A320 with Sharklets
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Somewhere...
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A320 with Sharklets
Hi,
Just out of curiosity I was wondering if anyone here has been flying on sharklet equipped A320?
Any possibility of sharing some insight when comparing to the regular models regarding performance, altitude capability, flight characteristics, X-wind behaviour, etc...
Thanks in advance.
Just out of curiosity I was wondering if anyone here has been flying on sharklet equipped A320?
Any possibility of sharing some insight when comparing to the regular models regarding performance, altitude capability, flight characteristics, X-wind behaviour, etc...
Thanks in advance.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One example - For 40 degrees C and 2000 ft Pressure height and at Maximum Landing Weight (Structural), One Engine Inoperative Approach Climb Gradients -
Standard A320 = 4.7%
Sharklet A320 = 5.2%
En-Route fuel saving = Approximately 4%
It seems that they work, even if the name sucks!
Standard A320 = 4.7%
Sharklet A320 = 5.2%
En-Route fuel saving = Approximately 4%
It seems that they work, even if the name sucks!
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Holding at DESDI
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been flying this thing for a few months now, and there are a few differences:
1. SOP > Cockpit Prep > Fuel Imbalance Limitations different from 'sharkless' 320's.
2. Radius of turn on the ground is 22.9m iso 22m.
3. Max X-wind for AUTO-ROLLOUT on a Cat 3 approach is 15kts iso 20kts.
4. New limits for contaminated runways
5. As mentioned, better climb gradient, BUT.... quote: "Improved performance on climb gradients and the takeoff flight path that result in an increase in the takeoff weight when obstacles or second segments limit the Maximum Take Off Weight (MTOW). The MTOW increase results in an increase of payload, or range, or in takeoff thrust reduction. For Turn Procedures, the flight path climb gradient will be different for A320 aircraft equipped with Sharklets than for A320 aircraft equipped with wingtips. Sharklets aircraft have higher climb gradient loss during turn than aircraft equipped with wingtips."
So, all of that stuff was from the books. Seat-of-the-pants feel when flying:
1. In cruise, it has a slightly rougher ride. Light lateral chops tend to cause more roll than a regular 320. The extra vertical surface area tends to make the aircraft roll a little more when it encounters a gust.
2. You can feel that the aircraft is a little more slippery, esp on the ILS. For example, 55t, 3deg slope, flaps 2, gear up, no wind... she tends to ACCELERATE! Standard 320's (esp at 55t or less) would decelerate or maintain their speed. You might need to drop the gear a second or two earlier to achieve your stabilization criteria.
3. Crosswind gusts at landing tend not to blow the nose into the wind, but push the whole aircraft off it's lateral path. i.e. it drifts further off the centerline with the wind and feels slightly 'wonky', but not too much.
You'd notice the difference the first couple of times you'd fly it, but you'll get used to it quite easily!
1. SOP > Cockpit Prep > Fuel Imbalance Limitations different from 'sharkless' 320's.
2. Radius of turn on the ground is 22.9m iso 22m.
3. Max X-wind for AUTO-ROLLOUT on a Cat 3 approach is 15kts iso 20kts.
4. New limits for contaminated runways
5. As mentioned, better climb gradient, BUT.... quote: "Improved performance on climb gradients and the takeoff flight path that result in an increase in the takeoff weight when obstacles or second segments limit the Maximum Take Off Weight (MTOW). The MTOW increase results in an increase of payload, or range, or in takeoff thrust reduction. For Turn Procedures, the flight path climb gradient will be different for A320 aircraft equipped with Sharklets than for A320 aircraft equipped with wingtips. Sharklets aircraft have higher climb gradient loss during turn than aircraft equipped with wingtips."
So, all of that stuff was from the books. Seat-of-the-pants feel when flying:
1. In cruise, it has a slightly rougher ride. Light lateral chops tend to cause more roll than a regular 320. The extra vertical surface area tends to make the aircraft roll a little more when it encounters a gust.
2. You can feel that the aircraft is a little more slippery, esp on the ILS. For example, 55t, 3deg slope, flaps 2, gear up, no wind... she tends to ACCELERATE! Standard 320's (esp at 55t or less) would decelerate or maintain their speed. You might need to drop the gear a second or two earlier to achieve your stabilization criteria.
