Several years ago when the A320NEO launched there were quite a lot of reports of reliability issues with the P&W GTF engines. There was endless threads on these forums about it and it was quite a sticky situation. It all seems to have gone quiet now, have P&W sorted out all of the growing pains with this engine now?

Judging by the daily news at avherald, things seem to be drastically better.
I understand PW took advantage of the pandemic slow down to develop, test, and implement improvements.
There are still periodic issues--jetBlue had an A220 lose an engine this month, for example--but it's not at the alarming rate that the PW started out at.
Thank goodness.

Pratt has claimed 99.98% dispatch reliability:
https://50skyshades.com/news/manufactur ... -Jets%20E2.


Very good. CFM-56/LEAP levels of good. This should help future orders for the A320NEO and A220.

AC just selected Pratt fir 30 A321xLR.
https://www.aviationpros.com/engines-co ... y-aircraft

I speculate one reason the latest PiP was so conservative was to maintain reliability.

Lightsaber

No, they aren't.

At least for PW1500G (A220 family), situation continues to be a mess.

Just ask Egypt Air how many of their A220s are grounded right now.

For all operators, time on wing has been pretty low (less than 1,000 hours), requiring very often labour-intensive inspections and many engine changes, with a low spare engine availability around the globe.

And just 2 weeks ago we had the 8th in-flight engine shut-down incident, this time with a brand new JetBlue frame.

SA280 wrote:

No, they aren't.

At least for PW1500G (A220 family), situation continues to be a mess.

Just ask Egypt Air how many of their A220s are grounded right now.

For all operators, time on wing has been pretty low (less than 1,000 hours), requiring very often labour-intensive inspections and many engine changes, with a low spare engine availability around the globe.

And just 2 weeks ago we had the 8th in-flight engine shut-down incident, this time with a brand new JetBlue frame.

Do you have a source? During the pandemic, the A220 just might have been the world's most active fleet

Warning, open in incognito tab (nasty cookies):
https://simpleflying.com/the-airbus-a22 ... ive-fleet/

Now, in 2019 a huge number of issues.
again, open incognito:
https://simpleflying.com/swiss-a220-grounding/

I couldn't find a single 2022 reference on EgyptAir issues. So I would like to know your source. I'm well aware of the recent JetBlue diversion.

In February Swiss was very happy with A220 reliability for the trailing 12 months:
https://skiesmag.com/features/airbus-a2 ... .%E2%80%9D

The Airbus statistics for the A220 in 2021 are also really good, and improving:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jl ... r-2021.pdf

So please share a source.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

SA280 wrote:

No, they aren't.

At least for PW1500G (A220 family), situation continues to be a mess.

Just ask Egypt Air how many of their A220s are grounded right now.

For all operators, time on wing has been pretty low (less than 1,000 hours), requiring very often labour-intensive inspections and many engine changes, with a low spare engine availability around the globe.

And just 2 weeks ago we had the 8th in-flight engine shut-down incident, this time with a brand new JetBlue frame.

Do you have a source? During the pandemic, the A220 just might have been the world's most active fleet

Warning, open in incognito tab (nasty cookies):
https://simpleflying.com/the-airbus-a22 ... ive-fleet/

Now, in 2019 a huge number of issues.
again, open incognito:
https://simpleflying.com/swiss-a220-grounding/

I couldn't find a single 2022 reference on EgyptAir issues. So I would like to know your source. I'm well aware of the recent JetBlue diversion.

In February Swiss was very happy with A220 reliability for the trailing 12 months:
https://skiesmag.com/features/airbus-a2 ... .%E2%80%9D

The Airbus statistics for the A220 in 2021 are also really good, and improving:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jl ... r-2021.pdf

So please share a source.

Lightsaber

According to airfleets there are quite a few parked that haven't flown in a while but obviously there's a multitude of reasons they might be parked. You wouldn't expect the most fuel efficient aircraft in a fleet to be parked during a period of high fuel prices unless other factors are at play.

https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Egy ... ve-csr.htm

What about gearbox removal? Not directly reliability and probably closely guarded PWproprietary data, but directly impact PW GTF business case

JohanTally wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

SA280 wrote:

No, they aren't.

At least for PW1500G (A220 family), situation continues to be a mess.

Just ask Egypt Air how many of their A220s are grounded right now.

For all operators, time on wing has been pretty low (less than 1,000 hours), requiring very often labour-intensive inspections and many engine changes, with a low spare engine availability around the globe.

And just 2 weeks ago we had the 8th in-flight engine shut-down incident, this time with a brand new JetBlue frame.

