SKY1
Topic Author
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:03 am

777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:37 am

As everybody knows, the new 777-X will be powered by the GE's newest engine, the GE9X.

http://www.newairplane.com/777x/gallery-experience/assets/img/gallery/engine/1-3.jpg


Is there any chance for Boeing customers to have an engine election, other than General Electric? What do you think?
Time flies! Enjoy life!
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:50 am

Zero chance. Contractual exclusivity.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:21 am

Boeing considered RFPs from GE and Rolls, but decided to continue forward with GE power only.
 
SASMD82
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 12:44 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:07 am

Beside political issues, why is it that nowadays planes are offered with a single engine manufacturer choice only? Beside the 787 and A320NEO, I can't come up with another plane that is offered with more engine choices.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:24 am

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 3):
Beside political issues, why is it that nowadays planes are offered with a single engine manufacturer choice only?

If you believe that the more resources an OEM uses to produce an engine the better engine that OEM can make then it can make a lot of sense. The engine OEM's will define the R&D budget based on the expected proceeds from selling that product. If you have to split the proceeds with another OEM you will make half as much so you dedicate half as much to R&D and you don't commit to hitting the best performance figures as you possibly can had you had the budget. Sometimes an engine OEM will even give the aircraft OEM money for development (GE90).

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 3):
Beside the 787 and A320NEO, I can't come up with another plane that is offered with more engine choices.

737NG. A330. Technically only the A350-1000 is a sole source engine for RR. The A359 can have another engine if anyone out there wants to throw their hat in the ring.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:38 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 4):
737NG. A330.

Throw in the A380 as well.
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:25 am

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 3):
Beside political issues, why is it that nowadays planes are offered with a single engine manufacturer choice only?

Generally political issues have nothing to do with it. As tortugamon noted, the decision is driven by RoI for the engine OEMs and risk management for the airframe OEMs.

On the original 777, for example, you had RR, PW and GE. Of the three, only GE designed an all-new engine (at a cost said to be close to $2 billion) and yet it was the third-place engine. The losses GE incurred on that engine was the reason they offered to invest in the 777-200X and 777-300X if Boeing gave them the exclusive (PW was out by default after the PW4098 fiasco, but Rolls had developed two new Trent models for the 777X).



Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 3):
Beside the 787 and A320NEO, I can't come up with another plane that is offered with more engine choices.


In addition to the 787 (GE and RR) and A320neo (PW and CFM), there is also the A320 family (CFM and IAE), the A380 (EA and RR), the 777-200ER (PW, GE and RR), the 767 family (PW, GE, RR) and the A330 family (PW, GE, RR).


Quoting tortugamon (Reply 4):
737NG.

The 737NG is only available with the CFM56-7 family.

[Edited 2014-01-12 21:55:21]
 
etoile
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:22 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:30 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
A380 (EA and GE)

RR; GE joined EA
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21633
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:53 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1):
Zero chance. Contractual exclusivity.

Unless GE suddenly goes bankrupt (not likely), that contract is signed.

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 3):
Beside political issues, why is it that nowadays planes are offered with a single engine manufacturer choice only? Beside the 787 and A320NEO, I can't come up with another plane that is offered with more engine choices.

Of aircraft currently in production or with production iminent:

A320: 2 choices
A320NEO: 2 choices
A330: 3 choices
A380: 2 choices
787: 2 choices
767: 3 choices

77W: 1 choice
77X: 1 choice
A350: 1 choice
737: 1 choice
73M: 1 choice
748: 1 choice

It's hard to claim that they're "all" being introduced with a single option.

Interestingly, more Boeing models are more single-sourced than Airbus. I wonder if there is a unifying reason for that or if it's just how it worked out.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:59 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
Interestingly, more Boeing models are more single-sourced than Airbus. I wonder if there is a unifying reason for that or if it's just how it worked out.

The 737 has always been single-source (PW on the original recipe / CFM on the Classics, Next Generation and MAX).

GE negotiated exclusivity deals for the 777-200LR, 777-300ER, 777 Freighter, 747-8 and 747-8F.

The 777X won an exclusivity I think in part based on time to market (GE I believe is farther along on the GE9X than Rolls is on the RB3025).
 
LH707330
Posts: 2262
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:18 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
In addition to the 787 (GE and RR) and A320neo (PW and CFM), there is also the A320 family (CFM and IAE), the A380 (EA and GE), the 777-200ER (PW, GE and RR), the 767 family (PW, GE, RR) and the A330 family (PW, GE, RR).

