Date: 15 Apr 97 03:22:42 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (matt weber) Organization: 1st Solutions Inc. References: 1 2 Followups: 1 2 3
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1997.899@ohare.Chicago.COM>, email@example.com says... > >H Andrew Chuang wrote: >> >> Delta has just announced its engine selections for the B767 and the B777. >. This means, other than a few B757s, P&W is >> practically shut out of Delta's deal. (The B737 is exclusively powered >> by the CFM56 engine.) It looks like P&W may also be shut out from the AA >> deal. I doubt AA will go with P&W for the B777 powerplant, but let's wait >> and see. Twenty some years ago, P&W had the total domination of the >> engine market. Now, it looks like that P&W may have a hard time holding >> onto its No. 2 position! > > I find this rather odd! > Pratt & Whitney engines have powered more passenger miles > than any other source. Their contribution to civil aviation > development is unsurpassed, with advanced design that other > manufactures were only too pleased to follow. Do you work for PW? the RB211 runs rings around the JT9 just about every airline that flies 747's with RR engines started with PW's, and the CF6's eat JT9s for breakfast on fuel economy and TBO. Wide chord blade wasn't developed by PW. Modular engine wasn't either. Pratt repuation came from an era when there were no other choices. That is no longer true. A great deal of PW's success comes from the perceived savings by sticking to one engine manufacturer. NW won't fly it if it doesn't have PW engines. > Perhaps their commitment to standards, rather to a price, > has some bearing on the matter; since deregulation, and the > apparent inability of the FAA to stop the increasing couterfeiting > of aircraft spares. I don't think it is any secret that a lot of airlines got very ticked off at PW's attitude in the mid 1980's. I know JAL was very public about it, and that is why JAL's 747-400's have CF6's. JAL also got burned on the D10-40's, which NW has. They just never provided the high/hot performance JAL wanted, and PW promised. If you talk to mechanics, given the choice between working on a GE or a PW engine, all the ones I talk to pick the GE every time. In terms of fuel economy, according to the specific fuel consumption figures published in Aviation Week and Space Technolgies 1997 Source Book, GE is the leader in both medium (CFM56) and large (CF6) categories. I have not seen published figures for any of the current RR, or PW or GE-90 series engines however. My opinions anyway.