Pilot7576

Fred won't decide what engines to use, Boeing has already done that. If they have Pratts, they cannot be converted to Rolls. If they have Rolls, you wouldn't want them converted to anything else!

Pilot7576

CactusCrew

Wouldn't be a surprise ... according to our fleet managers. The P&W powered ones are much easier to find these days, less demand.

We currently operate only the Rolls version, and for the moment, will most definitely, likely stay that way in the forseeable future ...

bravo24

Actually they can be converted if you want to pay the price but it wouldn't be worth it.

The first 757 was built with Rolls engines and was later converted to PWs. You can't miss the airplane - it's the goofy looking one that hangs out at KBFI. It was modified to test F-22 avionics.

RedeyeAV8r

We have Airbuses and MD-11's with both GE and Pratts..............
It wouldn't surprise me to see a mix of 757's with Pratts, Rolls Royce and GE.
If the price is right, Fred will buy them.

Daniel Larusso

Seeing as they never built a 757 with GE's it would surprise me! I would imagine that the only GE that would even be in the same thrust rating of a 757 @40k would the old CF6 motors from the DC-10-10's although I have no clue what they're rated at.

bravo24

During the development of the 757 GE was working on an engine for the airplane - a CF6-32 I believe. I don't know the reason why they changed their mind but in retrospect it may have been a wise choice.

Diesel Hog

Where is FDX getting their 757s?

Magenta Line

Pilot7576, what's so good about Rolls engines?

Pilot7576

Besides the fact they start in about a third of the time of the pratts, ups maintenance loves the reliability and the maintainability of the rolls over the pratts. The only thing they lack is the reverse thrust power that the pratts give you on landing. Ups first 33 or so 757 were pratts...the rest have all been rolls.

Pilot7576

FliFast

I have to agree with Pilot 7576, The Rolls motors have a higher max motoring than the PW2037s, but once you add the fuel they start faster than a car engine (airport cars need not apply). I have found the Rolls (at least the old National Airlines ones i flew at TransMeridian) were more subject to hot starts than the Pratts. When starting the Pratts, you could engage the starter, add fuel , and eat your lunch before they got to a stabilized idle.

The Pratts you can taxi on idle thrust, to me it seemed like you had to add power off-n-on to taxi with the RR motors, and on landing you could pull the power all the way off on the Pratts at 20 to 30 feet because they had a bit of residual thrust, whereas the RR motors, it seemed like a good idea to keep a tiny bit of power in until touchdown.

This may be an arguable point, but I found the Pratts had more power and flew a faster plane, even though the RR engines have a higher thrust. Maybe I always had Pratts when I had a commuter flight to catch....dunno.

Just my humble observations...your miles may vary.