Thai ditches Rolls engines and goes with GE
 

It what has to be a major blow to both Rolls and Airbus, Thai Air had decided they are fed up with Rolls Royce and are going to go with GE engines in the future. That means no more A350s...

Rolls Ditched as Thai Air’s Engine Supplier in New Jet Deal (msn.com)

Another Pharma Bro wannabe is getting a reality check. How dare Thai Air demand value from Rolls Royce !

This will have nothing to do with value and everything do with coloured envelopes

Here's a link to a newspaper article about some previous dealings between RR and TG:
https://www.thaipbsworld.com/the-rol...into-nosedive/

So the real reason is that RR is not willing to bribe them anymore?

Of course this is just some small Asian nation where bribery and corruption are common and of course never happen in Global Britain. I think RR are in no position to boost profits and strengthen balance sheets BUT they do need to fix either the problem or perception of reliability first before it starts to spread , Luckily there are not that many competitors and its a bit like B vs A , customers cannot just change since there are not many people making wide body engines but I dont think the CEO is the right guy fo r RR just now if he focusses on finance not product.

Thais not Chinese...but red packets gladly accepted...

I wonder if the dude running Rolls in chasing profitability, will end up making the same errors as befell the dude running Boeing doing much the same?

I'd be a little surprised if GE resorted to bribery to encourage the switch.
The US has pretty strict laws regarding such things - and in the past people have gone to prison for bribing foreign officials to obtain business orders.
When I spent time working in Indonesia about 30 years ago, I was given strict guidance - to the effect that if they found out I'd bribed any Indonesian officials, I'd be fired - no ifs, ands, or buts... This actually caused me some issues getting my long-term work permit - at the time bribes in order to get your paperwork processed were simply considered a part of the Indonesian process - and without such, my paperwork simply sat. Finally, when my temporary permit was about to expire (which would have forced me to leave the country), the local Boeing manager went to his file cabinet, grabbed a handful of 'Boeing' trinkets (Boeing key chains, money clips, etc.), and the two of us proceeded to go person to person getting my work permit processed (it was all in the same building which made it convenient). We'd go to whoever had the paperwork - give them a keychain or other trinket - and say we needed my paperwork done. It would be finished in a few minutes as we stood there, then it was taken to the next person in the process and those steps repeated.
I had my approved long-term work permit by the end of the day.
Apparently, giving away trinkets doesn't count as bribes, but cash does.

I also worked in Indonesia, about ten years before you, tdracer. The oil company I worked for had a similar policy. I had to sign a document indicating that I would abide by the policy. Luckily there was a significant 'but' in the policy. 'Facilitating payments' were allowed to grease the bureaucratic wheels, so I never had any problem with work permits (KIM-S).

An interesting example of this policy was how to obtain a driving licence. For next to no money, you could hang around the Jakarta police headquarters for a couple of days, going to various offices, getting paperwork stamped and doing a driving test.

For $100, you could go there with a minder and complete the process in a couple of hours, without taking a driving test. For $300, you could skip the visit and have the licence delivered!

Out of curiosity, I took the cheaper option. One part of the process was a multiple-choice exam on the Indonesian traffic rules. It had been so badly translated into English, that it was impossible to understand. Luckily, a helpful policeman stood by my desk and pointed out the correct boxes to check!

Don't know how prevalent the practice was in Asia but in Indonesia it was said that employees salary was low because the employer knew that the person in the position would be able to make $XXX from facilitation payments (bribes).We must have worked for the same oil company IFT, the ethics lecture always contained the statement "We dont pay bribes but do make facilitation payments", your use of the word "facilitation" is a bit of a giveaway as to the company, the big E.

Not really a giveaway - I worked for a smaller oil company in Africa and we also used the term. It was very frustrating - you did your best as an expat not to play but you really couldn't do your job without it.
It was endemic - everything from customs clearance of personal effects shipments to entry visas and vaccinations. I had a BA travel clinc yellow card with a "cholera" vaccine stamp on a separate piece of paper even though the vaccination was not required by the WHO and never given. Sometimes even that didn't work... in one country I was directed to the "health control" counter with a scary looking jar of used and bloody syringes on it. The conversation went like this: Officer in dirty white coat: "you must have cholera vaccine". Me: "How much to have the vaccine?" Officer "Ten dollars U.S." Me: How much NOT to have the vaccine?" Officer: "Ten dollars U.S.". I happened to go back after they built the new airport many years later and saw a sign over the unoccupied health counter "Cholera vaccine is not required"...

megan,

no I didn't work for 'the big E'.

Pinkman,

I had a friend in Singapore who needed a vaccination to travel to Africa (yellow fever?). He went to a clinic and was told the fee was $10 if he just wanted the stamp in his vaccination booklet or $30 if he actually wanted the vaccination!

All very much still in place in the capital of a well-known major western country, when getting visas to travel to such places.

There's a longwinded "official" process, and there are agents. Guess who owns the agencies ?

All very interesting, but relevant to the thread? By all means start a thread in JB on your reminiscences of "graft".

In my former company we called RR „Rotating Rubbish“ all missed the GEs until they came back with the 748

Small Asian nation?

Same population as the UK, twice the size.

https://fanclubthailand.co.uk/45-int...6.79%20million.

