Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
HA And The 763ER Blended Winglet - Possibility?  
User currently offlinePohakuloa From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 421 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3982 times:

With the way that fuel costs are going (yes it's another fuel price related thread!) and the need of any airline to save money, would it be beneficial for HA to consider getting its 763's outfitted with the blended winglets from Aviation Partners Boeing?

Claims are that there will be a 6% fuel savings on an aircraft amounting to an average fuel savings of 350,000 gallons annually. The company plans to have U.S. Federal Aviation Administration approval for its 767 product by the end of November.

My question is, with HA having an all 763 trans-pacific fleet could this be a real and viable option for the airline?

I personally only see two setbacks/reasons why they wouldn't, if nothing else, consider the conversion of their aircraft:


  • Estimated down time for the outfitting of each aircraft. There are no official estimates on time, but I personally (not an official estimate time!!) think it would be 10-20 days average per aircraft. The fact that HA's fleet is stretched thin already could prevent this from happening.
  • A 2012 EIS of the A332 for the airline with a possible ealrier entry from leasehold options in 2009.


All things considered, however, this could help out HA in the short term.

I am really interested in how all of you think in relation to this. Will they, won't they, should they, shouldn't they, etc. Any and all comments and scenarios welcomed!



Links referenced:
Aviation Partners Boeing

Fuel-saving Retrofit For Boeing 767-300s

Hawaiian Air To Spend $4.4B On 24 New Airbus Jets



Fast cars and 'Jet A' - such a sweet smell!
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAAH732UAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3799 times:

Why just HA?

AA is/or is soon to be running one thought the shop getting the raked wingtips/or winglets put on. Either AA or someone.

A much more major airline would prolley do this before HA...... HA has only like 15 767s while UA has 35 and AA has even more and DL. One of those IMHO would do it before HA.

The new ABs really don't mean anything.... the 767 is getting old/old technology and that is more of the reason I think HA chose the AB...... did not want to wait for the 787

[Edited 2008-06-02 21:27:43]

User currently offlineHA_DC9 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 653 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3724 times:

Here's my  twocents  , I think they won't go for it (as much as I think they would look great on HA's ships). IMHO, the reason being was the Airbus order.

I was one of many HA followers who probably fell off their chair the day the Airbus order was announced as my bets were on HA going with Boeing and the 787 or a mixed order. I think Mark Dunkerley got a sweetheart deal for the 332s and 358s (although we know now that intermediate lift offered by Airbus was a big factor to HA's decision to which Boeing could not offer). Knowing Dunkerley, he must have ran the numbers thoroughly (acquisition costs, installation, aircraft downtime, savings over the long-term, etc.) on the 763 blended winglets and maybe they are not financially feasible for HA given that a large chuck of the 763 fleet will have their leases due between 2009 and 2012, hence the provision of A332s as soon as 2009 in the Airbus agreement. I truly think HA will execute that provision and bring A332s online in the 2009-2012 timeframe moreso given the AQ/ATA situation.


User currently offlineHNL-Jack From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 820 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

The winglets could make a significant difference in the performance in the HA 767 fleet. The major factor is downtime, as mentioned and cost. Can the cost be justified given the fact that the fleet will be eventually be replaced, although 767's could be in the fleet for several years to come. Given the extremely good leadership currently in place at HA, it wouldn't surprise me at all, if they were one of the first airlines to make the order. 350,000 gallons a year times 15 looks pretty good at today's fuel prices.


Grew up in the business and continued the family tradition.
User currently offlineUA772IAD From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 1730 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2993 times:

I thought winglets were only advantageous for missions nearing the aircraft's range capabilities, no? With the exception of HNL-SYD/MNL, Hawaii-West Coast is hardly a stretch for the 767s capiblities. Would winglets help, or just add extra weight?

I can see why AA would want them, as they use the 767 for much lengthier trips.


User currently offlinePohakuloa From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 421 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2603 times:

Quoting UA772IAD (Reply 4):
I thought winglets were only advantageous for missions nearing the aircraft's range capabilities, no? With the exception of HNL-SYD/MNL, Hawaii-West Coast is hardly a stretch for the 767s capiblities. Would winglets help, or just add extra weight?

from everything i have read both here on a.net as well as the APB site and others, it is a savings in aerodynamics, lift and fuel efficiency regardless of the distance traveled and not just near the edge of operational range. After all, efficiency doesnt just kick in when the plane knows it is getting to the end of its flight.

[Edited 2008-06-03 00:25:17]


Fast cars and 'Jet A' - such a sweet smell!
User currently offlineSANFan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 5477 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2446 times:



Quoting Pohakuloa (Reply 5):
efficiency doesnt just kick in when the plane knows it is getting to the end of its flight.

I assume the statement about "efficiency increasing with longer stage lengths" is due to the weight penalty of the winglets needing to be figured into the overall fuel savings based on the duration of the flight. (Just a guess.)

I do agree that the cost (both purchase price and a/c downtime) of the winglets might be a bit much considering the uncertainty of the future of the '67s with HA. Perhaps if 1 or 2 "new" 767s are purchased soon, assuming the winglets are available at the time, HA could purchase and install a set while interior work, repainting, etc. are done, and see what the overall effects are for them. (However, I'm sure HA is hoping to have additional a/c long before November though; I know that we in SAN hope they have at least one new plane by September so we don't lose our OGG flight!)

bb


User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 2353 times:



Quoting SANFan (Reply 6):
I assume the statement about "efficiency increasing with longer stage lengths" is due to the weight penalty of the winglets needing to be figured into the overall fuel savings based on the duration of the flight. (Just a guess.)