Do you have a source? During the pandemic, the A220 just might have been the world's most active fleet

Warning, open in incognito tab (nasty cookies):
https://simpleflying.com/the-airbus-a22 ... ive-fleet/

Now, in 2019 a huge number of issues.
again, open incognito:
https://simpleflying.com/swiss-a220-grounding/

I couldn't find a single 2022 reference on EgyptAir issues. So I would like to know your source. I'm well aware of the recent JetBlue diversion.

In February Swiss was very happy with A220 reliability for the trailing 12 months:
https://skiesmag.com/features/airbus-a2 ... .%E2%80%9D

The Airbus statistics for the A220 in 2021 are also really good, and improving:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jl ... r-2021.pdf

So please share a source.

Lightsaber

According to airfleets there are quite a few parked that haven't flown in a while but obviously there's a multitude of reasons they might be parked. You wouldn't expect the most fuel efficient aircraft in a fleet to be parked during a period of high fuel prices unless other factors are at play.

https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Egy ... ve-csr.htm

I agree that one airline has a perplexing quantity of A220 stored. I cannot figure out why that is the case. But with overall fleet trends favoring the A220 that I posted before, I won't worry about one airline I cannot explain.

They have their own flight sim, so that constraint doesn't apply:
http://training.egyptair.com/News/A220FFS-Launch

When all indications are that all other A220 operators are utilizing the planes, I cannot explain the one anomoly. But when one is counter to the other available evidence, I look for airline specific reasons.

How is Egypt Air pilot availability? If pilots are in short supply, one upgauges. I don't know if this is the case, but one plausible reason. If they stood down pilot hiring, they might still be ramping up pilot induction, but this is only a guess on my part.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

SA280 wrote:

No, they aren't.

At least for PW1500G (A220 family), situation continues to be a mess.

Just ask Egypt Air how many of their A220s are grounded right now.

For all operators, time on wing has been pretty low (less than 1,000 hours), requiring very often labour-intensive inspections and many engine changes, with a low spare engine availability around the globe.

And just 2 weeks ago we had the 8th in-flight engine shut-down incident, this time with a brand new JetBlue frame.

Do you have a source? During the pandemic, the A220 just might have been the world's most active fleet

Warning, open in incognito tab (nasty cookies):
https://simpleflying.com/the-airbus-a22 ... ive-fleet/

Now, in 2019 a huge number of issues.
again, open incognito:
https://simpleflying.com/swiss-a220-grounding/

I couldn't find a single 2022 reference on EgyptAir issues. So I would like to know your source. I'm well aware of the recent JetBlue diversion.

In February Swiss was very happy with A220 reliability for the trailing 12 months:
https://skiesmag.com/features/airbus-a2 ... .%E2%80%9D

The Airbus statistics for the A220 in 2021 are also really good, and improving:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jl ... r-2021.pdf

So please share a source.

Lightsaber

I have my intel sources and they are not public.

You have to be careful with marketing numbers presented by OEMs and also consider that many positive public statements done by operators aim at keeping a good relationship and promoting an aircraft that they are already committed to.

So, talk to operators if you want to find more reliable information. I'm not telling you to avoid your media sources, just telling you not to disregard intel that is not public.

Regarding Egypt Air, you can check in many public platforms they have many aircraft parked, even though you cannot know the reason. That's when you ask insiders and, yes, the reason is the poor engine reliability, frequent removals and lack of spares.

The reason you will not find this in the media is because, as you may know, few airlines want to publicize their issues with OEMs as this would only worsens an already troubled relationship caused by EIS below expectations. Even airlines that do that, such as Qatar, just the tip of the iceberg goes to the media. And they suffer the consequences for puclizing it.

The IFSD rate is relatively low. The borescope fallout rate is through the roof and the on-wing times reflect that. A certain large airline in the southeastern US has 24 leased PW1500s flying in their fleet of A220 aircraft due to the fallout rate.

Just to complement my previous post, regarding being careful with OEMs' marketing numbers.

A high schedule reliability rate just means that a big amount of scheduled flights departed within a reasonable window between ETD and real TD with no technical issues.

That's the number we usually see in OEMs' marketing figures.

There's also a very important one that is not so much shared: aircraft availability, which is the time an aircraft is available for revenue flights and ground activities direct related to them, between two revenue flights (it excludes maintenance allocation).

And the fact is that the A220 aircraft availability has been very low due to PW1500G issues, requiring many inspections, low time on wing, many scheduled removals, with few spare engines available around the world.

So, we're talking about scheduled maintenance (much more often than promised by Airbus and PW), not unscheduled maintenance that would affect schedule reliability. So, if airlines plan their operations with enough spare aircraft, it does not affect schedule reliability.

