing. RR's next gen 8 stage HPC is too big for 5000lb class Ultrafan. They may not feel there is enough resource to develop a smaller core.

Also not sure how scalable fan gearbox is. Could be significant engineering effort to adapt gearbox design for 7000lb+ engine to 5000lb thrust class engine.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20577
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:48 pm

osiris30 wrote:
The entire point of how Boeing plans to be a game changer with MoM (if anyone has paid attention) is in manufacturing cost and unit cost.

Yes, and recovering less cost at purchase time and more throughout the life cycle of the aircraft.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:51 pm

Revelation wrote:
osiris30 wrote:
The entire point of how Boeing plans to be a game changer with MoM (if anyone has paid attention) is in manufacturing cost and unit cost.

Yes, and recovering less cost at purchase time and more throughout the life cycle of the aircraft.


Moreover is there any particular reason if the frame is highly efficient that it can’t be re-engined if a geared fan indeed becomes a necessity?

That being said people I talk to still say two different engines is the preference internally. Maybe they will find a way to make both CFM and Pratt happy.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:55 pm

bigjku wrote:
Revelation wrote:
osiris30 wrote:
The entire point of how Boeing plans to be a game changer with MoM (if anyone has paid attention) is in manufacturing cost and unit cost.

Yes, and recovering less cost at purchase time and more throughout the life cycle of the aircraft.


Moreover is there any particular reason if the frame is highly efficient that it can’t be re-engined if a geared fan indeed becomes a necessity?

That being said people I talk to still say two different engines is the preference internally. Maybe they will find a way to make both CFM and Pratt happy.


Absolutely. There is no reason they couldn't do a MOM NEO down the road. And if they build it with that in mind likely take out a lot of cost in the whole NEO part of the project. Hell if Boeing is going to get more money in the later airliners lifecycle they might even try something whacky.. like designing in future engine upgrades to existing frames.

It is possible with today's tech to do just that. The downside historically for the airframers has been lower revenue if the AC stay in service longer, but Boeing's construction for the '87 and ostensibly the MoM/NMA frame should last longer than traditional frames... which means in service NEO upgrades might be a thing that makes sense. Who knows.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
bigjku
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:01 pm

osiris30 wrote:
bigjku wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Yes, and recovering less cost at purchase time and more throughout the life cycle of the aircraft.


Moreover is there any particular reason if the frame is highly efficient that it can’t be re-engined if a geared fan indeed becomes a necessity?

That being said people I talk to still say two different engines is the preference internally. Maybe they will find a way to make both CFM and Pratt happy.


Absolutely. There is no reason they couldn't do a MOM NEO down the road. And if they build it with that in mind likely take out a lot of cost in the whole NEO part of the project. Hell if Boeing is going to get more money in the later airliners lifecycle they might even try something whacky.. like designing in future engine upgrades to existing frames.

It is possible with today's tech to do just that. The downside historically for the airframers has been lower revenue if the AC stay in service longer, but Boeing's construction for the '87 and ostensibly the MoM/NMA frame should last longer than traditional frames... which means in service NEO upgrades might be a thing that makes sense. Who knows.


The RR offering on the 787 was effectively replaced by the Ten right? No one called it a NEO but they pretty much scrapped the first model and put a largely new one on going forward.

I know the universal pylon was much derided but the basic concept is sound so long as growth is built into it. Seeing as most of the interfaces are software and not hardware based one can do things relatively more easily now than 20 years ago.

Like you said who knows.
 
Turnhouse1
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:58 pm

Seems fairly sensible from RR, they've pretty much sorted the Trent 1000 problems for new builds (issue seems to be capacity to manufacture replacement parts for older engines) and XWB and 7000 seem good. So focus on 5 years of producing those and bringing in some cash.

2025: Introduce the simplified ultrafan on A350 (and possibly 787)

2030: Introduce the full ultrafan on an A330 replacement.

Boeing's timelines work for them/customers, but possibly not for suppliers who are big enough to say no and have somewhere else (Airbus) to go. Pushing your supply chain on cost is often necessary, but you can't do it perpetually without effect.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20577
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:01 am

Turnhouse1 wrote:
Seems fairly sensible from RR, they've pretty much sorted the Trent 1000 problems for new builds (issue seems to be capacity to manufacture replacement parts for older engines) and XWB and 7000 seem good.

