JAM747
Topic Author
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 12:17 am

Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:52 pm

I believe GE has exclusive engine supply rights to the 748. Is it possible for RR to be also a supplier at some point ? Could having RR as a supplier help the 748 program in sales.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11141
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:14 pm

It might, or might not, have helped in the BA decision.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:23 pm

Its so hard to say.......the fact that RR engines are not available on the 773ER does not seem to be harming sales of that airplane. Example, CX has ordered a large 773ER fleet, and CX was a very very loyal RR customer until this order.

I think its more about the airplane than the engines: if an airline is convinced that a certain type is essential for their future needs and operations, then the airline will ""compromise"" on engines and go with an engine type that they would have not otherwise have selected. On the other hand, I dont think that an airline will buy an type simply because its ""engine of choice"" can be selected for the airframe.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:33 pm

Quoting JAM747 (Thread starter):
I believe GE has exclusive engine supply rights to the 748. Is it possible for RR to be also a supplier at some point ?

It's technically possible but, given the expected sales volume of the 748, there probably isn't a business case to develop and deploy two engines.

Tom.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18821
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:47 pm

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 2):
the fact that RR engines are not available on the 773ER does not seem to be harming sales of that airplane.

Actually incorrect. The 773ER would be selling even better if RR had been allowed to develop their Trent for it. That Trent would probably have had better fuel burn than the GE-90!  bigthumbsup 

Taking a side discussion, there is a strategy decision with engine options on a new airframe. If the engine is good, resale is helped by not having a major stumbling block to resale. Right now, it looks like the optimum option is to offer two competing engines on an airframe. When 3 engines are offered, the competition is too brutal and all three engines struggle to get economies of scale. Ideally, the future trend will be like the 787 where a common pylon is shared and engines can be swapped. Even more ideal is to share a nacelle (or share nacelles that only require minor internal rebuilding to accommodate different engines), but that forces one of the two engine builders to compromise their design for the sake of commonality with another company's design philosophy (e.g., the PW4062 on the 747 in part has a surge problem due to the 5th stage compressor blades having to be short enough so that the thrust reversers of the CF-6 could be kept as is).

But there needs to be enough "economy of scale." In the case of a 4 engine airframe, to justify 2 engine vendors one would need to expect sales of 250+ airframes. Since that isn't happening for a while on the 748, its better to stick with one engine vendor. In the case of the A380, two vendors should work out.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:15 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 4):
Actually incorrect. The 773ER would be selling even better if RR had been allowed to develop their Trent for it. That Trent would probably have had better fuel burn than the GE-90!

You think? Which airlines have passed on the 772LR/773ER due to the lack of engine choice?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26710
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:21 pm

Quoting JAM747 (Thread starter):
I believe GE has exclusive engine supply rights to the 748. Is it possible for RR to be also a supplier at some point ? Could having RR as a supplier help the 748 program in sales.

It is unlikely RR would be a supplier and I do not think RR would have helped the 748 land sales.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 5):
Which airlines have passed on the 772LR/773ER due to the lack of engine choice?

I'd argue AA. They (and CX) were seriously against no RR power on the 777X. CX eventually capitulated, but to date AA has not.
 
boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Ord

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:25 pm

Could having GE engines available for the A350XWB help it's sales?

Question is a mute point... IMO.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 4):
Actually incorrect. The 773ER would be selling even better if RR had been allowed to develop their Trent for it. That Trent would probably have had better fuel burn than the GE-90!

So you have some data to back that quote right?

Just like Clark saying he wants and engine choice on the 787/A350 battle then its posted on here that EK is going A350XWB... Only offering (1) engine choice. Yeah ok...  Yeah sure
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4961
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:51 pm

Depends, airlines who will use both B744 and B748, who already use RR for their B744s then it could be helpful?
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
NYC777
Posts: 5103
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:56 pm

Well if Leahy would stop insulting GE perhaps the A350 would have a choice of 2 engines. GE is pursuing from a pure business point of view..why invest $1bn in an engine for an airplane whose sales prospects are very limited at best and canabalize existing GE90 sales. The GEnx is aperfectly good engine for the A350 but LEahy had to open his motormouth and now not only can Airbus forget, for the time being at best, any GE engine on the A350 but also forget sales to GECAS.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15056
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:57 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):
It might, or might not, have helped in the BA decision.