SA280 wrote:

Just to complement my previous post, regarding being careful with OEMs' marketing numbers.

A high schedule reliability rate just means that a big amount of scheduled flights departed within a reasonable window between ETD and real TD with no technical issues.

That's the number we usually see in OEMs' marketing figures.

There's also a very important one that is not so much shared: aircraft availability, which is the time an aircraft is available for revenue flights and ground activities direct related to them, between two revenue flights (it excludes maintenance allocation).

And the fact is that the A220 aircraft availability has been very low due to PW1500G issues, requiring many inspections, low time on wing, many scheduled removals, with few spare engines available around the world.

So, we're talking about scheduled maintenance (much more often than promised by Airbus and PW), not unscheduled maintenance that would affect schedule reliability. So, if airlines plan their operations with enough spare aircraft, it does not affect schedule reliability.

I agree schedule reliability is important. Usually there is a guarantee of aircraft availability and maintenance hours.

I've tried to find utilization, the best surrogate statistic, but I have been unable to find the data.

However, the link I had from Swiss indicates they were happy enough "for a newer aircraft." I don't claim the performance is up to snuff completely. There is too much scramble at vendors for the replacement parts. The question is how long to get parts into the fleet. That can take years.

I'm well aware how games are played. E.g., I'm well aware of how many LEAP engines are needed for combustor replacement.

I haven't seen the public howling for spare engines where there was a huge relief when there first were enough spare pw1500Gs in 2018:
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/ ... pply-cs300

If we are talking a certain airline, they might make more profit being compensated on PW1500g work than taking the latest build engines. Obviously I speculate.

I've seen real world data where two different people interpret the data differently with engine issues. Top off orders will tell us the bigger picture.

Lightsaber

I came across this older Avherald article from a couple of years ago. This was the 2/12/2020 in-flight, uncontained engine failure suffered by an Air Baltic A220 with one of its PW1500G engines. Has this issue been fully addressed yet?

https://avherald.com/h?article=4d338076&opt=0

lightsaber wrote:

I've seen real world data where two different people interpret the data differently with engine issues. Top off orders will tell us the bigger picture.

Lightsaber

Not necessarily. As long as PW is willing to take the commercial risk of accelerated overhaul and compensate airlines appreciably for loss of use, there little reason to make the switch unless CFM is also willing to make the same commitments or they believe PW will go belly-up and be unable to sustain/support the fleet. The commitments can be in competitive PBH rates and appropriate unplanned LOU comp or early overhaul credits for traditional models.

UTC's turbofan financial performance over the coming quarters will be telling.

Checking the last few weeks operations out of DFW for a certain US airline which has an extensive BCS1 BCS3 operation there it looks like the dispatch reliability is 99% or greater. A couple flights took some enroute delays due to thunderstorms though. Looks like the aircraft and engine performance are outstanding.

lightsaber wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Do you have a source? During the pandemic, the A220 just might have been the world's most active fleet

Warning, open in incognito tab (nasty cookies):
https://simpleflying.com/the-airbus-a22 ... ive-fleet/

Now, in 2019 a huge number of issues.
again, open incognito:
https://simpleflying.com/swiss-a220-grounding/

I couldn't find a single 2022 reference on EgyptAir issues. So I would like to know your source. I'm well aware of the recent JetBlue diversion.

In February Swiss was very happy with A220 reliability for the trailing 12 months:
https://skiesmag.com/features/airbus-a2 ... .%E2%80%9D

The Airbus statistics for the A220 in 2021 are also really good, and improving:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jl ... r-2021.pdf

So please share a source.

Lightsaber

According to airfleets there are quite a few parked that haven't flown in a while but obviously there's a multitude of reasons they might be parked. You wouldn't expect the most fuel efficient aircraft in a fleet to be parked during a period of high fuel prices unless other factors are at play.

https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Egy ... ve-csr.htm

I agree that one airline has a perplexing quantity of A220 stored. I cannot figure out why that is the case. But with overall fleet trends favoring the A220 that I posted before, I won't worry about one airline I cannot explain.

They have their own flight sim, so that constraint doesn't apply:
http://training.egyptair.com/News/A220FFS-Launch

When all indications are that all other A220 operators are utilizing the planes, I cannot explain the one anomoly. But when one is counter to the other available evidence, I look for airline specific reasons.

How is Egypt Air pilot availability? If pilots are in short supply, one upgauges. I don't know if this is the case, but one plausible reason. If they stood down pilot hiring, they might still be ramping up pilot induction, but this is only a guess on my part.

