Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No Winglets On 767-200's?  
User currently offlineHNLsurfer From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 47 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10043 times:

I know that there aren't too many of them left in service, but why does AA not put winglets on their 762s but they put them on their 763's. Is it because they are planning on retiring them soon?

33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17066 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10046 times:

I would guess that the 762 is not certified for winglets.


Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 10010 times:

Quoting B747forever (Reply 1):
I would guess that the 762 is not certified for winglets.

What does it take to certify the 762 for the winglets?

On a related matter, would the 762 be used on a long enough segment and be profitable for the few aircraft left to make it worth while putting on the winglets?



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15744 posts, RR: 27
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9972 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 2):
What does it take to certify the 762 for the winglets?

Time and money, enough that it isn't really worth it considering how few 767-200s are still in service.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 2):
On a related matter, would the 762 be used on a long enough segment and be profitable for the few aircraft left to make it worth while putting on the winglets?

That's kind of a moot point now. Early on winglets were mostly used for longer flights, but now that fuel has gone up they are useful even for shorter flights.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinerjm777ual From UK - England, joined Nov 2011, 246 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 9813 times:

AA is retiring their 762's soon, so this would be pointless.


Greetings from Dulles!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25338 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 9356 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
Quoting brilondon (Reply 2):
What does it take to certify the 762 for the winglets?

Time and money, enough that it isn't really worth it considering how few 767-200s are still in service.

Same reason why the 737-600 (only 69 built) is the only member of the 737NG series that isn't certified for winglets.


User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2057 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 9318 times:

IMO, the 767 came in too late in the winglet craze. In fact, I think winglets should've been available for retrofit at least in the late 90s/early 2000s for any aircraft, then I think the 762 would've been a prime candidate for them, and we would see a lot more of them still flying around. But no one foresaw 9/11 and the rise in oil prices then, so fuel savings weren't as much of an issue then as they are now. My   


Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19711 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 9087 times:

I don't mean to drag this too far off-topic, but why do winglets need to be certified separately for every size of a given model? Or rather, why is the certification process anything more than a few flights to show that it handles the same? It strikes me that if the aircraft has the same wing and wing box, the behavior at the wingtip can scarcely be that different.

User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7190 posts, RR: 13
Reply 8, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 8959 times:

because the winglets are more expensive than the 762s themselves..

User currently offlineshengzhurou From China, joined May 2010, 64 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 8846 times:

there are not that many 762 flying around, and most 762 are too old, 762 operators probably won't keep the 762 for long and spending money on winglets won't help them save much money. Last time I read, even UA parked two of its late build ex-co 762


Sheng Zhu Rou
User currently offlineUnited_fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 8612 times:

I thought I read a couple years back that AA was going to install winglets on their 762's. I guess not.


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineLN-MOW From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1908 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 8484 times:

In short - the reason is that noone would 'donate' an aircraft for the certification. As this is a proces that takes around 6 months, it's a huge expense, If I remember correct, CO at one point said they were cionsidering letting APB have an aircraft, but changed their mind as they needed the aircraft in traffic. As was the same reason the 736 never got certified, as WestJet pulled their promised aircraft from the program.


- I am LN-MOW, and I approve this message.
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3644 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7349 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
I don't mean to drag this too far off-topic, but why do winglets need to be certified separately for every size of a given model? Or rather, why is the certification process anything more than a few flights to show that it handles the same?

Because believe it or not, installing winglets is a serious airframe modification.



PHX based
User currently offlineFX1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7287 times:

Quoting shengzhurou (Reply 9):
Last time I read, even UA parked two of its late build ex-co 762

Unless they have parked 2 more, the original 2 that were parked have been in service with OAE for quite some time now doing the LAS-HNL-LAS runs.

FX1816


User currently offlineTranspac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3208 posts, RR: 13
Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7130 times:

For those that think the 762 isn't certified to have winglets - the KC-46 tanker, based off the 767-200ER, will carry PW4062 motors and have the APB winglets:


http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/s720x720/380604_4189118130938_1699981512_n.jpg


User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2438 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7105 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
Or rather, why is the certification process anything more than a few flights to show that it handles the same? It strikes me that if the aircraft has the same wing and wing box, the behavior at the wingtip can scarcely be that different.