I think this was a major factor in the BA decision. It was a mistake for BA to choose the GEnx for the 748 instead of the RR, if they had to choose only one. Just my opinion, but if you look at the carriers that may have had the best shot at buying it, RR may have helped. But honestly, both would have helped more.

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 2):
Its so hard to say.......the fact that RR engines are not available on the 773ER does not seem to be harming sales of that airplane.

BA, AA both really could have used this aircraft, but the GE only option may have hindered their purchase. Those are two of the largest carriers in the world, with very large widebody fleets.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:58 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 4):
Actually incorrect. The 773ER would be selling even better if RR had been allowed to develop their Trent for it. That Trent would probably have had better fuel burn than the GE-90!

I would doubt (speculate) for any of the true applications of the 777 Longer Range series the Trent would have burnt less - The GE90 is optimal on longer missions. But for sure it would have been even more popular if it had RR's available. AA spring to mind.

Thankfully for the 777LRs they perform so well compared to rivals it's enough to justify in many cases a new engine supplier for the airline. But the 747-8 has not shared the same success in the passenger model so maybe an RR option would have swung a few more orders their way. SQ, BA, CX maybe (the latter may still choose the 747 of course).

So in conclusion of course a new engine supplier would have aided the 748 but given the target market size it would be advisable in the long run for to Boeing to only offer one.
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1632
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 7:05 pm

The 773ER engine would be a major development, so there was a logic in only having one supplier coughing up got an expensive programme.

That Boeing only wanted 1 engine on the 748 when there were clearly 2 brand new engines from the 787 that with relatively minor tweaks could fitted on the 748 as well suggests straight away a lack of confidence in the level of sales likely to be generated when compared with it's predecessors...

The lack of RR power on the 748 may have been a factor for BA, though I'm not sure. It's possible that it might be a factor for airlines that have already chosen T1000 powered 787s such as NW, NZ and NH, but not a major one...
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26710
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Ord

Sun Oct 21, 2007 7:23 pm

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 7):
Could having GE engines available for the A350XWB help it's sales?

Yes, in that the long-terms sales prospects for the A350 look (to me) a good deal more rosier and robust then the 747-8.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 9):
GE is pursuing from a pure business point of view..why invest $1bn in an engine for an airplane whose sales prospects are very limited at best and cannibalize existing GE90 sales.

I believe the A350's sales prospects are anything but "limited" and I believe GE can sell plenty of GE90s attached to plenty of 77Ls, 77Ws and 77Fs even after announcing a "GEnx2" for both the A350 and the 787HGW/777RS.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10):
It was a mistake for (Boeing) to choose the GEnx for the 748 instead of the RR, if they had to choose only one. Just my opinion, but if you look at the carriers that may have had the best shot at buying it, RR may have helped. But honestly, both would have helped more.

Perhaps on the passenger side, but on the freighter, the customers will live with whatever is available because they have no choice.

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 12):
The 773ER engine would be a major development, so there was a logic in only having one supplier coughing up got an expensive programme.

Perversely, both GE and P&W felt the sales prospects for the LR 777 were poor and therefore demanded exclusivity. However, with the reports that even with the strong sales for the program GE needs two decades of sales to make back an investment of $500 million on the GE90-11xB, it may very well be impossible for any aircraft program to support two engine suppliers going forward.

Should GE not join the A350 in the end may very well be an acknowledgment that RR beating them to the punch means that if they join, both companies will lose their shirts. As such, the 787HGW/777RS would by default be a GE program because they need a new platform and RR could not hope to make money on it if they joined with GE...

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 12):
That Boeing only wanted 1 engine on the 748 when there were clearly 2 brand new engines from the 787 that with relatively minor tweaks could fitted on the 748 as well suggests straight away a lack of confidence in the level of sales likely to be generated when compared with it's predecessors...

