Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Rolls-Royce and Safran, major European engine OEMs with different fortunes.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
July 30, 2015 © Leeham Co. Rolls-Royce and Safran, the parent company of CFM partner Snecma, released their Q2 and first half 2015 earnings today. It is interesting to compare these companies as they are in different strategic situations in their dominant business segments, civil turbofan engines.
Civil turbofans constitute 52% of Rolls-Royce total business whereas it makes 54% of Safran’s turn over. Rolls-Royce’s focus has been widebody engines to the point where it exited its part of International Aero Engines, which makes the single aisle V2500 engine, three years ago. Safran on the other hand is heavily invested in the single aisle market through its 50% part in CFM through its Snecma subsidiary.
The present situation and the future outlook for these two companies are intimately aligned with this strategic difference. We look at why and how this will affect their immediate future.
Summary:
- Rolls-Royce is experiencing migration problems in its widebody turbofan business. Its bread and butter Trent 700 engine is on its way out and it takes until 2018 for the replacement, Trent 7000, to kick in.
- Other programs are only growing slowly: the Trent 1000 for Boeing’s 787 or Trent XWB for the Airbus A350.
- Safran civil turbofan business Snecma is enjoying record sales and deliveries through its CFM joint venture with GE.
- Despite sharing its revenue 50:50 with GE, the business turnover is the size of Rolls-Royce turbofan business today and larger tomorrow. Profit margins are three times higher.
Bjorn’s Corner: Weight or fuel limited, what is this all about?
By Bjorn Fehrm
24 July 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In recent articles around the Ultra Long Haul (ULH) needs of Singapore Airlines, there have been many references to aircraft being either fuel or weight limited. It is not so evident what this all means and what the practical consequences are of one or the other limitation.
Let’s go through what it all means with a practical example and show how it will affect the performance of the aircraft and what one can do about it.
As an example we will pick Boeing’s ULH 777-200LR. It is known as the Worldliner since it can connect almost any two cities in the world with its ultimate range of 9,300nm. In practical use, the Worldliner has often been configured for less range. In such configurations it runs out of fuel tank space before it reaches its Max Take-Off Weight. This is “fuel limited.” Here is how it works.
Options for Singapore Airlines to operate direct flights to the US, part 2.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
July 23, 2015 © Leeham Co. After having looked at Airbus’ A350-900 and Boeing’s 777-200LR for filling Singapore Airlines (SQ) need for an Ultra Long Haul (ULH) airliner we now complement the analysis by including Airbus’ and Boeing’s up and coming A350-1000 and 777-8X.
Singapore Airlines has 70 A350-900 on order to replace 25 Boeing 777-200ER. There would also be place in that order to replace the 25 777-300ERs that Singapore operate, most likely with the A350-1000 (SQ has the right to change model).
The 777-8X is Boeing’s replacement aircraft for 777-200LR and direct competitor to A350-1000. It is interesting to compare these two types flying the Trans-Pacific routes non-stop from Singapore to US that we flew with A350-900LR and 777-200LR and to compare the per seat fuel consumption versus the smaller aircraft.
Summary:
- The 777-8X and A350-1000 are a sized larger than both 777-200LR and A350-900LR, and can therefore transport more payload.
- The 777-8X is designed as an ULH aircraft, the A350-1000 not. We explore what this means for the US missions.
- Flying to the US which of these four aircraft will be the most efficient? And carry an interesting payload?
Bjorn’s Corner: hot summer, hot engines
By Bjorn Fehrm
17 July 2015, ©. Leeham Co: It is summer in south of Europe and we have had over 30°C/86°F for weeks. It makes one realize the conditions where the engines have to work over their flat rating point in the Middle East.
Aircraft engines are a bit fidgety. They don’t like temperature although they are made to sustain that their hottest parts, the nozzle and first turbine after the combustor, gets scalded to 1700°C/3,092°F or more.
Go down to the very back end of the engine and we come to where the key engine parameter, EGT (Exhaust Gas Temperature), is measured. It determines a lot of things, among them the time the engine stays on wing. Things are typically 700°C/1,832°F cooler here and this is where a reliable temperature measurement probe can be placed. Based on its values, the total health of the engine’s core is determined. It is also a key input whether the engine shall be throttled back in a hot take-off like in the Middle East.
Boeing 777X heading towards design freeze a bit heavier than planned.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required
Introduction
July 12, 2015, © Leeham Co. As we reported from Boeing’s Paris Air Show briefing, Boeing’s 777X project is progressing to a design freeze later in 2015. At the briefing everything was presented as being on track with no changes of key data. There have been signs that this in not fully the case. The 777X program is suffering the same disease that hits other aircraft programs, weight gain flu.
To understand it better, we compiled the many indications that points to weight increase and ran them through our proprietary model to understand why and see what it means for the aircraft’s performance.