It's more than that, it's the facilities to rebuild failed/returned engines, the test cells to test these rebuilt engines, the people to do the rebuilds and the testing, etc.

I hear more and more is getting moved out to MROs but it still is a big factor impacting getting customers back in the air and getting the other product lines ramped up to full production.

I just read that BA has a 787 that has been grounded for a year now due to the engine situation.

No wonder Willie Walsh expressed public displeasure with RR again recently.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
NeBaNi
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 10:45 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:47 am

Revelation wrote:
LDRA wrote:
CFM's offering has to be flawless. With sole source engine, it could drag down NMA program if there is issue.

Is CFM's proposal a derivative of LEAP? Curious how they control tech risk

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ne-446993/ says:

A CFM International engine for Boeing’s New Mid-market Airplane (NMA) would be a growth version of the Leap series turbofan, suggesting a balance between a derivative and a clean-sheet design, says GE Aviation chief executive David Joyce.

It will be bigger,” Joyce told a JP Morgan investment conference on 14 March. “It’s advancing [on the Leap technology] not a full generation but a half-generation.”

This has led some to refer to the engine as "LEAP 1.5".

If GE Aviation's CEO is saying this, I think you can be pretty confident in it.

I also think it's safe to assume some if not much of the risk is being retired as GE tests GE9X on 777X.

It's being pretty widely suggested that GE's CMC technology from GE9X will flow down to the LEAP 1.5.

Keep in mind that CFM partner Safran is also a significant 777X partner ( https://www.safran-group.com/media/2014 ... e9x-engine ).

It's not a great LEAP (see what I did there) to see the same players will be involved in the NMA LEAP engine.

From an engine perspective, I think whichever OEM Boeing ends up choosing, it is good for the A320neo/737MAX families. I'm sure some of the technology advancements to cut down fuel burn for Boeing's RFP could be incorporated into PIPs for the LEAP-1A/B and the GTF.

On a side note, this LEAP 1.5 talk makes me wonder if CFM can also include some PIPs into the LEAP-1A that includes a thrust bump, since currently, the GTF is expected to have the highest thrust for the A321neo while the CFM offering lags a bit behind. Also interesting to think about the implications for an A321XLR if my speculation turns out to be correct. :scratchchin:
 
SteelChair
Posts: 978
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:48 am

Revelation wrote:
Turnhouse1 wrote:
Seems fairly sensible from RR, they've pretty much sorted the Trent 1000 problems for new builds (issue seems to be capacity to manufacture replacement parts for older engines) and XWB and 7000 seem good.

It's more than that, it's the facilities to rebuild failed/returned engines, the test cells to test these rebuilt engines, the people to do the rebuilds and the testing, etc.

I hear more and more is getting moved out to MROs but it still is a big factor impacting getting customers back in the air and getting the other product lines ramped up to full production.

I just read that BA has a 787 that has been grounded for a year now due to the engine situation.

No wonder Willie Walsh expressed public displeasure with RR again recently.


Speaking of MRO's, I think that RR desperately need the rebuild capacity provided by the new Delta engine shop.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20577
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:00 am

NeBaNi wrote:
I'm sure some of the technology advancements to cut down fuel burn for Boeing's RFP could be incorporated into PIPs for the LEAP-1A/B and the GTF.

On a side note, this LEAP 1.5 talk makes me wonder if CFM can also include some PIPs into the LEAP-1A that includes a thrust bump, since currently, the GTF is expected to have the highest thrust for the A321neo while the CFM offering lags a bit behind.

It will be interesting to see the strategy if one, or both, vendors ends up spending ~$3B to get on to the NMA.

If (for instance) CFM ends up being the sole engine on NMA, how much of a running start would they give LEAP 1.5 towards earning back that huge investment? Especially given that customers really bought CFM on A32x out of conservatism (it seems) rather than an urge for the utmost in fuel efficiency.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
NeBaNi
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 10:45 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:03 am

Revelation wrote:
It will be interesting to see the strategy if one, or both, vendors ends up spending ~$3B to get on to the NMA.

If (for instance) CFM ends up being the sole engine on NMA, how much of a running start would they give LEAP 1.5 towards earning back that huge investment? Especially given that customers really bought CFM on A32x out of conservatism (it seems) rather than an urge for the utmost in fuel efficiency.