If neither company is investing any money into the 747-8 program, what does Boeing care? It would be in their interests to have two engine suppliers to maximize sales. As such, I can only assume that GE was again willing to invest in the airplane program where RR was not and therefore GE was again given exclusivity.
 
scotron11
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:24 pm

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 12):

The lack of RR power on the 748 may have been a factor for BA, though I'm not sure.

This year BA have ordered 40 aircraft all with RR engines. If the 773 was a contender at BA they would have ordered it by now.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18262
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:46 pm

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 7):
Just like Clark saying he wants and engine choice on the 787/A350 battle

Airlines would always prefer a choice, but EK seems to have no problem operating or ordering no fewer than 6 types with no engine choice (A343, A345, 77L, 77W, 77F, 748F). Go figure! scratchchin 

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 9):
why invest $1bn in an engine for an airplane whose sales prospects are very limited at best

Very limited?  rotfl 

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 9):
The GEnx is aperfectly good engine for the A350

Was. For the original A350. It's clearly not a good engine for the XWB considering it doesn't offer enough thrust - just as it likely won't have enough thrust for HGW 787-10s and any possible -11s.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10):
BA, AA both really could have used this aircraft, but the GE only option may have hindered their purchase.

If BA really wanted the 77W they would have ordered it, they already have plenty of GE powered 777s. Yes, BA has historically preferred RR, but I don't see GE power on 777NGs as an issue. However, at this point, given the choices they've already made, I don't see BA ever buying the 77W.
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.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Sun Oct 21, 2007 10:51 pm

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 9):
why invest $1bn in an engine for an airplane whose sales prospects are very limited at best and canabalize existing GE90 sales.

Huh?

I'm pretty sure even either of the Randy's at Boeing wouldn't even say that.

The A350 has massive sales prospects.

NS
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18821
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:56 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 5):

You think? Which airlines have passed on the 772LR/773ER due to the lack of engine choice?

Long term? Maybe none. But RR had quite a few customers lined up for their 772LR/773ER engine. The only order that probably would have been swung is the VA A346 order. BA might have ordered. It mightalso have swung EK to the 773ER earlier and thus had an earlier 2nd large order.  spin 

Do recall the building profile of the 777 (units/month). Do to the early teething problems of the 1st generation GE-90, quite a few customers delayed their orders to see how it performed. I can only speculate if any would have jumped on the RR 773ER earlier, but if they had, the smoothed out production probably would have spurred further sales by now.

Now I was asked for data. Obviously I cannot provide. But I've worked enough in aerospace to know. I also know engines and RR had an impressive design to replace the Trent 800. At the time I was working for Pratt when GE was selected as the exclusive engine. I remember one thing vividly: Not one customer complained that Pratt was excluded from the airframe, but over a dozen airlines formally complained to Boeing about them excluding RR from the 773ER. Does that mean any sales? We can only speculate. But Pratt had the wake up call of a lifetime when no customers demanded a Pratt engine on the 773ER.

But there is a difference. Everyone expected Boeing to continue to sell 772LR/773ER planes in enough numbers to support two engine families. By everyone I mean Pratt, GE, RR, Boeing, and enough airlines to make a difference. However, Boeing was having trouble selling bonds at the time and GE was the only one willing to become a risk sharing partner (with the volumes of money Boeing needed). With the 748I, RR is disappointed not to be on the airframe, but I haven't heard a ruckess from the airlines demanding more engine choice. Thus, it seems quite a few airlines are "happy enough" with the GEnX or just aren't interested in the 748I.

Quoting Scotron11 (Reply 14):
If the 773 was a contender at BA they would have ordered it by now.

BA was part of the committee for the RR 773ER engine... pure speculation here, but I believe they would have ordered a few if RR had been offered. RR has a very loyal customer base for a reason.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):

Perversely, both GE and P&W felt the sales prospects for the LR 777 were poor and therefore demanded exclusivity.