Summary:
- Weight increase is an evil that all aircraft programs battle with. Our analysis shows that 777X is no different.
- Engine thrust is one of the areas which will be increased to mitigate increased weight. We give the latest status of GE9X thrust development, now beyond 105,000 lb.
- A number of airframe changes have been made. We analyze their consequences and make predictions for future maximum weight increases.
LEAP, the best of 1,000 investigated alternatives.
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
June 23, 2015, © Leeham Co. CFM International went through 1,000 iterations before settling on the final design for the LEAP engines that will power the Airbus A320neo, the Boeing 737 MAX and the COMAC C919.
In an interview with us at the Paris Air Show, CFM LEAP program manager Gareth Richards explained the macro process of the development of LEAP, CFM’s sequel to CFM56. This will be the largest turbofan engine program in the history of civil aviation and the follow on to the world’s most-sold turbofan, the CFM56.
Richards focused on how an engine like LEAP gets designed and what the trades are that a single aisle, short haul engine has compared to long haul engines.
LEAP is sharing the A320neo platform with Pratt & Whitney’s GTF but is sole engine on the 737 MAX and the C919. This will lead to engine production rates five years into the program of 1800 engines which is higher than the present rate of CFM56 deliveries.
Dependant on rate increases by Airbus and Boeing, this can increase beyond 2,000 engines per year after the initial ramp. It would make LEAP the largest civil turbofan program whichever way one counts: engines, installed thrust or revenue.
Summary:
- Research of optimal engine cycle was extensive, with more than 1,000 alternatives investigated before settling on the final LEAP cycle.
- The production ramp is the fastest ever, from 30 engines 2015 to 1,700 by 2019.
- While CFM does not want to ramp faster than planned, final production rate is flexible.
- The large volume of sold engines, the fast production ramp and the short-haul cycle makes for a conservative approach to performance.
- We discuss with Richards how such a program is managed and how you make sure you can deliver on promises.
Bjorn’s Corner: What Paris Air Show taught us about East and West.
By Bjorn Fehrm
25 June 2015, © Leeham Co: With a few days in the office one can look back at Paris Air Show with a bit of perspective. So what are the impressions?
It was surprising how many orders Airbus and Boeing landed. Both had played down the expectations, telling that it will be a decent show but nothing close to record. Yet both were booking orders or commitments which were better than expected going into the PAS. Read more
Pontifications: Final thoughts of the Paris Air Show
- Our interview during the Paris Air Show with Tom Williams, president and COO of Airbus Commercial, is now open to all Readers. Williams discussions production, supply chain issues, launch aid for the potential A380neo and more.
By Scott Hamilton
June 22, 2015, c. Leeham Co. The Paris Air Show was largely as expected, with a few small surprises. Boeing did better than expected via-a-vis Airbus, actually leading slightly in firm orders and tied in orders-and-options going into Thursday. This is virtually never the case, particularly at the Paris Air Show, Airbus’ “home” turf. At the same time, some Wall Street analysts noted the firm orders fell below expectations. I’m not especially concerned about whether an announcement was firm or a commitment, because the latter typically firm up, if not within the current calendar year then usually in the next. Note, for example, Boeing announced the launch of the 777X program at the 2013 Dubai Air Show was some 200 commitments, or thereabouts, but the orders didn’t firm until 2014. Airbus announced a commitment for 250 A320s from Indigo in 2014 and it will likely be firmed up this year.
Engine Alliance undertakes PIPs, but not to level Emirates wants
June 17, 2015, Paris Air Show, c. Leeham Co. Engine Alliance, one of the two power plant suppliers for the Airbus A380, said today that it is undertaking Performance Improvement Package (PIP) upgrades to the GP7200 to lower maintenance and operating costs and to reduce fuel burn.
This contrasts with blunt remarks from Tim Clark, president and COO of Emirates Airlines (EK), that EA has “flat lined” and isn’t undertaking PIPs. Emirates is by far the largest operator of EA-powered A380s but recently ordered the competing Rolls-Royce Trent 900s for EK’s 50 A380s ordered late last year. Clark kept engine selection open at the time.
Dean Athans, Engine Alliance president, told LNC today that the A380 is a low-volume airplane and the
David Athans, president of Engine Alliance
business case for investing in the GP7200 to the level Clark want’s isn’t there.
“Tim is acting in the best interests of Emirates Airline, and he wants to most and the best of GP that he can get,” Athans said in an interview. “I’d do the same thing if I was in his place. He wants a brand new engine. He wants a large GTF or GE9X version for this A380s. I would, too. The position I’m in, looking at the volume and the business case for the A380, it doesn’t enable that level of investment.”
At the Annual General Meeting of the International Air Transport Assn. last week in Miami Beach (FL), Clark told LNC that EA wasn’t willing to invest in the PIPs Clark wanted, and RR is.