3. Crosswind gusts at landing tend not to blow the nose into the wind, but push the whole aircraft off it's lateral path. i.e. it drifts further off the centerline with the wind and feels slightly 'wonky', but not too much.
You'd notice the difference the first couple of times you'd fly it, but you'll get used to it quite easily!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: -
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apart from the things Seagull posted which by the way are spot on, I found that flying during night time with the strobes on causes a constant flashing inside the cockpit and its really ANNOYING!!!!!!!!!!
The strobes are installed in the leading edge of the sharklet, the should have been installed on the trailing edge.
The strobes are installed in the leading edge of the sharklet, the should have been installed on the trailing edge.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Holding at DESDI
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks AVA! 
BTW, Airbus is aware of this issue, and a modified strobe light is currently under certification. Check your effectivity/tail number in the SOP's.
For early production aircraft, it will tell you quite clearly that AT ANY TIME, IF NECESSARY, you can switch the strobe lights OFF!
And... as for having the strobes installed on the leading edge, it's a legal requirement. 110 degree field of view for the wing tip strobes, forward facing, etc. etc.. It was there in one of the ICAO annexes or CAR's. I did study this a long time back in ground school... can't remember the exact numbers, though.
If I find it, I will post.
BTW, Airbus is aware of this issue, and a modified strobe light is currently under certification. Check your effectivity/tail number in the SOP's.
For early production aircraft, it will tell you quite clearly that AT ANY TIME, IF NECESSARY, you can switch the strobe lights OFF!
And... as for having the strobes installed on the leading edge, it's a legal requirement. 110 degree field of view for the wing tip strobes, forward facing, etc. etc.. It was there in one of the ICAO annexes or CAR's. I did study this a long time back in ground school... can't remember the exact numbers, though.
If I find it, I will post.
Last edited by J.L.Seagull; 14th May 2013 at 06:26.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mcdhu,
AI haven't come up with ANY crosswind limits (excepting Auto-Land considerations) for any A320. There's a whole bunch of maximum DEMONSTRATED crosswinds encountered, but thus far the only actual limits stated are in company SOPs. Our mob couldn't help themselves, and imposed a new crosswind consideration for the aircraft.
A small difference performance wise is that Vmcg is increased by 1 Kt (due to greater wing span), impacting on short field RTOWs which are Vmc limited, but 2nd segment limited operations allow for improved RTOWs.
It's all been worthwhile, but no retro-fitting seems to be in order.
AI haven't come up with ANY crosswind limits (excepting Auto-Land considerations) for any A320. There's a whole bunch of maximum DEMONSTRATED crosswinds encountered, but thus far the only actual limits stated are in company SOPs. Our mob couldn't help themselves, and imposed a new crosswind consideration for the aircraft.
A small difference performance wise is that Vmcg is increased by 1 Kt (due to greater wing span), impacting on short field RTOWs which are Vmc limited, but 2nd segment limited operations allow for improved RTOWs.
It's all been worthwhile, but no retro-fitting seems to be in order.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seagull,
Good information....
Within the RNP procedure designs, there have been some issues with the winglets/sharklets. They tend to be a bit more slippery, so especially when there is a turn to short final, which is usually a smaller radius turn, the criteria design just wont work, the ac will roll out of the turn.
I would also note that Airbus now uses a 2.8 GPA for RNP procedures with their sharklet ac (like all) due to the energy management issues on final...
Given that the criteria for the A320 is usually a Cat C, with FAS of 140 kts, its easy to see how a design turn cannot be realistic for the ac. (if the turn is to FAF, the CAT speed is used for the entire turn..in the criteria)
There have been many procedures that worked very well before the for same ac with/without winglet/sharklet issue, and have now been modified or abandoned.
Interesting note on the crosswind. I will ponder that as the criteria considers wind always as a tailwind, that follows it through the turn. There is no consideration for crosswind...
Good information....
Within the RNP procedure designs, there have been some issues with the winglets/sharklets. They tend to be a bit more slippery, so especially when there is a turn to short final, which is usually a smaller radius turn, the criteria design just wont work, the ac will roll out of the turn.