GE wanted to be exclusive for risk sharing. Pratt thought the prospects were good, but were not interested in risk sharing and, due to the PW4098, wasn't the top runner for the launch customers anyway.  cry  Part of the problem for Pratt is they were having to develop a new "clean sheet" engine for the 77W/77L as its thrust/fuel economy demands were beyound any further PW4000 derivative. The engine would have been a contra-rotating PW6000 like design except with a very high bypass ration and two HPT stages (with more HPC stages, of course). And Boeing wasn't about to trust Pratt with the "crown jewels" of an exclusive offer.

As to the A350, the #1 problem is that it isn't flying anytime soon.  Sad Thus airlines are left to consider the 748I, 773ER, and A380. Funny thing is that the 788/789 has done so well, that its available delivery slots put it out of consideration too; so Boeing will just have to expedite production.  Wink

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 15):
Airlines would always prefer a choice, but EK seems to have no problem operating or ordering no fewer than 6 types with no engine choice (A343, A345, 77L, 77W, 77F, 748F). Go figure!

Its possible for EK to get a little better bargain with an engine choice than without.  Wink That said, look how they choose when they have a choice: A332, 772(A and ER). Its always RR. That said, they have enough GE that it might just be "luck of the draw." And yes, I've noted which engine company EK does not fly.  cry 

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:59 am

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 12):
The lack of RR power on the 748 may have been a factor for BA, though I'm not sure. It's possible that it might be a factor for airlines that have already chosen T1000 powered 787s such as NW, NZ and NH, but not a major one...

NZ has an engine maintenance agreement with RR that sees virtually all MRO work on its 787 engines outsourced, so engine commonality becomes less important in the fleet selection process. Evidently the GE exclusivity on the 773ER hasn't stopped them ordering that model, despite their RR powered 772 frames. And NZ has a mix of RR and GE 744s.

Even CX now operates PW and RR 744s (granted, PW aircraft are ex-SQ) along with GE and RR 777s.

The core reaosn for engine commonality - to cut internal engine MRO costs - is becomming less and less relevant as airlines increasingly opt for external MRO providers, often from OEMs themselves.

Few! That's a lotta acronyms! But seriosuly, the business case for commonality is growing weaker because of this fundamental shift in the MRO market.

And anyway, aren't the RRs physically too large for the 748 anyway? I recall them not having enough ground clearance or something similar.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26710
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:02 am

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 18):
And anyway, aren't the RRs physically too large for the 748 anyway? I recall them not having enough ground clearance or something similar.

Like GE, RR would have had to create a version of the Trent with a smaller fan diameter to fit the 747-8.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2736
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:17 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
Like GE, RR would have had to create a version of the Trent with a smaller fan diameter to fit the 747-8.

Interesting. I thought for GE it was just a matter of derating the engine, as (I thought) there's was a fittable size, while RR and gone for a larger diameter for the 787.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18821
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 2:45 am

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 20):

Interesting. I thought for GE it was just a matter of derating the engine, as (I thought) there's was a fittable size, while RR and gone for a larger diameter for the 787.

Nyet. It maintains the same high spool (with some evolution/modification) with a new low spool. The GEnX on the 748 even gets a brand new low pressure compressor (LPC) that has one few stages than the GEnX on the 787. Some of this is due to the higher spool RPM (smaller fan) and some due to an evolution of the IBR compressor and wide chord blade technology. (Wasn't fully really for the 788).

The GEnX and Trent are 111" and 112" in diameter on the 787.
GEnX on the 748 is 105" diameter (quite a growth from the 94" of the CF6/PW6000/RB211).
Wikipedia is pretty good on this topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_GEnx

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 18):

The core reaosn for engine commonality - to cut internal engine MRO costs - is becomming less and less relevant as airlines increasingly opt for external MRO providers, often from OEMs themselves.

Mostly true. But there is also technician training and tools. GE/Pratt use "Standard" tools, RR engines need Metric tools. A 9/16" wrench won't do any good on a trent.  Wink A minor work around though.  spin 

But you are right on the MRO costs. Its the line costs where too much variation add incremental costs. e.g., how many different fuel and oil filters do you want to stock at every airport? The engines have both and they need to be changed fairly often.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
cartoonranger
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:47 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 6:49 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
Like GE, RR would have had to create a version of the Trent with a smaller fan diameter to fit the 747-8.

