Re-Engining Old Aircraft: Can It Be Done? Should It Be Done? 

The engines would fly further than the flyer 🤣

Lol 🤣🔥🛩️🔝

Would love to see FEDEX/UPS start the trend.

For optimum fuel efficiency for the 72K pound thrust range, a custom-designed derivative would be pretty awesome - GE could call it the GE8X 😎

​@@rafaelwilks I think a downscaled Trent XWB would suffice

They would rip themselves off the wings, too powerful. The A380 actually is already the most powerful passenger jet out there.

@@rafaelwilksif only GE went all in but I doubt they had so much interest in the A380 programme hence collabing with PW to make the GP7000

​@HesJustSteven they couldn't use GE90 or Genx derivatives because they had exclusive contracts with Boeing. So it would cost more to make something different

No, that's pointless. No one is flying four engine aircraft any longer.

The a350 has already replaced the a340

That would make it inefficient. Trent 500s are okay to go to older variants

Yes Trent xwb or genx on the A340

The MD-80 series should have been re-engined with the Pratt & Whitney PW6024 engine starting in 2007.

It's an exclusive contract

Other airlines are forced to retire them since some have metal fatigue or corrosion

I was on an AA ANC-DFW flight last year operated by an A321neo. Another passenger nearby asked the flight attendant what the "neo" meant (having seen it on the safety card). The flight attendant didn't know.

The NEO or MAX are not a re engine of an old plane. Putting CFM56 on a DC8 of KC135 is a re engine of an old plane. Same as with the re engine of the B52 or the C5 galaxy.

That's essentially what the P3-Orion is; an upgraded and reengined DC-3.

@@romandelasalle a company years ago modified a DC-3 by stretching the fuselage adding turboprop engines as well as a streamlined nose cone

A B747-400 with two GE9X engines rated at 127,000lb thrust each would indeed be physically possible, considering the GE9X famously generated a maximum thrust of about 134,000lb. A DC10 with GEnx power could also be physically possible, considering the GEnx was originally designed to be able to produce a minimum of 53,000lb thrust.

​@@rafaelwilkshowever the 747 wings have to be reinforced if it were to serve a two engine design, given that the outer engines' weight counters the bending force acting on the outer part of the wing during cursing

Do you mean one engine instead of two? That will never be certified.

Can be also called as “Trent 600 (III)”

Either option would result in the most powerful 757 of all time

What Airbus calls NEO is not a really a re-engine (and the MAX isn't either). They are not putting new engines on old airframes. Those are all brand new, somewhat redesigned airframes with new engines, and some other new features. In both the A320 and the MAX case, that includes longer fuselages and updated wingtip devices. The MAX also has longer, and telescoping landing gear, to gain a bit more clearance. The problem you face with a regular re-engines (for commercial aircraft), like the DC-8 and 727 examples in the video, is that you are working with airframes that are likely past at least half of their service life (if not even more), so they don't have much time to make back the cost of the re-engine. That's not to mention everything else that's outdated in the plane.

Concorde perhaps with the SR-71s Ramjets.

8 GE9x on b52 😂😂😂