RSAF chooses GE powerplant for F-15T

sgFish SG

"Singapore chooses GE

Singapore has selected the General Electric F100-129 over Pratt & Whitneys F100-229 as the preferred engine for its new fleet of Boeing F-15Ts. GE is in contract negotiations with Singapore and P&W has been informed that it will only be called in for negotiations should the country fail to complete a contract with GE, say industry sources, writes Brendan Sobie.

Last month Singapore confirmed it was in contract negotiations with Boeing for an initial eight to 12 next-generation fighters and had eliminated the only remaining contender, Dassaults Rafale. In its original proposal to Singapore last year, Boeing included pricing on both the F100-129 and F100-229. But GE and P&W also submitted separate proposals to Singapores Defence Science and Technology Agency and the engine contract is being negotiated separately. The contract is expected to include two engines per aircraft, plus two to four spares, but it is unclear if Singapore will acquire eight or 12 F-15Ts. Singapore initially asked for bids for both eight and 12 fighters and is seeking options for another eight to 12 aircraft.

The selection of the F100-129 is a blow to P&W, whose F100-220 and F100-229 now power Singapores fleet of Lockheed Martin F-16s. P&W also has several joint venture maintenance companies in Singapore and services F100s locally with partner Singapore Technologies Aerospace."

From http://www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2005/10/04/Navigation/190/201960/Singapore+chooses+GE.html

what happened to commonality and the ease of logistics o.O

sgFish SG

hmm. i think there is an error in the article. the GE engine should be the F110-GE-129, not F-100..

sbst275 SG

OK

Engine settled

storm_freaky13 SG

wait i confused…. the GE one has more thrust or P&W ah?

Shotgun SG

I think someone said the GE one.

For a strike fighter, which would be carrying a heavy payload, an engine with more thrust is definitely desireable. Carrying all those high drag payloads, LGBs, Mavericks, whatever, I would want an engine thats capable of pushing it when its needed.

I found a site that mentioned something abt PW 229 engine and the strike eagle.

Asymmetric thrust is a potential problem only for F-15Es configured with PW F100-229 engines. In the event of an ATDPS failure above 500 KCAS or 1.1 Mach, the jet is subject to departure. Likewise, intentional asymmetric throttle inputs in this flight regime can also lead to departure.

from http://afsafety.af.mil/magazine/htdocs/julmag97/pg15jul.htm

Joe Black SG

aiya,

both GE F110-129 and PW F100-229 produce 29,000 lb of thrust each. GE engine is however a little shorter in length and a little heavier - just about 100+ lb heavier.

Currently, all RSAF Vipers use the PW F100-229 engines.

sbst275 SG

Lower fc lor

sgFish SG

The F-16 entered service powered by the Pratt & Whitney F100 afterburning turbofan. Seeking a way to drive unit costs down the USAF implemented the Alternative Fighter Engine (AFE) program in 1984, under which the engine contract would be awarded through competition. The F110 currently powers 86% of the USAF F-16C/Ds.

The GE F110 provides 5,000 lbf (22 kN) more thrust than the P&W F100 and requires more air, which lead to the increase in the area of the engine intake. The F-16C/D Block 30/32s were the first to be built with this larger intake and a common engine bay, able to accept both engines.

Initial orders were for the F110-GE-100 rated at 28,000 lbf (125 kN). Later developments include the F110-GE-129 delivering 29,000 lbf (129 kN) thrust and the F110-GE-132 delivering 32,000 lbf (142 kN)

38 SG

Lets compare to ROK Air force

ROK AF operates both F15 and F16 and the engine for F15K is GEs and PWs for their F16

However, some ROKAFs F16 crashed because of the PW F100 engine problem and Taiwans F16 crashed for the same F100 engine problem

The reliability issue convinced Koreans to choose GEs powerplant.

Exclamation

sgFish SG

hmm. then since the late model F-16s are built with a common engine bay, is it possible and/or economical for the RSAF to retrofit our vipers with the GE engines for safety and logistical efficiency?

38 SG

So you want those who service the PW engine in SG lose their jobs right? Wink

I Don't Think So !

Change powerplane is a big issue specially when all the things are integrated

Delta 5 SG

But if the change of F-16 powerplants to the GE model is done gradually over a few years should not be a problem rite? Hmmm I like the GE engines... Esp the F110 GE132 providing 32000lbs of thrust.

38 SG

PW F100 still got its own merit specially its Bypass Ratio is only almost half of GE F110's, which indicates it may have better high altitude performance and acceleration. As a air superiority fighter, these are valuable assets.

The F110 with much higher Bypass Ratio means much less fuel consumption and gives a striker longer mileage. F15T is such a Striker. However F16 may not play the same role.

Shotgun SG

But apparently there are reliability problem regarding the PW engines. ROKAF had to ground their F-16s cos of it i heard. GE engines were recognised to be more reliable.

touchstone_2000 SG

I think most the posters forgot I important factor.

You cannot have 1 engine model used by 2 planes.

If for some reason there is a grounding order due to the engine, no more RSAF!

Joe Black SG

I do wonder if the Eagles are going to be have the 32,000 lb GE engine instead of the 29,000 lb. What would really be cool (but is not going to happen) is that the Eagles be modified with multi-axis thrust vectoring with a new FBW. Then all of a sudden the Eagles would be as agile as the Sukhois.

sgFish SG

haha. with HMCS and AIM-9X, no need MATV also can whack Mr. Green

duotiga83 SG

gd choice…finally choose GE over P&W…

sgFish SG

a bit off, but will our F-15Ts be provided with FAST (fuel and sensor tactical) packs?

duotiga83 SG

FAST is actually CFT (conformal fuel tank) this shld clarify your doubt...