It could help them win future airline RFPs based on fuel efficiency as well as reliability and price! Or might add a markup to their quoted prices. If it's worth the investment (and based on the A320neo/737MAX volumes, I'd argue it is) I'm sure there will be PIPs coming.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:22 am

LDRA wrote:
NMA engine is 5klb class, a class above current Leap engine. Core mass flow increase would be substantial enough GE can not reuse Leap core; Leap already has high pressure ratio, can't increase pressure ratio enough to get required mass flow. They are going to need a new design HP compressor I think

Unless they put a gearbox on the front.

With the same shaftpower from the core a gearbox allows more thrust from the main fan.

Rolls Royce is testing a gearbox. Pratt already has a gearbox. GE owns the company that makes Pratts gearbox.

Surely it is time for GE to fit a gearbox?
 
LDRA
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:35 am

RJMAZ wrote:
LDRA wrote:
NMA engine is 5klb class, a class above current Leap engine. Core mass flow increase would be substantial enough GE can not reuse Leap core; Leap already has high pressure ratio, can't increase pressure ratio enough to get required mass flow. They are going to need a new design HP compressor I think

Unless they put a gearbox on the front.

With the same shaftpower from the core a gearbox allows more thrust from the main fan.

Rolls Royce is testing a gearbox. Pratt already has a gearbox. GE owns the company that makes Pratts gearbox.

Surely it is time for GE to fit a gearbox?


Then Boeing should want second source for engine. New technology in a new product carries amplified risk
 
smartplane
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:16 am

Revelation wrote:
osiris30 wrote:
The entire point of how Boeing plans to be a game changer with MoM (if anyone has paid attention) is in manufacturing cost and unit cost.

Yes, and recovering less cost at purchase time and more throughout the life cycle of the aircraft.

But other than by acquiring GE, and massive HO rationalisation, plus GE exclusivity on every Boeing model for volume, what meat is left?

When you are dealing with the US3, ME3, EU3 and a few other select mega airlines, they are already negotiating fixed price lifetime, or at the very least ownership years, plus 1-2 years, deals.

We have mega airlines, having screwed down air frames, engines and interior OEM's on upfront and ownership costs, have now even concluded landing gear deals direct (not initial purchase, but parts and maintenance).

Small and medium operators are seeing no movement on margins, or even widening, which ultimately will help the mega airlines become more mega, with perhaps one or two additions to that club.

In an ideal world, mega airlines need three mega engine and air frame OEM's. Certainly not two. If there are only two, mega airlines will operate blended fleets from both.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:43 am

LDRA wrote:
Then Boeing should want second source for engine. New technology in a new product carries amplified risk

The Pratt gearbox is low risk. There has not been a single problem with the gearbox in the worldwide fleet. The LEAP core is also low risk all the bugs have now been ironed out.

Fitting a low risk core and a low risk gearbox produces an engine that is probably the lowest risk of all options.

A scaled up GE LEAP with more CMC components to hit the fuel burn target will require it to run really hot. This would be higher risk.

A scaled up Pratt GTF with a bigger hot core is also higher risk. Higher risk simply because Pratts recent track record is poor.

I expect GE to get sole source with the engine, but I am 50/50 on what engine they will produce. It will either be a conventional low risk 2 spool with a higher risk core or a higher risk geared 2 spool with a low risk core.

Pratt will probably get very large licence royalties on the gearbox tech if GE goes geared. So it would be a win win for both Pratt and GE. The geared GE engine would effectively be 60% GE, 20% Pratt and 20% Safran in terms of intellectual property.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8357
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:41 am

is "withdraws bid" correct here?
Looks more like RR declined to bid on the Boeing RFP
Murphy is an optimist
 
VV
Posts: 704
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 7:57 am

WIederling wrote:
is "withdraws bid" correct here?
Looks more like RR declined to bid on the Boeing RFP


If I am not mistaken the formal bid process started already a while ago.
Someone said that February 2019 was the expected engine selection.

So, in my opinion the term "withdraw" is the right one.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:00 am

I think we are reading this wrong. I think Boeing has decided who their engine suppliers will be for this bird. They have CLEARLY been in talks with suppliers (it has been stated in several articles) and looking for price breaks and the lot.

I am guessing NMA is settled on design wise. My guess is RR didn't make the cut. Rather than having it look that way when the AC is launched RR and Boeing agreed to let RR bow out of "their own choice".

