User talk:Mark G Ellsworth

I think there are a couple of improvement needed in the current article. (1) In the first paragraph there is a statement to the effect that the design of the 787 has a standard interface that allows either the GEnx or Trent 1000 engine to be flown at any time provided modifications are made to the pylon. None of the three references cited at the end of the sentence make the claim. The pylon is the standard interface. More research is needed to affirm or refute the question. At present, I think both engines mount without pylon modification. (See note below) (2) The reference to upgrades on the Trent 1000 Ten also makes a confusing and ultimately incorrect statement about the AFT stages of the intermediate compressor turbines spinning at higher speeds. Whether a two-spool system (GEnx) or a three-spool system (Trent) the aft stages on the respective shafts do not have independent speeds compared to the FORE stages. Everything attached to a shaft rotates at the same speed. The article would be more correct to say that modifications to the intermediate-compressor turbines increase the rotational velocity of the shaft. The upshot is better compressor efficiency.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/2012_q3/2/

Boeing article says "In order to maximize the capital value of the airplane, Boeing decided that the propulsion systems should be designed for full interchangeability between the two engine types."

Mark G Ellsworth (talk) 12:41, 10 July 2016 (UTC)