oschkosch
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:49 pm

Does anyone know why RR already said "no" to Boeing end of 2018, but it only became public 2 months later?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:03 pm

Faro wrote:
keesje wrote:
downdata wrote:
Eh. There is no chance in hell Pratt will meet a 2025 EIS. GE/CFM were not only the forerunner, they were the only runner to begin with. It's going to be a long long while before we see another non GE engines on a Boeing.


Meaning a no geared fan LEAP off spring for the NMA?

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/leap-derivative-likely-in-cfms-bid-for-nma-engine-446993/

That would be all fine, bringing some maturity, risk reduction, GE co-financing.. all very well.

But, meanwhile Airbus, Pratt keep ramping up A321NEO/LR/XLR/322 deliveries, enhanced geared turbo fans and CFM 78 Inch Leaps, thousands.

Image

Even if Boeing looks the other way, airlines aren't. I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.



Haven't CFM/Boeing said that the engine tech will be a 0.5 generation improvement and not a full generation ahead? Looks to me that they are unwilling to push newer engine tech too much to reduce development risk...


Faro


A LEAP without geared technology IMO wouldn’t really qualify as a “0.5 generation improvement”.

It is starting to look to me, as if Boeing hasn’t a way around Pratt / UTC, with RR out & CFM behind on geared fans and Aitbus overruning the lower NMA segment, together with CFM and Pratt.

Boeing probably deeply dislikes that situation. Collins Aerospace isn’t supportive of Partnering for Success, and very large.
Last edited by keesje on Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1070
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:08 pm

william wrote:
Ruscoe wrote:
Can someone quantify the differences in fuel burn and weight between the CFM and Pratt on the NEO's. If its significant why is the CFM selling on the NEO?
Ruscoe


With all of the "insiders" that post here, I am still waiting for an answer to this question.


I don't have insider information, and this is a generalization but I believe that the PW GTF burns less fuel (a few percent) but has had more reliability problems than the CFM. CFM LEAP had had its issues but not as bad as the PW. PW is kind of a train wreck compared to CFM imho.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1179
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:12 pm

Faro wrote:
keesje wrote:
downdata wrote:
Eh. There is no chance in hell Pratt will meet a 2025 EIS. GE/CFM were not only the forerunner, they were the only runner to begin with. It's going to be a long long while before we see another non GE engines on a Boeing.


Meaning a no geared fan LEAP off spring for the NMA?

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/leap-derivative-likely-in-cfms-bid-for-nma-engine-446993/

That would be all fine, bringing some maturity, risk reduction, GE co-financing.. all very well.

But, meanwhile Airbus, Pratt keep ramping up A321NEO/LR/XLR/322 deliveries, enhanced geared turbo fans and CFM 78 Inch Leaps, thousands.

Image

Even if Boeing looks the other way, airlines aren't. I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.



Haven't CFM/Boeing said that the engine tech will be a 0.5 generation improvement and not a full generation ahead? Looks to me that they are unwilling to push newer engine tech too much to reduce development risk...


Faro


As others have pointed out NMA may not have two engines at initial EIS - but could have a second option 1-3 years later. NMA will take some time to ramp up even assuming that they make 2025. There could only be 100-150 deliveries before a next-gen GTF is available in the 2027-2028 time frame.

Keesje - you may be right that a 2025 EIS is not realistic and you keep throwing out if they don't launch until 2020 they will never make it. However you keep ignoring Boeing's own admissions that over 1,000 engineers are already working on it.

That seems to me a few more people than are needed to define an Aircraft. Especially when they are apparently not working on any moonshot technology.

If they use 787/777X as the basis for Systems and wing design the only thing that would require some new engineering is the fuselage if they go oval.

However as they have been working on that for a good decade I would think they have figured that out already.

I would have to guess the bulk of the engineering going forward will be to figure out how to build it efficiently and further their cost advantage over Airbus on the 320 series (as evidenced by there higher profit margin on commercial aircraft the bulk of which are 737).

The A321/322 with possible new wing and same gen engines as NMA (if they choose to wait that long - which would throw away there advantage) will be a great plane performance wise but from a production cost standpoint maybe not so great. A new wing design will help.

I think Boeing has shown with the 787 program how efficient they can get at building aircraft. NMA and as I believe NMA/NSA as basically the same program should set new standards in terms of how efficient one can build a modern airliner with very low labour hours.

Boeing keeps talking about Wide body Comfort at Single Aisle prices/Efficiency. To me this a combination of operating cost and production cost. They should be able to at least meet A320 series efficiency per seat with a tight light 7W Composite Body and folding wing (even assuming Airbus has new wing and same gen engines).

Where I think Boeing will win is on production efficiency/cost. What Airline wouldn't want an NMA when they get a much more flexible cabin, potentially more Cargo Volume - when operating cost per seat could be the same if not better better (you can pack a lot more premium seats in) and acquisition costs on a per seat basis the same if not better as well.

Yes a lot more to develop but if NMA/NSA use basically the same Nose/Fuselage/Systems - you are amortizing costs over an easy 10,000+ frames which even if the total cost is $20 billion for both will be less than $2 million per frame.

Put it this way - Boeing needs to do NMA or you are right they will be screwed by Airbus even without a new wing and Stretch on A321. They need to do NMA.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:07 pm

keesje wrote:
A LEAP without geared technology IMO wouldn’t really qualify as a “0.5 generation improvement”.




I suppose it depends on what your reference is...if the present LEAP engine is taken for reference, then IMHO it is a '0.5 generation improvement'...unless they somehow manage to put CMC rotating parts on it...with CMC turbine blades, it would even be a 1+ generation improvement...that would be ground-breaking...


Faro
The chalice not my son
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:16 pm

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
I think if GE/PW/Safran are smart, they don't see each other as competition but RR and its UltraFan as the competition. If they're smart, they'll consider joining forces, sharing risks and profits, and partner on a CFM LEAP Pure Power 50GTF. It would keep RR out of the NB market and lay the groundwork for a scaled up UltraFan competitor in the WB market. It would keep RR out of the NB market and lay the groundwork for a scaled up UltraFan competitor in the WB market, keeping RR from charging crazy premiums and limiting their profit margins.