Unlike plane makers, engine makers are doing it hard. The financial risk of bleeding edge engines is huge and losing them money.

My thoughts! They all pushed the limits and maybe went over it with their latest generations.

Doesn't mean not to criticize them. What did RR do wrong in recent years? More than the other two?

Time for the aircraft manufacturers to return to multi vendor strategy?

all the big engine manufacturers have had troubles with their latest set of engines - probably pushing the technology to the absolute limits - and of course faced by a duopoly of airframers you HAVE to give them a price they Iike otherwise there is no-one to sell to

Indeed. Engine makers have long been the high end of technological push. The first engines in the 707/DC*, the JT3C, smoked and were inefficient, and often got stripped off and replaced after just a few years (many 707s and all the DC8s). The first widebody big fan engines likewise were plagued with similar issues. What a good thing those aircraft had a flight engineer to control it all. Rolls Royce were also on the early 707s and DC8s, but fell behind as they got insufficient sales for the huge, even then R&D that continued to be required.

If you want, you can go right back to piston times, when there were comparable long-term issues with production engines. Not for nothing were the last few years of piston aircraft production just thrown away worthless when the first jets appeared.

Hard to keep overview. When we look for issues of the newer engines, what are the troubles? Lets leave A380 away, cause noone will cancel an order because of RR engine

• P&W GTF for Airbusses: a variety of issues can be called a crisis on its own
• RR Trent 1000: Turbine trouble on B787, iirc?
• RR XWB: Issues in Hot and Sandy Environment for A350? Also Turbines trouble? Emirates fell off from A350 because of these?
• GE GEnx: don't remember
• How about RR Trent 7000 for A330neo?
• and GE LEAP?

Wanna know if RR is especially hit by tech trouble.

And Saffran had to pull their engine off the new Falcon BJ altogether and its been replaced by ...RR.......

For other problems Google is your friend

Well, I think I was wrong with assuming RR of recently having multiple safety issues. So that's not the factor here. Apart from Trent 1000 IPT and IPC cracking, affecting B787 ETOPS range, the XWB and -7000 models (A330neo) are fine.
It's just the (precautionary) short on-wing time on A350-1000 for hot and sandy env that piecced off Sandy Tim. While Quatar an Ethihad operate them with no reported complaints.

And now Thai? But looks like the pricing negotiations were the cause. Again, bean counters ignore a wonderful aircraft and an engine company that puts safety over profits?

For any aircraft manufacturer it feels advisable to have more than one engine supplier on future programs again.

The new GE engines have been pretty good - the GEnx and the LEAP (the LEAP is basically the same technology as the GEnx, just downsized).
Although the GEnx struggled early one with durability issues (i.e. time on wing before overhaul), it's reliability out of the box was quite good (much better than required for 180 minute ETOPS). They had some early gearbox issues with GEnx-1B on the 787 (driving those big generators) that caused a few shutdowns but were able to sort that fairly quickly. I've been out of the loop since I retired, but before GE had made big improvements in their time-on-wing such that it was comparable with earlier engines.
GE did have some serious reliability and durability issues with the GE90 early on (bad enough that - after being the launch customer for BA on the 777, BA switched to Rolls), but they managed to sort them out fairly quickly and by the time they introduced the GE90-115B, it was an impressively good engine.

Rolls has struggled with turbine reliability on their newer products, and of course Pratt's geared turbofan has had its own sets of problems.

The problem with that is that developing a new engine has become so costly. Engine companies like having an aircraft program devoted to their engine.

Rolls had the "sandwich" fan blades, Pratt the powder it just feels safer to have two to pick from.

What often happens is that one airframe and/or engine manufacturer see a certain deal as something they strategically wish to win. So in this case Boeing and GE have gone out of their way to win the order, and Airbus/RR would not come down any further. History is full of such deals on all sides.

Rolls-Royce can charge a premium when they have a premium product, at the moment they don’t

XWB is a mighty fine engine, doing very well in service, but in this case I suspect R-R were not prepared to give the level of discount on the total package that Thai wanted, and thus Boeing/GE got the deal. Its quite likely that this is almost a loss leader!

It is highly unlikely that TG was looking for the cheapest bidder. That would be a complete change of course for them.

Tight on topic, Trent XWB for A350 was unacceptable for Thai. If it wasn't financial reasons, it it tech problems? The XWB didn't show any after i spent some searching, it's just Emirates complaining about the short of wing inspection cycles. Dont know if this is out of caution and could be extended in future.

Other latest RR models seem to have no operational issues, with the exception of 787 Trent1000 and its IPC and IPT blade issues.

If Thai aims for 787 and the GEnx, are these safer?
2x Shaft cracks, but found pre-delivery. Don't know if a permanent fix was found.
1x icing issues with damage in flight, but sorted out meanwhile by design change. both also happened on 747-8 in operation.
Haven't found the Generator Gearbox issues brought up by tdracer. But I believe its real, and resolved.
Any other restrictions on the 787 GEnx?

If they aim for 777-X, a whole new set of uncertainty lies ahead of them. But that's not the plane to look for if you originally wanted A350, right?

The fan shaft cracks were due to stress corrosion - which in turn was caused by improper storage of engines that sat for an extended time waiting for the aircraft to be certified (both the 787 and 747-8 certified years behind schedule). Discovered and sorted before customers ever saw the engine.