Of these, only the 787 and A320 are really relevant these days, the A330 has been RR-dominated in the past few years and the rest are not really selling well.

There are two factors that I'd say are influencing the reduced number of choices on a given frame:

1. R&D: As mentioned earlier, engine OEMs get more RoI on a single-source engine because they get 100% of the airframe sales. Airframers prefer multi-source for price competition, but engine OEMs prefer exclusivity. As engines have gotten better, the incremental savings in fuel burn have been getting more expensive to get, so the scale is tipping towards more single-source platform/engine combinations to make the business case work.
2. Engine thrust diversity and ETOPS: In the 1970s/80s, most widebodies had two or three engine options, because each OEM made an engine in the ~50k category, and the frames had 2 (A300, 767), 3 (DC-10, L-1011), or 4 (747) of them, so the RoI for and engine OEM could be spread over different frames for each engine (CF-6 on 4 frames, RB211 on 3, JT9D on 4). Now that we've largely got ETOPS twins in the same size segments, the thrust requirements vary from ~68k-115k, so each bracket needs its own engine thrust class, and this approach of "one engine fits all" no longer works (exception GEnX on 787/748). Because R&D is no longer spread over 3-4 frames, the engine OEMs go for exclusivity to get a similar unit count to amortize the investment. The average engines per aircraft has also been trending down, so this further drives the breakeven point to the right and exacerbates this effect.
 
SKY1
Topic Author
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:03 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 9:32 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
Of aircraft currently in production or with production iminent

It was a OZ 777-200ER delivered by the end of July the last -200ER ever built? Is still Boeing offering the model to airlines?
Time flies! Enjoy life!
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:44 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 1):
Zero chance. Contractual exclusivity.

   Which basically ends this "discussion". Boeing have again selected GE and the previous choice on the B77L/B77W has proven to be a huge succes. So they have no reason to allow another engine, which they have sealed off with a contractual exclusivity for GE as engine OEM on the B777-X program.

RR will get other chances for sure, but not on the B777-X program.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:22 pm

GE is one of those companies that gets it right every time. They have B's loyalty and the trust of a litany of airlines, so it is only natural that they get this contract...

is this engine going to be bigger than the 90?
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:31 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 13):
is this engine going to be bigger than the 90?

The fan looks to be a bit larger (132" vs. 128" on the GE90-11xB), but as to the overall size of the engine, I do not believe there is any hard data.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1139
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:52 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 13):
GE is one of those companies that gets it right every time.

Can you expand on this a little further? Do you mean in terms of engine performance (fuel burn, maintenance, performance retention) ?

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 13):
They have B's loyalty and the trust of a litany of airlines, so it is only natural that they get this contract...

Whilst these points may be credible, I suspect GE's success as the number one engine OEM is more by virtue of their financial clout (GECAS).
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:32 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
The 737NG is only available with the CFM56-7 family.

Right you are.

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 10):
Because R&D is no longer spread over 3-4 frames, the engine OEMs go for exclusivity to get a similar unit count to amortize the investment. The average engines per aircraft has also been trending down, so this further drives the breakeven point to the right and exacerbates this effect.

This is an excellent point. Although I have a small comment regarding engine exclusivity benefiting engine OEMs. I see aircraft OEMs benefiting from exclusivity (other than financially from support $) as I believe the engine OEM will produce a better product which will benefit the model more than an engine option will (in most cases).

Quoting ChaosTheory (Reply 15):
I suspect GE's success as the number one engine OEM is more by virtue of their financial clout (GECAS).

I see GECAS having very little to do with it. GECAS is a force to be sure but if you look at total aircraft production they represent a small piece of the demand and when it comes to financing they also finance RR and other OEM powered aircraft. GE is good at turbines, period (IMO)  .

tortugamon
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:21 pm

Between them (RR and GE, Airbus and Boeing) they have successfully carved out the big twin market between them, I suspect that a lot of airlines will operate both RR powered A359/10s and GE powered 779s, as the two aircraft seem to complement each other quite well.
It should be a recipe for good profits
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
LH707330
Posts: 2262
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:40 pm

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 13):
GE is one of those companies that gets it right every time. They have B's loyalty and the trust of a litany of airlines, so it is only natural that they get this contract...

