Date: 07 Oct 97 14:10:18 From: Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) Organization: Concentric Internet Services References: 1 2 3
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1997.2386@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Exiled Expat <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: [snip] >( but that is typical for PW, Just look at how many mods were >made to the JT9D to bring it up to it's reliability ). Your example reinforces what I'm trying to say: reliability is very important. The only application the JT9D did well was the early B747 market, in which the JT9D initially had the sole source. After Boeing started to offer the CF6 and the RB.211, P&W share of the B747 market drastically fell. P&W practically lost every major European B747 customer, such as, Lufthansa, KLM, Alitalia, BA, Air France, etc. >The recent failure >of our RR Trent is so far believed to have been induced by foreign object >damage wich is difficult to fault the engine for. The Trent 800, as well as its competitors, went through rigorous birdstrike tests, including one with a 4-kg bird. The purpose of the test is to make sure engines can maintain certain level of thrust even in an event of birdstrike. (Furthermore, R-R has long claimed one of the many advantages of wide-chord fans is foreign objects seldom get into the core flow.) Thus, even if the damage was due to a birdstrike, the engine should not have had a catastrophic failure. If there is any truth to Flight's speculation (that metal chips from the bearing were found), then I think R-R has a much more serious problem at hand. R-R claimed to have solved the Trent 700 bearing problem by putting the Trent 800 bearing in the Trent 700. Perhaps, R-R has not solved the problem, yet.