What a laugh. I have never read such a blind one-sided post that is just so in line with the a.net name of the hapless poster!

Looks like you really like healthy competition and choice in your own little world! You even dream of the days when the competition in the NB segment for engines is reduced!

Any industry (including aeroengines and airframes) is a healthier place with real competition, the more the merrier! We are already in the West down to 2 main airframers, and struggling to stay with 3 main engine-makers. Please state your arguments for a monopoly in either/both of these sectors!
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:19 pm

SteelChair wrote:
william wrote:
Ruscoe wrote:
Can someone quantify the differences in fuel burn and weight between the CFM and Pratt on the NEO's. If its significant why is the CFM selling on the NEO?
Ruscoe


With all of the "insiders" that post here, I am still waiting for an answer to this question.


I don't have insider information, and this is a generalization but I believe that the PW GTF burns less fuel (a few percent) but has had more reliability problems than the CFM. CFM LEAP had had its issues but not as bad as the PW. PW is kind of a train wreck compared to CFM imho.

I am sure the engine choice is important, but I think airframe capacity and range are MORE important. That's the differentiating factor, after all. Despite some wanting to throw shade on the LEAP 1.5 because its not a GTF, I am unconvinced that matters. Sure a few percent burn difference may make a difference to some in the A320/B737 "contest", but it doesn't to everyone all the time. Don't airlines buy MAXes (no GTF offer), and buy neos with LEAPs? But on the B797, there's no comparable size frame. The "business model" won't be made or broken by the absence of a GTF. That argument is being promoted mainly by the "B797 sucks, and it'll suck even more because it doesn't have an engine type Airbus uses" usual suspects.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20961
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 3:09 pm

WIederling wrote:
PW100 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Pratt's tech is failure prediction and cooling. The later GE has the talent. The former cost Pratt years of testing.


cooling" : gearbox or turbine ?

Gear cooling. It's a hard problem. Our thread viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1372987 starts with a quote from one of the developers of the RR gear:

“I can’t tell you exactly the levels of efficiency we achieved in this gearbox but if you can imagine 53 MW at 99% efficiency we’d have 500 kW of (waste) energy –which is a pretty sizeable gas turbine in its own right,” says Stein. As the result, he adds a significant focus for the tests is an evaluation of heat management technology. “That’s a lot of energy to get rid of so the heat-to-oil and oil system is very significant,” says Stein.

Even if you scale that down from UltraFan scale to NMA scale and add in fudge factors, you're talking about getting rid of hundreds of kW of waste energy from a fairly small area so we're talking about a large energy density.

keesje wrote:
Meaning a no geared fan LEAP off spring for the NMA?

Ahh, a new narrative is taking shape right in front of our eyes:

    GEAR = GOOD
    NO GEAR = NO GOOD


keesje wrote:
I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.

Ok, tell us, what basis do you have for saying airlines have such a fear, when airlines are seeing parity between LEAP and GTF on A320?

Can you quote a single airline executive saying "I don't want a NMA without geared fan technology"?

All we have is a long list of airline executives saying they do want NMA and none saying anything about gears.

Feel free to show us otherwise.

keesje wrote:
I think a consideration for Boeing must be the competition is almost surely offering the airlines enhanced LEAP and GTF engines on future A321/22 variants. Using all lessons learned, PIP’s and new materials available. The A321 is a big market for both CFM and Pratt and they are fiercely competing for each new contract, they can never sit on their hands, wait & see..

Yes, there is a fierce competition in the A320 space, so fierce that both NMA engine contenders insist on exclusive status to avoid such a fierce competition.

So if NMA launches one of those engine makers is going to have just made a ~$3B commitment to their NMA engine to gain an exclusive market.

I think that chosen engine maker might continue to compete fiercely for A32x orders despite having those lines sold out to 2027 or so, or they might begin to act in ways that tend to protect the exclusive franchise they just spend $3B to obtain.

Image
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: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 4:26 pm

Revelation wrote:
WIederling wrote:
PW100 wrote:


cooling" : gearbox or turbine ?

Gear cooling. It's a hard problem. Our thread viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1372987 starts with a quote from one of the developers of the RR gear:

“I can’t tell you exactly the levels of efficiency we achieved in this gearbox but if you can imagine 53 MW at 99% efficiency we’d have 500 kW of (waste) energy –which is a pretty sizeable gas turbine in its own right,” says Stein. As the result, he adds a significant focus for the tests is an evaluation of heat management technology. “That’s a lot of energy to get rid of so the heat-to-oil and oil system is very significant,” says Stein.

Even if you scale that down from UltraFan scale to NMA scale and add in fudge factors, you're talking about getting rid of hundreds of kW of waste energy from a fairly small area so we're talking about a large energy density.

keesje wrote:
Meaning a no geared fan LEAP off spring for the NMA?

Ahh, a new narrative is taking shape right in front of our eyes:

    GEAR = GOOD
    NO GEAR = NO GOOD


keesje wrote:
I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.

Ok, tell us, what basis do you have for saying airlines have such a fear, when airlines are seeing parity between LEAP and GTF on A320?

Can you quote a single airline executive saying "I don't want a NMA without geared fan technology"?

All we have is a long list of airline executives saying they do want NMA and none saying anything about gears.

Feel free to show us otherwise.

keesje wrote:
I think a consideration for Boeing must be the competition is almost surely offering the airlines enhanced LEAP and GTF engines on future A321/22 variants. Using all lessons learned, PIP’s and new materials available. The A321 is a big market for both CFM and Pratt and they are fiercely competing for each new contract, they can never sit on their hands, wait & see..

Yes, there is a fierce competition in the A320 space, so fierce that both NMA engine contenders insist on exclusive status to avoid such a fierce competition.

So if NMA launches one of those engine makers is going to have just made a ~$3B commitment to their NMA engine to gain an exclusive market.