At first I assumed this was because RR couldn't make the product well enough or soon enough. But what if it is deeper. What if it is concerns around Brexit or RR long-term financial viability (again with Brexit) that caused them to not get the win.

At first blush this seemed simple. After a day of reflection I am not sure this is cut and dry. I do think given the ramp up in news cycle around NMA recently the launch is imminent.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
VV
Posts: 704
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:26 am

Whatever the reality behind this, the fact is that they are not in the competition any more before the selection has been formally announced.
In addition, the press release mentioned the term "withdraw".
https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/press ... tform.aspx


Why should we even discuss about this ?
 
WIederling
Posts: 8357
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 8:51 am

VV wrote:
Why should we even discuss about this ?


preciseness of facts
you withdraw a bid in scope of multiple finished offers existing
you withdraw from the process and there are no finished offerings
back and forth between the participants.

withdraw from the RFP (process )
or
withdraw a bid.

I'd guess the first.
Murphy is an optimist
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:13 am

It is also possible that RR did withdrew, they did not see any possibility to make a profit on engines for the 797.
 
fsabo
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:47 am

mjoelnir wrote:
It is also possible that RR did withdrew, they did not see any possibility to make a profit on engines for the 797.


Developing an engine for NMA would pull resources away from ultrafan; too much on plate.

I think RR withdrawing is good news for ultrafan.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:44 am

musman9853 wrote:
frigatebird wrote:
Hmm... Boeing NMA was supposed to be launched 2025. Does this mean EIS of the A350neo (with Ultrafan engine) would also be not 2025 but later?

pabloeing wrote:
Another GE proyect for Boeing.....the B797


SEPilot wrote:
Having an engine option adds cost for both the engine manufacturers and for the airframe manufacturers. It also reduces profits for the engine makers. It may be coming to the point where they all decide it is a luxury they can no longer afford.


I thought P&W were still in the running for the NMA?


all 3 oems were invited to participate in the program. so they're probably still in the running, but considering all the issues they've been having for the a320neo gtf, it might be better to just go with a scaled up LEAP.


That is a strange comment. 3 jet engine producers were invited to bid. CFM. RR and P&W. That is far from all jet engine producers. It is also clear that not GE is offering, but CFM. For that Safran and GE changed their agreement what size of engine CFM could offer. GE was not interested to offer an own engine.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 978
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:26 pm

Several references in the thread to PW getting their act together, and that the GTF issues have not been in the gearbox but in the rest of the engine.

Thats the real issue with PW isnt it? They never get their act together. They are unable to build a suitably reliable engine for the standards of today. Or, at least they have been unable to demonstrate that they can build engines that will run 30,000 FH on the wing on first run the way CFM and GE have.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12914
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 12:43 pm

Maybe the after market profit sharing model in the 797 business case played a role too.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:05 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
LDRA wrote:
Then Boeing should want second source for engine. New technology in a new product carries amplified risk

The Pratt gearbox is low risk. There has not been a single problem with the gearbox in the worldwide fleet. The LEAP core is also low risk all the bugs have now been ironed out.

Fitting a low risk core and a low risk gearbox produces an engine that is probably the lowest risk of all options.

A scaled up GE LEAP with more CMC components to hit the fuel burn target will require it to run really hot. This would be higher risk.

A scaled up Pratt GTF with a bigger hot core is also higher risk. Higher risk simply because Pratts recent track record is poor.

I expect GE to get sole source with the engine, but I am 50/50 on what engine they will produce. It will either be a conventional low risk 2 spool with a higher risk core or a higher risk geared 2 spool with a low risk core.

Pratt will probably get very large licence royalties on the gearbox tech if GE goes geared. So it would be a win win for both Pratt and GE. The geared GE engine would effectively be 60% GE, 20% Pratt and 20% Safran in terms of intellectual property.


Very interesting. One engine, three partners. Seems feasible and allows for greater risk sharing. I wonder if CFM work together on a standard engine, with the PW GTF version also being made available. 3 partners, 2 engines?
© 2019. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20577
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:06 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Several references in the thread to PW getting their act together, and that the GTF issues have not been in the gearbox but in the rest of the engine.

Thats the real issue with PW isnt it? They never get their act together. They are unable to build a suitably reliable engine for the standards of today. Or, at least they have been unable to demonstrate that they can build engines that will run 30,000 FH on the wing on first run the way CFM and GE have.

