Re: 30-year-old technology

Date:         20 Mar 97 02:34:54 
From:         Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang)
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1997.690@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
Karl Swartz <kls@ohare.Chicago.COM> wrote:
>>Using some examples in the engine business to prove new designs are
>>not always better.  The IAE V2500 may have better fuel consumption
>>than the CFM56, however, the maturity of the CFM56 engine still
>>prove to be very important for the operators.  The same thing
>>(i.e., maturity) probably can be said about the PW4084 (vs. the
>>GE90 and Trent 800 on the B777).
>
>Why do you lump the Trent 800 with the GE90?  Despite the new name
>(er, it was new for the A330) it's a derivative of the tried-and-true
>RB.211, and thus could be considered a far more mature design than the
>PW4084.  A lot has changed from the L-1011's original RB.211-22B, but
>the PW4084 has changed a lot from the A310's PW4152, too.

Yes.  The Trent series is based on the RB211.  However, both the
Trent 700 and 800 have experienced more problems than the competing
engines made by P&W or GE.