I think that chosen engine maker might continue to compete fiercely for A32x orders despite having those lines sold out to 2027 or so, or they might begin to act in ways that tend to protect the exclusive franchise they just spend $3B to obtain.

Image



Revelation it's not all that black - white, with us - against us. Avoid the made up generalisations and questions nobody can answer, nor deny.

I think:

-GE avoided geared fan for the LEAP:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-general-electric-united-tech-engine/ge-exec-says-avoided-geared-design-in-jet-engine-battle-with-pratt-idUSKBN0HA2H620140915

- they changed their mind for the NMA, no longer ignoring it:
http://m.atwonline.com/paris-air-show-2017/cfm-hints-possible-geared-fan-engine-middle-market-aircraft

- GE have been fighting Pratt in recent year to get access to geared fan technology that Pratt claims is theirs:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/02/02/ge-aviation-claims-rivals-patents-are-bad.html

I think CFM are trying catch up but can't offer a 2025 EIS for a Boeing NMA, or 2026, 2027..

I think Pratt can. But they are UTC.

Meanwhile Boeing can't close the business case and Pratt is all over Airbus, who didn't even offer them a Partnership for Success.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8522
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 4:50 pm

GE / CFM were very confident that they can make the 2025 EiS with a Leap 1.5. 2025 EiS is not possible with an all new engine.And I do not see what should be wrong with a LEAP engine with no gear, this engines controls about 2/3rds of the single aisle engine market.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1084
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 4:56 pm

keesje wrote:
Faro wrote:
keesje wrote:

Meaning a no geared fan LEAP off spring for the NMA?

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/leap-derivative-likely-in-cfms-bid-for-nma-engine-446993/

That would be all fine, bringing some maturity, risk reduction, GE co-financing.. all very well.

But, meanwhile Airbus, Pratt keep ramping up A321NEO/LR/XLR/322 deliveries, enhanced geared turbo fans and CFM 78 Inch Leaps, thousands.

Image

Even if Boeing looks the other way, airlines aren't. I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.



Haven't CFM/Boeing said that the engine tech will be a 0.5 generation improvement and not a full generation ahead? Looks to me that they are unwilling to push newer engine tech too much to reduce development risk...


Faro


A LEAP without geared technology IMO wouldn’t really qualify as a “0.5 generation improvement”.

It is starting to look to me, as if Boeing hasn’t a way around Pratt / UTC, with RR out & CFM behind on geared fans and Aitbus overruning the lower NMA segment, together with CFM and Pratt.

Boeing probably deeply dislikes that situation. Collins Aerospace isn’t supportive of Partnering for Success, and very large.


I feel like I’ve seen these points made by you before a couple dozen times in a half dozen different threads. As long as we can keep making more threads you can just keep repeating them right? Maybe with some random unrelated pictures pasted for good measure?

There is literally nothing left to rehash on this topic until the manufacturers announce something.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:05 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
WIederling wrote:

cooling" : gearbox or turbine ?

Gear cooling. It's a hard problem. Our thread viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1372987 starts with a quote from one of the developers of the RR gear:

“I can’t tell you exactly the levels of efficiency we achieved in this gearbox but if you can imagine 53 MW at 99% efficiency we’d have 500 kW of (waste) energy –which is a pretty sizeable gas turbine in its own right,” says Stein. As the result, he adds a significant focus for the tests is an evaluation of heat management technology. “That’s a lot of energy to get rid of so the heat-to-oil and oil system is very significant,” says Stein.

Even if you scale that down from UltraFan scale to NMA scale and add in fudge factors, you're talking about getting rid of hundreds of kW of waste energy from a fairly small area so we're talking about a large energy density.

keesje wrote:
Meaning a no geared fan LEAP off spring for the NMA?

Ahh, a new narrative is taking shape right in front of our eyes:

    GEAR = GOOD
    NO GEAR = NO GOOD


keesje wrote:
I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.

Ok, tell us, what basis do you have for saying airlines have such a fear, when airlines are seeing parity between LEAP and GTF on A320?

Can you quote a single airline executive saying "I don't want a NMA without geared fan technology"?

All we have is a long list of airline executives saying they do want NMA and none saying anything about gears.

Feel free to show us otherwise.

keesje wrote:
I think a consideration for Boeing must be the competition is almost surely offering the airlines enhanced LEAP and GTF engines on future A321/22 variants. Using all lessons learned, PIP’s and new materials available. The A321 is a big market for both CFM and Pratt and they are fiercely competing for each new contract, they can never sit on their hands, wait & see..

Yes, there is a fierce competition in the A320 space, so fierce that both NMA engine contenders insist on exclusive status to avoid such a fierce competition.

So if NMA launches one of those engine makers is going to have just made a ~$3B commitment to their NMA engine to gain an exclusive market.

I think that chosen engine maker might continue to compete fiercely for A32x orders despite having those lines sold out to 2027 or so, or they might begin to act in ways that tend to protect the exclusive franchise they just spend $3B to obtain.

Image



Revelation it's not all that black - white, with us - against us. Avoid the made up generalisations and questions nobody can answer, nor deny.

I think:

-GE avoided geared fan for the LEAP:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-general-electric-united-tech-engine/ge-exec-says-avoided-geared-design-in-jet-engine-battle-with-pratt-idUSKBN0HA2H620140915

- they changed their mind for the NMA, no longer ignoring it:
http://m.atwonline.com/paris-air-show-2017/cfm-hints-possible-geared-fan-engine-middle-market-aircraft

- GE have been fighting Pratt in recent year to get access to geared fan technology that Pratt claims is theirs:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/02/02/ge-aviation-claims-rivals-patents-are-bad.html

I think CFM are trying catch up but can't offer a 2025 EIS for a Boeing NMA, or 2026, 2027..

I think Pratt can. But they are UTC.

Meanwhile Boeing can't close the business case and Pratt is all over Airbus, who didn't even offer them a Partnership for Success.