The other issue to monitor is quality at scale. Airbus is now depending on Pratt to deliver ~50% of the A320 engines and 100% of the A220 engines. My friends back in CT say Pratt is having a hard time finding qualified workers in what is an expensive place to live. I can imagine the same is true at Mirabel. Keep in mind that Pratt is ramping up production of the engines for the F-35 fighter at the same time. Hopefully they can scale up with a bunch of newbies without sacrificing quality, but that will be a tough ask.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:10 pm

LDRA wrote:
osiris30 wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:

Oh yeah, its all supposedly existing technology for low risk.

But somehow going to be a "game changer" versus current aircraft.

Powerpoint Rangers at work.


The entire point of how Boeing plans to be a game changer with MoM (if anyone has paid attention) is in manufacturing cost and unit cost.

That said RR's announcement here makes me question if the Ultrafan project is on track as everyone likes to sing about it being. I can imagine it might have been 18 months ago before all hell truly broke loose for Rolls. I'm not sure the project timeline is still on track.

MoM will likely end up a GE and Pratt dual engine offering based on RR pulling out. Hopefully we will see a next half gen from each in the engine tech department to give us some guidance of where they are going, as unlike Rolls neither is really screaming about their future tech just yet.


I think the issue is not necessary Ultra fan technology. The issue might be sizing. RR's next gen 8 stage HPC is too big for 5000lb class Ultrafan. They may not feel there is enough resource to develop a smaller core.

Also not sure how scalable fan gearbox is. Could be significant engineering effort to adapt gearbox design for 7000lb+ engine to 5000lb thrust class engine.


This is my guess too. Airbus and RR are working closely on UltraFan's first priority, a A350neo. They don't have the capacity to deliver a derivative by 2025. This also means no Airbus MOM powered by UltraFan. In fact, odds are that UltraFan won't be ready by 2025 for a A350neo.
© 2019. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20577
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 1:14 pm

smartplane wrote:
But other than by acquiring GE, and massive HO rationalisation, plus GE exclusivity on every Boeing model for volume, what meat is left?

When you are dealing with the US3, ME3, EU3 and a few other select mega airlines, they are already negotiating fixed price lifetime, or at the very least ownership years, plus 1-2 years, deals.

We have mega airlines, having screwed down air frames, engines and interior OEM's on upfront and ownership costs, have now even concluded landing gear deals direct (not initial purchase, but parts and maintenance).

Small and medium operators are seeing no movement on margins, or even widening, which ultimately will help the mega airlines become more mega, with perhaps one or two additions to that club.

In an ideal world, mega airlines need three mega engine and air frame OEM's. Certainly not two. If there are only two, mega airlines will operate blended fleets from both.

We read that B is inserting itself into the picture as OEM for APUs and is developing an avionics product line as well.

The MBA fad used to be diversification and horizontal integration, now it is consolidation and vertical integration. SpaceX seems to have helped rewrite the rules.

I've read that B is going as far as to ask for rebates from OEMs on the parts and services it sells for NMA, so all those negotiations you mention would result in cash flowing back to B.

I'm sure the OEMs resent the way they're being squeezed, but right now they are capturing 70% of the life cycle profit and B is hungry to claw some of that back.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12914
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:03 pm

Revelation wrote:
smartplane wrote:
But other than by acquiring GE, and massive HO rationalisation, plus GE exclusivity on every Boeing model for volume, what meat is left?

When you are dealing with the US3, ME3, EU3 and a few other select mega airlines, they are already negotiating fixed price lifetime, or at the very least ownership years, plus 1-2 years, deals.

We have mega airlines, having screwed down air frames, engines and interior OEM's on upfront and ownership costs, have now even concluded landing gear deals direct (not initial purchase, but parts and maintenance).

Small and medium operators are seeing no movement on margins, or even widening, which ultimately will help the mega airlines become more mega, with perhaps one or two additions to that club.

In an ideal world, mega airlines need three mega engine and air frame OEM's. Certainly not two. If there are only two, mega airlines will operate blended fleets from both.

We read that B is inserting itself into the picture as OEM for APUs and is developing an avionics product line as well.

The MBA fad used to be diversification and horizontal integration, now it is consolidation and vertical integration. SpaceX seems to have helped rewrite the rules.

I've read that B is going as far as to ask for rebates from OEMs on the parts and services it sells for NMA, so all those negotiations you mention would result in cash flowing back to B.

