Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
RJ Winglets  
User currently offlineCVGpilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 588 posts, RR: 1
Posted (10 years 10 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3011 times:



Hey I was wondering do winglets on RJ's really do anything as far as fuel, speed, control? If so how do the decide the angles, EX: USairways CRJ are 90* and ERJ's are more normal looking like at 70*or so. If they are all that great how come not all RJ's airlines have them on there aircraft EX: CO-ERJ145 and what's the story behind the spit Airbust winglets? Tho all winglets do look badass. Thanks


Globally Yours
24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSsides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 1, posted (10 years 10 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2956 times:

I know CoEx flies the "XRJ" on its longest RJ routes, like IAH-BFL. Apparently it gives them a little extra range for the longer trips.


"Lose" is not spelled with two o's!!!!
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6441 posts, RR: 34
Reply 2, posted (10 years 10 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2920 times:

If you go to http://www.aviationpartnersboeing.com you will find lots of info on the 737 and BBJ blended winglets.





Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineERJ From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 245 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (10 years 10 months 21 hours ago) and read 2805 times:

Winglets provide better efficiency. If I remember correctly from my Aerodynamics classes (several years and many beers ago) winglets create a theoretical infinite wing, eliminating drag from vortices created by the traditional finite wing shape. I would conjecture that the pointed wing shape of the DO328 and B767 accomplishes this without winglets. Though, they aren't nearly as cool looking as the 8 foot blended winglets on the 737NG's  Smile

Hopefully there is an engineer out there that can explain these concepts better than I can.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17180 posts, RR: 66
Reply 4, posted (10 years 10 months 16 hours ago) and read 2747 times:

Not an engineer, but I know this:

Even though the drag-creating vortices from the wingtips may be eliminated, the winglets themselves create their own wing(let)tip vortices. These are smaller of course, or there wouldn't be much point.

While it is clear that you always have to factor in weight penalties when adding the winglets, it is also important to weigh in the added manufacturing cost. Savings derived from the winglets have to be greater (normalized to current $/€/£) than the extra cost of the aircraft + maintenance over the calculation period.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineSkibo777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (10 years 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 2700 times:

I know that if you were to remove the tip tanks off the old Gulfstream 2, (each contain 250 gallons of fuel) and install the Aviation Partners Blended winglets, the A/C's range actually increases, along with the payload. So the winglets obviously are effective at increasing the range, speed, and altitude, and possibly worth the $600,000 price tag.

User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17180 posts, RR: 66
Reply 6, posted (10 years 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 2675 times:

727 winglet retrofits increase climb rate, and thus allow the 727 to comply with noise regulations at many airports.


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineOlympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (10 years 10 months 14 hours ago) and read 2633 times:

CVGpilot,

7 Replies, including mine, and none of them has really answered your questions. Try the Tech/Ops Forum.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17180 posts, RR: 66
Reply 8, posted (10 years 10 months 14 hours ago) and read 2596 times:

One answer is that there are many ways to aerodynamically skin a cat, just as there are many ways to build a wing or design an engine.

Maybe a certain company has expertise with a certain winglet look, and it costs that company less to continue along that route, research and manufacturing wise.

If you are Boeing or Airbus, you might be able to afford trying out 20 wingtip permutations every time and go for close to the optimum in each case (747, 767-400/777NG, 737, A318-321, A330-340, A300-600B, A380) while if you are Canadair you go with the tried and true. So if you lose a couple of tenth of a percent. It costs you less in the end maybe.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (10 years 10 months 7 hours ago) and read 2512 times:

Winglets provide better efficiency. If I remember correctly from my Aerodynamics classes (several years and many beers ago) winglets create a theoretical infinite wing, eliminating drag from vortices created by the traditional finite wing shape.

Oh boy, not again...winglets do not create a theoretical infinite wing, and they do not completely eliminate Di ("induced drag", or drag from wingtip vorticies). I always refer to this link, but really do check out http://www.airliners.net/discussions/tech_ops/read.main/77356/4/, particularly my reply (#6). In it I explain exactly how winglets work.

Even though the drag-creating vortices from the wingtips may be eliminated, the winglets themselves create their own wing(let)tip vortices. These are smaller of course, or there wouldn't be much point.

A common misconception. Winglets DO NOT eliminate wingtip vorticies. Rather, they utilise them to produce forward lift (thrust). You are, however, completely correct that, because winglets are just little wings, they have vorticies and induced drag themselves.


Sorry I'm late replying to this,
QantasA332


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17180 posts, RR: 66
Reply 10, posted (10 years 10 months 6 hours ago) and read 2450 times:

Thx for the info QantasA332. As I said, I'm not an engineer. I can figure out the economic factors, nothing much else. And from that standpoint, I can say that if winglets were the be all and end all of wing efficiency, they would be on every plane designed since their conception.

The fact that they are not on every new design indicates that there are many ways to increase efficiency, and even that in some cases there are economic arguments against them, such as in short-range operations.

On a tangent, will winglets/raked wingtips/fences produce greater wake turbulence?



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (10 years 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 2399 times:

On a tangent, will winglets/raked wingtips/fences produce greater wake turbulence?

Well yes, they all will, but that's to be expected. Any body on an aircraft will create a greater total wake and thus pressure drag, due to the nature of pressure drag itself. For anything, airflow will seperate while travelling around it, leaving a retarding ("dragging") high-pressure wake area of jumbled air. All things produce pressure drag.

Hope that helps,
QantasA332


User currently offlineCvgpilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 588 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (10 years 10 months 5 hours ago) and read 2362 times:

Thanks Quantus and all.......


