A340 winglet!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: #37 for Start
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFAIK on the 747-400 this is allowed, but with certain performance considerations et al.
If this is the case, I "assume" that similar would apply to A340.
Only speculating though, thus waiting to hear the "informed" answer.
If this is the case, I "assume" that similar would apply to A340.
Only speculating though, thus waiting to hear the "informed" answer.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: South Africa
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another question: Can a 747 freighter fly with damage to the tail/rudder area?
By the way, on the radio there were some immediate recriminations with ATC (Ground) ensuring that everyone knew what her clearance was..... and the A340 crew not committing and complaining about not being able to make the required t/way. Its going to be an interesting insurance claim.
By the way, on the radio there were some immediate recriminations with ATC (Ground) ensuring that everyone knew what her clearance was..... and the A340 crew not committing and complaining about not being able to make the required t/way. Its going to be an interesting insurance claim.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: South Africa
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way, on the radio there were some immediate recriminations with ATC (Ground) ensuring that everyone knew what her clearance was..... and the A340 crew not committing and complaining about not being able to make the required t/way. Its going to be an interesting insurance claim.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: around
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happened during the pushback
Will see what happens.
MK B747 still parked there today.
Cheers
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SA
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought but doesn't it only become an ATC isssue when the aircraft is on the taxiway and an ACSA problem when its still in the bay-we had a similar thing some years ago and were told ATC had nothing to do with us as we weren't on the taxiway.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hotazel
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saw Lufthansa flying into Cape Town with a B744 about 6-7 years ago with no right winglet and on asking the Capt..he replied "it makes no difference" So I wonder why they have winglets??
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I understand regarding winglets, they are neither proven to be more efficeint or economical than if without, except for at a particular level and cruise set up.
So, again, from what I understand, at that particular cruise level and conditions they make the aircraft more efficeint and economical, but perhaps decrease those values getting to that level.
Hence, neither one way or the other.
If you stick something onto a plane and into the airflow you will 1. increase the weight of the total plane and 2. increase the drag, thats about my level of understanding.
So, again, from what I understand, at that particular cruise level and conditions they make the aircraft more efficeint and economical, but perhaps decrease those values getting to that level.
Hence, neither one way or the other.
If you stick something onto a plane and into the airflow you will 1. increase the weight of the total plane and 2. increase the drag, thats about my level of understanding.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really doesnt matter warlock, anything in an airflow creates drag....!
What you have to decide is whether the penalty is greater or less than the advantage gained while in the cruise?
What you have to decide is whether the penalty is greater or less than the advantage gained while in the cruise?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SC- what you're forgetting is that winglets are there to eliminate (or at least substanially reduce) wingtip vortices caused by air flowing around the edge of the wing from the high pressure area beneath to the lower pressure area on top. Sure, sticking something into the airflow will increase drag, but in this case the increase in drag is more than cancelled out by the decrease in drag caused by the reduction of the wingtip vortices - in all stages of flight.
Warlock's quote above from the MEL - "increase fuel consumption by 1%" - says it all.
t
Warlock's quote above from the MEL - "increase fuel consumption by 1%" - says it all.
t
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, you are quite right about wing tip vortices, but you have also added weight to the overall aircraft weight, so therefore more thrust is required to push it along, which means more fuel, which in turn means more weight again, more weight requires more lift, which increases the amount of induced drag...
My point about winglets, is there are definately two schools of thought on them, from what I have read in articles, and I think this is proven by virtue of the fact that not all planes have them, eg. 747-400´, b737-7/800 yes, all the Airbus 320 family no, A340 yes, B757,767,777 no.
Explain that ?
My point about winglets, is there are definately two schools of thought on them, from what I have read in articles, and I think this is proven by virtue of the fact that not all planes have them, eg. 747-400´, b737-7/800 yes, all the Airbus 320 family no, A340 yes, B757,767,777 no.
Explain that ?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: RSA
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SC – All the Airbuses (310/318/319/320/321) were fitted with winglets, much smaller than the A340 winglets, looks like a delta wing on the tips. Some of the new A320 winglets look like the A340 winglets and even old B727 (private jets) get to be fitted with winglets. The B773 got some funny wing / winglet on the tip of the wing, but I don’t know if it’s a wing tip or winglet.
Seems as if the manufacturers do believe it makes a difference in a/c performance.
E
Seems as if the manufacturers do believe it makes a difference in a/c performance.
E
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eraser...
you are right about the a-320 family, but i was not considering them as winglets, i mean, to be fair, they are something quite different to what the b737 & 747 and a340 have.
this is exactly my point, the weight and size of the 'winglets' that airbus use on the a320 family is far less than that of the b737's, and are obviously deemed to do as good a job, so why the huge things on the b737?
you are right about the a-320 family, but i was not considering them as winglets, i mean, to be fair, they are something quite different to what the b737 & 747 and a340 have.
this is exactly my point, the weight and size of the 'winglets' that airbus use on the a320 family is far less than that of the b737's, and are obviously deemed to do as good a job, so why the huge things on the b737?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The MK plane was parked like that because they were loading freight through the nose. The SAA plane was instructed to push back far enough to exit via the HOTEL exit, which he acknowledged, and again on taxi, was told to exit via HOTEL, which the acknowledged again, and still taxied straight ahead and struck the MK plane causing damage to the APU door and one of the elevators
The SAA flight was delayed by 12 hours because no spare planes were available. It has since been patched up and is flying with one winglet. The MK plane is still on the apron, only departing tonight, nearly a week after the incident.
The SAA flight was delayed by 12 hours because no spare planes were available. It has since been patched up and is flying with one winglet. The MK plane is still on the apron, only departing tonight, nearly a week after the incident.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 49
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eraser...
you are right about the a-320 family, but i was not considering them as winglets, i mean, to be fair, they are something quite different to what the b737 & 747 and a340 have.
this is exactly my point, the weight and size of the 'winglets' that airbus use on the a320 family is far less than that of the b737's, and are obviously deemed to do as good a job, so why the huge things on the b737?
you are right about the a-320 family, but i was not considering them as winglets, i mean, to be fair, they are something quite different to what the b737 & 747 and a340 have.
this is exactly my point, the weight and size of the 'winglets' that airbus use on the a320 family is far less than that of the b737's, and are obviously deemed to do as good a job, so why the huge things on the b737?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: terra softa
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay south coast, you're right - I have it on good authority that the eminently qualified aeronautical engineers and designers at Airbus and Boeing just decided to shove winglets on some of their aircraft as a bit of a lark - much like the guys used to do with the rear wing on a '79 Ford Cortina.
It's all a sales gimmick. Please don't tell anybody.
It's all a sales gimmick. Please don't tell anybody.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: #37 for Start
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering these winglets are semi-composite i.e. Lightweight.
More Tons = More $$$'s Revenue
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=248914
