Member Info for MJK1

That’s a crazy click bait headline, the T1000 hasn’t been grounded. There are well documented supply chain issues which are preventing some T1000’s being serviced on time but the vast majority of the fleet are still flying so they haven’t been grounded.

Something else to consider is the 30 day rule. For the gain to stick under CGT rules you can’t buy back into the same share for 30 days. Would you want to be out of this share for the 3rd quarter results on 8th November?

Also if the CGT increase is immediate from the budget day it is extremely underhand. We should be able to tax plan for the year ahead not have the rules changed half way through.

“Fact is this country needs either a campaign to 'breed for Britain' or immigration.”

That’s the last thing this country needs, it’s like a giant Ponzi scheme with more and more young needed to pay for more and more old. The longer it goes on the more painful it will be when it crashes, which it will, we can’t keep increasing our population ad infinitum.

AZ, thanks for ruining another thread with more of your unintelligible nonsense. What do you think you’re achieving by flooding this board with all this cr@p, totally bizarre!

RYCEY at $7.50 which is equivalent to £5.78 at 0.77 £/$. RYCEY has consistently been about £0.08 higher than RRL all afternoon, anyone know why this is? I thought they usually matched fairly closely.

Where do you get £6.5 million from? 258571 shares sold at £5.23259 gives £1.35 million.

Very positive from the Telegraph and here it is for anyone who doesn’t subscribe.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/this-engineering-giant-s-shares-are-up-77pc-this-year-and-still-on-a-roll/ar-AA1r9K7Q?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=d828df0b95fc44e0a88bb6f2cab78f65&ei=35

RYCEY closed at $6.34 on the Nasdaq yesterday which equals £4.88 at the current exchange rate. Will this translate to a strong opening for the share this morning on the FTSE?

Https://ph.parker.com/us/en/product-list/complex-tube-and-hose-assemblies

The photo on the right is the short length of high pressure fuel pipe in question that serves each burner. These are RR engine parts not airframe parts. As Napalm says, this really doesn’t warrant the mass media hysteria and the effect it’s having on the share price.

From what I’ve pieced together from the various reports, the problem is with a short length of braided flexible high pressure fuel pipe that serves each burner from the fuel manifold that runs round the engine. RR will have designed them and have ultimate responsibility for them but they will likely be a bought in part. The good news is they are very easy to change with a pipe nut at each end. I expect this to be a very short term problem with little financial implications for RR fortunately.

….and should be banned, totally tiresome.

Nothing to do with the Trent 1000. The A350-1000 is powered by Trent XWB-97, which are the engines to be inspected.

From wiki “In 2013, Turbomeca (part of the Safran Group, and now known as Safran Helicopter Engines) acquired the entire programme, becoming responsible for both production and product support.”

So nothing to do with RR now.

Exactly, this problem couldn’t be much more different to the Trent 1000 situation a few years ago. Replacing fuel nozzles is a one day job on wing. Parker Aerospace supply the fuel nozzles so I guess they will make a substantial contribution to any losses incurred by RR as well.

please, whatever or whoever you are, stop posting this ****e. you are ruining this board.

Trent 1000 problems alluded to earlier this week by A17? I see they had 2 inflight surges in as many days on BA 787’s. Not good if that continues.

Pete, life issues don’t show up until the engines have done hundreds if not thousands of flights. However if the cracks are showing up only partially into the projected overhaul interval it is a major cost headache for RR.

A17, is this compressor or turbine blades?

The net zero carbon answer for long haul has to be synthesised SAF. This will be produced by taking as much carbon out of the air as is put back in when it burns in the engines. This will need huge amounts of electricity for which RR has SMR’s. I don’t feel pessimistic about RR’s long term future. And anyone who thinks 8 billion people burning as much fossil fuel as we do has no effect on our atmosphere leading to gradual climate change is living in cloud cookoo land

Totally agree, absolute bonkers. It wouldn’t reduce the amount of fossil fuel we burn, it would just increase the amount we import rather than the country benefitting from producing our own.