Lightsaber

Just speculation but there aren't many A220 operators that have as demanding of a climate as MS and I wonder if this plays any role. Other airlines in the region have the A220 on order but right now MS actually has a fleet to speak of. Originally it was mentioned that the GTF needs to fully cool down after a flight to aide the longevity of the engine could this be a factor? What are the typical routes that are used by the fleet do they stay in hot/sandy regions?

Okcflyer wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I've seen real world data where two different people interpret the data differently with engine issues. Top off orders will tell us the bigger picture.

Lightsaber

Not necessarily. As long as PW is willing to take the commercial risk of accelerated overhaul and compensate airlines appreciably for loss of use, there little reason to make the switch unless CFM is also willing to make the same commitments or they believe PW will go belly-up and be unable to sustain/support the fleet. The commitments can be in competitive PBH rates and appropriate unplanned LOU comp or early overhaul credits for traditional models.

UTC's turbofan financial performance over the coming quarters will be telling.

If Raytheon tech wants to take the risk, that will be an incentive to fix the problem. Raytheon tech isn't at risk, so that would be the correct commercial risk to take.

I wish I had access to data traunched by build date. It is quite easy to see, within 6 to 12 months, how well fixes are working.

I'm certain 2020 and earlier build engines still have issues until overhauled. The question is, how are 2021 or early build 2022 engines performing? If we see fleet performance improve, we know the root causes (there are several) were fixed. I'm under no illusion that the even the OEM numbers are good enough (not even close per my prior link from Airbus).

I am of the opinion new builds are good enough. I respect I cannot prove that. I hope airlines start publishing more data (utilization in hours and cycles).

When I look at Delta in the FAA database:
https://av-info.faa.gov/sdrx/Query.aspx

Ok, the A220-171s have had issues and some just too low early utilization (5 hours and 2.4 cycles per day).

The A220-371s, I couldn't find the incidence of maintenance cases (a good thing). Only N302DU had maintenance far enough apart where utilization has been 7.9 hours per day and 3.5 cycles. A bit light I'll admit.

For JetBlue N3008J and N3023J had 6.4&6.9 hours per day and 2.3&2.5 cycles per day, implying issues.

But most didn't have enough maintenance data (a good thing) to calculate.

N3062J had 11.7 hours per day, 2.8 cycles per day. That is expected JetBlue duty.

So it looks like August 2021 and later deliveries are doing well; much better for the time in service than prior deliveries. It also appears prior to May 2021 deliveries have issues. I admit a spot check, so assume uncertainty and I do not know what changes were made during that time.

But if there are a lack of maintenance incidents, that is a good thing. I found plenty of engine related issues earlier on in the FAA database.

Lightsaber

SA280 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

SA280 wrote:

No, they aren't.

At least for PW1500G (A220 family), situation continues to be a mess.

Just ask Egypt Air how many of their A220s are grounded right now.

For all operators, time on wing has been pretty low (less than 1,000 hours), requiring very often labour-intensive inspections and many engine changes, with a low spare engine availability around the globe.

And just 2 weeks ago we had the 8th in-flight engine shut-down incident, this time with a brand new JetBlue frame.

Do you have a source? During the pandemic, the A220 just might have been the world's most active fleet

Warning, open in incognito tab (nasty cookies):
https://simpleflying.com/the-airbus-a22 ... ive-fleet/

Now, in 2019 a huge number of issues.
again, open incognito:
https://simpleflying.com/swiss-a220-grounding/

I couldn't find a single 2022 reference on EgyptAir issues. So I would like to know your source. I'm well aware of the recent JetBlue diversion.

In February Swiss was very happy with A220 reliability for the trailing 12 months:
https://skiesmag.com/features/airbus-a2 ... .%E2%80%9D

The Airbus statistics for the A220 in 2021 are also really good, and improving:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jl ... r-2021.pdf

So please share a source.

Lightsaber

I have my intel sources and they are not public.

You have to be careful with marketing numbers presented by OEMs and also consider that many positive public statements done by operators aim at keeping a good relationship and promoting an aircraft that they are already committed to.

So, talk to operators if you want to find more reliable information. I'm not telling you to avoid your media sources, just telling you not to disregard intel that is not public.

Regarding Egypt Air, you can check in many public platforms they have many aircraft parked, even though you cannot know the reason. That's when you ask insiders and, yes, the reason is the poor engine reliability, frequent removals and lack of spares.

The reason you will not find this in the media is because, as you may know, few airlines want to publicize their issues with OEMs as this would only worsens an already troubled relationship caused by EIS below expectations. Even airlines that do that, such as Qatar, just the tip of the iceberg goes to the media. And they suffer the consequences for puclizing it.