I'm sure the OEMs resent the way they're being squeezed, but right now they are capturing 70% of the life cycle profit and B is hungry to claw some of that back.


I would think this played a role in Boeing RR negotiations too. And the back ground battle Boeing - UTC (Collins Aerospace) on APU's, Landing gears, Pratt engines, avionics, galleys, interiors.. They resist getting along with discussed NMA after market profit sharing. They are too big to ignore and have increasingly strong ties to archrival Airbus, while Boeing was in bed with GE.

BTW, does anyone know how far GE is on geared turbofan technology. Did they change their mind already? Behind closed doors probably?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:22 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
smartplane wrote:
But other than by acquiring GE, and massive HO rationalisation, plus GE exclusivity on every Boeing model for volume, what meat is left?

When you are dealing with the US3, ME3, EU3 and a few other select mega airlines, they are already negotiating fixed price lifetime, or at the very least ownership years, plus 1-2 years, deals.

We have mega airlines, having screwed down air frames, engines and interior OEM's on upfront and ownership costs, have now even concluded landing gear deals direct (not initial purchase, but parts and maintenance).

Small and medium operators are seeing no movement on margins, or even widening, which ultimately will help the mega airlines become more mega, with perhaps one or two additions to that club.

In an ideal world, mega airlines need three mega engine and air frame OEM's. Certainly not two. If there are only two, mega airlines will operate blended fleets from both.

We read that B is inserting itself into the picture as OEM for APUs and is developing an avionics product line as well.

The MBA fad used to be diversification and horizontal integration, now it is consolidation and vertical integration. SpaceX seems to have helped rewrite the rules.

I've read that B is going as far as to ask for rebates from OEMs on the parts and services it sells for NMA, so all those negotiations you mention would result in cash flowing back to B.

I'm sure the OEMs resent the way they're being squeezed, but right now they are capturing 70% of the life cycle profit and B is hungry to claw some of that back.


I would think this played a role in Boeing RR negotiations too. And the back ground battle Boeing - UTC (Collins Aerospace) on APU's, Landing gears, Pratt engines, avionics, galleys, interiors.. They resist getting along with discussed NMA after market profit sharing. They are too big to ignore and have increasingly strong ties to archrival Airbus, while Boeing was in bed with GE.

BTW, does anyone know how far GE is on geared turbofan technology. Did they change their mind already? Behind closed doors probably?


Well, it must not exist if you don't know about it. Any wishful thinking that GE/CFM aren't doing any GTF R&D, especially after buying the related companies, would be incredibly niave.
© 2019. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
LDRA
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:26 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
LDRA wrote:
Then Boeing should want second source for engine. New technology in a new product carries amplified risk

The Pratt gearbox is low risk. There has not been a single problem with the gearbox in the worldwide fleet. The LEAP core is also low risk all the bugs have now been ironed out.

Fitting a low risk core and a low risk gearbox produces an engine that is probably the lowest risk of all options.

A scaled up GE LEAP with more CMC components to hit the fuel burn target will require it to run really hot. This would be higher risk.

A scaled up Pratt GTF with a bigger hot core is also higher risk. Higher risk simply because Pratts recent track record is poor.

I expect GE to get sole source with the engine, but I am 50/50 on what engine they will produce. It will either be a conventional low risk 2 spool with a higher risk core or a higher risk geared 2 spool with a low risk core.

Pratt will probably get very large licence royalties on the gearbox tech if GE goes geared. So it would be a win win for both Pratt and GE. The geared GE engine would effectively be 60% GE, 20% Pratt and 20% Safran in terms of intellectual property.


Some of the bearing issues on GTF are geared fan architecture related. GTF is not just the gearbox. In fact the physical gearbox Pratt even contracted out
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12914
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:33 pm

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
We read that B is inserting itself into the picture as OEM for APUs and is developing an avionics product line as well.

The MBA fad used to be diversification and horizontal integration, now it is consolidation and vertical integration. SpaceX seems to have helped rewrite the rules.

I've read that B is going as far as to ask for rebates from OEMs on the parts and services it sells for NMA, so all those negotiations you mention would result in cash flowing back to B.

I'm sure the OEMs resent the way they're being squeezed, but right now they are capturing 70% of the life cycle profit and B is hungry to claw some of that back.


