LY4XELD From United States, joined Mar 2000, 794 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1482 times:
Its not always the most cost effective solution, if it is a solution at all. For really short hops, it's probably not worth the added efficiency they add compared to the cost it is to add them to the airplane. It's not a simple "snap on" procedure - the wingtip needs to be strengthened before they can be retrofitted.
Brilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 1466 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1482 times:
They may not see the added cost of installing them as a benefit in the long run. Although I can't for the life of me think that the savings in fuel would be that small that it would not be worth the extra expense that the winglets would add to cost of the plane.
Having low expectations means you won't be disapointed.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1478 times:
Some airlines have logistical concerns that would prevent the wider-span of the 737NG with winglets from fitting into every gate they utilize.
AA had some problems with certain ORD gates that prevented them from ordering winglets for some time. I believe FL also opted against winglets so the 73G would fit into 717 ramps...
RoseFlyer From United States, joined Feb 2004, 5614 posts, RR: 27 Reply 5, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1393 times:
The three big reasons are:
1. They are expensive
2. They increase the wingspan which may not let them fit in all gates and could require modifications
3. On short hops, the added weight compared to the aerodynamic improvements are not enough to decrease fuel burn. On short flights, the aerodynamic efficiencies don't improve much since winglets have a more pronounced effect at high speed cruise. The extra weight increases fuel burn, so winglets have the opposite effect of what airlines want.
LHRspotter From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 123 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1286 times:
Quoting Haggis79 (Reply 7): Quoting Toering (Reply 6):
What makes them so expensive anyways? Just some bent metal is all?
well... probably 5% of the cost is the bent metal and 95% for the knowledge of how to exactly bend it...
The most expensive bit (at least when retrofitting is concerned) is the time the plane has to spend on the ground, hence fitting a $2000 part outside the normal mx schedule can end up costing an airline fifty times as much. Multiply this by the number of ships in an average fleet and you'll get the picture.
Scaledesigns From United States, joined Aug 2006, 211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1202 times:
Most are composite.Alot of airliners also have mels to allow them to
fly with one broken.I think I even saw a A340 photo with one wingtip broken
off inflight on a.net.
Check the site.
AA777223 From United States, joined Feb 2006, 809 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1166 times:
I read in another thread that each set of winglets, from whoever AA and WN ordered them cost $800,000 per set!!! I think if you look at the fine print you will also find that does not include installation, and the time spent on the ground.
RoseFlyer From United States, joined Feb 2004, 5614 posts, RR: 27 Reply 12, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1125 times:
Quoting Toering (Reply 6): How much do they cost? What makes them so expensive anyways? Just some bent metal is all?
Wow, you are a little misguided if you think it is just bent metal. I'm devoting my career to just bent metal I guess then with my work as a mechanical engineer. I personally work on bent metal that just happens to produce the electricty abord airliners and other jet aircraft.
The certification is ridiculously complicated since they have to be proved to be safe. Safety is vital in aviation. Also the design is not simple. Manufacturing of the hardware is not the most expensive part in aerospace components.
Jaws707 From United States, joined Aug 2001, 699 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 984 times:
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 12): The certification is ridiculously complicated since they have to be proved to be safe. Safety is vital in aviation. Also the design is not simple. Manufacturing of the hardware is not the most expensive part in aerospace components.
I understand certification is complicated, but doesn't it just have to be done one time, and I would imagine Boeing and the designer of the wingtip would take care of it, then pass the cost on to the airlines. So if the airlines order thousands of wingtips, spreading out the R&D should only amount to very little for each frame. Same with the design cost. Done one time, once it works and is satisfied, it should be done and spead out over thousands of sets. There is no way a pair of composite wingtips should cost $800,000. Also on the topic of installing them, I would imagine there is an option that if the plane is purchased new, Boeing can install them, so then there is no extra downtime when the plane gets into service.
Curmudgeon From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 694 posts, RR: 27 Reply 16, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 844 times:
Quoting Jaws707 (Reply 13): There is no way a pair of composite wingtips should cost $800,000.
They aren't priced by research + costs + profit, they are priced by value.
An airline operating a 737 NG 10 hours a day can save $187,000/year if the winglets yield a 3% savings in fuel burn (based on 3000kg/hr, your actual mileage may vary)
Sponsor Message: 
From France, joined Nov 2005, 1630 posts, 
From United States, joined Mar 2000, 794 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 1466 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Jun 2006, 1065 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 123 posts, 
From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 694 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
