大家一齊黎compare下其分別~~
RR偈

PW偈

我黎先-
1. 引擎蓋設計唔同
2- RR偈係嘈過PW﹐尤其是on taxi﹐RR都好刺耳~~ |
|
Cathay 888...clear to land rwy 26 Right
|
|
|
原帖由 billlmf 於 2007-2-20 01:17 發表
2- RR偈係嘈過PW﹐尤其是on taxi﹐RR都好刺耳~~
就係因為RR偈太嘈,CX飛SFO果陣已經多次被當地政府點名投訴。
SFO區域設有嘈音管制,仲聽聞因為CX用RR偈744飛SFO而被罰款!
我始終都係鐘意GE偈的744,比RR偈靜又比PW偈好力 |
|
至于你信不信,我反正信了
|
|
|
一般英資/歐洲航空公司(國泰亦是一例)才使用 RR 系列
RR 系列幾乎佔最低的市場比率,雖然廠方聲稱比較省油,
唯結構乃 RR,GE,PW 三者之中最複雜,小毛病甚多,維修複雜
且成本高. 從前 B747-100 只有 GE,PW 系列,後來至到 A380 也
只好提供 RR Trent900 和 GP7200 (GE,PW 合作的產品) 兩個選擇.
RR 乃英國公司,可是英航的 B777 也不再使用此品牌.
除非是 A340-500,A340-600 (只有 RR Trent500 可用) 而且
波音都係信自己國家的 GE 較多,目前只有 GE90 可取得高達
207 分鐘 的 ETOPS 認證,其餘頂多是 180 分鐘. |
|
|
|
|
原帖由 kitarolo 於 2007-2-20 22:14 發表
RR 乃英國公司,可是英航的 B777 也不再使用此品牌.
除非是 A340-500,A340-600 (只有 RR Trent500 可用) 而且
波音都係信自己國家的 GE 較多,目前只有 GE90 可取得高達
207 分鐘 的 ETOPS 認證,其餘頂多是 180 分鐘.
其實BA係後期批777改用左RR Trent 895引擎﹐原因好似係聽講早期批GE90有唔少問題出現。 |
|
Cathay 888...clear to land rwy 26 Right
|
|
|
原帖由 kitarolo 於 2007-2-20 22:14 發表
一般英資/歐洲航空公司(國泰亦是一例)才使用 RR 系列
RR 系列幾乎佔最低的市場比率
Well, as there are only big three, even RR may have the lowest market share, they still got abundant customers to purchase them
And, regarding "Only Brits/European purchase RR", the American Airline 757 would explain that it's not correct
原帖由 kitarolo 於 2007-2-20 22:14 發表
從前 B747-100 只有 GE,PW 系列,後來至到 A380 也
只好提供 RR Trent900 和 GP7200 (GE,PW 合作的產品) 兩個選擇.
1. When 747-100 was born, the RB211 was still in the drawing board...
2. It's better to see why Boeing choose GE and RR only for their Dreamliner...
原帖由 kitarolo 於 2007-2-20 22:14 發表
RR 乃英國公司,可是英航的 B777 也不再使用此品牌.
除非是 A340-500,A340-600 (只有 RR Trent500 可用) 而且
波音都係信自己國家的 GE 較多,目前只有 GE90 可取得高達
207 分鐘 的 ETOPS 認證,其餘頂多是 180 分鐘.
1. ETOPS was certified with request from airline companies, not totally related with the engine itself
2. Boeing 757 was designed, and certified with RB211 first
3. Boeing originally loved P&W more...you will find that early Boeing Jets were all powered by P&W products, at least P&W first... |
|
|
|
|
原帖由 akboy 於 2007-2-20 12:47 發表
Well, as there are only big three, even RR may have the lowest market share, they still got abundant customers to purchase them
And, regarding "Only Brits/European purchase RR", ...
I have to say...RR-powered 757 is the first version of 757 as the only choice for airliners.
later on, DL,NW's 757s has PW-powered 757, because CO and AA are some of the first cos's of 757
BTW, I don't have a great time w/ RR engine.
P.S.: Malaysia Airline's RR-powered 777 had been "drop down" couple pieces on the sky. scared me...scared u? |
|
CO1151@73Y>CO99@772ER>
|
|
|
747仲係設計時,係揀了P&W,雖然GE贏取C-5 0既訂單,仲係高函道比
但當時GE 0既引擎唔夠力推747,但P&W 0既新引擎(研製中)就夠力
要留意係,部份Boeing董事同時都係GE股東 |
|
nwfb23
|
|
|
原帖由 volvo_chan 於 2007-2-20 10:03 發表
就係因為RR偈太嘈,CX飛SFO果陣已經多次被當地政府點名投訴。
SFO區域設有嘈音管制,仲聽聞因為CX用RR偈744飛SFO而被罰款!
如果係真既話﹐我諗唔止CX﹐連BA或者QF大部份既744(QF有陣時send RR偈744黎SFO)都有份~~ |
|
Cathay 888...clear to land rwy 26 Right
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
|