From: H Andrew Chuang <email@example.com> Organization: Concentric Internet Services Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 12:51:41 GMT References: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
Matt: Sounds like you're doing a promo for GE. ;-) While many of your points are valid, I think they are a bit exaggerated. IMHO, the single biggest advantage that GE has is its deep pocket. In addition, GE's engine services have matured and well-established that any after-market contracts can easily be packaged with the aircraft orders. Neither P&W nor R-R can compete on this front. Since Boeing has to be able to convince existing non-GE B777 operators to by the GE90-powered B777X, nicely-packaged after-market contracts can help the marketing process, especially to smaller operators. I won't be surprised that initially a lot of the orders will go through GE Capital Aviation Services. If GE does deliver, the GE90-powered B777 will rule. If GE doesn't, Boeing once again will leave a hole for Airbus to attack (previously, they left the B727-replacement market unattended for too long). James Matthew Weber wrote: > > It has been announced that the engine contract for the 777-200/-300X > has gone to General Electric. > > I suspect there are several reasons this has happened: > > 1). By most accounts, the GE90 core is probably good for about 120,000 > pounds thrust. The GE90 can get to the required 110-115,000 pound > thrust needed for these aircraft much more easily than the Trent, and > it was clear that a PW4000 design was a stretch to get to the > PW4098.Any larger engine was going to be a major exercise, and if > Boeing wanted an early in service date, a problem as well. My guess is > Boeing is about to come after the A340-500/600 with a vengeance, and a > competitive in service date was a requirement. > > GE can probably get there sooner and probably at lower cost than > either RR or PW. It is equally clear that there will probably be a > need for larger engines, and even at 110,000 to 115,000 pounds there > is still some growth left in the GE90. It is doubtful that there would > be anything left in a 110,000 pound Trent 800. > > 2). Fuel economy. The intended market for the 777X is very long range, > and the GE90 is the most fuel efficient engine in the sky today, and > GE promises further improvements in the 1-2% range. On an ultra long > range aircraft Fuel economy is serious business, and a 2% advantage in > fuel burn over a 7000 mile sector is BIG revenue over the life of the > airframe. > > 3). While the GE90 had a serious weight penalty relative to the > competition, as the thrust on the PW engines and on the RR engines has > been increased, this penalty has diminished. In fact the PW4098 and > GE90 weights are only a few hundred pounds different, and a very > large portion of the weight advantage the Trent 800 enjoyed over the > GE90 has also disappeared. > > The combination of early delivery, good fuel economy, and competitive > engine shipset weight is tough to argue with. > > The reported problems with the A340-500, and the improvements in the > Asian Economy suggest that 777X launch with an in service date very > close the A340-500/600 is probably very near. > > It will obviously raise the bar on the A3XX as well, as Airbus will > have to offer a substantial direct cost improvement relative to the > 777X family, as opposed to the 747-400. The problem with very long > running programs is the goal posts tend to get moved, and I suspect > that is part of the A3XX problem. My guess is that if A3XX is not > lauched before 777X, A3XX will never be launched in anything > resembling the current form.. > > No doubt all of this is causing a certain level of anxiety at Airbus > Industries... > > My opinions anyway..