Date: 27 Aug 99 14:03:36 From: Terry Schell <email@example.com> Organization: Florida State University References: 1 2 3 4 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
James Matthew Weber wrote: > By almost all accounts the GE90 is capable of providing the 115,000 > pounds thrust, and then some. It is probably the only offer that was > also capable of providing an engine with an in-service date that would > be competitive with the A340-500/600. It also offers better fuel > economy than the RR or current PW products. On an ultra long range > aircraft, fuel economy is a major issue. GE also has a much better > developed service/support organization to look after the engine, > which should reduce the pain that non-GE operators see if they buy the > aircraft. > > My own belief is GE got the business in part because the other choices > were not especially viable in the eyes of Boeing... PW was almost > certain to have problem with In-Service Date, RR didn't provide any > growth capability, which would effectively lock the aircraft into a > 1999 configuration indefinitely. What I don't understand is why GE wanted the exclusive contract. They have a great deal of evidence that their competitors could not bring a product to market in a timely and cost-effective fashion. GE had to realize that they could crush any offering by RR or PW because of their vastly lower development costs. If I was a GE executive I would not push an exclusive agreement which irritates your potential customers and has the appearance of anti-competitive practices... when you would eventually win all of the contracts based on your product. It would have looked a lot better for Boeing and for GE if the GE90 was *defacto* the only engine for this airframe, rather than forcing it to be the only engine with exclusive contracts.