Exactly why AA and DL will not initially install on every aircraft.


User currently offlineAlessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 15 hours ago) and read 2181 times:

1,85MUS$ for the retrofit without the labor, http://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com/products/programlistprices.html
So they need to be lot of flying left in the airframe to invest in it?


User currently offlinePohakuloa From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 421 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 6 hours ago) and read 1997 times:



Quoting Alessandro (Reply 8):
1,85MUS$ for the retrofit without the labor, http://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com/products/programlistprices.html
So they need to be lot of flying left in the airframe to invest in it?

that does make sense there

Quoting Sxf24 (Reply 7):
Quoting SANFan (Reply 6):
I assume the statement about "efficiency increasing with longer stage lengths" is due to the weight penalty of the winglets needing to be figured into the overall fuel savings based on the duration of the flight. (Just a guess.)

Exactly why AA and DL will not initially install on every aircraft.

would the 2084nm+ distance from Hawaii to the west coast not benefit any 763, regardless of airline? anything over 500nm already boasts a minumum of 1.2%-1.6% block fuel improvement. 4%+ on Hawaii-west coast. EWR-LHR 4.5%+. 5%+ from HNL-ORD. on one flight it may make a minimal difference, but with cost cutting and the fact that if HA were to install them or AA or DL, they wouldnt be using them on sub 1000nm routes anyway so IMO they would be making a difference in operating costs for the routes and the aircraft.

one more thing before anyone bashes, discredits, flames, etc. any and everything i have just written (it happens, i understand that), taking the average savings of 350,000 gallons per aircraft annually and the nationwide average price of Jet A @ $5.69USD/gallon ( http://www.avweb.com ) saving an average of $1,991,500USD a year. It more than pays for itself in the first year. with increasing fuel costs it can only be better for those who will have the aircraft in their fleet for a prolonged period of time.

ps.
average price of Jet A in Hawaii is $5.85USD/gallon increasing the cost of savings/year to $2,047,500USD.

hearing and reading everything here and what others are saying i would agree that perhaps it may not be in the best interest of HA to convert their entire fleet, however I dont think it is the worst idea to convert a few that will be in the fleet through atleast 2012 until they are replaced.



Fast cars and 'Jet A' - such a sweet smell!
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25841 posts, RR: 50
Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 5 hours ago) and read 1965 times:



Quoting Pohakuloa (Reply 9):

Couple points.

1) Dont forget the downtime for the retrofit -- I know a 757 operator that does the retrofits in just under 10 days with multiple daily shifts. If you only run a single shift you are looking at about 20 days.
Additionally If you pull a plane outside of planned heavy maintenance you have significalf loss of revenue, while if you wait for heavy D check cycle you'll be waiting several years before you see all the planes come through. (eg HA likely retire the 767s prior)
2) Labor cost. Safe number to use for US all in labor is $50/hr and you are looking at a few thousand hours.
3) Additional cost/time to update manuals, update flight planning software etc. Small details but they all cost money, and take time.
4) Your fuel cost assumptions are way out of the ball park. Your numbers looks like cost at a FBO and not what a airline pays. As reference as of 5/28 the into plane price inclusive of all taxes and fees for a major airline was $4.03 at HNL and $3.51 at LAX.

I've seen many airlines study winglets, and have yet to see any that have been able to get the ROI to get much under 3 years even with todays fuel cost.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2565 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1856 times:

We (HA) purchase our fuel in Singapore, and have it shipped to Hawaii. Last time I saw the price listed, in a quarterly financial report, I think it was in the area of $3 per gallon. We also have hedges in place to reduce the overall cost. It's not as much as Southwest, but more than most other airlines.

HAL



One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlinePohakuloa From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 421 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1761 times:

Thats actually great information HAL. Appreciated. In light of this and the fact that some hedges are in place, I think that officially sinks my idea of whether or not they will or wont get the mods.

~Pohakuloa



Fast cars and 'Jet A' - such a sweet smell!
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...
HA And The Inter-island Flights posted Wed Aug 21 2002 19:28:12 by BR715-A1-30
SWA And The Blended Winglet posted Tue Aug 8 2006 20:56:29 by UAXDXer
Delta And The Winglet posted Wed Oct 18 2006 04:05:46 by DeltaL1011man
Delta And The Possibility Of A JFK-ABQ Route posted Fri Oct 6 2006 20:16:39 by 1337Delta764
Delta And The Winglet. posted Tue Sep 12 2006 00:23:52 by ATLFlyer323
3) Peter Max's Travels .. And The Winglet Twins. posted Tue Aug 17 2004 22:14:53 by Iahcsr
Concorde And The Current Price Of Oil posted Thu May 22 2008 04:30:47 by Trent1000
Delta And The ERJ-145LR posted Mon May 19 2008 15:47:18 by Simairlinenet
Southwest And The $29 Fare posted Sat May 10 2008 10:59:28 by MSYtristar
V Australia And The NW/DL Merger? posted Wed May 7 2008 19:52:15 by VHECA