Why are Airbus' winglets radically different from the one's Boeing and MD-11's use?
Are they comparable in terms of efficiency. I see the A380 has A319 style winglets. It would looked nicer to see A330 or 747 style winglets on the big bird.
Captain
Difference between Boeing, MD and Airbus winglets?
Moderator: Latest news team
-
Jense
This isn't true Jense.Jense wrote:The winglets on the 744 don't spare any fuel, they're only used for
a) advert
b) design
The winglets on the MD-11 are used for efficiency and not for advert and design like the 744.
Even on the B744 like on the other planes with winglets the induced drag on the wingtip will be reduced. Thanks to that drag reduction, the fuel efficency will be slightly better on the planes.
Boeing wouldn't put a winglet on a plane just for design and advert. This costs a lot of money to design but more important it is additional weight for the plane. And as you know weight is very important !!!
Why Airbus has designed other types of winglets for the A320 family I don't know.... But I've heard that the A380 got the smaller winglets since otherwise the wingspan would exceed the 80m box..
greetz
Chris
-
Jense
Thank you for your explanations!
Someone with bad eyes could say if he sees one in the sky, "look there is an 319 with 4 engines, it's called the Airbusino 319"
so what do you mean with "wingspan would exceed the 80m box.." winglets , do make wings longer... no ?
Yeah , it's true that the A380 looks a lot like the A319, it's got the same proportions... and the same winglets...Avro wrote:Why Airbus has designed other types of winglets for the A320 family I don't know.... But I've heard that the A380 got the smaller winglets since otherwise the wingspan would exceed the 80m box..
Someone with bad eyes could say if he sees one in the sky, "look there is an 319 with 4 engines, it's called the Airbusino 319"
so what do you mean with "wingspan would exceed the 80m box.." winglets , do make wings longer... no ?
From a layman's point of view, I would think that the difference in winglet design may be a result of the different philosophies that both A & B implement in the design of their planes e.g. the difference between hard & soft limits in their FBW systems.
However, I am sure that the winglets are essentially to increase efficiencies & not for purely advert and design. As pointed out by Avro, would be a very expensive manner of advert.
Cheers,
Walter.
However, I am sure that the winglets are essentially to increase efficiencies & not for purely advert and design. As pointed out by Avro, would be a very expensive manner of advert.
Cheers,
Walter.
Well you should tell your head-technician to get the facts straightJense wrote:@ Avro
I got this info straight from a head-technician specialized in 744 from KLM maintenance.
EDIT: I was also very suprised to hear this and if you want I'll ask him again?
Thanks to the reduction in induced drag the winglet offers a fuel mileage improvement of about 3 percent on the B747-400.
If you don't believe me go to Boeing's website and do a search and I'm sure you'll find the answer as well.
As I already said in my previous reply, Boeing wouldn't put money to develop a device on their plane which is only their to put the logo of airlines, while on the other side it would put additional weight and stress on the wings.
The fact hat the airlines put their logos on the wingtip is a side effect of those wingtips.
What I wanted to say is that if Airbus would have put the "big" winglets like on the A330 on their A380, the total wingspan would exceed the 80m. And as you know planes have to be able to park in 80*80m boxes at gates on airports. So in fact I've heard that they installed the smaller winglets "like" on the A320, to be able to stay in the 80*80m limits. But I'm not sure about this....so what do you mean with "wingspan would exceed the 80m box.." winglets , do make wings longer... no ?
As for the shape of the smaller winglets, I would like to know this as well and I'll try to research that.
Chris
Have a look at the two following shots and you'll see what I mean:Ovostar wrote:Ok, thank you!
but... I still don't understand, Wings with small or big winglets have the same size. So big winglets wouldn't change the size of the wings, so i don't see the connection with the 80*80m box
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/936011/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/923805/L/
Chris
Everything you always wanted to know about winglets from the people who invented them.
http://trc.dfrc.nasa.gov/Organizations/ ... -DFRC.html
http://trc.dfrc.nasa.gov/Organizations/ ... -DFRC.html
-
Jense
Re: Difference between Boeing, MD and Airbus winglets?
Airbus opted for "A320 style" winglets on the A380 to respect the 80mx80m virtual box.Captain wrote:Why are Airbus' winglets radically different from the one's Boeing and MD-11's use?
Are they comparable in terms of efficiency. I see the A380 has A319 style winglets. It would looked nicer to see A330 or 747 style winglets on the big bird.
Captain
Sorry to say this Jense but this is again wrong. I don't know what this technician told you but apparently he doesn't know very well what he's talking about....Jense wrote: Sorry mate, I was wrong. It's the MD-11 who uses more with winglets than without.
The winglets on the MD11 were designed for the same reason. They reduce the induced drag and help with other new aerodynamic features to save some fuel with respect to the DC10.
As I already stated twice above. It would be stupid for a manufacturer to design such a device just for the fun of placing logos on them.
It's ok don't worry(I was mixing them up, appologises)
Chris
EDIT: TYPO
just want to add that adding winglets to the wing means a trade-off in terms of re-inforcement of the wingstructure to carry the extra weight at the outer end of the wing -> more weight penalty.
I remember a thread (but did not find it) where someone was explaining the first generation T7 wings without winglets where this trade off (additional weight<->reduced drag) was in favor for skipping them. as far as I know it does no make sense for each of the 737 for example to have their (blended) winglets attached considering their deployment/routes to fly.
I would also assume that the design of the winglet - or the decision to attach them depends also on the wing-design and the length/sweepness of the wing.
-lr
I remember a thread (but did not find it) where someone was explaining the first generation T7 wings without winglets where this trade off (additional weight<->reduced drag) was in favor for skipping them. as far as I know it does no make sense for each of the 737 for example to have their (blended) winglets attached considering their deployment/routes to fly.
I would also assume that the design of the winglet - or the decision to attach them depends also on the wing-design and the length/sweepness of the wing.
-lr
@ Jense : Just to make it clear. Winglets can produce more drag then savings at certain flight conditions. That's maybe what your technician wanted to point out ?
Chris
Indeed it all depends on the average flying hours of your flights. For very short flights its better not to have them while for longer flights its more economical to have them. But this has all to do with each specific aircraft type.lastrow wrote: as far as I know it does no make sense for each of the 737 for example to have their (blended) winglets attached considering their deployment/flown destinations.
Chris
Well that's what they do.earthman wrote:Would it then not make sense to remove winglets from winglet-equipped planes if they are being used on short routes for a while?
On the B747-400 which is used on high density routes (short haum) in Asia they have removed the winglets. This puts less stress on the wingtips and saves maintenance costs.
The B737 is another good example. It all depends on the kind of conditions under which your planes will fly. Shorter flights or longer ones etc... If airlines think they can save money by investing in the winglet devices they install it otherwise they don't.
Chris