June 7, 2016: The new Pratt & Whitney Geared Turbo Fan, on seven Airbus A320neos,
have achieved more than 2,000 revenue cycles with no returns or rejected take-offs, says Bob Leduc, president of Pratt & Whitney. The engines have a 99.5% dispatch reliability. The last time this level was achieved was with the introduction of the Boeing 777, which at the same point had a 100% dispatch reliability rate.
There are 7,100 GTF engines in the backlog that will be delivered over the next 7-8 years, about one-third of the time it took to deliver the same number of V2500 engines.
There will be 58 customers by the end of 2018.
Leduc wouldn’t name customers who have complained about the teething problems of the GTF, although all media present knew he was talking about Qatar Airways, Indigo and Lufthansa Airlines. But he said the complaints aired in public by the unidentified customers were about holding PW’s feet to the fire and “grandstanding.”
The dispatch reliability, performance so far and meeting fuel burn and emissions promises belie the complaints, Leduc said.
“People sometimes question whether our technology is leading edge,” Leduc said. “Nobody else has a geared turbo fan.” Leduc also cited new engine technology on military aircraft, adding that in his view, nobody can now question whether PW is a leader in technology.
Despite the dramatic increase in commercial engine deliveries, the aftermarket business is forecast to increase only about 3% during the same period. The increasing on-wing time is the reason. About 80% of the new engines will be under MRO contracts with PW, typically about 10 years in duration.
“If I had to sum it up, I think Pratt is back and back in a big way,” Leduc said.
There are two geared turbofans which have been in service for many years. These are the Avco Lycoming ALF 502 and the AiResearch731
Both now Honeywell products. The 731 has been in service since about 1972 with over 11,000 sold. The 502 , and its successor 507, was used in the BAe 146 / AVRO 100 program. The 731 is still in production and for a long time dominated the bizjet market. Glad to hear positive news of the Pratt GTF but let’s keep the history of geared turbofans out front.
> Leduc wouldn’t name customers who have complained about the teething problems of the GTF, although all media present knew he was talking about Qatar Airways, Indigo and Lufthansa Airlines.
So, the only customer that _hasn’t_ complained publicly about the engine took their first one five days ago and Leduc calls it grandstanding?
Is there a need for a reality check here, or am I missing something?
Interesting comment on after-market sales, RR have been pretty intent on squeezing after-market and now he P+W see that slowing as engines last longer. RR might have missed something here?
I think there needs to be some clarity about what “the aftermarket business” is. Does it mean turnover generated post ownership transfer? Or does it mean the turnover generated merely on fixing things post ownership transfer, with no comment on whether the turnover on preventatives (the whole remote monitoring etc.) will change at all? Or something else? If it is a general decline as % of overall turnover per engine through lifetime then wouldn’t this mainly affect initial on wing price and affect P&W and GE to a similar extent as RR?
Longer on wing times doesnt mean less part sales, so it is indeed very ambiguous.
” the Boeing 777, which at the same point had a 100% dispatch reliability rate.”
Dispatch reliability is the number of flights that leave within a defined margin of SDT.
A reserve aircraft feathering in to do the flight (in time) is allowed for dispatch reliability.
Was that the case with the 777 and the new neo’s?
That was the case for the 787. always one frame in reserve in Japan. ( IMU Boeing invests quite a bit of effort into fibbing with numbers.)
There was only one A320 NEO flying for LH for a couple of weeks. ( Did it have any unscheduled outages?)
He asked if it was the case with the 777, not the 787. As for “fibbing” with numbers, yeah Airbus never does that…
This is obviously not about never or always as it is not a religious “virginity” issue but about how much
effort you put into it and how much this is used to form the corporate image presented to the public.
The way the 787 project developed shows clearly that Boeing’s corporate mind orbits around appearances much more than foundational solutions.
( this IMU includes the 777: Boeing never talked about an estimated doubling of development cost for the 777. At the time they still had the design/engineering capabilities to make “swamping with money” effective and keep to the projected timeline. Not so for the 787.
Interesting to calling out a customer as grandstanding even if they are.
It shows how much P+W hav riding on this. Protecting the products reputation is more important at this stage than upsetting a customer who probably (ha ha) got a pretty good discount on early build engines, and thought he could get away with negotiating in the press because he always does.