Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CO 757s And 767s In FLL  
User currently offlineNADC10Fan From United States of America, joined May 2005, 165 posts, RR: 11
Posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4716 times:

Did a quick search to hopefully ensure I'm not revisiting an existing topic ...

Lately in my afternoon drive-time here in Fort Lauderdale, several pieces of CO equipment flying into FLL have caught my attention.

First is the pair of 752s which seem to arrive - often consecutively - between 4:30 - 5:00 p.m. local. These always sports winglets, and I think look quite sharp. One thing, though ... the winglets appear to create a different dynamic on the wings when I watch the aircraft in action. (This is much the same when I see 73NGs with winglets both landing and rotating.) Perhaps it's simply my imagination, but it appears as though there's noticeably more wing flex on wingleted variants of these aircraft than on their non-equipped brethren. Is this true? and if so, why?

Second is the CO 762s I've seen flying in (I think - they may be 763s, but they seem a bit too stubby to be; and I ruled out 752s because a) there were no winglets and b) the aircraft were too fat!  Silly). This was interesting, because these are the first examples of CO wide-bodies I've ever seen make their way into FLL. I'm guessing these are only seasonal schedulings on CO's part?


TANSTAAFL!
21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMatt From Canada, joined May 1999, 693 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4635 times:

As you know, CO flies a variety of equipment into FLL from EWR, IAH and CLE: 753, 752, 739, 738, 733, 735. I really don't think any 762s (or 764s) are scheduled into FLL as they're used mostly for international flights (and flights between hubs). And CO doesn't fly 763s.


Next flights: YQM-YYZ-YOW v.v. / YQM-CUN v.v. / YQM-YUL-YWG v.v. / YSJ-YYZ-SEA-SFO / SFO-YYZ-YOW-YQM / YQM-YYZ-MUC-TXL /
User currently offlineIahflyr From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4622 times:

I believe CO flies B752's to FLL year round.....one from IAH and the other from EWR would be my guess without checking the schedule. The short stubby widebody would be the B762 as CO only operates B762 and B764 in the 767 fleet. If you enjoy the take-offs watch the B762 go up...quite a treat if it is able to have an unrestricted climb to say 4,000' or higher and you are able to view it.....love that ride.


Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
User currently offlineNjdevilsin03 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 727 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4548 times:

Lately the 762 has been a visitor to FLL on a regular basis. In the last month I think i've seen it 10 times or so. THe 757's are also a very frequent visitor. During the day some of the EWR and Iah flights are timed within a few minutes apart and do approach back to back.


717, 727, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 752, 753, 762, 763, 777, DC9, MD80, DC10, L1011, ERJ, CRJ, ATR, DH8, A300,
User currently offlineBrianDromey From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3920 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 4514 times:

Quoting NADC10Fan (Thread starter):
Perhaps it's simply my imagination, but it appears as though there's noticeably more wing flex on wingleted variants of these aircraft than on their non-equipped brethren. Is this true? and if so, why?

Ive noticed this, too, the first time I saw it was on an FH 738 from ACE-ORK. I hadent flown on a 737 with winglets before, so I was a little surprused to see so much flexing.

I reckon the reason there is more flexing is because of the increaded mass at the end of the wingtips, where there would normally be little mass. The extra mass at the wingtip would be pretty much perpendicular to the wing, I reckon, thus increasing the bending moment, which would lead to greater flex on the wing than normal. I imagine this would be more obvious on landing, when the aircraft is lighter and any fuel tanks in the wings would be empty, or almost empty.

P.S. I am not an engineer by any means, just going on a (limited!!!) knowlage of statics and physics.

Cheers
Brian



Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
User currently offlineNADC10Fan From United States of America, joined May 2005, 165 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 4475 times:

Quoting Iahflyr (Reply 2):
I believe CO flies B752's to FLL year round.....one from IAH and the other from EWR would be my guess without checking the schedule. The short stubby widebody would be the B762 as CO only operates B762 and B764 in the 767 fleet.

Yeah, I've actually been on one of CO's IAH-FLL 752s ... it was in October '05, pre-winglet, one of the very last flights in before Wilma hit the area. I hadn't known that CO doesn't fly the 763, so that certainly narrows it down to the 762.

Quoting Njdevilsin03 (Reply 3):
Lately the 762 has been a visitor to FLL on a regular basis. In the last month I think i've seen it 10 times or so. The 757's are also a very frequent visitor. During the day some of the EWR and Iah flights are timed within a few minutes apart and do approach back to back.

Ah, good, it's great to know this hasn't just been my imagination working overtime! Out of curiosity, do we now if that 762 is coming from IAH or from EWR? I'd imagine the latter, as a more northerly hub from (or through) which the snowbirds might be expected to flee the snow ...

Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 4):


Quoting NADC10Fan:
Perhaps it's simply my imagination, but it appears as though there's noticeably more wing flex on wingleted variants of these aircraft than on their non-equipped brethren. Is this true? and if so, why?