Globally Yours
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 13, posted (10 years 10 months ago) and read 2289 times:

I think the winglets are just decorations. The things that winglets say they can do, in my opinion, are myths. They dont do squat. Just for looks.


A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineBoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2238 times:

Is that why the addition of winglets to the 737's provides a 7-10% improvement in fuel economy? The "displacement" of drag improves the overall performance of the aircraft thus reducing "work". This saves fuel and has multiple other benefits including the extension of engine service life, less wear and tear on the aircraft wing structure etc...

[Edited 2004-02-28 08:44:27]

User currently offlineMITaero From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 497 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2196 times:

>The things that winglets say they can do, in my opinion, are myths. They dont do squat. Just for looks.

Aerodynamics isn't a matter of opinion.


User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2194 times:

Well said, MITaero! Amen to that!

Cheers,
QantasA332



User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2125 times:

As the winglets reduce the strength of the vortices, they should theoretically make wake turbulence less of an issue as the main culprit is the vortices, not the turbulent air left behind.

Cheers,
Fred



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2054 times:

As the winglets reduce the strength of the vortices, they should theoretically make wake turbulence less of an issue as the main culprit is the vortices, not the turbulent air left behind.

Hmm, really? Pressure drag operates by the higher pressure of wake turbulence acting on the backs of bodies on the aircraft, as you must know, and in the vortice's case, all that's there to act against is the small profile of the winglet. Pressure drag shouldn't be reduced that much...but I could be wrong.

Cheers,
QantasA332


User currently offlineFredT From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2002, 2185 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1976 times:

Yes, there is a turbulent wake behind most objects on an airframe. However, as I said, this is not the same as wake turbulence. The wake turbulence you need to watch out for is the lingering vortices - which are reduced by the winglets.

Cheers,
Fred



I thought I was doing good trying to avoid those airport hotels... and look at me now.
User currently offlinePilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3152 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1979 times:

AirframeAS,

I think the fact that Southwest is spending millions to retrofit their existing fleet because of the fuel cost savings it will realize as a result of the addition of winglets proves that they don't just look good.

I think that when you consider that Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, and Bombardier have spend millions on the design of winglets and nearly every new model or varient that has come from these manufacturers recently has incorporated some sort of wingtip enhancement such as a winglet or raked tip. Proves that they don't just look good.

While I also agree with the smart engineer types here, and all these other very intelligent postings here I also know this. Airlines are businesses, they wouldn't spend loads of cash on something that didn't improve the bottom line.



DMI
User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 1974 times:

The choice to use winglets and their shapes and configuration are highly dependant on the design of the wing. Even though they may look similar, aircraft wings can be quite different.

Furthermore, winglets can be optimized for the operating requirments for the aircraft. The same winglet design may not be appropriate for the CRJ if its flight duration was increased or decreased for that matter.

Its my personal belief that the CRJ wouldn't have winglets if it wasn't a derivitive of the longer range Challenger. Aircraft with 1 or 2 hour flight durations don't typically get to enjoy the benifits of the winglets.

[Edited 2004-02-29 15:56:56]

User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1955 times:

The devil is in the details. It's not enough to simply slap a winglet on the end of a wing and call it good. The angles, length, etc. are critical. Even after the winglet is designed, it still has to be flown and tweaked. A good design will help, but get the angles of by a few fractions of a degree and your efficiencies go out the door. Like I said in an earlier post - it's almost a black art to get it right. Computers help, but they're not enough. If they were, there'd be no need for test pilots.


User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1931 times:

Yes, there is a turbulent wake behind most objects on an airframe. However, as I said, this is not the same as wake turbulence. The wake turbulence you need to watch out for is the lingering vortices - which are reduced by the winglets.

Right. Of course. Upon doing a double take I realized we were talking about two different things.  Laugh out loud Silly me.

Cheers,
QantasA332


User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4229 posts, RR: 37
Reply 24, posted (10 years 9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1922 times:

The CRJ winglets also happen to be right at head level for me. The wing decided it would high five my head this morning. ouch!


Chicks dig winglets.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic RJ Winglets
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
BAe 146/RJ Overhead Panel posted Mon Nov 13 2006 15:17:27 by Kris
Winglets And Ground Effect posted Mon Nov 6 2006 16:23:55 by BAe146QT
Blended Winglets posted Mon Aug 14 2006 22:37:39 by Mnik101
Winglets Question posted Thu Jul 20 2006 16:58:53 by Tonytifao
Approach Speed With/without Winglets posted Thu Jun 15 2006 00:35:42 by Amberair732
What Are Winglets For? posted Wed Apr 5 2006 07:59:35 by Okees
Airbus Winglets Revealed posted Wed Apr 5 2006 03:56:30 by Cancidas
BAe 146/RJ Throttles Question posted Wed Mar 15 2006 14:01:30 by Kris
Wingtip Vortices Question, Winglets (with Pic) posted Tue Feb 28 2006 18:54:09 by Boeing Nut
Actual Max Range Of A Boeing 757-200ER W/Winglets? posted Wed Feb 15 2006 14:43:56 by BrightCedars
Why No Winglets On 747-830? posted Wed Aug 31 2011 12:52:08 by EASTERN747
Winglets And Max Altitude posted Thu Jun 9 2011 03:55:49 by smartt1982
Why No Winglets On Brand New 767 For JAL? posted Thu Nov 25 2010 14:01:25 by windshear
Iata Codes For Aircraft With Retrofitted Winglets posted Sat Nov 20 2010 14:43:30 by workhorse
Where To Charter Or Wet Lease RJ Aircraft? posted Mon Nov 1 2010 16:45:37 by ShrimpBurrito
Sharklets Vs Winglets posted Sat Sep 25 2010 12:57:34 by Goblin211

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format