Premium – Powering the enhanced A321 and a putative 797

This week we have seen two good sources discussing how Airbus is likely to respond to a potential new Boeing. The Reuters story is here and the CNN story is here. Both these stories lay out clearly how the two OEMs are working through this process to outwit each other. This is the game theory at work with serious, big money, stakes. What will be powering these aircraft is the place to be watching. What is less discussed at this early stage is that there are no engines that can power these two aircraft. But all three western engine makers are going to chase these two aircraft programs. The stakes are big for them, too. Winning a spot on one or both programs provides the payback on high-cost R&D. It also means staying in the business. Failure to win a spot can be a disaster. Consequently, the knives will be razor sharp and the fight will be brutal. Nobody will give, or expect any quarter. The three engine makers are going to be CFM (GE & Safran), Rolls-Royce and Pratt & Whitney. CFM - This company has an instant lead at Boeing, having been sole supplier to the 737 program for many years. Parent partner GE is the sole supplier on the 777X and a critical supplier on 787. The CFM partnership has been highly successful. It has, by far, the largest number of engines powering jets. The agreement between GE and SAFRAN covers thrust ranges from 18,000 to 50,000 pounds. The new engine will, therefore, be at the high end of this agreement. The CFM LEAP engine is likely to be the departure point and a new engine will include all the latest tricks these two firms have developed. That means, for instance, extensive additive manufacturing. It is also likely to include ceramics. There is no indication CFMI has anything in development. But we bet they are very busy on this right now. CFM has a leg up on any Boeing program and a better than even chance at Airbus. Rolls-Royce - This company is in the midst of two new engine development programs. There is the Advanced and the Ultra. Watch a video explaining what they are doing here. So much of what is being done is new that there are scant details. The Advance is targeted for 2020 and should offer a 20% improved fuel burn. By 2025 the Ultra should offer even better fuel burn and, please note, will have a geared fan. Some information can be found here. Rolls is close to Airbus and is the sole supplier on a number of models; the A350 and A330neo. Rolls, it is fair to say, is dependent on Airbus. This means it has an advantage giving it a better than even chance to be on a new Airbus aircraft. Pratt & Whitney - This company is in the midst of a comeback. They missed on powering the 737NG and therefore also missed on MAX. P&W bought Rolls-Royce from their joint venture in IAE to get the flexibility they needed to market the GTF. Interestingly, the FAA certification of the GTF is under the IAE brand, even though the engines carry P&W labels. The GTF is P&W's way to escape what looked like commercial aviation oblivion. The GTF is going to be the basis for any new P&W engine. It has an architecture that can be scaled up to the required thrust these new aircraft require. By the time these engines are needed, P&W will have worked out the kinks currently gnawing at the program. P&W is not the only engine maker with challenges. (As we write this, a report has emerged that CFM LEAP engines on the MAX are presenting a problem. Airbus A320neo with LEAP engines are also going slowly.) The selection process The underdog in the race to be on these new aircraft is clearly P&W. Although their GTF is on the Airbus A320neo program, that has not gone swimmingly. The company was recently embarrassed by Airbus' CFO. But the engine appears to be doing what was promised on the C Series. It has also been selected for the Embraer E2, Mitsubishi MRJ and the Irkut MC-21. Despite its bumpy start, the GTF cannot be discounted. It is further down the road in R&D than its likely competitors and will have thousands of hours in service by the time Airbus and Boeing define their requirements. If a gear was such a risk, Rolls-Royce seems to have overcome that risk. Rolls-Royce may have an advantage at Airbus but doesn't at Boeing. CFMI has an advantage at Boeing but that won't be enough to ensure it remains a sole source. Boeing may decide to spread their own risk by having two engine vendors. The LEAP issue can only reinforce that, no matter how small the issue they are dealing with now is. For Airbus having two engine vendors on the A320neo program was an excellent decision - they can deliver at least some of their production. In summary, while all the attention is on Airbus and Boeing now, there is a bigger and nastier battle being prepared among the engine makers. Aircraft get all the attention, but any new aircraft depends on increasingly high-tech engines. That is the more interesting space to watch.

No results