I would also note that Airbus now uses a 2.8 GPA for RNP procedures with their sharklet ac (like all) due to the energy management issues on final...
Given that the criteria for the A320 is usually a Cat C, with FAS of 140 kts, its easy to see how a design turn cannot be realistic for the ac. (if the turn is to FAF, the CAT speed is used for the entire turn..in the criteria)
There have been many procedures that worked very well before the for same ac with/without winglet/sharklet issue, and have now been modified or abandoned.
Interesting note on the crosswind. I will ponder that as the criteria considers wind always as a tailwind, that follows it through the turn. There is no consideration for crosswind...
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 14th May 2013 at 20:17.
Strobe and Navigation Lights
Just been flying a new A320 with Sharklets.
"And... as for having the strobes installed on the leading edge, it's a legal requirement. 110 degree field of view for the wing tip strobes, forward facing, etc. etc.. It was there in one of the ICAO annexes or CAR's. I did study this a long time back in ground school... can't remember the exact numbers, though."
There is no requirement that I know of for "Strobes" to be visible from leading edge nor that they cover a field of 110º since no position information is gleaned from them. In fact there there is no requirement that I know of to have them switched on. There is a requirement to have either an anti-collision beacon or strobes but if you have the beacon you do not need strobes.
There is a requirement for Port, Starboard and Tail Navigation lights to be on from 30 mins before sunset to 30mins after sunrise (if memory serves me and this is FAA). The requirement for the Port and Starboard Naveigation lights is from Straight ahead to 110º either side. On the A320 with Sharklets the the Port Nav light is visible not only from the flight deck but a good 10º to the right of the centre line and vice versa for the starboard. I would have thought this was actually contrary to certification requirments.
The following is extracted from FAR Part 25-(God knows where it is now under EASA Acceptible Means of Compliance) but I doubt there is a variation in this as it is probably maritime law and certainly under what was UK rules of the air.
FAA Part 25 States:
§ 25.1385 Position light system installation.
(a) General. Each part of each position light system must meet the applicable requirements of this section and each system as a whole must meet the requirements of §§ 25.1387 through 25.1397.
(b) Forward position lights. Forward position lights must consist of a red and a green light spaced laterally as far apart as practicable and installed forward on the airplane so that, with the airplane in the normal flying position, the red light is on the left side and the green light is on the right side. Each light must be approved.
(c) Rear position light. The rear position light must be a white light mounted as far aft as practicable on the tail or on each wing tip, and must be approved.
(d) Light covers and color filters. Each light cover or color filter must be at least flame resistant and may not change color or shape or lose any appreciable light transmission during normal use.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-38, 41 FR 55468, Dec. 20, 1976]
Back to Top
§ 25.1387 Position light system dihedral angles.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, each forward and rear position light must, as installed, show unbroken light within the dihedral angles described in this section.
(b) Dihedral angle L (left) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the left of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(c) Dihedral angle R (right) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the right of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(d) Dihedral angle A (aft) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes making angles of 70 degrees to the right and to the left, respectively, to a vertical plane passing through the longitudinal axis, as viewed when looking aft along the longitudinal axis.
(e) If the rear position light, when mounted as far aft as practicable in accordance with § 25.1385(c), cannot show unbroken light within dihedral angle A (as defined in paragraph (d) of this section), a solid angle or angles of obstructed visibility totaling not more than 0.04 steradians is allowable within that dihedral angle, if such solid angle is within a cone whose apex is at the rear position light and whose elements make an angle of 30° with a vertical line passing through the rear position light.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-30, 36 FR 21278, Nov. 5, 1971]
Back to Top
§ 25.1389 Position light distribution and intensities.
(a) General. The intensities prescribed in this section must be provided by new equipment with light covers and color filters in place. Intensities must be determined with the light source operating at a steady value equal to the average luminous output of the source at the normal operating voltage of the airplane. The light distribution and intensity of each position light must meet the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Forward and rear position lights. The light distribution and intensities of forward and rear position lights must be expressed in terms of minimum intensities in the horizontal plane, minimum intensities in any vertical plane, and maximum intensities in overlapping beams, within dihedral angles L, R, and A, and must meet the following requirements:
(1) Intensities in the horizontal plane. Each intensity in the horizontal plane (the plane containing the longitudinal axis of the airplane and perpendicular to the plane of symmetry of the airplane) must equal or exceed the values in § 25.1391.