I did notice that MS had 8 parked at one point. Also been wondering why no follow up orders from Delta even though it is the perfect a319/717 replacement.

You hear anything about Delta or Korean or airbaltic?

randomdude83 wrote:

SA280 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Do you have a source? During the pandemic, the A220 just might have been the world's most active fleet

Warning, open in incognito tab (nasty cookies):
https://simpleflying.com/the-airbus-a22 ... ive-fleet/

Now, in 2019 a huge number of issues.
again, open incognito:
https://simpleflying.com/swiss-a220-grounding/

I couldn't find a single 2022 reference on EgyptAir issues. So I would like to know your source. I'm well aware of the recent JetBlue diversion.

In February Swiss was very happy with A220 reliability for the trailing 12 months:
https://skiesmag.com/features/airbus-a2 ... .%E2%80%9D

The Airbus statistics for the A220 in 2021 are also really good, and improving:
https://www.airbus.com/sites/g/files/jl ... r-2021.pdf

So please share a source.

Lightsaber

I have my intel sources and they are not public.

You have to be careful with marketing numbers presented by OEMs and also consider that many positive public statements done by operators aim at keeping a good relationship and promoting an aircraft that they are already committed to.

So, talk to operators if you want to find more reliable information. I'm not telling you to avoid your media sources, just telling you not to disregard intel that is not public.

Regarding Egypt Air, you can check in many public platforms they have many aircraft parked, even though you cannot know the reason. That's when you ask insiders and, yes, the reason is the poor engine reliability, frequent removals and lack of spares.

The reason you will not find this in the media is because, as you may know, few airlines want to publicize their issues with OEMs as this would only worsens an already troubled relationship caused by EIS below expectations. Even airlines that do that, such as Qatar, just the tip of the iceberg goes to the media. And they suffer the consequences for puclizing it.

I did notice that MS had 8 parked at one point. Also been wondering why no follow up orders from Delta even though it is the perfect a319/717 replacement.

You hear anything about Delta or Korean or airbaltic?

DL has topped off it's original order of 75 with 15 more and converted a majority of the order for the A223. Replacing the 717 is the more pressing need for DL to streamline the fleet. The 319 has commonality with their newly acquired A321CEO fleet and shares the same pilot group.

JohanTally wrote:

randomdude83 wrote:

SA280 wrote:

I have my intel sources and they are not public.

You have to be careful with marketing numbers presented by OEMs and also consider that many positive public statements done by operators aim at keeping a good relationship and promoting an aircraft that they are already committed to.

So, talk to operators if you want to find more reliable information. I'm not telling you to avoid your media sources, just telling you not to disregard intel that is not public.

Regarding Egypt Air, you can check in many public platforms they have many aircraft parked, even though you cannot know the reason. That's when you ask insiders and, yes, the reason is the poor engine reliability, frequent removals and lack of spares.

The reason you will not find this in the media is because, as you may know, few airlines want to publicize their issues with OEMs as this would only worsens an already troubled relationship caused by EIS below expectations. Even airlines that do that, such as Qatar, just the tip of the iceberg goes to the media. And they suffer the consequences for puclizing it.

I did notice that MS had 8 parked at one point. Also been wondering why no follow up orders from Delta even though it is the perfect a319/717 replacement.

You hear anything about Delta or Korean or airbaltic?

DL has topped off it's original order of 75 with 15 more and converted a majority of the order for the A223. Replacing the 717 is the more pressing need for DL to streamline the fleet. The 319 has commonality with their newly acquired A321CEO fleet and shares the same pilot group.

AirBaltic originally only ordered 20, then another 30.

https://www.airbaltic.com/en/airbaltic- ... inal-order

With the closure of Russian airspace, the will not need more for years, in my opinion.

I could see DL ordering more. They will have even better data.

Korean is managing the reopening of international flights. They are years away from needing more A220.

Near term is LH, JetBlue, and AirFrance after DL.

I see SAS being the canary in the coal mine due to their obvious skepticism of the small GTF.
https://airinsight.com/sas-demands-bett ... 220-or-e2/

If SAS orders, we know the A220 has matured. If not...