Which was the basis of the Trent 600 (second proposal). This is where the beauty of the trent family comes in. Parts commonality or scaled down components mean that developing the engine is not as problematic as it could be. (Although still by no means easy!)
 
F14D4ever
Posts: 306
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:20 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 12:24 pm

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 7):
Question is a mute point... IMO.

The word you're looking for is 'moot'.

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 7):
So you have some data to back that quote right?

Lightsaber usually does, but in this case he's made an overly general claim. The GE90 will generally out-cruise everything, while the Trent(s) do better on shorter segments due to better climb SFC. However, the beauty of the Trent three-spool architecture is its flexibility; if they cared to spend the money, RR could well have selected a design point optimised for cruise rather than climb. Ultimately nobody in their right mind believes the 748 take rate will be enough to justify that kind of expenditure.
"He is risen, as He said."
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18821
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:57 pm

Quoting F14D4ever (Reply 23):

Lightsaber usually does, but in this case he's made an overly general claim.

Both true.  Wink However, I recall when the 773ER was launched that RR customers screamed about not having the option of ordering with RR. There is no one customer that said "I'll buy RR but not GE" and stuck with it. However, customers did delay to wait for the GE-90.

Do compare to the proposed trent for the 773ER, not the Trent 800.  spin  RR was on target to match the GE-90 in cruise fuel burn and would have had a slightly lighter engine with lower fuel burn during climb (which seems to be RR's design target... some confusion with me as to why they unwilling to optimize past 5,000nm... but that is another topic).

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:01 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 24):
There is no one customer that said "I'll buy RR but not GE" and stuck with it.

American Airlines is the one.  Smile

NS
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5518
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:22 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
but to date AA has not.

But AA has not bought any long haul aircraft recently, have they? They certainly haven't bought any A330's or A340's. And in spite of all the rumors meandering around this forum about a massive order for the 787 that hasn't appeared yet either. They seem to be focusing on replacing the MD80's with 737's at this point.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
art
Posts: 3127
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:49 pm

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 12):
That Boeing only wanted 1 engine on the 748 when there were clearly 2 brand new engines from the 787 that with relatively minor tweaks could fitted on the 748 as well suggests straight away a lack of confidence in the level of sales likely to be generated when compared with it's predecessors...

Did Boeing ever predict that the 748 would generate sales volumes of the order of 747 sales volumes? If that had been the case, its launch would not have been the on/off affair that it proved to be for a long time.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26710
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:51 pm

Quoting Art (Reply 27):
Did Boeing ever predict that the 748 would generate sales volumes of the order of 747 sales volumes?

Total sales? Not a chance. But they do seem to believe it should do at least as well as the 747-400 family (passenger and freighter).
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13981
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Mon Oct 22, 2007 10:08 pm

My opinion is that it might have helped in the BA decision, helped not guaranteed. It also might have been a factor in a couple other decisions or pending decisions. The problem is that the development costs on new aircraft such as the 748, 787, 777-300ER, 777-200LR, A350X are so high and Boeing and Airbus need other suppliers and powerplant manufacturers such as GE and RR to pick up some of the development costs and assume some risk. In order for companies such as GE to assume risk they want large (or exclusive) rights as sole suppliers.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4405
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Tue Oct 23, 2007 5:53 am

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 3):
It's technically possible but, given the expected sales volume of the 748, there probably isn't a business case to develop and deploy two engines.

There wouldn't be much cost involved as RR is already developing/developed the T1000 for the 787.
64 types. 44 countries. 24 airlines.
 
andrewtang
Posts: 368
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2001 8:51 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Tue Oct 23, 2007 7:02 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 2):
Its so hard to say.......the fact that RR engines are not available on the 773ER does not seem to be harming sales of that airplane. Example, CX has ordered a large 773ER fleet, and CX was a very very loyal RR customer until this order.

Actually it's not until this order. CX purchased A340-300 and it came with CFM56-5C4 engines. The common thing between the A343 and B773ER orders is that both came with only 1 engine choice.

