|
Missing Winglet on an Airbus?
I flew last night on an Airbus type on a UK domestic flight. The aircraft had one winglet; the other wing had the winglet removed with what appeared to be gaffer tape covering where the winglet should have been attached.
Can an aircraft be dispatched with this defect for unlimited flying ? And does it have any performance impact on the aircraft operation? |
Trawling through my old (10yrs) copy of the CDL/MEL manual, for an A321 the following penalties apply for a single missing wingtip fence:
T/O and approach limiting weights reduced by 8910kgs One engine inop ceiling reduced by 735ft Fuel consumption penalty +1.34% HTH |
Originally Posted by atprider
(Post 10525123)
I flew last night on an Airbus type on a UK domestic flight. The aircraft had one winglet; the other wing had the winglet removed with what appeared to be gaffer tape covering where the winglet should have been attached.
Can an aircraft be dispatched with this defect for unlimited flying ? And does it have any performance impact on the aircraft operation? But when Aer Lingus had an A333 wingtip knocked off at SFO just over a year ago (by a tug driver), they positioned the aircraft back to DUB empty. |
Yep missing as I boarded and still not there on landing :)
|
Wing tip fence: one may be missing, TopBunk's data is pretty accurate for the A320 as well.
Sharklet: no go. |
Thanks for the informative replies folks
|
A two-manned fossil fueled Rutan aircraft ground off one of those upturned wing ends during the takeoff roll of its flight once around the planet...all without stopping or refueling along the way.
|
Originally Posted by dogsridewith
(Post 10525233)
A two-manned fossil fueled Rutan aircraft ground off one of those upturned wing ends during the takeoff roll of its flight once around the planet...all without stopping or refueling along the way.
|
Not uncommon - the 747-400 CDL allows dispatch without one (or both) winglets. Again, small performance penalty.
I don't know about the 737 winglets (didn't spend much time working the 737), and the 757 and 767 winglets are aftermarket STC so I don't know about those either. |
A330 and A340 also allow dispatch with one missing.
A320 sharklets however are a no-go. |
Originally Posted by LookingForAJob
(Post 10525367)
Not a professional pilot but curious....anyone know why a missing sharklet is a no dispatch item?
|
Originally Posted by atprider
(Post 10525123)
I flew last night on an Airbus type on a UK domestic flight. The aircraft had one winglet; the other wing had the winglet removed with what appeared to be gaffer tape covering where the winglet should have been attached.
|
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10525297)
Not uncommon - the 747-400 CDL allows dispatch without one (or both) winglets. Again, small performance penalty.
I don't know about the 737 winglets (didn't spend much time working the 737), and the 757 and 767 winglets are aftermarket STC so I don't know about those either. It’s been a while while but I’m fairly sure that the CDL only allows 1 Winglet removed on the 744. |
Originally Posted by ACMS
(Post 10525601)
It’s been a while while but I’m fairly sure that the CDL only allows 1 Winglet removed on the 744. |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10525605)
I know there is a way to dispatch with them both missing on a 747-400. It might be a service bulletin rather than CDL.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6382d0fb0a.jpg Yes, I do know they were built like that. :O |
Originally Posted by LookingForAJob
(Post 10525367)
Not a professional pilot but curious....anyone know why a missing sharklet is a no dispatch item?
|
Originally Posted by TURIN
(Post 10525476)
High Speed Tape or HST. Approved by all Aircraft manufacturers for temporary repairs of this kind. Not 'gaffer' tape, whatever that is.
(ducks) |
C'mon, folks!
Duct tape - because it was first used for sealing HVAC duct seams. I've never had to seal a duck.....however, one brand uses Duck as a registered brand name/logo (cute, hunh?). Gaffer tape - very similar, used by gaffers (lighting technicians) to make repairs, reinforcements or temporary hold-downs on movie or stage sets HST or Speed Tape - also similar, but with a stronger adhesive that won't (ideally) flap loose under the stress of the slipstream, and is more resistant to solvents like hydrocarbon fuels or oils. |
My Dad was enroute from Brize Norton to the Falklands in 2013, and as the A330 taxied in at Ascension, it somehow ended up with a winglet jammed underneath the wing of another aircraft. After some delay and discussion, I think the solution they came to was to keep the passengers onboard (presumably to keep the landing gear as loaded as possible), and refuel the wings asymetrically to lower the jammed tip to where they could move it clear. Then they removed the damaged winglet, and carried on South. The whole operation at Asi caused a delay of about 8 or 9 hours. |
Originally Posted by pattern_is_full
(Post 10526216)
C'mon, folks!
Duct tape - because it was first used for sealing HVAC duct seams. I've never had to seal a duck.....however, one brand uses Duck as a registered brand name/logo (cute, hunh?). Gaffer tape - very similar, used by gaffers (lighting technicians) to make repairs, reinforcements or temporary hold-downs on movie or stage sets HST or Speed Tape - also similar, but with a stronger adhesive that won't (ideally) flap loose under the stress of the slipstream, and is more resistant to solvents like hydrocarbon fuels or oils. |
Sharkets are probably no go for a number of reasons. Two I can think of, the sharket is attached internally of the wing, need to get into the fuel tanks to remove so no simple task compared to a wing fence on earlier A320s. The other reason is no way to turn of the Load Alleviation Function that is required for aircraft fitted with sharkets so would remain operational even if you removed the sharket mass from the wingtip. |
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
(Post 10525678)
I'd be surprised if there wasn't - ANA managed it for years:
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6382d0fb0a.jpg Yes, I do know they were built like that. :O No idea if that actually came to pass or not. |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10528415)
DR, the story at the time was that ANA was going to use them as 'SR' aircraft - flying short haul around Japan - until they got to a certain number of cycles. When they got to the right number of cycles, they'd convert them to long haul (and install the winglets). I thought it was a clever way to maximize the utility of the airframe - maxing out on hours and cycles.
No idea if that actually came to pass or not. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....f8c7ffa75e.jpg https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e6bff1bc57.jpg https://www.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/photo/All-...481D/1308615/L https://www.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/photo/All-...481D/2645379/L Conversely, a couple of ANA's 747s started life with winglets which were subsequently removed. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 07:22. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.