keesje wrote: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.
You still haven't shown that airlines are asking for a geared fan.
You've just posted your personal opinion that they should be, without any proof that they are.
As I wrote earlier, they may end up getting one, given that Boeing has a geared and a non geared proposal in their hands.
Gears come with advantages and disadvantages, and it's good Boeing has a choice, isn't it?
VV wrote:So the question is whether anyone here can say with certainty that PW's bid is based on a geared turbofan.
No, no one can, although Boeing has said they are trying to avoid technological risk and PW would have to invent a non-geared turbofan from decades old designs in a short period of time which would be an enormous technological risk.
For that matter, no one can say that CFM hasn't been cooking up a geared turbofan in a secret laboratory somewhere and has chosen it for its NMA proposal, yet of course that too would be an enormous technological risk.
So, Boeing could have a PW non-geared proposal and a CFM geared proposal on their desks, but given our understanding of their desires, that is very unlikely.