Actually Revelation had a pretty simple point. Tell us of an airline that has asked for a geared fan on the NMA. If you are correct that airlines want a geared fan, it should be pretty easy finding a quote since so many airlines have publicly expressed interest in the airplane. Otherwise, it sounds like you are peddling a false narrative.

GE made a choice to avoid adding the extra complexity associated with a gearbox. So far it appears to have been a prudent decision. Less complexity = less risk. Airplanes don’t burn much fuel when they aren’t flying.

Image

Image

I would be surprised if a geared turbofan is a requirement for the NMA
 
oschkosch
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:13 pm

oschkosch wrote:
Does anyone know why RR already said "no" to Boeing end of 2018, but it only became public 2 months later?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
does nobody know why?

https://leehamnews.com/2019/02/28/trans ... mpetition/



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20961
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:16 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation it's not all that black - white, with us - against us. Avoid the made up generalisations and questions nobody can answer, nor deny.

I think:

-GE avoided geared fan for the LEAP:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-general-electric-united-tech-engine/ge-exec-says-avoided-geared-design-in-jet-engine-battle-with-pratt-idUSKBN0HA2H620140915

- they changed their mind for the NMA, no longer ignoring it:
http://m.atwonline.com/paris-air-show-2017/cfm-hints-possible-geared-fan-engine-middle-market-aircraft

- GE have been fighting Pratt in recent year to get access to geared fan technology that Pratt claims is theirs:
https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/02/02/ge-aviation-claims-rivals-patents-are-bad.html

I think CFM are trying catch up but can't offer a 2025 EIS for a Boeing NMA, or 2026, 2027..

I think Pratt can. But they are UTC.

Meanwhile Boeing can't close the business case and Pratt is all over Airbus, who didn't even offer them a Partnership for Success.

Thank you for the links, but they aren't supportive of the suggestion that airlines don't want an NMA without geared fan technology.

Your statement was quite binary, now you want to apply fuzzing.

For instance, the link about GE challenging PW patents didn't even mention gears:

The petitions challenge patents related to concepts such as bypass ratios, fan blade tip speeds, numbers of low pressure turbine stages and the use of thermal cooling components, composite materials and variable area fan nozzles with gas turbine engines, according to a GE statement. GE Aviation argues that those concepts were well known in the industry before patents were sought, meaning those patents should not be valid.

GE is just pushing back against a laundry list of claims for the obvious reason: it doesn't want its competitor to be given exclusive access to obvious developments.

What would be supportive is a quote from one or more airline executives saying "I don't want a NMA without geared fan technology", but apparently you can't provide that.

Maybe you should give this line of reasoning a rest till we actually have evidence to support it?
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
seahawk
Posts: 8522
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:22 pm

Because at that time RR only told Boeing that they can not make the time frame, which suggest Boeing has now confirmed to RR, that they have a bidder that can.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1068
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:25 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Tell us of an airline that has asked for a geared fan on the NMA. If you are correct that airlines want a geared fan, it should be pretty easy finding a quote since so many airlines have publicly expressed interest in the airplane.

Airlines ask for a certain fuel efficiency. They won't care too much about the precise technology used to achieve that. But with both P&W and RR moving towards geared turbofans, there is considerable doubt that a gear-less NMA engine is competitive against one that uses a gear. Note that the gear is the one part that is working fine (both at RR and P&W).
 
User avatar
NameOmitted
Posts: 654
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:59 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:26 pm

World a CFM engine have any maintenance synergies that works help attract Southwest, Ryanair, or other major 737 operators?
 
WIederling
Posts: 8496
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:31 pm

Revelation wrote:
< lots of interesting stuff snipped>
Image


My attention was caugt by the "cooling" plus "GE talent" part of what lightsaber wrote.
All I've read : GE is big in turbine (variable) cooling.
Then I am aware of the design intrinsics of gearboxes.
P&W GTF has managed cooling the gearbox.
( How good is R&R with their new effort as it is an engine upsize by about three vs the established product )
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20961
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:50 pm

keesje wrote:
Pratt is all over Airbus, who didn't even offer them a Partnership for Success

I'm a big fan of the Pratt engine on Airbus products. It's a shame they had such a terrible EIS. Hopefully things will go better as time moves forward.

I'm not a big fan of Boeing squeezing the supply chain, but I can see why they're doing it, given that 70% of the profits of the aircraft end up being made by suppliers and third parties.

If Boeing is successful in this Airbus will have no choice but follow, or end up being at a disadvantage in the market place.

mxaxai wrote:
Airlines ask for a certain fuel efficiency. They won't care too much about the precise technology used to achieve that. But with both P&W and RR moving towards geared turbofans, there is considerable doubt that a gear-less NMA engine is competitive against one that uses a gear. Note that the gear is the one part that is working fine (both at RR and P&W).

There was considerable doubt that a gear-less CFM LEAP engine would be competitive against a PW one that uses a gear yet we see that was wrong.

Let's give it time to play out. We should all know a lot more in a few months time.

Boeing has the proposals in hand from both CFM and PW, and if the CFM proposal is not competitive, it will not be selected.

If a gear is required for competitiveness Boeing will be the first to know, because they will have up-to-date and detailed geared and non-geared proposals right in front of them!

Boeing is not going to paint itself into a corner where they spend >$10B and end up with product that isn't competitive for its intended life span.

Obviously they understand NMA will have to be competitive on day 1 and remain competitive for many, many years, fully knowing that the industry moves forward quickly.

I can see them not launching NMA long before I see them releasing a product that can't be competitive for its expected lifespan.
Last edited by Revelation on Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
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
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1397
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:32 pm

GE's T901 delivers 3,000 shaft HP in a 500# single spool engine, it has been selected by the US Army (being protested). It appears that GE does know some things about gearboxes. Reliability is so important on an engine, adding a gear reduction changes a lot of things: the fan turns slower generally good but the shaft torque and bearing forces are higher for the same energy delivered, also a very short shaft from the box to the front bearing. The LP spool is running nearly 3x its prior speed, less torque on the shaft but the blade tip speed is far higher. New harmonics are present, different conditions than nearly all operating engines, except RR's middle spool. In turbines, in service experience at the operating parameters is quite important.