Ive noticed this, too, the first time I saw it was on an FH 738 from ACE-ORK. I hadn't flown on a 737 with winglets before, so I was a little surprised to see so much flexing.

I reckon the reason there is more flexing is because of the increased mass at the end of the wingtips, where there would normally be little mass. The extra mass at the wingtip would be pretty much perpendicular to the wing, I reckon, thus increasing the bending moment, which would lead to greater flex on the wing than normal. I imagine this would be more obvious on landing, when the aircraft is lighter and any fuel tanks in the wings would be empty, or almost empty.

P.S. I am not an engineer by any means, just going on a (limited!!!) knowledge of statics and physics.

Cheers
Brian

And again, it's nice to know I'm not the only one!! Thanks, Brian. Maybe we can get someone with the "knowledge" to explain it to us? I'm sure there has to be some sort of engineering reason for it. You think about the aircraft which have serious flex and it's usually extra-large equipment like the 764, 777 and 774 for B and A330 and 340 for A. Most of these feature much greater wing spans than we were previously used to. But the smaller aircraft like the 737, 757 and A32X never did - or at least appeared to until we saw the winglets such as are now at least fairly common on the 737 and 752. Is that change made to what's always seemed an otherwise rigid wing construction that drastic such that it's as you suggest, or is there some other effect that's operating here?

[Edited 2007-02-10 18:14:53]


TANSTAAFL!
User currently offlineLuvfa From United States of America, joined May 2005, 446 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 4451 times:

With the February shool break coming next week fot the metro NYC area, CO could easily fill a 767 with just local EWR traffic. The whole state of New Jersey goes to Florida that week LOL!

User currently offlineKFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3301 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 4435 times:

Quoting Luvfa (Reply 6):
shool

Ironic, isn't it?

 Wink



"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
User currently offlineMatt From Canada, joined May 1999, 693 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 4425 times:

Quoting Luvfa (Reply 6):
With the February shool break coming next week fot the metro NYC area, CO could easily fill a 767 with just local EWR traffic. The whole state of New Jersey goes to Florida that week LOL!

CO might be substituting 762s for 752s now and then (on the EWR-FLL route, for example), but it has nothing to do with the number of passengers. In fact, CO's 762's carry 174 passengers, while the smaller 752s actually carry one more, at 175 passengers. And the 739 is close, with 167 passengers.



Next flights: YQM-YYZ-YOW v.v. / YQM-CUN v.v. / YQM-YUL-YWG v.v. / YSJ-YYZ-SEA-SFO / SFO-YYZ-YOW-YQM / YQM-YYZ-MUC-TXL /
User currently offlineFLLspoter From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 314 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4391 times:

I have seen the 762s at FLL only this past week
There were only two differnt ones though i have the regs somewhere cant find them now
I belive that they were super bowl charters though



FLL justs gets better and better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
User currently offlineA340Spotter From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1980 posts, RR: 23
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4333 times:

Quoting Njdevilsin03 (Reply 3):
Lately the 762 has been a visitor to FLL on a regular basis.



Quoting NADC10Fan (Thread starter):
Second is the CO 762s I've seen flying in (I think - they may be 763s, but they seem a bit too stubby to be; and I ruled out 752s because a) there were no winglets and b) the aircraft were too fat! ).



Quoting FLLspoter (Reply 9):
I have seen the 762s at FLL only this past week

Well, I'd love to be able to give you registrations, but I can 100% guarantee you weren't seeing a CO B762 at FLL. There hasn't been a B762 seen on a Florida ramp this month.

What you are probably seeing is a B737-900. No winglets and at first glance, can actually be mistaken for a B762.

Cheers
JSD



"Irregardless, it's a Cat III airplane, we don't need an alternate!"
User currently offlineXJET From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 491 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4312 times:

Quoting NADC10Fan (Thread starter):
One thing, though ... the winglets appear to create a different dynamic on the wings when I watch the aircraft in action. (This is much the same when I see 73NGs with winglets both landing and rotating.) Perhaps it's simply my imagination, but it appears as though there's noticeably more wing flex on wingleted variants of these aircraft than on their non-equipped brethren. Is this true? and if so, why?

The winglets do add a substantial amount of weight to the wingtips on the 752. The 737NGs have a much thinner wing which lets it flex a lot more. You can see those wings bouncing around a good bit during turbulence.


User currently offline777gk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1641 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4310 times:

We have run the 737-300 on a few off-peak EWR-FLL flights, as well as some CLE-FLL. I wouldn't discount someone mistaking a 733 for a 762 given their stubby appearances.

Didn't we have a spare 762 at IAH in the schedule recently? I could have sworn I saw ship 152 sub on an IAH-TPA run a few times in the not-so-distant past. Could FLL have been in the mix for that ship as well?