GE missed spec on the GEnX by a few percent, I wouldn't say that's "getting it right every time." To your point though, they've got a pretty good track record.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22331
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:48 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):

A320: 2 choices
A320NEO: 2 choices

I think having two engine choices on a narrowbody is a rarity. Seems it's only the Airbus models that do it. The 737s, the DC-9/MD-[89]X and all the RJs are just once choice, no? BBD's C-series is GTF-only.

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 10):
Because R&D is no longer spread over 3-4 frames, the engine OEMs go for exclusivity to get a similar unit count to amortize the investment. The average engines per aircraft has also been trending down, so this further drives the breakeven point to the right and exacerbates this effect.

  

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 13):
GE is one of those companies that gets it right every time.

Except when they don't i.e.:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
On the original 777, for example, you had RR, PW and GE. Of the three, only GE designed an all-new engine (at a cost said to be close to $2 billion) and yet it was the third-place engine.

If it wasn't for the re-do that GE got with the 77W/77L/77F the GE-90 would be viewed as a flop, and of course we wouldn't have it's GE-nX and GE-9X derivatives. It was said that Jim McNerney was the one who talked the GE board into spending the money needed to get the GE-90 back on track, and it paid huge dividends for GE as well as for McNerney, who is now the CEO of Boeing.
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
 
SKY1
Topic Author
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:03 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:57 pm

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 12):
Boeing have again selected GE and the previous choice on the B77L/B77W has proven to be a huge succes. So they have no reason to allow another engine

... a good valid reason could be to allow a customer to select and choose more than just 1 powerplant option, like happened on the B777 Classic or A330. At the end, GE decided not to make an engine for the XWB and focusing to develop their newest engine, instead. I wonder also if RR has really been interested about powering the -9X, I remember listening some time ago a possible joint-venture RR-PW but not sure if it became a serious possibility.
Time flies! Enjoy life!
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:58 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 18):
GE missed spec on the GEnX by a few percent, I wouldn't say that's "getting it right every time." To your point though, they've got a pretty good track record.

But they beat RR.

tortugamon
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 7:24 pm

The whole engine exclusivity thing on the big 777s was that they were expected to sell a small number of frames relative to the 777-200ER, so everyone pushed back on the costs of such an engine.

Doing the same thing going forward when it is quite clear the larger frames are selling quite well seems somewhat silly.

NS
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 7:56 pm

Quoting SKY1 (Reply 20):
I wonder also if RR has really been interested about powering the -9X, I remember listening some time ago a possible joint-venture RR-PW but not sure if it became a serious possibility.

Of course they wanted it.

The partnership was abandoned in September:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9d3dc2d8-2...ff-00144feab7de.html#axzz2qJIWMn4A

tortugamon
 
SKY1
Topic Author
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:03 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:00 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 22):
Doing the same thing going forward when it is quite clear the larger frames are selling quite well seems somewhat silly

Dunno "silly" but certainly a non-usual move.

Despite the Rolls' engine for the 787 because the GE rejection to develop a XWB engine & Rolls/PW keeping away from the 777X it seems lately there's a tendency for GE going to Boeing and Rolls going to Airbus.
Time flies! Enjoy life!
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11137
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Mon Jan 13, 2014 8:29 pm

Exclusive engine options on airliners is not new. The B-707, with the sole exception of the few B-707-400s, was all P&W engines. The Comet was all RR. The same with the DC-8, B-727, DC-9, all were P&Ws. The CV-880/-990 were all GE engines. The L-1011 was all RR and the DC-10 was all GE, with the exception of a few airlines demanding the P&W powered DC-10-40, and only a relatively few of them were built.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4175
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 1:37 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 25):
Exclusive engine options on airliners is not new. The B-707, with the sole exception of the few B-707-400s, was all P&W engines. The Comet was all RR. The same with the DC-8, B-727, DC-9, all were P&Ws. The CV-880/-990 were all GE engines. The L-1011 was all RR and the DC-10 was all GE, with the exception of a few airlines demanding the P&W powered DC-10-40, and only a relatively few of them were built.

The 707-338 was fitted with Rolls Conway engines, RR bailed out Lockeed and financed the deveopment of the L1011, The Comet did have an option for the PW JT8D-1 in conjunction with the Aerospatiale for the Carevelle Super 12. The Trident was built all Rolls. and never had any other option . This was all before the JAR/FAR implementation, where an airplane could be denied US or European certification for political reasons. rather than technical reasons.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3888
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:14 am

[quote=tortugamon,reply=4]Technically only the A350-1000 is a sole source engine for RR. The A359 can have another engine if anyone out there wants to throw their hat in the ring.