The NMA is competing between the PW1100G thrust of 35K and the 72.8 K thrust of the Trent 7000. The engine on the NMA may be 1 or 2% worse than optimum on SFC provided the whole plane is tight to its overall efficiency.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1070
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:33 pm

Bricktop wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
william wrote:

With all of the "insiders" that post here, I am still waiting for an answer to this question.


I don't have insider information, and this is a generalization but I believe that the PW GTF burns less fuel (a few percent) but has had more reliability problems than the CFM. CFM LEAP had had its issues but not as bad as the PW. PW is kind of a train wreck compared to CFM imho.

I am sure the engine choice is important, but I think airframe capacity and range are MORE important. That's the differentiating factor, after all. Despite some wanting to throw shade on the LEAP 1.5 because its not a GTF, I am unconvinced that matters. Sure a few percent burn difference may make a difference to some in the A320/B737 "contest", but it doesn't to everyone all the time. Don't airlines buy MAXes (no GTF offer), and buy neos with LEAPs? But on the B797, there's no comparable size frame. The "business model" won't be made or broken by the absence of a GTF. That argument is being promoted mainly by the "B797 sucks, and it'll suck even more because it doesn't have an engine type Airbus uses" usual suspects.


I definitely dont want to throw shade on the LEAP.

We've seen this game before: the 757. The PW engine was lighter and burned less fuel, but had reliability problems and still has reliability issues to this very day. The RR offering was a little bit heavier and burned a little more gas but ran 2-3x as long on the wing. I'll go for the reliability every day. I'm not sure the weight analogy will translate to the LEAP/GTF though, but I have high confidence in CFM WRT reliability.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:48 pm

mxaxai wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
Tell us of an airline that has asked for a geared fan on the NMA. If you are correct that airlines want a geared fan, it should be pretty easy finding a quote since so many airlines have publicly expressed interest in the airplane.

Airlines ask for a certain fuel efficiency. They won't care too much about the precise technology used to achieve that. But with both P&W and RR moving towards geared turbofans, there is considerable doubt that a gear-less NMA engine is competitive against one that uses a gear. Note that the gear is the one part that is working fine (both at RR and P&W).

I believe the supposed few percentage points a GTF gives is secondary though. What airlines supposedly want from the NMA is capacity and range. If BCA can give them that and they get enough orders with LEAP 1.5, you may never get to see a housefly Airbus product with a GTF turn into a real flying machine. Especially if all the a.net NMA doubters are correct about the size of the market being half of what BCA has hypothesized. Chances are Airbus will skip the battle in favor of the A32X replacement.
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 3495
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:38 pm

Keep the thread on topic. There's no need for personal attacks on other users.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
VV
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:56 pm

Does anyone know with certainty if Pratt & Whitney's bid is with a geared turbofan?

From Rolls-Royce's press release we know for sure that their withdrawn bid was with the Ultrafan.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20961
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Sun Mar 03, 2019 11:58 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
GE's T901 delivers 3,000 shaft HP in a 500# single spool engine, it has been selected by the US Army (being protested). It appears that GE does know some things about gearboxes. Reliability is so important on an engine, adding a gear reduction changes a lot of things: the fan turns slower generally good but the shaft torque and bearing forces are higher for the same energy delivered, also a very short shaft from the box to the front bearing. The LP spool is running nearly 3x its prior speed, less torque on the shaft but the blade tip speed is far higher. New harmonics are present, different conditions than nearly all operating engines, except RR's middle spool. In turbines, in service experience at the operating parameters is quite important.

The NMA is competing between the PW1100G thrust of 35K and the 72.8 K thrust of the Trent 7000. The engine on the NMA may be 1 or 2% worse than optimum on SFC provided the whole plane is tight to its overall efficiency.

Interesting you should mention this. https://blog.geaviation.com/100-year-an ... f-winning/ came to my twitter feed and it describes the history of the GE turbo shaft line, mainly centered around the Lynn, MA site, not that far from where I am. It says:

T901: By the second decade of the 21st century, the Lynn team was in the throes of developing an engine to ultimately replace the wildly successful T700 engine. In December of 2009, the U.S. Army launched the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP) to seek a new turboshaft engine to provide 50% more power, 25% better specific fuel consumption while reducing life cycle costs. GE carried over the benefits of the T700 engine’s single-spool core architecture to the T901 engine. Like its predecessors, the T901 is incorporated with advanced ideas and technology. The T901 includes additive manufacturing, including one part that reduces an assembly of more than 50 subcomponents to just one. It also includes 3D aerodynamic design, advanced cooling technologies and ceramic matrix composites (CMCs) to make the engine more efficient and reduce fuel consumption.

It would be interesting to see if this made it in to a future product.
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
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1397
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:22 am

Revelation wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
GE's T901 delivers 3,000 shaft HP in a 500# single spool engine, it has been selected by the US Army (being protested). It appears that GE does know some things about gearboxes. Reliability is so important on an engine, adding a gear reduction changes a lot of things: the fan turns slower generally good but the shaft torque and bearing forces are higher for the same energy delivered, also a very short shaft from the box to the front bearing. The LP spool is running nearly 3x its prior speed, less torque on the shaft but the blade tip speed is far higher. New harmonics are present, different conditions than nearly all operating engines, except RR's middle spool. In turbines, in service experience at the operating parameters is quite important.

The NMA is competing between the PW1100G thrust of 35K and the 72.8 K thrust of the Trent 7000. The engine on the NMA may be 1 or 2% worse than optimum on SFC provided the whole plane is tight to its overall efficiency.