(2) Intensities in any vertical plane. Each intensity in any vertical plane (the plane perpendicular to the horizontal plane) must equal or exceed the appropriate value in § 25.1393, where I is the minimum intensity prescribed in § 25.1391 for the corresponding angles in the horizontal plane.
(3) Intensities in overlaps between adjacent signals. No intensity in any overlap between adjacent signals may exceed the values given in § 25.1395, except that higher intensities in overlaps may be used with main beam intensities substantially greater than the minima specified in §§ 25.1391 and 25.1393 if the overlap intensities in relation to the main beam intensities do not adversely affect signal clarity. When the peak intensity of the forward position lights is more than 100 candles, the maximum overlap intensities between them may exceed the values given in § 25.1395 if the overlap intensity in Area A is not more than 10 percent of peak position light intensity and the overlap intensity in Area B is not greater than 2.5 percent of peak position light intensity.
Back to Top
§ 25.1391 Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane of forward and rear position lights.
Each position light intensity must equal or exceed the applicable values in the following table:
Dihedral angle (light included)
Angle from right or left of longitudinal axis, measured from dead ahead
Intensity (candles)
LandR(forward red and green)
0° to 10°
10° to 20°
20° to 110°
40
30
5
A (rear white)
110° to 180°
20
I have never read of any legal requirment for the strobes to be on the leading edge with a 110º field of view. A lot of aircraft have the strobes mounted on the actual wingtip behind the leading edge and many aircraft also have the Navigation lights mounted on the actual wingtip but behind the leading edge this effectively providing the cut off for straight ahead. So long as they are visible from straight ahead back round 110º they are OK.
Regarding the Anti-Collision Light system, FAR 25 again states:
§ 25.1401 Anticollision light system.
(a) General. The airplane must have an anticollision light system that—
(1) Consists of one or more approved anticollision lights located so that their light will not impair the crew's vision or detract from the conspicuity of the position lights; and
(2) Meets the requirements of paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section.
(b) Field of coverage. The system must consist of enough lights to illuminate the vital areas around the airplane considering the physical configuration and flight characteristics of the airplane. The field of coverage must extend in each direction within at least 75 degrees above and 75 degrees below the horizontal plane of the airplane, except that a solid angle or angles of obstructed visibility totaling not more than 0.03 steradians is allowable within a solid angle equal to 0.15 steradians centered about the longitudinal axis in the rearward direction.
(c) Flashing characteristics. The arrangement of the system, that is, the number of light sources, beam width, speed of rotation, and other characteristics, must give an effective flash frequency of not less than 40, nor more than 100 cycles per minute. The effective flash frequency is the frequency at which the airplane's complete anticollision light system is observed from a distance, and applies to each sector of light including any overlaps that exist when the system consists of more than one light source. In overlaps, flash frequencies may exceed 100, but not 180 cycles per minute.
(d) Color. Each anticollision light must be either aviation red or aviation white and must meet the applicable requirements of § 25.1397.
Link to the FAA page:
eCFR ? Code of Federal Regulations
The main point is the Nav lights should not really be directly visible from the flight deck which they are on the sharklet A320 and the strobes should certainly not be visible and flashing into the flight deck.
To say "Airbus are aware of this issue" is just flabbergasting. How the hell did they get an STC or new C of A for these sharklets with lights installed in this manner? IMHO this is a real
up.
"And... as for having the strobes installed on the leading edge, it's a legal requirement. 110 degree field of view for the wing tip strobes, forward facing, etc. etc.. It was there in one of the ICAO annexes or CAR's. I did study this a long time back in ground school... can't remember the exact numbers, though."
There is no requirement that I know of for "Strobes" to be visible from leading edge nor that they cover a field of 110º since no position information is gleaned from them. In fact there there is no requirement that I know of to have them switched on. There is a requirement to have either an anti-collision beacon or strobes but if you have the beacon you do not need strobes.
