gas path, sorry, I meant the next gen of RRs above the -524.
The thrust link on the CF6s that I was involved with when I was as an inspector was not steel. It's fwd mount area config was a curved and sandwitched plate arrangement that bolted to the fwd LPC flange under the fwd mount and tied in with this floating mount. When you really think about this drag link, it does not prevent all of the bowing of the core casing during what I like to call 'pod nod' during real hard turbulence. What would be a better design for these engines would be longtidunal plate mounted say at the twelve oclock position on the engine 4-6" deep running along the casing and tied into each engine flange.
If they could eliminate minute bowing of the case the mfgs could tighten up blade tip clearances for even more efficency.
That's very true Clive, all this ICAO data excludes the cruise portion.
Turin, so true the GE and PW engines were a nightmare to inspect around the core section and were difficult for the engineers. the only major negative regarding peripheral components mounted on the fancase of the RR would be increased diameter of the cowled up fan case resulting in more flate plate area.
Was the FCOC relocated on the Trent from the fan case to the core for more heat?
Is the ICAO data that I've noted extracted from the manufactures' test cell engine runs? I don't know.
Meanwhile many happy memories I've had of being on 'the hangar floor' playing with these masterpieces of machinery. One must move onwards and upwards for a good future.
Blue skies folks, now off to fly my Cessna....what a great life.