Interesting you should mention this. https://blog.geaviation.com/100-year-an ... f-winning/ came to my twitter feed and it describes the history of the GE turbo shaft line, mainly centered around the Lynn, MA site, not that far from where I am. It says:

T901: By the second decade of the 21st century, the Lynn team was in the throes of developing an engine to ultimately replace the wildly successful T700 engine. In December of 2009, the U.S. Army launched the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP) to seek a new turboshaft engine to provide 50% more power, 25% better specific fuel consumption while reducing life cycle costs. GE carried over the benefits of the T700 engine’s single-spool core architecture to the T901 engine. Like its predecessors, the T901 is incorporated with advanced ideas and technology. The T901 includes additive manufacturing, including one part that reduces an assembly of more than 50 subcomponents to just one. It also includes 3D aerodynamic design, advanced cooling technologies and ceramic matrix composites (CMCs) to make the engine more efficient and reduce fuel consumption.

It would be interesting to see if this made it in to a future product.


Well the T901 has been selected to be on a Blackhawk near you, unless the protest overturns it.

https://www.americanmachinist.com/news/ ... ne-program

I am not sure if the technology from the Leap and GE-9X was used on the T901, was concurrent technology, or went from the T901 onto other engines. Yes, the T700 is a 45 year old design, but getting 50% more power and 25% better SFC within the same dimensions and weight is still some trick. That 1 part replacing 50 as well as all of those thicker areas for taps all going away is quite amazing.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:25 am

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
Well this is a surprise!

Considering the RR woes on the Trent, you'd think they would have gone all out to try and power the NMA.

Could it be that the revenue/resources being sapped from the Trent troubles have impacted development of UltraFan and now that engine schedule is awry?

That would make sense and explain why they've left the field open to GE and CFM.

I'm surprised they couldn't update the core 535 engine that powered the B757. It's not like they didn't have the stepping stone.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:31 am

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
Pratt is all over Airbus, who didn't even offer them a Partnership for Success

I'm a big fan of the Pratt engine on Airbus products. It's a shame they had such a terrible EIS. Hopefully things will go better as time moves forward.

I'm not a big fan of Boeing squeezing the supply chain, but I can see why they're doing it, given that 70% of the profits of the aircraft end up being made by suppliers and third parties.

If Boeing is successful in this Airbus will have no choice but follow, or end up being at a disadvantage in the market place.

mxaxai wrote:
Airlines ask for a certain fuel efficiency. They won't care too much about the precise technology used to achieve that. But with both P&W and RR moving towards geared turbofans, there is considerable doubt that a gear-less NMA engine is competitive against one that uses a gear. Note that the gear is the one part that is working fine (both at RR and P&W).

There was considerable doubt that a gear-less CFM LEAP engine would be competitive against a PW one that uses a gear yet we see that was wrong.

Let's give it time to play out. We should all know a lot more in a few months time.

Boeing has the proposals in hand from both CFM and PW, and if the CFM proposal is not competitive, it will not be selected.

If a gear is required for competitiveness Boeing will be the first to know, because they will have up-to-date and detailed geared and non-geared proposals right in front of them!

Boeing is not going to paint itself into a corner where they spend >$10B and end up with product that isn't competitive for its intended life span.

Obviously they understand NMA will have to be competitive on day 1 and remain competitive for many, many years, fully knowing that the industry moves forward quickly.

I can see them not launching NMA long before I see them releasing a product that can't be competitive for its expected lifespan.

I read somewhere that GE is contracting with PWA to use their GTF tech on a new GE core. If that's so? Then Rolls would be in "Deep Kimchee" to field a comparable engine,
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:42 am

Tell us of an airline that has asked for a geared fan on the NMA.


:confused:

Tell us of an airline that hasn't asked for a geared fan on the NMA.

Strange way of looking at the market.

I know a lot airlines that not only asked for geared turbofans for their new medium aicraft, but ordered them & introduced them into service.

Money talks.

Image

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:50 am

keesje wrote:
Tell us of an airline that has asked for a geared fan on the NMA.


:confused:

Tell us of an airline that hasn't asked for a geared fan on the NMA.

Strange way of looking at the market.

I know a lot airlines that not only asked for geared turbofans for their new medium aicraft, but ordered them & introduced them into service.

Money talks.

Image

Image


Weren’t you the one that suggested not having a GTF might be a problem for airlines?
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17710
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:07 am

VV wrote:
Does anyone know with certainty if Pratt & Whitney's bid is with a geared turbofan?

From Rolls-Royce's press release we know for sure that their withdrawn bid was with the Ultrafan.

Pratt has developed larger gearboxes, so I would be shocked if they didn't.

RR has hinted they would be willing to partner. IMHO, that is the only way the get onto the NMA. SAFRAN and GE battle behind the scenes which creates a better LEAP.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:19 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
keesje wrote:
Tell us of an airline that has asked for a geared fan on the NMA.


:confused:

Tell us of an airline that hasn't asked for a geared fan on the NMA.

Strange way of looking at the market.

I know a lot airlines that not only asked for geared turbofans for their new medium aicraft, but ordered them & introduced them into service.

Money talks.

Image

Image


Weren’t you the one that suggested not having a GTF might be a problem for airlines?


I said:

Even if Boeing looks the other way, airlines aren't. I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.


Looking at replies, some members suggest CFM might strike a deal to get this technology on board next to their more evolutionairy LEAP engine technology.

It seems the market is answering the question for Boeing if an NMA should have geared technology or not. Pratt can hardly keep up, RR is testing and GE fighting for IP.

No airline or Boeing qoutes. It still is happening. If Boeing is investing 10-15 Billion in a new project, it is vital that it includes the technology that makes it the most efficient engine option for the 2025-2040 period. That probably means at least a realistic development plan on top of the current CFM and PW offerings.
Last edited by keesje on Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1397
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:29 am

Revelation linked a different article from air insight, this pertains to this thread. RR has spent a huge amount getting these problems solved, I'm surprised they are doing any R & D outside of getting these problems fixed.

https://airinsight.com/rolls-royce-drop ... -dont-fit/

The Trent 1000C engines, certified in 2013 were first found to have problems in 2016, with 2018 being where the FAA chopped the ETOPS, this problem will not be rectified on the 787 until mid 2020. There were up to 50 of the 787s sitting at one point, a 1% efficiency delta pales to the cost of the plane sitting for months.