Looking at the past years, whenever CX buys a brand new plane (that comes with a RR engine option), Rolls-Royce is always chosen. The only time they buy GE or PW is when RR is not offered on those type. (Eg. 747-400ERF, A340-300, B777-300ER) Whether that trend is going to stay or not, we don't know. But it will be an interesting thing to look forward to seeing tho.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18821
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:43 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 25):
American Airlines is the one.

I forgot about that one!

AA would almost certainly have "up-gauged" for the China Routes if there had been a RR option.

AA isn't happy with some of the issues they've had with the CF6.

http://www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/Freebies/AAEngine/


Just to be clear, at this point 773ER sales won't be impacted by the lack of engine choice. The GE-90-115 is now a proven known entity. Due to the lack of volume, a single engine choice on the 748 will probably help sales (eases resale).

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:03 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 25):
Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 24):
There is no one customer that said "I'll buy RR but not GE" and stuck with it.

American Airlines is the one

But is AA really interested in the longer range 772LR or the higher capacity 773ER? Even if these types were available with RR engines, there is no reason to believe that AA would have actually ordered.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26710
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Wed Oct 24, 2007 2:54 pm

I think AA might have found a use for at least the 77L...
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:08 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 34):
I think AA might have found a use for at least the 77L...

If its pilots were willing to fly the ultra long haul flights..........
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26710
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Ord

Wed Oct 24, 2007 3:53 pm

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 35):
If its pilots were willing to fly the ultra long haul flights..........

One doesn't need a 77L just for ULR ops. If your 77Es are payload-restricted on a route, a 77L would not be.
 
boeing767-300
Posts: 625
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 11:23 pm

RE: Would RR Engines Availability On B748 Help Orders?

Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:53 pm

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 4):
Actually incorrect. The 773ER would be selling even better if RR had been allowed to develop their Trent for it. That Trent would probably have had better fuel burn than the GE-90!

.....in your opinion.....

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 17):
Do recall the building profile of the 777 (units/month). Do to the early teething problems of the 1st generation GE-90, quite a few customers delayed their orders to see how it performed

There is no doubt that there were early teething problems with the GE 90. Everybody has seen pictures of the 1st build T7s for British Airways minus their engines and PAE. But then RR stretched an existing design in the Trent and PW as you well know stretched the PW series and GE decided they had been stretching the CF6 for too long and opted for the 'clean sheet' yet most expensive approach. If my memory serves me correctly the GE90 had issues early on which were resolved and the Trent on 777s after a good start began having a lot of issues.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 17):
I can only speculate if any would have jumped on the RR 773ER earlier, but if they had, the smoothed out production probably would have spurred further sales by now.

Speculate indeed but the fact remains three of the biggest 777 RR customers (EK SQ CX) ordered large (especially in EKs case) Large numbers of 77Ws.

The GE-115B is without doubt the most succesful engine in terms of EIS. As well as being in territory uncharted before (115K) this engine has proved ultra reliable and economical making the 3rd generation 777s in GE format a must have despite your loyalties (EK CX SQ) and is total vindication of the 'clean sheet approach' and its success has utimately killed the Trent 500 powered A346 more or less stone dead. RRs Trent for 773ER may or not have been a success but it certainly would have made the program uneconomic for both RR and GE.

Frankly I doubt the Trent would have been as reliable as the 115B has proved to be let alone equal the SFC. The GE 115B is a freak and wether you like GE or not you can only be impressed by the sheer power and reliability and economy of the worlds largest (by a fair margin) commercial jet engine.

In short I don't believe the lack of RR option has hurt Boeing in the end. I believe SQ and CX had to order (after trialling Trent A346) in the end and as everybody is aware the 77W was so damn good it was a "must have" EK kept ordering truckloads of them and refused point blank to take their A346s. The rest as 77W sales elude to is history   

Same applies to 748 sales there is definately not enough for two manufacturers and I don't think an RR option would make any difference...
[Edited 2007-10-24 11:55:11]

[Edited 2007-10-24 11:56:54]

[Edited 2007-10-24 11:57:33]

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