How can this be? GE was willing to provide an engine for the A350-800 & -900 but Airbus rejected the offer since GE would not provide an engine for the -1000 and Airbus wanted engine manufacturers to cover all A350 models. Now that RR has an exclusive on the -1000, how can any other engine manufacturer provide an engine for all three A50 models?
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:51 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 4):
Technically only the A350-1000 is a sole source engine for RR. The A359 can have another engine if anyone out there wants to throw their hat in the ring.
Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 27):
How can this be? GE was willing to provide an engine for the A350-800 & -900 but Airbus rejected the offer since GE would not provide an engine for the -1000 and Airbus wanted engine manufacturers to cover all A350 models. Now that RR has an exclusive on the -1000, how can any other engine manufacturer provide an engine for all three A50 models?

They cannot. A new OEM could only offer an engine for the A350-800 and A350-900 - tortugamon's comment specifically noted the A35(0)-9(00).
 
LH707330
Posts: 2262
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 4:08 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 25):
Exclusive engine options on airliners is not new. The B-707, with the sole exception of the few B-707-400s, was all P&W engines. The Comet was all RR. The same with the DC-8, B-727, DC-9, all were P&Ws. The CV-880/-990 were all GE engines. The L-1011 was all RR and the DC-10 was all GE, with the exception of a few airlines demanding the P&W powered DC-10-40, and only a relatively few of them were built.

The reason the 707-400 didn't sell well is not due to contracts, but because the JT3D-powered 300B leapfrogged the RR Conway in efficiency due to its much better bypass ratio. The Conways were actually better than the JT4As on the straight-pipe 300s when initially sold in 1956, which prompted a PW exec to tell his team to "go figure out how to make a better one," which they did. Had RR come back with a better mousetrap, we'd have seen more RR-powered 707s. Same goes for the DC-8, which had the same basic development history with the engine technology.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 26):
The 707-338 was fitted with Rolls Conway engines

To be highly pedantic, there were no 707-338s, but the 707-338Cs delivered to Qantas all had PW JT3Ds:
http://www.707.adastron.com/gallery/vh-ebu-2.jpg

Source: http://www.707.adastron.com/gallery/338-gallery.htm
 
jupiter2
Posts: 1736
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 11:30 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 4:26 am

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 29):

To be highly pedantic, there were no 707-338s, but the 707-338Cs delivered to Qantas all had PW JT3Ds:


Source: http://www.707.adastron.com/gallery/338-gallery.htm

Off topic I realise, but I take it that dent/hole in the wing was a bird strike ?

Didn't DC8's have a RR Conway option ? I thought CP's DC8's had Conways ?
 
SKAirbus
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:18 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:37 am

What is an OEM?? Can people not communicate in proper English nowadays?

I'm not convinced having one engine is the way to go as different airlines have different operational requirements. Having different engines to choose from allows airlines more flexibility. Look at the A320CEO for example... AA has chosen two different engine types... CFMs for the A319s and IAEs for the A321s. Why? Because operationally this works better for the airline.
Base: BRU
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3888
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 2:47 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 27):How can this be? GE was willing to provide an engine for the A350-800 & -900 but Airbus rejected the offer since GE would not provide an engine for the -1000 and Airbus wanted engine manufacturers to cover all A350 models. Now that RR has an exclusive on the -1000, how can any other engine manufacturer provide an engine for all three A50 models?
They cannot. A new OEM could only offer an engine for the A350-800 and A350-900 - tortugamon's comment specifically noted the A35(0)-9(00).

Then I'll be more clear.

- Airbus required engine OEM's to provide engines for all three A350 models

- RR has an exclusive on the A350-1000

- Therefore RR is the only engine OEM that can provide an engine for all three A350 models

- Unless Airbus revises its original policy, only RR can provide engines for the A350-800 & -900

- Has Airbus indicated they are changing their original policy?
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:11 pm

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 31):
What is an OEM?

Original Equipment Manufacturer.

In the context of this thread, that would be a company like GE Aviation Engines, Rolls-Royce Group PLC, Pratt & Whitney Commercial Engines, Engine Alliance, International Aero Engines and CFM International.



Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 31):
Can people not communicate in proper English nowadays?

This site is rife with acronyms because it is easier and quicker than spelling everything out.

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 32):
- Airbus required engine OEM's to provide engines for all three A350 models

That was their stand from 2006 to 2011, driven mainly by GE Aviation Engines desire to only provide an engine for the A350-900 as they did not believe the A350-800 would sell in large numbers and their desire to not provide a high-thrust engine for the A350-900F | A350-900LR | A350-1000 so as to protect their position on the 777-200F | 777-200LR | 777-300ER.

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 32):
- RR has an exclusive on the A350-1000

Correct. This was announced at the 2011 Paris Air Show.



Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 32):
- Therefore RR is the only engine OEM that can provide an engine for all three A350 models

Also correct.

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 32):
- Unless Airbus revises its original policy, only RR can provide engines for the A350-800 & -900

Airbus effectively did revise that policy in June 2011 once they gave RR the exclusive on the A350-1000 (and, I assume, anything larger as well as the A350-900 Freighter and A350-900LR).

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 32):
- Has Airbus indicated they are changing their original policy?

That Airbus did not grant exclusivity to Rolls-Royce across the entire A350 family is de facto indication that they have changed their policy and would allow another commercial aviation engine original equipment manufacturer to provide a powerplant for the A350-800 and A350-900.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3888
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:56 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 33):
Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 32):- Has Airbus indicated they are changing their original policy?
That Airbus did not grant exclusivity to Rolls-Royce across the entire A350 family is de facto indication that they have changed their policy and would allow another commercial aviation engine original equipment manufacturer to provide a powerplant for the A350-800 and A350-900.


If RR doesn't have an exclusive on the A359, couldn't this be a bit ugly for them? A competitor's A359 engine at the same technical level as the GE9x or better could push the operating costs per seat of the re-engined A359 below that of the A3510.

This would mean the RR exclusive on the A3510 was of doubtful valve and destroy the market for the RR A359.

Interesting times to come!

[Edited 2014-01-14 07:58:00]
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 4:15 pm

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 34):
f RR doesn't have an exclusive on the A359, couldn't this be a bit ugly for them?

I do not believe so as they already have secured engine orders for the bulk (if not all) of the A350-900s ordered to date, which is north of 550 frames. So should GE or PW decide to offer an engine, they would be well-behind to start and would be pretty much limited to new customers who only want the A350-900 (and have no interest in the A350-1000). And I expect that potential market is not large enough to justify investing in an all-new engine.

So RR will be the sole supplier for the A350, IMO, because nobody else will want to offer an engine as the RoI won't be there.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3888
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 7:29 pm

So RR will be the only engine on all models of the A350 due to its exclusive on the A350-1000.

That was rather my point all along.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
LH707330
Posts: 2262
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:38 pm

Quoting jupiter2 (Reply 30):
Off topic I realise, but I take it that dent/hole in the wing was a bird strike ?

Didn't DC8's have a RR Conway option ? I thought CP's DC8's had Conways ?

Yes and yes. Early on, Boeing and Douglas had similar model designators for the engine types (1=JT3C, 2/3=JT4A, 4=RR Co), but then it got messed up with the DC8-50 and 707-300B:
DC8-10/707-100: PW JT3C
DC8-20 and 30/707-200/300: PW JT4A
DC8-40/707-400: RR Conway
DC8-50 and 60/707-100B and 300B: PW JT3D

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 36):
So RR will be the only engine on all models of the A350 due to its exclusive on the A350-1000.

That was rather my point all along.

Yes, but not by any contracted exclusion, mostly due to market forces. I think this is the point Stitch and others were making.

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 31):
I'm not convinced having one engine is the way to go as different airlines have different operational requirements. Having different engines to choose from allows airlines more flexibility. Look at the A320CEO for example... AA has chosen two different engine types... CFMs for the A319s and IAEs for the A321s. Why? Because operationally this works better for the airline.

I agree for narrowbodies, where volumes are ~10x higher so R&D can be spread out over more units. To some extent, the 787 engines have a similar relationship (RR better for shorter flights, GE on long). That said, there's a tradeoff between this optimal engine for a route concept and the OEMs half-assing it if they won't have as much market share. Airframers obviously prefer engine choices, because it helps them sell planes and the engine OEMs need to compete on price, but the engine OEMs won't go for it on the larger frames as R&D goes up and units go down, hence the exclusivity agreements. A better way of phrasing it would be "we might not have a 777-9 if the engine OEMs had to split the market in half, because they wouldn't all want to bet $2bn on it."
 
jupiter2
Posts: 1736
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 11:30 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:48 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 37):

Quoting jupiter2 (Reply 30):
Off topic I realise, but I take it that dent/hole in the wing was a bird strike ?