The PW GTF we really don't know if all the issues are solved, it is just getting into where fatigue due to vibration can start to appear, like those in the Trents.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:35 am

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Won't both the 787 and 350 be looking for new engines sometime after 2025? Also Airbus is likely to launch an NMA a little bigger than the 797, but EIS in the late 20s. RR has a lot of market possibilities. And for now lessons to learn, and profits to make.

Why would the B787 be looking for new engines around 2025? Boeing has NOT been in the business of fielding "Warmed over" airplanes have they?
If that were the case? They would have incrementally updated the B767 wouldn't they??
 
jagraham
Posts: 863
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:50 am

SteelChair wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

I don't have insider information, and this is a generalization but I believe that the PW GTF burns less fuel (a few percent) but has had more reliability problems than the CFM. CFM LEAP had had its issues but not as bad as the PW. PW is kind of a train wreck compared to CFM imho.

I am sure the engine choice is important, but I think airframe capacity and range are MORE important. That's the differentiating factor, after all. Despite some wanting to throw shade on the LEAP 1.5 because its not a GTF, I am unconvinced that matters. Sure a few percent burn difference may make a difference to some in the A320/B737 "contest", but it doesn't to everyone all the time. Don't airlines buy MAXes (no GTF offer), and buy neos with LEAPs? But on the B797, there's no comparable size frame. The "business model" won't be made or broken by the absence of a GTF. That argument is being promoted mainly by the "B797 sucks, and it'll suck even more because it doesn't have an engine type Airbus uses" usual suspects.


I definitely dont want to throw shade on the LEAP.

We've seen this game before: the 757. The PW engine was lighter and burned less fuel, but had reliability problems and still has reliability issues to this very day. The RR offering was a little bit heavier and burned a little more gas but ran 2-3x as long on the wing. I'll go for the reliability every day. I'm not sure the weight analogy will translate to the LEAP/GTF though, but I have high confidence in CFM WRT reliability.


A main selling point for LEAP is fewer shop visits. A lot fewer than before the LEAP and Pratt GTF. Teething pains have skewed the initial comparison, but we will see over time

Jul 9, 2012 - According to CFM, the Leap-1A will require two fewer shop visits over its life cycle, compared with the PW1100G. “That's two out of five or six, ...

https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... tle-pw-gtf
 
2175301
Posts: 1439
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:31 am

keesje wrote:
Even if Boeing looks the other way, airlines aren't. I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.


Perhaps I'm missing something... IF I recall correctly B787 EIS was in 2011. 8 years later there are a fair number of them sitting on the ground because their promised "state of the art" engines for 2011 still do not work properly.

The Pratt GTF engines seem to have had a whole series of problems since EIS as well, and I believe I have heard that new aircraft are sitting waiting for these new "state of the art" engines.

It seems to me that many Airlines would be quite happy with a new aircraft where they can expect the engines to reasonably work reliably from EIS. Buying "state of the ait" and "next generation" has risks... real risks... and most Airlines tend to be risk adverse as needed.

Also, I am very sure that the NMA will be designed so it can be retrofitted with GTF engines... when they really show they are reliable down the road and there is one in the required size range (and not too large for a heavier aircraft).

Have a great day,
 
tealnz
Posts: 560
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:26 am

strfyr51 wrote:
Why would the B787 be looking for new engines around 2025? Boeing has NOT been in the business of fielding "Warmed over" airplanes have they? If that were the case? They would have incrementally updated the B767 wouldn't they??

Only the 737 (twice), 747 (twice), 777 (twice...) And yes, arguably also the 767.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 4:51 am

keesje wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
keesje wrote:

:confused:

Tell us of an airline that hasn't asked for a geared fan on the NMA.

Strange way of looking at the market.

I know a lot airlines that not only asked for geared turbofans for their new medium aicraft, but ordered them & introduced them into service.

Money talks.

Image

Image


Weren’t you the one that suggested not having a GTF might be a problem for airlines?


I said:

Even if Boeing looks the other way, airlines aren't. I doubt Boeing & the airlines want an NMA without geared fan technology for introduction from second half of next decade.


Looking at replies, some members suggest CFM might strike a deal to get this technology on board next to their more evolutionairy LEAP engine technology.

It seems the market is answering the question for Boeing if an NMA should have geared technology or not. Pratt can hardly keep up, RR is testing and GE fighting for IP.

No airline or Boeing qoutes. It still is happening. If Boeing is investing 10-15 Billion in a new project, it is vital that it includes the technology that makes it the most efficient engine option for the 2025-2040 period. That probably means at least a realistic development plan on top of the current CFM and PW offerings.


That’s great. He asked for some sort of source for your claim, that’s all.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:50 am

seahawk wrote:
Because at that time RR only told Boeing that they can not make the time frame, which suggest Boeing has now confirmed to RR, that they have a bidder that can.


And further, that Boeing confirmed the time frame.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
VV
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:34 am

lightsaber wrote:
VV wrote:
Does anyone know with certainty if Pratt & Whitney's bid is with a geared turbofan?

From Rolls-Royce's press release we know for sure that their withdrawn bid was with the Ultrafan.

Pratt has developed larger gearboxes, so I would be shocked if they didn't.

RR has hinted they would be willing to partner. IMHO, that is the only way the get onto the NMA. SAFRAN and GE battle behind the scenes which creates a better LEAP.

Lightsaber


Do you know with absolute certainty that Pratt & Whitney's bid is based on a geared turbofan?
 
osiris30
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 6:41 am

VV wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
VV wrote:
Does anyone know with certainty if Pratt & Whitney's bid is with a geared turbofan?

From Rolls-Royce's press release we know for sure that their withdrawn bid was with the Ultrafan.

Pratt has developed larger gearboxes, so I would be shocked if they didn't.

RR has hinted they would be willing to partner. IMHO, that is the only way the get onto the NMA. SAFRAN and GE battle behind the scenes which creates a better LEAP.

Lightsaber


Do you know with absolute certainty that Pratt & Whitney's bid is based on a geared turbofan?