There is a requirement for Port, Starboard and Tail Navigation lights to be on from 30 mins before sunset to 30mins after sunrise (if memory serves me and this is FAA). The requirement for the Port and Starboard Naveigation lights is from Straight ahead to 110º either side. On the A320 with Sharklets the the Port Nav light is visible not only from the flight deck but a good 10º to the right of the centre line and vice versa for the starboard. I would have thought this was actually contrary to certification requirments.
The following is extracted from FAR Part 25-(God knows where it is now under EASA Acceptible Means of Compliance) but I doubt there is a variation in this as it is probably maritime law and certainly under what was UK rules of the air.
FAA Part 25 States:
§ 25.1385 Position light system installation.
(a) General. Each part of each position light system must meet the applicable requirements of this section and each system as a whole must meet the requirements of §§ 25.1387 through 25.1397.
(b) Forward position lights. Forward position lights must consist of a red and a green light spaced laterally as far apart as practicable and installed forward on the airplane so that, with the airplane in the normal flying position, the red light is on the left side and the green light is on the right side. Each light must be approved.
(c) Rear position light. The rear position light must be a white light mounted as far aft as practicable on the tail or on each wing tip, and must be approved.
(d) Light covers and color filters. Each light cover or color filter must be at least flame resistant and may not change color or shape or lose any appreciable light transmission during normal use.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-38, 41 FR 55468, Dec. 20, 1976]
Back to Top
§ 25.1387 Position light system dihedral angles.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, each forward and rear position light must, as installed, show unbroken light within the dihedral angles described in this section.
(b) Dihedral angle L (left) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the left of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(c) Dihedral angle R (right) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes, the first parallel to the longitudinal axis of the airplane, and the other at 110 degrees to the right of the first, as viewed when looking forward along the longitudinal axis.
(d) Dihedral angle A (aft) is formed by two intersecting vertical planes making angles of 70 degrees to the right and to the left, respectively, to a vertical plane passing through the longitudinal axis, as viewed when looking aft along the longitudinal axis.
(e) If the rear position light, when mounted as far aft as practicable in accordance with § 25.1385(c), cannot show unbroken light within dihedral angle A (as defined in paragraph (d) of this section), a solid angle or angles of obstructed visibility totaling not more than 0.04 steradians is allowable within that dihedral angle, if such solid angle is within a cone whose apex is at the rear position light and whose elements make an angle of 30° with a vertical line passing through the rear position light.
[Doc. No. 5066, 29 FR 18291, Dec. 24, 1964, as amended by Amdt. 25-30, 36 FR 21278, Nov. 5, 1971]
Back to Top
§ 25.1389 Position light distribution and intensities.
(a) General. The intensities prescribed in this section must be provided by new equipment with light covers and color filters in place. Intensities must be determined with the light source operating at a steady value equal to the average luminous output of the source at the normal operating voltage of the airplane. The light distribution and intensity of each position light must meet the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) Forward and rear position lights. The light distribution and intensities of forward and rear position lights must be expressed in terms of minimum intensities in the horizontal plane, minimum intensities in any vertical plane, and maximum intensities in overlapping beams, within dihedral angles L, R, and A, and must meet the following requirements:
(1) Intensities in the horizontal plane. Each intensity in the horizontal plane (the plane containing the longitudinal axis of the airplane and perpendicular to the plane of symmetry of the airplane) must equal or exceed the values in § 25.1391.
(2) Intensities in any vertical plane. Each intensity in any vertical plane (the plane perpendicular to the horizontal plane) must equal or exceed the appropriate value in § 25.1393, where I is the minimum intensity prescribed in § 25.1391 for the corresponding angles in the horizontal plane.
(3) Intensities in overlaps between adjacent signals. No intensity in any overlap between adjacent signals may exceed the values given in § 25.1395, except that higher intensities in overlaps may be used with main beam intensities substantially greater than the minima specified in §§ 25.1391 and 25.1393 if the overlap intensities in relation to the main beam intensities do not adversely affect signal clarity. When the peak intensity of the forward position lights is more than 100 candles, the maximum overlap intensities between them may exceed the values given in § 25.1395 if the overlap intensity in Area A is not more than 10 percent of peak position light intensity and the overlap intensity in Area B is not greater than 2.5 percent of peak position light intensity.