Didn't DC8's have a RR Conway option ? I thought CP's DC8's had Conways ?

Yes and yes. Early on, Boeing and Douglas had similar model designators for the engine types (1=JT3C, 2/3=JT4A, 4=RR Co), but then it got messed up with the DC8-50 and 707-300B:
DC8-10/707-100: PW JT3C
DC8-20 and 30/707-200/300: PW JT4A
DC8-40/707-400: RR Conway
DC8-50 and 60/707-100B and 300B: PW JT3D

LH707330, thank you, appreciated.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26608
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:58 pm

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 36):
So RR will be the only engine on all models of the A350 due to its exclusive on the A350-1000.

That was rather my point all along.
Quoting LH707330 (Reply 37):
Yes, but not by any contracted exclusion, mostly due to market forces. I think this is the point Stitch and others were making.

Exactly. RR will be the sole source because it already owns all of the A350-1000 market and a significant enough share of the A350-900 market that the future A350-900 market will likely not be large enough to justify developing an engine. And when I stay"not large enough" I am referring to potential new A350 customers, as I am assuming that top-up orders from current customers will stay with RR even if another option is available (unless it is significantly better than the Trent XWB).

Now, if Airbus takes my advice and turns the A350-800 into the new A330-300 / A350 Regional, then that might open up enough new customers and new sales to make it worth GE or PW entering the market.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7892
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Sun Jan 19, 2014 1:28 pm

Quoting ChaosTheory (Reply 15):
Whilst these points may be credible, I suspect GE's success as the number one engine OEM is more by virtue of their financial clout (GECAS).

thaaaat is true. They are quite stable indeed and reliable along that front.

Quoting ChaosTheory (Reply 15):
Can you expand on this a little further? Do you mean in terms of engine performance (fuel burn, maintenance, performance retention) ?
Quoting LH707330 (Reply 18):
GE missed spec on the GEnX by a few percent, I wouldn't say that's "getting it right every time." To your point though, they've got a pretty good track record.

Ok maybe they arent perfect but they havent had too many ballups along the years.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18672
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: 777-X: No Chance For RR Or Other Engine?

Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:16 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
Interestingly, more Boeing models are more single-sourced than Airbus. I wonder if there is a unifying reason for that or if it's just how it worked out.

Several reasons Boeing went single source more than Airbus:
1. Boeing had issues with the 767 and 744 being triple sourced. It created enough hickups in the resale market that Boeing will not have a triple sourced engine again. While the 772/E didn't have the resale issue (worthy of its own thread), Boeing seems to consider that a 'ducked bullet' more than wise strategy. The 787 is the start of 'two engines at most' strategy for Boeing.

For Airbus, the worst selling engine on the A330 is also the engine that launched the airframe...

2. As already noted, GE has been aggressive in taking on risk sharing to lock in single sourcing. This was really notable on the 77W when GE offered risk sharing with the GE-90-115 and would only offer the GE-90-115 with risk sharing. This locked out the RR engine. (Pratt's was not seen as competitive due to the PW4098 debacle.) Since Risk sharing is saving Boeing's butt on the 787, I doubt they will ever do away with it...

I fully expect engine competition in the future, but not to see another 3 engine choice airframe.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 33):
That Airbus did not grant exclusivity to Rolls-Royce across the entire A350 family is de facto indication that they have changed their policy and would allow another commercial aviation engine original equipment manufacturer to provide a powerplant for the A350-800 and A350-900.

Yes, but where the new engine would excel is the A35J. (e.g., more thrust margin). So by securing exclusivity where the Trent XWB is weakest, it makes it so there is no 'easy niche' for a competitor to enter. I do not expect to see a competing engine on the A350. Not due due to contracts as you noted, but just good old market forces. As you note:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 39):
RR will be the sole source because it already owns all of the A350-1000 market and a significant enough share of the A350-900 market that the future A350-900 market will likely not be large enough to justify developing an engine.

And RR will have 'sewn up' most of the A359 market thanks to being first to market...

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.

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