Lightsaber

randomdude83 wrote :
I did notice that MS had 8 parked at one point

It would be too easy to attribute this to engine problems alone. The pandemic hit Egypt hard because tourism collapsed and many jobs were lost as a result. Tourism is the second largest source of income for the country after agriculture. Then came the Ukraine war. One has to consider that around a third of the tourists came from Russia and Ukraine which is now almost zero.
source in German only :
https://visumantrag.de/aegypten/nachrichten/tourismus-krieg-ukraine

MS has leased two A220s to Ibom Air, which, surprisingly, are also flying at the moment. Only after then did Ibom Air order 10 A220s from Airbus. Why would they do that if they assumed permanent engine problems?
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/su-gfa

Swiss initially had problems but sent the last delivered A220 on a long demonstration trip, which for me is a clear indication that the engines are reliable.
Just my

At least Wizz Air seems happy and content with P&W GTFs when they received the 1000th A320 family jet with GTFs on April 27th.
Incidentally, they received two more of them today.

https://twitter.com/wizzair?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1519322980752531461%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fa380.boards.net%2Fthread%2F2531%2Fwizz-air-a320neos-50-a321neos%3Fpage%3D1

Dispatch reliability is loosely, not directly, related to longevity.

Sounds like dispatch reliability still has some trouble spots based on several signs of below-average utilization. However, it is significantly improved from 2016 service introduction. Fixing this is usually of higher importance than longevity improvement. Networks cannot handle or absorb this type of disruption no matter how much compensation (unless a covid black swan event occurs).

Longevity (durability) appears to still be a cluster****. Lots more work to do there. From an operator's POV, unlike with dispatch reliability, the longevity issue can be solved commercially. However, it will be very painful for the manufacturer's financial performance if the issues are not resolved quickly or fully.

Delta Tech Ops has the MRO for the P&W GTF engines so they should know a lot about the engine and it's quirks. They have already tore down an engine for updates. Delta seems to be happy with their A220's and A320neo powered with the GTF.

PW1100G sounds more promising. Interesting report here.

To Pratt & Whitney’s credit, it has also been creative to limit engine downtime in MRO shops. A more recent example following an FAA directive in 2019 to replace LPT Stage 3 Blades, it established quick-turn shops using its MRO partner network to incorporate a nickel alloy blade similar to LPT Stage 1 & 2 blades. Combined, this quick work, and work in progress has propelled the Pratt & Whitney PW1100G GTF to a dispatch reliability of 99.98% and utilisation above pre-Covid levels.

…

Despite this, there remains scepticism as changes are not yet fully-proven, and there continue to be on-going developments and testing in service especially with the latest combustor (now on its fourth build standard).

We do not know (well, most of you) the level of engine change on the PW1500G or on PW1100G-JM.

lightsaber wrote:

JohanTally wrote:

randomdude83 wrote:

I did notice that MS had 8 parked at one point. Also been wondering why no follow up orders from Delta even though it is the perfect a319/717 replacement.

You hear anything about Delta or Korean or airbaltic?

DL has topped off it's original order of 75 with 15 more and converted a majority of the order for the A223. Replacing the 717 is the more pressing need for DL to streamline the fleet. The 319 has commonality with their newly acquired A321CEO fleet and shares the same pilot group.

AirBaltic originally only ordered 20, then another 30.

https://www.airbaltic.com/en/airbaltic- ... inal-order

With the closure of Russian airspace, the will not need more for years, in my opinion.

I could see DL ordering more. They will have even better data.

Korean is managing the reopening of international flights. They are years away from needing more A220.

Near term is LH, JetBlue, and AirFrance after DL.

I see SAS being the canary in the coal mine due to their obvious skepticism of the small GTF.
https://airinsight.com/sas-demands-bett ... 220-or-e2/

If SAS orders, we know the A220 has matured. If not...

Lightsaber

AirBaltic are operating some for Eurowings and Scandinavian at the moment. So they're making hay at least.

freakyrat wrote:

Delta Tech Ops has the MRO for the P&W GTF engines so they should know a lot about the engine and it's quirks. They have already tore down an engine for updates. Delta seems to be happy with their A220's and A320neo powered with the GTF.

I would love insight into their data.

Above I posted links on my analysis of the FAA data. I remain of the opinion August 2021 and later examples are doing better. However, it will take several years to overhaul those delivered before May 2021 (I cannot tell when in the May to August timeframe the issue was fixed off limited data).

Lightsaber

Frontier has many years of experience with Leap NEOs and their parent, Indigo Partners, has many years of experience with GTF NEOs. When it came time to order a new batch of NEOs for Frontier they went with GTF. That is the clearest data point I know of from an operator with both Leap and GTF operational knowledge choosing GTF. As the initial issue with GTF are widely known Indigo must have seen a significant positive trend in reliability to make the switch at Frontier.

The main issue with the GTF is not reliability, it is longevity. These two issues seem to be getting intermixed in this thread. The dispatch and in-service reliability has improved dramatically as bugs get addressed. The time-on-wing has only improved marginally.

