Re: ETOPS question on Aer Lingus A330

Date:         01 Dec 97 02:33:55 
From:         kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Organization: Chicago Software Works, Menlo Park, California
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>I think, and this is strictly opinion, the 777's 180 minute out of the
>box approval had more to do with the work Boeing and the engine
>manufacturers did prior to the aircraft entering service.  I am a little
>uncomfortable with that, there is a substantial learning curve with any
>new aircraft or engine for both the operator and the manufacturer.

In fairness, the last 600 (?) flights of the 1,000 flight ETOPS
proving program for the PW4000-powered 777 were operated by United,
with Boeing supervision, so United did have significant operational
experience prior to service entry.  They also already had a sizeable
PW4000 fleet.

>While the PW4000 is based on an existing type, the GE90 and RR Trent
>are a whole new breed of cat.

The Trent is as much a derivative as the 777's PW4000s -- Rolls just
stopped using the RB.211 designation.  There are a lot of changes, to
be sure, but the same is true when comparing a PW4084 and a PW4060.

--
Karl Swartz	|Home	kls@chicago.com
		|Work	kls@netapp.com
		|WWW	http://www.chicago.com/~kls/
"The average dog is a nicer person than the average person." - Andrew A. Rooney