I would think this played a role in Boeing RR negotiations too. And the back ground battle Boeing - UTC (Collins Aerospace) on APU's, Landing gears, Pratt engines, avionics, galleys, interiors.. They resist getting along with discussed NMA after market profit sharing. They are too big to ignore and have increasingly strong ties to archrival Airbus, while Boeing was in bed with GE.

BTW, does anyone know how far GE is on geared turbofan technology. Did they change their mind already? Behind closed doors probably?


Well, it must not exist if you don't know about it. Any wishful thinking that GE/CFM aren't doing any GTF R&D, especially after buying the related companies, would be incredibly niave.



So you think they changed their mind?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-general-electric-united-tech-engine-idUSKBN0HA2H620140915
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
osiris30
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:47 pm

keesje wrote:
GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
keesje wrote:

I would think this played a role in Boeing RR negotiations too. And the back ground battle Boeing - UTC (Collins Aerospace) on APU's, Landing gears, Pratt engines, avionics, galleys, interiors.. They resist getting along with discussed NMA after market profit sharing. They are too big to ignore and have increasingly strong ties to archrival Airbus, while Boeing was in bed with GE.

BTW, does anyone know how far GE is on geared turbofan technology. Did they change their mind already? Behind closed doors probably?


Well, it must not exist if you don't know about it. Any wishful thinking that GE/CFM aren't doing any GTF R&D, especially after buying the related companies, would be incredibly niave.



So you think they changed their mind?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-general-electric-united-tech-engine-idUSKBN0HA2H620140915


That entire article was nothing more than an attempt by GE to spread FUD about the GTF. Every engineer has understood the value of a geared fan for a long time.

Also because GE didn't do it 5 years ago does not mean they were not researching it. 5 years is a long time in today's world man.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
ikramerica
Posts: 14836
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:52 pm

RR claims they dont have the testing capacity to build a Trent NMA but they are floating the idea of building a plant in China to power the 929?

These two things dont correlate.

Here’s what happened: RR was told by Boeing their engine was in third place and they would need to improve in some way (weight, price, burn, etc) and RR decided to withdraw instead.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8351
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:58 pm

Or more realistically RR can not meet the 2025 EiS and a competitor who can demands exclusivity on the 797 in return for making the 2025 EiS and probably investing some money into the development.

It was always certain that GE/CFM with a LEAP 1.5 and RR with a Ultrafan engine as the 2 engine options for the 797 won´t work out. The interests of the OEMs are way too much in conflict.
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:00 pm

Yep, GE bought Avio to do...nothing...

https://www.avioaero.com/What/Mechanical-Transmissions
© 2019. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
LDRA
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:08 pm

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
Yep, GE bought Avio to do...nothing...

https://www.avioaero.com/What/Mechanical-Transmissions


They bought it for consolidate engine accessories transmission components. GE was also considering buying Woodward at one point for example
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12914
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:09 pm

ikramerica wrote:
RR claims they dont have the testing capacity to build a Trent NMA but they are floating the idea of building a plant in China to power the 929?

These two things dont correlate.

Here’s what happened: RR was told by Boeing their engine was in third place and they would need to improve in some way (weight, price, burn, etc) and RR decided to withdraw instead.


Yes, or RR didn't like the proposed aftermarket profit sharing Boeing is trying to enforce on its supply chain & RR did their own studies on NMA market potential, like GE did before moving it to CFM.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-16/ge-unconvinced-there-s-a-business-case-for-powering-new-boeing

Pratt has the best papers for the NMA, they know it,
and they are negotiating with Boeing based on that.

Not sure Boeing us happy with RR withdrawing. They want a good geared fan for the NMA in 2025. And share in the profit it makes too, but Collins Aerospace has its own goals. Currently they are likely completing details on a PW1100G PIP/ uprate for a A321XLR /322 program. And bag orders in July.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
LDRA
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Reuters: Rolls Royce withdraws bid for Boeing NMA project

Fri Mar 01, 2019 3:09 pm

seahawk wrote:
Or more realistically RR can not meet the 2025 EiS and a competitor who can demands exclusivity on the 797 in return for making the 2025 EiS and probably investing some money into the development.

It was always certain that GE/CFM with a LEAP 1.5 and RR with a Ultrafan engine as the 2 engine options for the 797 won´t work out. The interests of the OEMs are way too much in conflict.


So the real question would be does PW stand a chance for second source?

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