Back to Top
§ 25.1391 Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane of forward and rear position lights.
Each position light intensity must equal or exceed the applicable values in the following table:
Dihedral angle (light included)
Angle from right or left of longitudinal axis, measured from dead ahead
Intensity (candles)
LandR(forward red and green)
0° to 10°
10° to 20°
20° to 110°
40
30
5
A (rear white)
110° to 180°
20
I have never read of any legal requirment for the strobes to be on the leading edge with a 110º field of view. A lot of aircraft have the strobes mounted on the actual wingtip behind the leading edge and many aircraft also have the Navigation lights mounted on the actual wingtip but behind the leading edge this effectively providing the cut off for straight ahead. So long as they are visible from straight ahead back round 110º they are OK.
Regarding the Anti-Collision Light system, FAR 25 again states:
§ 25.1401 Anticollision light system.
(a) General. The airplane must have an anticollision light system that—
(1) Consists of one or more approved anticollision lights located so that their light will not impair the crew's vision or detract from the conspicuity of the position lights; and
(2) Meets the requirements of paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section.
(b) Field of coverage. The system must consist of enough lights to illuminate the vital areas around the airplane considering the physical configuration and flight characteristics of the airplane. The field of coverage must extend in each direction within at least 75 degrees above and 75 degrees below the horizontal plane of the airplane, except that a solid angle or angles of obstructed visibility totaling not more than 0.03 steradians is allowable within a solid angle equal to 0.15 steradians centered about the longitudinal axis in the rearward direction.
(c) Flashing characteristics. The arrangement of the system, that is, the number of light sources, beam width, speed of rotation, and other characteristics, must give an effective flash frequency of not less than 40, nor more than 100 cycles per minute. The effective flash frequency is the frequency at which the airplane's complete anticollision light system is observed from a distance, and applies to each sector of light including any overlaps that exist when the system consists of more than one light source. In overlaps, flash frequencies may exceed 100, but not 180 cycles per minute.
(d) Color. Each anticollision light must be either aviation red or aviation white and must meet the applicable requirements of § 25.1397.
Link to the FAA page:
eCFR ? Code of Federal Regulations
The main point is the Nav lights should not really be directly visible from the flight deck which they are on the sharklet A320 and the strobes should certainly not be visible and flashing into the flight deck.
To say "Airbus are aware of this issue" is just flabbergasting. How the hell did they get an STC or new C of A for these sharklets with lights installed in this manner? IMHO this is a real
up.
It's all been worthwhile, but no retro-fitting seems to be in order.
A non-Boeing buddy of mine worked the STC for the 757 and 767 winglets and he said the internal wing changes are substantial. On the plus side, fuel burn improvement for 3+ hour flights will pay for it in a year, even though the retrofit cost is seven figures.
If they are really getting 4% for the sharklets, someone will do the work to retrofit them via STC.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EGGW
Posts: 2,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tdracer
Its a little different with the Boeing 757 & 767 as you only have an STC, Boeing does not fit them on the 757 & 767 only on the 737NG.
The Airbus fit is part of the TC, so l can not see a STC being developed in the near future.
Airbus is the same, major wing strengthening as per the APB modifications, it is amazing the area of the a/c that is covered by reduced MRBR/MPD intervals, including a lot of the fuse.
Increased maintenance cost which is never mentioned, but reduced fuel burn as you have rightly pointed out.
The Airbus fit is part of the TC, so l can not see a STC being developed in the near future.
Airbus is the same, major wing strengthening as per the APB modifications, it is amazing the area of the a/c that is covered by reduced MRBR/MPD intervals, including a lot of the fuse.
Increased maintenance cost which is never mentioned, but reduced fuel burn as you have rightly pointed out.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been told that winglet design varies between long-range and short-range aircraft. The sharklet/blended winglets provide more benefit in climb and descent whereas long-range aircraft have winglets optimized for high-altitude cruise.