Think about what you are asking. If he knows with absolute certainty he cannot say that he does as he would be violating NDA. However, Lightsaber is the engine god around these parts (in case you don't know). I believe he is ex Pratt. I also believe his reasoning is sound. I do not see Pratt offering any commercial engine that is NOT GTF these days. They need GTF to make up for their short comings in other parts of the engine (namely the hot bits).
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
VV
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 7:21 am

osiris30 wrote:
VV wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Pratt has developed larger gearboxes, so I would be shocked if they didn't.

RR has hinted they would be willing to partner. IMHO, that is the only way the get onto the NMA. SAFRAN and GE battle behind the scenes which creates a better LEAP.

Lightsaber


Do you know with absolute certainty that Pratt & Whitney's bid is based on a geared turbofan?


Think about what you are asking. If he knows with absolute certainty he cannot say that he does as he would be violating NDA. However, Lightsaber is the engine god around these parts (in case you don't know). I believe he is ex Pratt. I also believe his reasoning is sound. I do not see Pratt offering any commercial engine that is NOT GTF these days. They need GTF to make up for their short comings in other parts of the engine (namely the hot bits).


Okay.

We know with absolute certainty that Rolls-Royce's withdrawn bid was based on Ultrafan, which is known to be a geared turbofan fan.

We know with certainty from various GE/CFM statements that their bid is a kind of scaled up Leap with some improvements based on their GEnx and GE9X.

Now, it seems everyone is saying that Pratt & Whitney's bid is a geared turbofan, but no one would say that he or she is absolutely certain it is the case. As far as I know, the engine manufacturer has not made any public statement about it's offer.

So I ask again the question if anybody knows with certainty that Pratt & Whitney's bid is based on a geared turbofan.

If you know then say you do otherwise just say no or say nothing relative to my question.
Last edited by VV on Mon Mar 04, 2019 7:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 7:38 am

strfyr51 wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
Won't both the 787 and 350 be looking for new engines sometime after 2025? Also Airbus is likely to launch an NMA a little bigger than the 797, but EIS in the late 20s. RR has a lot of market possibilities. And for now lessons to learn, and profits to make.

Why would the B787 be looking for new engines around 2025? Boeing has NOT been in the business of fielding "Warmed over" airplanes have they?
If that were the case? They would have incrementally updated the B767 wouldn't they??


They tried https://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_03/ps/ps01/art/sidebar02.gif

Boeing has NOT been in the business of fielding "Warmed over" airplanes have they?


Depends on definitions, but we could put 737Classic, NG and MAX in here, together with 747-400, -8, 777W and probably some more. Succesful too.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17279
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 7:51 am

strfyr51 wrote:
Boeing has NOT been in the business of fielding "Warmed over" airplanes have they?
If that were the case? They would have incrementally updated the B767 wouldn't they??


There's zero demand for new passenger 767s. Anyway, Boeing's too busy doing "warmed over" 737s, 747s and 777s! :wink2:
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8496
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:53 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
Weren’t you the one that suggested not having a GTF might be a problem for airlines?


Afaics GTF at the moment and for NB craft can be taken as synonymous to "better market leading sfc". :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 9:19 am

VV wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
VV wrote:
Does anyone know with certainty if Pratt & Whitney's bid is with a geared turbofan?

From Rolls-Royce's press release we know for sure that their withdrawn bid was with the Ultrafan.

Pratt has developed larger gearboxes, so I would be shocked if they didn't.

RR has hinted they would be willing to partner. IMHO, that is the only way the get onto the NMA. SAFRAN and GE battle behind the scenes which creates a better LEAP.

Lightsaber


Do you know with absolute certainty that Pratt & Whitney's bid is based on a geared turbofan?


Interesting question. Do you have any information that could make you think otherwise?

https://www.pw.utc.com/products-and-services/products/commercial-engines/

VV, the "absolute certainty" is for looking back. We are looking in the future though & can't hide behind uncertainties.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
WholaLottaLove
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:46 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:08 am

lightsaber wrote:
VV wrote:
RR has hinted they would be willing to partner. IMHO, that is the only way the get onto the NMA.


A geared V5000 (50k thrust) would be amazing, but how likely is this? - On the V2500 the following parties were involved:

  • Fan: ?
  • LPC compressor: JAEC
  • HPC compressor: RR
  • Combustor: P&W
  • HPT: P&W/MTU
  • LPT: MTU

If an IAE 2.0-like consortium were to be established, how would that look like? P&W producing the gearbox and RR taking over the HPT part instead?
 
VV
Posts: 792
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:01 pm

keesje wrote:
VV wrote:

Do you know with absolute certainty that Pratt & Whitney's bid is based on a geared turbofan?


Interesting question. Do you have any information that could make you think otherwise?

https://www.pw.utc.com/products-and-services/products/commercial-engines/

VV, the "absolute certainty" is for looking back. We are looking in the future though & can't hide behind uncertainties.


No.

We are just looking back to a very recent past. Pratt & Whitney submitted a bid to power the NMA. It's done.

So the question is whether anyone here can say with certainty that PW's bid is based on a geared turbofan.
Is the question so difficult to understand?
 
WIederling
Posts: 8496
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:07 pm

WholaLottaLove wrote:
On the V2500 the following parties were involved:
  • Fan: ?


This says the fan blades are an RR wide chord design:
https://cdn.ymaws.com/titanium.org/reso ... ces_Wi.pdf
This says the fan is JAEC task:
https://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS1 ... 96-0.5.pdf
Murphy is an optimist
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1130
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

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

Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:28 pm

tealnz wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
Why would the B787 be looking for new engines around 2025? Boeing has NOT been in the business of fielding "Warmed over" airplanes have they? If that were the case? They would have incrementally updated the B767 wouldn't they??

Only the 737 (twice), 747 (twice), 777 (twice...) And yes, arguably also the 767.

Actually, the 737 was "warmed over" 3 times (737 Classic -300/400/500, 737NG -600/700/800/900/900ER & 737 MAX -7M/8M/9M/10M).

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