Wingtip lost from Thomas Cook A332 en route to Cuba
 

A Thomas Cook flight to Cuba had to return to Manchester this afternoon after losing the port wingtip midflight. FR24 track here. Landing was normal. DM article here.

What's not in the article is that the flight was over two hours late taking off, and before takeoff a passenger noted that ground crew were patching said wingtip with metal tape and took a picture. "Not sure I will make it to Cuba", he said.

I hope there isn't some Atlantic fishing boat with a new hole in it ...

It looks to me like the winglet was removed before flight and a speed tape repair was carried out. It's perfectly acceptable practice, the missing winglet would increase fuel consumption and possibly incur a slight performance penalty but nothing more. Obviously it's not as exciting a story as the DMs "wing tip falls off mid-flight" but why let the truth get in the way of a bit of drama!

So why the return of it's been taped prior to departure? Would you even be able to see if the tape had come off?

Disregard - "low oil"....but the pics seem to show lack of speed tape.

The wingtip was removed at least one month ago as it hit the hangar door at Manchester.

The issue on this particular flight was low oil pressure in the #1 engine.

OK, so the article has now been updated with the "low oil" reason. It still doesn't look good to be speed-taping the plane at the gate, then having the plane come back without the tape, does it?

A video of the plane landing without a wingtip on the 22 May 2017.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egrNVmfAIZA

Why does PPRuNe even allow links to a fascist fake news peddling dirtrag like the Daily Mail? Shame on you for posting this BS.

Because we all need a good laugh now and again!

The Twitter account of Simon Rawlinson reads like the Daily Fail letters page. What a whinging tw4t!

I suppose he would have been much happier if the aircraft had carried on had to divert to Greenland on one engine. Much better outcome. Pillock!:mad:

Do you unite against Fascism? We all should; they're everywhere!

There is nothing wrong with flying the A330 wingtip to get the aircraft through its rotation and to a maintenance base. Flying the aircraft for a month that way calls into question the airlines maintenance practices.

Missing wing tip on Thomas Cook flight to Cuba
 

Reported in the Daily Telegraph here

The aircraft landed at Manchester apparently due to an unrelated fault.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/d...i2sSYQDkA.jpeg

It's allowed to fly minus one winglet only, if I recall in the DDG. Deviation Dispatch Guide. I have flown Airbus myself minus one winglet, and another time, minus the flap track "canoe". Reduction in ZFW and take off weight for the winglet, if I recall.

]

One may be missing provided the hole is covered.
Performance:
The following performance penalties are applicable:
Takeoff and approach climb performance limiting weights are reduced by 17 150 kg (37 810 lb)
En route performance limiting weight is reduced by 1 768 kg (3 898 lb)
Fuel consumption is increased by 1.20 %.

Why didn't he show 'em "the bird"? :}

Mmm. The daily fail (probably other places too) has photos that don't look awfully covered, in fact they look to me more like "freshly ripped off", but I am not an expert. Maybe the speed tape fell off :)

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/...8488937918.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/...8490236941.jpg

Maybe the unrelated fault was partially involved in the loss of the wingtip?

I think the Daily Mail influence is getting to you. :O

See post #4 - the winglet was knocked off in a collision with a hangar door at MAN.

Given the reduction in performance, increased fuel use, and presumably the cost of replacing the speed tape every flight - would it not be more economical to replace the wing tip, rather than fly around without it for a month?

No it doesn't. It proves that the aircraft is in the middle of a busy summer schedule and is being utilised to the maximum. There is no limitation that I can find for the length of time that the winglet can be missing. Why take it out of service when you can very safely and legally operate under the DDG until the next scheduled hangar input?

What is called into question is the fact that several newspapers can slander a legitimate business and get away with it. If I was Thomas Cook I would be seeking compensation from the Scum, Fail and every other Tom Dick and Mary that has tweeted or facebooked this all over the world!