There has been a steady flow of news about A320neo program delivery delays. So far, these have all been directed at the P&W GTF engine. P&W has explained to us that the issue is minor and a fix is being implemented. A number of GTF powered neos have been delivered and are, as far as we know, doing what they are meant to do.
Then yesterday, Reuters reported news about the hydraulics. This is an Airbus issue, not an engine issue. As one can see from the linked story, the source of the compliant is a familiar one.
Then Reuters added that the LEAP engine is also being modified. We contacted Reuters to ask about this and were told that CFM provided an explanation that it is re-blading the LPC which may or may not be related to an issue found in tests (CFM says not, just an enhancement). This change affects all LEAP engines, for both Boeing and Airbus. The change will come into effect after entry to service for LEAP-1A and before EIS for 1B and 1C. CFM is not modifying their 15% fuel savings target; the changes are to improve durability by allowing more flying time between major overhauls. What was not clear is how many production engines have been shipped without the modification and when these will be updated. This is a information Airbus controls and has not shared. CFM advised us “The booster enhancement is not a required modification. The current configuration meets all requirements so there is no need to change the hardware unless they want to do so at the first shop visit, which would happen seven or more years after entry into service.”
Airbus has its hands full with the neo program. Which brings us back to the source of complaint mentioned above. Airbus has one customer that is voluble on the slower than expected neo deliveries. Now this customer says he is speaking with Boeing, it appears Qatar is considering 737NGs. Other neo customers may be equally annoyed about the delays – after all they too run a business that is schedule driven. But they don’t don’t use the media to send messages.
Co-Founder AirInsight. My previous life includes stints at Shell South Africa, CIC Research, and PA Consulting. Got bitten by the aviation bug and ended up an Avgeek. Then the data bug got me, making me a curious Avgeek seeking data-driven logic. Also, I appreciate conversations with smart people from whom I learn so much. Summary: I am very fortunate to work with and converse with great people.
Your launch airline isn’t a customer. Its more like a technical partner.
I consider U-turn Al a bad partner. I would be reluctant to do business with him.
[and I wouldn’t be slow in letting him, and my competitor(s) know. The resultant price gouging would perhaps result in a bit of an attitude adjustment on his behalf. Quatar need Airbus or Boeing to survive. Airbus and Boeing do not need Quatar to survive. U-Turn would do well to consider that before opening his mouth.]
The big news here is not the NEO story but the leap engine’s new LPC. The question remains Why? The current configuration stays on wing for 7 years????
Good point
LPC modification is for the fuel burn instead of durability. CFM is good at masking their issues.