By Alwyn Scott
PARIS, June 16 Engine makers for next-generation
Airbus and Boeing narrow-body jets stepped up
their war of words on Sunday, claiming their new power plants
will burn less fuel than current models plus last longer without
maintenance and create less noise than their rival's.
CFM International, the engine maker for about three-quarters
of the orders for next-generation Airbus and Boeing narrow-body
jets, said its LEAP engine will deliver 15 percent lower fuel
burn and 2 percent to 3 percent lower operating costs compared
with comparable current engines.
Rival Pratt & Whitney hit back, saying its geared
turbofan engine has undergone testing on aircraft, giving its
claims of 15 percent lower fuel burn over current engines much
more credibility. CFM has test parts but not a full engine.
"We are within 10ths of a percent of that (15 percent)
figure," Robert Saia, vice president of the next generation
product family at Pratt & Whitney, said in an interview with
Pratt noted that it has won more than half of the orders for
new engines on the A320neo family, including 75 percent of A321
orders, and vowed to maintain the lead after orders are tallied
at the Paris Air Show that begins on Monday. CFM dominates
orders for the smaller A319 jet.
There are about 925 orders for A320 family jets for which
customers have not yet selected an engine.
"Quite a few of those will be out of limbo when this air
show is done," said Todd Kallman, president of commercial
engines at Pratt & Whitney. "We may be a little bit higher on
market share when the show is over."
Narrow-body planes are a crucial market, accounting for 70
percent of an estimated $4.8 trillion in new aircraft sales over
the next 20 years.
CFM is a joint venture of GE Aviation and Safran
SA of France. Pratt & Whitney is a unit of United
The two engine makers are battling over which will power
more of the next-generation narrow-body jets.
Since the LEAP engine is the only choice on Boeing's 737MAX,
that leaves the A320neo as the battlefield for claims and
counter-claims in sales campaigns. Pratt says staying off the
low-to-ground 737 allowed it to optimize for the A320 and use
larger front fans.
The A320neo next-generation jet is due to enter service in
2016, with Boeing's rival following a year later. The Airbus
plane has 2,068 firm orders, compared with Boeing's 1,381.
CFM says its LEAP engine will burn up to 15 percent less
fuel than today's best comparable engines. It also says the LEAP
will burn 1 percent less fuel on the A320 than the Pratt engine
when new and that its performance won't erode over its life as
it claims Pratt's will, giving it another 1 percent advantage.
CFM says its engine's architecture better protect airfoils
inside from being damaged by sand and debris that degrade
On the A321neo, a larger version of the A320, CFM says its
engine will supply a 3 percent advantage because of fuel savings
on the plane's longer missions.
The savings amount to about $4 million a year per airplane
in reduced fuel and operations costs, CFM said. Similar savings
apply to the 737MAX, but there is no competing engine on that
plane since Boeing chose to offer only the LEAP to customers.
Pratt & Whitney says its geared turbo fan engine is shorter
and lighter than the LEAP. It also will require less
maintenance, create less noise and incur lower emissions fees,
generating $1.5 million in annual savings per aircraft.
Pratt notes its engine is on five aircraft: the Bombardier
CSeries, which is due to fly for the first time by the end of
the month, the Mitsubishi Regional Jet, the A320neo, the Russian
Irkut MC21 and the Embraer second generation EJet. CFM says with
the A320 and Boeing orders, it will be producing 1,700 engines a
year by 2020. That compares with more than 1,000 a year by Pratt
by the same date.
There have been suggestions that CFM isn't working hard to
sell its LEAP on the 737MAX because it has no competition. The
company said that isn't true. "We're obligated to compete on the
MAX and the neo, and we go to every campaign," Chaker Chahrour,
executive vice president of CFM, said at a briefing.
The ultimate arbiters, the airlines, must choose between
competing claims for equipment designed to last 10 years before
needing a major overhaul.
Both engine makers face are to some extent victims of their
Like makers of shaving razors, their business model is to
offer engines relatively cheaply and make the money back on
spare parts as engines are overhauled.
But high reliability that has become industry standard is
hampering that spare-part business. CFM said that CFM56 engines
delivered nearly a decade ago were due to come in after six
years but are just now coming in for service. The revenue is
thus arriving later than predicted and a "bow wave" hasn't
materialized in the way it was expected.
"We have a pretty substantial population of engines that are
at around 40,000 hours" before their first shop visit, CFM
spokeswoman Jamie Jewell said. In one case, an engine stayed on
the wing 14 years before coming in for its first major repairs.
While that affects CFM's revenue, it is doubtless appealing