Great thread. Even the fact there is room for debate means the new generation of engines is becoming plausibly mature in airline service. It takes years to perfect new equipment through the duty cycle. I’ll say ten years.

Avatar2go wrote:

B757Forever wrote:

The main issue with the GTF is not reliability, it is longevity. These two issues seem to be getting intermixed in this thread. The dispatch and in-service reliability has improved dramatically as bugs get addressed. The time-on-wing has only improved marginally.

So is the issue premature wear of components? And will they address that by introducing more durable components over time?

Yes. Most of the premature wear is in the hot section. The compressors seem to be holding up better than the turbines. The gearbox, that many assumed would be problematic, have had no issues. Pratt is aware of all the issues. I presume they are diligently working to resolve but it seems they have a lot on their plate with 1100/1500 GTF issues and the PW2000 turbine blade issues.

According to MTU Aero Engines (the company that contributes around 1/6 to the GTF program) the major problems are solved. However, the Irkut MS-21 derivate has been cancelled.

They also claim that on mid-range routes comparable to North American transcons the A220-300 consumes just a little bit over 2½ litres per 100 passenger kilometers -- which equals to well over 90 miles per gallon.

Report about a RIX-TFS flight:
https://aeroreport.de/en/good-to-know/t ... gest-route

I think P&W have just delivered their 1000th GTF engine, the engine type must be doing some significant hours now.

Guess 4000+ hours a day

zeke wrote:

I think P&W have just delivered their 1000th GTF engine, the engine type must be doing some significant hours now.

Guess 4000+ hours a day

This article is from a year ago and says there have been 1,000 aircraft delivered with P&W GTF. That would put the number of engines at well over 2,000 today.

https://www.aviationpros.com/engines-co ... 0-aircraft

dopplerd wrote:

This article is from a year ago and says there have been 1,000 aircraft delivered with P&W GTF. That would put the number of engines at well over 2,000 today.

https://www.aviationpros.com/engines-co ... 0-aircraft

You are correct, according to P&W “More than 1,100 aircraft in service with 58 airlines” from https://pwgtf.com/

The article I saw was 1000 GTF engines just on the A320 series https://newsroom.prattwhitney.com/2022- ... y-Aircraft

Well, Qantas firmed their order for 20 A220. Something must be going right.

https://www.stattimes.com/amp/aviation/ ... er-1345263

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Well, Qantas firmed their order for 20 A220. Something must be going right.

https://www.stattimes.com/amp/aviation/ ... er-1345263

Lightsaber

I would like to add that according to the Airbus press release, the A321XLRs are also equipped with P&W GTFs. At 80+ engines one must also congratulate P&W

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-05-qantas-confirms-future-airbus-fleet

oldJoe wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Well, Qantas firmed their order for 20 A220. Something must be going right.

https://www.stattimes.com/amp/aviation/ ... er-1345263

Lightsaber

I would like to add that according to the Airbus press release, the A321XLRs are also equipped with P&W GTFs. At 80+ engines one must also congratulate P&W

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-05-qantas-confirms-future-airbus-fleet

I missed that QF went Pratt on the A321s. A switch from the 737s and with the 787s being GE, I just assumed LEAP. With AC and QF going Pratt on A321xLRs, there seems to be a positive trend.

Hope UA orders them for their A321s.

Avatar2go wrote:

B757Forever wrote:

Yes. Most of the premature wear is in the hot section. The compressors seem to be holding up better than the turbines. The gearbox, that many assumed would be problematic, have had no issues. Pratt is aware of all the issues. I presume they are diligently working to resolve but it seems they have a lot on their plate with 1100/1500 GTF issues and the PW2000 turbine blade issues.

Thanks for this, it's interesting that the issues are in the engine core rather than the gearbox as expected.

I've heard little but good regarding the gearboxes since this thing began. I remember from many years ago them announcing they were getting 99% efficiency instead of the 98% they'd planned, which doesn't sound like much better from one direction But from another angle, it means only half the inefficiency, which means only half the heat generated which is a huge deal.

Nomadd wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

B757Forever wrote:

Yes. Most of the premature wear is in the hot section. The compressors seem to be holding up better than the turbines. The gearbox, that many assumed would be problematic, have had no issues. Pratt is aware of all the issues. I presume they are diligently working to resolve but it seems they have a lot on their plate with 1100/1500 GTF issues and the PW2000 turbine blade issues.

Thanks for this, it's interesting that the issues are in the engine core rather than the gearbox as expected.

I've heard little but good regarding the gearboxes since this thing began. I remember from many years ago them announcing they were getting 99% efficiency instead of the 98% they'd planned, which doesn't sound like much better from one direction But from another angle, it means only half the inefficiency, which means only half the heat generated which is a huge deal.

