Les possibilités de progrès du V2500, d'après Lightsaber , un ingé moteurs, client sérieux de chez A.net :
Bon, 5-6 % sont possibles, si le marché se présentait, et si un consensus existait !
Des solutions pas gratuites non, plus !
Ca m'a fait penser au T700, assis sur ses mains depuis qq temps, et qui aurait bien besoin de ce type d'effort de la part du motoriste ... les 5-6 % pour maintenir le A330 en vie encore qq années, mais RR ne bouge guère, dés qu'une situation de rente s'installe !
Intéressant quand même la turbine HP composite à 6% d'écos de GE, sur le LeapX peut être ??
------------- Le Lien Anet, et le post de Lightsaber reply 28 !-------------
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5038714/
Quoting EPA001 (Reply 36):
1-2% gains are not very realistic any more in this stage of the maturity of both airframes
Per year? I agree with you. But there is about 4% left in the V2500 that I know of... But then? We're towards the end as you note. But the engines could receive:
1. new fans (1% cut in fuel burn)
2. New wider Chord low turbine (Expensive... unlikely in a narrowbody): 2% cut in fuel burn
3. New high turbine coatings (1% cut in fuel burn)
4. Low compressor to all integrated blade rotor (also called BLISK): 1/2% cut in fuel burn and a few hundred pounds of weight.
5. Composite high turbine (only GE is ready). In a retrofit, only a 2% drop in fuel burn, but a few hundred pounds of weight would be shed. In a new engine we're talking a 6% cut in fuel burn...
It really comes down to it isn't worth improving the current engines much. Not when it would be cheaper to design, test, and build a new engine. At some point starting from a clean sheet is far more economical.
Lightsaber
JPRS