User currently offlineNjdevilsin03 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 727 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4277 times:

The last two 762's I saw in FLL one came from IAH and one was from FLL so they are coing from both locations.


717, 727, 731, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 752, 753, 762, 763, 777, DC9, MD80, DC10, L1011, ERJ, CRJ, ATR, DH8, A300,
User currently offlinePizzaandplanes From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4277 times:

I will be flying EWR-FLL tomorrow on a 757. When does CO make the descison to upgrade planes. Which flight is normally upgraded to 767? I would be pleasntly surprised to see a 767 at the gate tomorrow!

Quoting Luvfa (Reply 6):
With the February shool break coming next week fot the metro NYC area, CO could easily fill a 767 with just local EWR traffic. The whole state of New Jersey goes to Florida that week LOL!

Yes, this is very true. Although, mainly the traffic is to MCO.


User currently offlineXJET From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 491 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3686 times:

Quoting Pizzaandplanes (Reply 14):
Yes, this is very true. Although, mainly the traffic is to MCO

If you have ever been to Fort Lauderdale Beach in February or March, you would swear they all came to FLL or MIA.


User currently offlineNADC10Fan From United States of America, joined May 2005, 165 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3671 times:

Quoting A340Spotter (Reply 10):
Well, I'd love to be able to give you registrations, but I can 100% guarantee you weren't seeing a CO B762 at FLL. There hasn't been a B762 seen on a Florida ramp this month.

No, that certainly wasn't a 739 I saw; I would definitely have recognized a 73X family aircraft, as we see huge numbers of those on a daily basis. The aft end of the two aircraft are far too disparate to mistake. If, as you say, it's 100% guaranteeably impossible for that aircraft to have been a 762, I could see perhaps thinking it was a 752; but all those being flown in by CO - in that time slot of late, anyway - have winglets, and this aircraft was also too large for a 752.

I'd be willing to buy a Stupor Bowl charter as explanation.



TANSTAAFL!
User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5170 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3619 times:

Quoting NADC10Fan (Reply 16):
I'd be willing to buy a Stupor Bowl charter as explanation.

Except that the 762 holds 1 less seat than the 752 in CO config. Usually what happens is a 757 may go tech or get in too late to do the turn and their may be an extra 762 around for a few hours...viola.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineA340Spotter From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1980 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3415 times:

Quoting NADC10Fan (Reply 16):
I'd be willing to buy a Stupor Bowl charter as explanation

CO did fly a few charters right after the Super Bowl, but no 767-200s were used. I went back for the past 10 days (and I was at FLL myself Feb 1-2 spotting and photographing) and none of the CO 767-200s made an appearance in any of the Florida stations. The charters were 757s if I remember right (can double check that tomorrow).



"Irregardless, it's a Cat III airplane, we don't need an alternate!"
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2403 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3117 times:

When spotting wingletted 737/757 aircraft, I often find the winglet itself difficult to see from certain angles, in low lighting conditions, or from great distance. From the side, they are high-profile surfaces, but when looking at the aircraft head-on or from behind, the damn things are so thin that sometimes they seem to disappear, at least when I try to pick them out on the Turnpike through the North Jersey smog!

User currently offlineGraphic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3082 times:

The winglets keep airflow aligned over the wing surfaces out toward the wingtips. Because of this, vortice strength is reduced and the wings produce more lift out toward the wingtip than their non-tipped counterparts, hence the more flexing.

User currently offlineCOEI2007 From Vanuatu, joined Jan 2007, 1912 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 2337 times:

I dont see any 762's in the FLL schedule. I make it 6 752's, 1 753, 1 733 and 1 738 from EWR, 2 752's, 1 738, 1 739 and 1 753 from IAH, and a 737 and 738 from CLE.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
BA 757s And 767s- What Routes? posted Thu Dec 20 2001 02:44:51 by Airplanetire
CO 762 And 764 In IAH. posted Tue Jan 9 2001 14:58:23 by Adam84
747s, 757s And 767s posted Sat Jul 31 1999 03:03:15 by Air_Chick_757
Logic Of CO And DL In Same Alliance? posted Thu Oct 26 2006 19:29:58 by PanAm747
CO 764 In FLL 12/20 posted Tue Dec 20 2005 11:29:58 by CALMSP
DL And CO Partnership, Seats And Check-in posted Tue Apr 26 2005 16:39:31 by RamerinianAir
CO 764 & DL 772 Due In FLL Sat Pm posted Sat Apr 2 2005 22:38:44 by Falcon flyer
Winglets For CO 737s And 757s! posted Tue Apr 27 2004 03:40:08 by FoxBravo
Comparing CO 777 And 767-400ER In Coach posted Tue Sep 30 2003 19:33:58 by TranStar
CO Flight Lands In FLL With Injuries From Turb. posted Thu May 15 2003 23:23:41 by Fsuwxman