Certifying winglets on an aircraft is more than just making a few flights. Winglets are considered a significant change to the aircrart per FAR 21.101 and Advisory Circular AC 21.101A, Appendix 1. As a significant change to the aircraft, the compliance must be shown to the latest regulations.
The effect on wing external loading needs to be re-evaluated, and a structural assessment against the existing loads substantiation. This may involve wind tunnel testing to update the aerodynamic model. Boeing had to modify some of the wing stringers on some 737 models due to increased wing loading at the tip. The winglets have to be certified to ice protection, HIRF and Lightning protection. Adding winglets may require reconfiguration of the anti-ice exhaust louvers on the winglet. The winglets must meet regulations specific to winglets - CFR 23.443 and 23.445 for smaller, Part 23 aircraft. A re-evaluation of flight and performance and handling qualities characteristics is required. The relocation of the wingtip anti-collision lights needs to be certified to ensure that the lights still meet the visibility requirements. Weight and balance manuals need updated, AFMs need updated. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) needs to be updated.



Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4018 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7011 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think if the blended winglets had been developed much earlier, we would have seen them made for the 762ERs as well. When they did start to develop them, the majority of the 762ERs had already been retired.

User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15744 posts, RR: 27
Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7011 times:

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 14):

For those that think the 762 isn't certified to have winglets - the KC-46 tanker, based off the 767-200ER, will carry PW4062 motors and have the APB winglets:

That's not a 767-200ER, that's a 767-2C. And the most relevant parts for winglet conversion, the wings, come from the 767-300F, not the -200ER.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19711 posts, RR: 58
Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6966 times:

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 15):
Certifying winglets on an aircraft is more than just making a few flights. Winglets are considered a significant change to the aircrart per FAR 21.101 and Advisory Circular AC 21.101A, Appendix 1. As a significant change to the aircraft, the compliance must be shown to the latest regulations.
The effect on wing external loading needs to be re-evaluated, and a structural assessment against the existing loads substantiation. This may involve wind tunnel testing to update the aerodynamic model. Boeing had to modify some of the wing stringers on some 737 models due to increased wing loading at the tip. The winglets have to be certified to ice protection, HIRF and Lightning protection. Adding winglets may require reconfiguration of the anti-ice exhaust louvers on the winglet. The winglets must meet regulations specific to winglets - CFR 23.443 and 23.445 for smaller, Part 23 aircraft. A re-evaluation of flight and performance and handling qualities characteristics is required. The relocation of the wingtip anti-collision lights needs to be certified to ensure that the lights still meet the visibility requirements. Weight and balance manuals need updated, AFMs need updated. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) needs to be updated.

Yes, yes. I get it. Winglets significantly change the aerodynamics. But why is it such a big deal to certify the 762 when the 763 is certified?

The 753 got certified...


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15744 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6905 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
But why is it such a big deal to certify the 762 when the 763 is certified?

It's not a big deal, it's just not worth it. Winglets take time to pay off, and when you take the cost of certification plus not having that much time left in service for them to pay off the numbers don't work out.

Then again, they could get Google money behind them, but buying carbon credits might be easier.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2438 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6813 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
Winglets significantly change the aerodynamics.

It is more than just aerodynamics that must be addressed for certification of winglets.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
The 753 got certified...

And so can the 767-200...How do you know that the 753 wasn't a "big deal"?

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 18):
But why is it such a big deal to certify the 762 when the 763 is certified?

Because the FAA requires that the same amount of certification is required on the 762 that was required on the 763. Some items can possibly be certified by similarity to the 763.
The real reason that the 762 hasn't been done is not because it is such a big deal, but rather there is no business case for them and for the following reasons already stated:

Quoting rjm777ual (Reply 4):
AA is retiring their 762's soon, so this would be pointless.

and

Quoting shengzhurou (Reply 9):
there are not that many 762 flying around, and most 762 are too old, 762 operators probably won't keep the 762 for long and spending money on winglets won't help them save much money.

and

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
It's not a big deal, it's just not worth it.


