Date: 16 Nov 97 19:58:45 From: Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) Organization: Concentric Internet Services References: 1 2 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1997.2594@ohare.Chicago.COM>, ALWahoo <email@example.com> wrote: >> I am not too sure why GE and P&W both >>are abandoning the ultra-long-range market (i.e., the A340-500/600 and >>B777-200X/300X). > >P&W is not abandoning the ultra-long-range market - at least not on the 777. >However, the competitive pressures between the three manufacturers on the 777 >ensures that no-one will be making any money on these engines any time soon. >Since P&W and GE have shareholders that require higher returns than RR, both >U.S. manufacturers are a little gun shy about throwing more money at a losing >proposition. The A340 story is a long and sordid one but is not yet over... Both GE and P&W are unwilling to commit to ~105K-lb-thrust engine necessary for the B777-200X/300X program. The argument is the projected market size does not justify the development costs. I can understand that the B777-200X to be very small (which, I belive, Boeing estimated at around 200 units for the next 20 years), but the B777-300X should be a winner. There are about 1,200 B747s ordered. Most of them can be replaced by the B777-300/-300X. From a marketing perspective, GE and P&W are allowing R-R to have a monopoly in this market (i.e., B777-200X/300X and A340-500/600). Had GE committed to a higher thrust engine, I strongly believe American would go with GE instead of R-R. IMHO, AA is too important a customer to the GE90 program; without AA, the GE90 is pretty much destined to be the big loser in the B777 competition.