Re: Delta's engine selections

Date:         16 Apr 97 01:55:56 
From:         Steve Lacker <slacker@arlut.utexas.edu>
Organization: applied research laboratories
References:   1 2 3
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

matt weber wrote:
>
> In article <airliners.1997.899@ohare.Chicago.COM>, carrog@geocities.com
> says...
> 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.

But then again, the JT9 was the first successful engine in that class,
too, and Pratt is no longer making it. My point is you should compare
the RB211 and CF-6 to the PW4000. Rolls almost never got the RB211 to
work, bankrupted themselves, nearly bankrupted Lockheed, and essentially
handed the big trijet market to Douglas, effectively putting Lockheed
out of the passenger aircraft business. Not a pretty point in Rolls'
history.

None of the above is to say that today's RB211 is not a fine engine, nor
does it detract from the superb record of the GE CF-6. Pratt used to be
*clearly* the innovator in the field. That is no longer true, and Pratt
is feeling it.

A very good book for anyone interested in aircraft propulsion is
'Encyclopedia of Aero Engines' by Bill Gunston. It has lots of great
information on Pratt, GE, Rolls, and virtually every other company
that's ever made airplane engines. The internal bickerings at Rolls in
the post-WW2 to early 70's time frame make good reading for those that
like soap operas :-)

--
Stephen Lacker
Applied Research Laboratories, The University of Texas at Austin
PO Box 8029, Austin TX 78713-8029
512-835-3286	slacker@arlut.utexas.edu