L-1011 cabin altitude
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,833
Likes: 2
From: Sale, Australia
Alternative engine from L-1011 Tristar History
There simply was no easy alternative to the Rolls engines. To turn to Pratt & Whitney for its JT-9D turbofan or to General Electric for its own commercial engine, the CF-6, would cost a year in time and $100 million in development costs. That was because neither of these engines would slip in neatly as a replacement. There would be need for extensive redesign of engine housings and installations, starting with wind-tunnel tests, proceeding through reconsideration of weight distributions
There simply was no easy alternative to the Rolls engines. To turn to Pratt & Whitney for its JT-9D turbofan or to General Electric for its own commercial engine, the CF-6, would cost a year in time and $100 million in development costs. That was because neither of these engines would slip in neatly as a replacement. There would be need for extensive redesign of engine housings and installations, starting with wind-tunnel tests, proceeding through reconsideration of weight distributions
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 454
Likes: 3
From: Georgia, USA
There were many reasons that alternative engines were never offered on the L-1011. However, came down to the fact that Lockheed did not have the money required for-designing, re-tooling and re-certifing an alternative engine. Remember after the Lockheed (Dan Houghton) got Rolls Royce out of bankrupicy, Lockheed had to borrow $250M from the US government, just to keep the L-1011 program alive.