[Edited 2012-06-28 10:59:20]


Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently onlineatct From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2293 posts, RR: 38
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6673 times:

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 20):

And so can the 767-200...How do you know that the 753 wasn't a "big deal"?

Long story short, the first company that wants the winglets has to "donate" an airplane to the cause. In the meantime this means lost revenue while the airplane is still costing the carrier money as essentially they are paying for the test flights. A good buddy of mine was the project manager for the 753 at CO and it cost alot more than just parking an airplane for a few months. The amount of engineers and lawyers that it takes to create the STC's and other paperwork to demonstrate that the mod is safe to fly costs ALOT of money in man hours. Saudia Aramco was also on board with the 767-200 (N767A) winglet program until something fell through with the Boeing end in regards to a temporary replacement aircraft.



"The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing." - Walt Disney
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19711 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6547 times:

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 20):
And so can the 767-200...How do you know that the 753 wasn't a "big deal"?

Because there aren't many 753 airframes in the world. So the barrier to entry was relatively higher and yet it still got certified.

It makes more sense that people have pointed out that the few remaining 762's will probably be retired before winglets would pay off.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15744 posts, RR: 27
Reply 23, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6505 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 22):
So the barrier to entry was relatively higher and yet it still got certified.

But they are a lot younger and will be in service much longer so the payoff for winglets is much better. The barriers to entry are actually much lower. Winglets don't work retroactively, so there isn't much sense fitting them to planes that will be retired soon anyway.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3076 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5580 times:

Quoting Transpac787 (Reply 14):
For those that think the 762 isn't certified to have winglets - the KC-46 tanker, based off the 767-200ER, will carry PW4062 motors and have the APB winglets:


http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-...n.jpg

No they won't That's an old outdated rendition. No winglets on the KC-46.


25 Post contains images Viscount724 : More recent Boeing KC-46 images without winglets:
26 FX1816 : I though I remember hearing somewhere that the new KC46 would have the raked wing tips, but I could be wrong given that the ones that have been built
27 DocLightning : Why not? What's the drawback?
28 ghifty : 1) Not necessary or 2) Certification 1) The aircraft probably just doesn't need them for the role it'll fill. AS has some B737 flying around without
29 CitationJet : I suspect one reason is that the military is not under the financial pressure for financial efficiency, and to make a profit or stay out of bankruptc
30 Post contains links MountainFlyer : Not exactly true. The U.S. Military is facing potentially drastic budget cuts, and even besides that, they have become more serious about fuel effici
31 777STL : Not to mention that PMCO, now UA, owns the majority of the world's 753 fleet so the economies of scale were certainly there for them as well.
32 DocLightning : They still can use the increased performance. It can stay in the air longer and/or lift more payload.
33 LN-MOW : And not least, CO had aircraft available as they were phasing in ATA's last four 753's at the time. As these were parked for quite some time, they de
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...
Why No Winglets On British Registered B757's? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 12:06:25 by KA501
Why No Winglets On 787! posted Sat Oct 7 2006 20:27:37 by Bringiton
Why No Winglets On The B777 posted Wed Dec 17 2003 16:18:56 by B747FAN
Why No Winglets On DL/AA 738s? posted Mon Aug 4 2003 18:36:55 by JFKTOWERFAN
Why No Winglets On All Aircraft Types? posted Wed Dec 5 2001 21:10:06 by SEVEN_FIFTY7
Why No Winglets On This 744? posted Wed Apr 18 2001 18:08:45 by B7474
Why No Winglets On Boeing Aircraft? posted Fri May 12 2000 22:09:43 by Mason
Why Did AA Give Up On 767-200 Trans-Atlantic? posted Sat Dec 22 2007 15:53:15 by DC10@DFW
Why No F Class On AA 767-300s posted Thu Sep 14 2006 03:20:59 by Albird87
Why No Findings On Afriqiyah And ET Crash? posted Fri Aug 19 2011 10:01:10 by comorin