Key numbers are the rate and actual performance degradation, and the level which triggers maintenance / replacement on a plan / under warranty / at operators cost (partial / full).

As usual, the devil is in the detail, very much based on how the engines are used and abused. Not one size fits all.

lightsaber wrote:

oldJoe wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Well, Qantas firmed their order for 20 A220. Something must be going right.

https://www.stattimes.com/amp/aviation/ ... er-1345263

Lightsaber

I would like to add that according to the Airbus press release, the A321XLRs are also equipped with P&W GTFs. At 80+ engines one must also congratulate P&W

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2022-05-qantas-confirms-future-airbus-fleet

I missed that QF went Pratt on the A321s. A switch from the 737s and with the 787s being GE, I just assumed LEAP. With AC and QF going Pratt on A321xLRs, there seems to be a positive trend.

Wouldn’t the GTF make more sense in general in the 321XLRs due to the better optimization at longer ranges?

B757Forever wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

B757Forever wrote:

The main issue with the GTF is not reliability, it is longevity. These two issues seem to be getting intermixed in this thread. The dispatch and in-service reliability has improved dramatically as bugs get addressed. The time-on-wing has only improved marginally.

So is the issue premature wear of components? And will they address that by introducing more durable components over time?

Yes. Most of the premature wear is in the hot section. The compressors seem to be holding up better than the turbines. The gearbox, that many assumed would be problematic, have had no issues. Pratt is aware of all the issues. I presume they are diligently working to resolve but it seems they have a lot on their plate with 1100/1500 GTF issues and the PW2000 turbine blade issues.

It's the engine core that provides the power and it can give only so much power.
Pooh surprise!

Imagine a long haul GTF!

Nomadd wrote:

I've heard little but good regarding the gearboxes since this thing began. I remember from many years ago them announcing they were getting 99% efficiency instead of the 98% they'd planned, which doesn't sound like much better from one direction But from another angle, it means only half the inefficiency, which means only half the heat generated which is a huge deal.

I've always found it a bit funny that people were most worried about the gearbox. It's a planetary reduction.

You know what other engine family has used a planetary reduction output gearbox since 1964?

The Pratt & Whitney Canada PT-6.

Quick googling says 50000+ produced, about half are still in service and a combined 140 million+ hours of service. Also regarded as one of the most reliable turbine engines around.

Granted, the power and speeds are different, but I'm sure Pratt has novels of lessons learned on PT-6 gearboxes by now.

SA280 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

SA280 wrote:

No, they aren't.



Lightsaber

I have my intel sources and they are not public.

You have to be careful with marketing numbers presented by OEMs and also consider that many positive public statements done by operators aim at keeping a good relationship and promoting an aircraft that they are already committed to.

So, talk to operators if you want to find more reliable information. I'm not telling you to avoid your media sources, just telling you not to disregard intel that is not public.

Regarding Egypt Air, you can check in many public platforms they have many aircraft parked, even though you cannot know the reason. That's when you ask insiders and, yes, the reason is the poor engine reliability, frequent removals and lack of spares.

The reason you will not find this in the media is because, as you may know, few airlines want to publicize their issues with OEMs as this would only worsens an already troubled relationship caused by EIS below expectations. Even airlines that do that, such as Qatar, just the tip of the iceberg goes to the media. And they suffer the consequences for puclizing it.

While one would like to give due credit to your intel sources, I find it hard to believe that publicly listed operators of the type dont talk about the reliability as an issue anymore. Such information would be considered material and needs to be disclosed.

Quoting Qatar as an example does not cut it.

Best, Subramanian

So this particular article states that Egyptair has had 15 of its 24 PW engines on the A220 replaced and they're waiting on the remaining to be replaced as well.

That would be very interesting if all the fleet's engines have been replaced and alarming a bit. as of now, they are flying only 5 of the 10 they have and the remaining have been stored for a while.

https://www.timesaerospace.aero/sites/a ... issue1.pdf

Page 7 of the pdf.

randomdude83 wrote:

So this particular article states that Egyptair has had 15 of its 24 PW engines on the A220 replaced and they're waiting on the remaining to be replaced as well.

That would be very interesting if all the fleet's engines have been replaced and alarming a bit. as of now, they are flying only 5 of the 10 they have and the remaining have been stored for a while.

https://www.timesaerospace.aero/sites/a ... issue1.pdf

Page 7 of the pdf.

It would be alarming if all A220 operators were having the exact same issue. If that were the case, then I'm sure it would be all over A.net, it's not.