User avatar
AirPacific747
Topic Author
Posts: 9269
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:28 pm

Hi,
I am sitting in AMS waiting for my flight at the moment.. half an hour ago while eating a burger, I saw an Air France Airbus A320 taxiing outside the window without winglets... does anyone know what happened to it? I could not see the reg. as it was too far away.
 
JetMaster
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:30 pm

It was an A320-100 which aren't equipped with winglets. Air France operates 13, British Airways 5 models of that type.


Regards,
JM
The Journey is my Destination
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:31 pm

Quoting AirPacific747 (Thread starter):
does anyone know what happened to it?

Nothing. It´s an example of the older A320-100 with lower MTOW and without winglets. Only 21 were built in 1987/88.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Topic Author
Posts: 9269
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:35 pm

oh okay.. I have never seen those before
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:40 pm


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Luis Pontes - Lisbon Spotters
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jorge Abreu - Madeira Spotters



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Christian Waser



regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Topic Author
Posts: 9269
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sat Oct 15, 2005 7:54 pm

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 4):

exactly  Wink

thankyou for the pictures!
 
ushermittwoch
Posts: 2530
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sat Oct 15, 2005 8:25 pm

Just as stated above. It's the -100 series. No real difference when flying with them. Just something to brag about, when talking to your nerd friends.  Wink
Where have all the tri-jets gone...
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Topic Author
Posts: 9269
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 3:52 am

Quoting Ushermittwoch (Reply 6):

lol  Wink
 
airbusA346
Posts: 7284
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:05 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:01 am

They are called wing fences not winglets.
With out wing fences

And this is the Original A320-100 FWWDC


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jörg Tegen



Tom.
Tom Walker '086' First Officer of a A318/A319 for Air Lambert - Hours Flown: 17 hour 05 minutes (last updated 24/12/05).
 
aerlingus330
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 2:21 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:04 am

Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 8):
They are called wing fences not winglets.

But dont they serve the same purpose as winglets?...

AerLingus330
Aer Lingus Airbus A330-300
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:08 am

What I have always wondered about, why not retrofit the few original -100s with wing fences to reduce the drag and thus the fuel flow?

If I remember correctly Airbus upgraded at least one of the first A320-100 to full -200 standard (this includes more than just the wing fences BTW) during the certification program, so in theory it should be possible. How come none of the airlines operating the A320-100 (Air Inter then Air France on one side and British Caledonian then later British Airways on the other side) ever showed serious interest in this through the years? Would the fuel saving vs cost really be that marginal?

Anyway, I suppose it keeps al those spotters very happy! Just have a look at how often they comment about the missing wing fences on their pictures of these truely revolutionary machines...

[Edited 2005-10-15 23:16:49]
 
mNeo
Posts: 718
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:12 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:34 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 10):
What I have always wondered about, why not retrofit the few original -100s with wing fences to reduce the drag and thus the fuel flow?

I believe it was something about that since only 21 were built the expense of certifying the changes would be to large to make any kind of profit.
Powered by Maina
 
Rom1
Posts: 120
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 10:03 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:50 am

@ Sabenapilot

I may be wrong but AF and BA operates these aircraft on such short flights that the savings made would not be really important! These aircraft are over 15 years old as well and will be probably sold to charter companies while being replaced by new A320 I guess.
The winglets (or wing fences lol) only save 1 or 2% of fuel consumption for an A320...
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:02 am

The fuel savings would indeed be marginal, but still some airlines are doing it to their 737, so it has stunned me AF nor BA have ever seriously considered it. At least at AF the A320-100 is used on the European network like any other A320, so it might prove economical over time, although like you say they are almost nearing the end of their life now, so it should possibly have been done earlier on then to make some sense.

Oh well, nice to have some oddly looking A320s flying around in the European skies.... (those EZY A319s with double overwing exits are also quite nice to see, although much less rare obviously)
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:18 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 13):
but still some airlines are doing it to their 737

a wing tip fence is no blended winglet. just because both are on the end of the wing doesn't make them equal. the 737 winglet increases lift and decreases take off run, decreases minimum approach speed, cuts down on noise, and decreases fuel burn by more than 1-2% (3-5% is what is usually stated). But it also adds length and weight to the end of the wing.

If all that was required to accomplish what the blended winglet does was the addition of a tiny chevron at the end of a wing, all airliners would have these.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
797
Posts: 1386
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:23 pm

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 1):
Air France operates 13

13!!! Wow, another one to add to my bad luck story list...

A couple years ago I did my first flight to CDG and had a connection to MXP... I was dying to fly on an Airbus because I never did it before... What I found was that my AF A320 had no winglets and.... I WAS MAD!  banghead  Just because what actually atracted me to fly on an Airbus, were their winglets... just a short story! biggrin 
Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
 
blsbls99
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:07 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 2:25 pm

If there were 21 A320-100s built, Air France operates 13, BA operates 5, are the other 3 with Airbus?
319 320 313 722 732 733 735 73G 738 739 742 752 763 772 CRJ D9S ERJ EMB L10 M88 M90 SF3 AT4
 
AR1300
Posts: 1686
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:22 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 3:35 pm

Quoting Blsbls99 (Reply 16):
If there were 21 A320-100s built, Air France operates 13, BA operates 5, are the other 3 with Airbus?



Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 8):
nd this is the Original A320-100 FWWDC

here you have one, I guess.And the other 2 maybe belong to Airbus too.


Mike
You are now free to move about the cabin
 
varig_dc10
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2001 2:21 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 4:48 pm

MSN numbers 9 and 15, formerley with Air France and Air Inter, were written off.

varig_dc10
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:45 pm

Quoting Blsbls99 (Reply 16):
If there were 21 A320-100s built, Air France operates 13, BA operates 5, are the other 3 with Airbus?

indeed:
-) 1 (the very first one) is with Airbus Industries
-) 5 are with BA
-) 13 are with AF
-) 2 are sadly written off (the 2 'notorious A320 accidents in Paris - Le Bourget and Strasbourg)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michel Gilliand



Although only 21 A321-100 have been officially delivered, I know for sure airbus CONVERTED at least one -100 to full -200 standards during the production process. I think it was the first plane for LH, but I could be wrong... Anyone has more information on this???

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
A wing tip fence is no blended winglet. just because both are on the end of the wing doesn't make them equal.

Thank you for explaining, but I think I know pretty well what a wing fence on an A320F does. That 'tiny chevron' at the end of a wing is in fact a superior method of cutting off the vortex induced drag of that wing while at the same time avoiding much of the unwanted side effects of large winglets like you can see on the A330/A340, B747-400 or the B737NG.
Weight, increased span and the need for a more cautious handling of the plane during ground operations (notably at de-icing but also when taxiing) are not really things any airline is after; they are however inherent to a design which is retrofitted to a less than optimal wing and for which a simple fence would not help much.

Note for instance that the A340 was originally planned with the kind of chevron fences like on all other Airbusses too, but when the original US engine manufacturer abandoned the new A340 engine due to ongoing technical problems, Airbus had no choice but to select the weaker CFM56. Since the aerodynamic design of the first European long haul plane was already finished by then and the wing could not be fully reworked to cope with engines giving less thrust, all Airbus could do to help its newest baby was to fit large lift producing wing tips at the end. The A330 (designed as a twin sister) simply inherited these although it could very well cope without them. Iin fact at one stage Airbus played with the idea of NOT giving them the large A340 style wing lets, but in the end it was decided that it was easier to stick to the one-for-all option and now we see them on the A350 too, all because of commonality. With the A380 however, Airbus has reverted to the much smaller wing fences of before...
Not really surprising since on a well designed modern wing where no compromise has to be found with existing production methods (which is the case for the A350 like I've said), you don't need large tip devices, all you need is a small distorting device to wipe off the vortex trailing at the tip. Best proof is the 777 or the 787... The 737NG blended wing might look very smashing and it certainly increases efficiency of the wing, but I wouldn't hail it too much, since their beauty is a visual proof of just how much room for improvement there is in the aerodanamic concept of the wing itself (despite B. repetitive claims they had completely reworked the wing....)

[Edited 2005-10-16 10:47:06]
 
toolman
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:06 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:21 pm

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 19):
2 are sadly written off (the 2 'notorious A320 accidents in Paris - Le Bourget and Strasbourg)

Let me correct you, but I think the Air France fatality happened in Mulhouse-Habsheim not in Le Bourget.
Have a look at aviation-safety.net for more details on Air France crash an aviation-safety.net for the Air Inter crash.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:26 pm

Yes you are right of course...
That was also the reason why I couldn't find a picture of the AF A320 disappearing in the tries... thanks for pointing this out!
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5182
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:46 pm

Air France A320-100 :

Based at ORLY. Used only for Domestic services. (172 Y seats). Ex-Air Inter aircraft :

F-GGEA
F-GGEB
F-GGEC
F-GGED Crashed while approching SXB in January 1992.
F-GGEE
F-GGEF
F-GGEG

Based at CDG. Used on short European network. (159 seats).

F-GFKA
F-GFKB
F-GFKC Crashed in Habsheim during Air Show in June 1988.
F-GFKD
F-GFKE
F-GFKF
F-GFKG
F-GFKQ*

*Despite what you may read on some website, including A.net, F-GFKQ has never been converted into a -200 and is still referred in AF's manuals as an A320-100.

This aircraft is actally msn 002, used by Airbus for flight tests and finally delivered to AF in Feb.1991.


BA's A320-100 are :

G-BUSB
G-BUSC
G-BUSD
G-BUSE
G-BUSF.

Add to this list the prototype msn 001 F-WWBA, still the property of Airbus and you have all the 21 A320-100 built.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andreas Müller - Spotterteam Graz
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Spencer Wilmot

 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:34 pm

Quoting FlySSC (Reply 22):
Despite what you may read on some website, including A.net, F-GFKQ has never been converted into a -200 and is still referred in AF's manuals as an A320-100.

oh I know, the only A320-100 converted to -200 standards is -as far as I know- the first plane for LH. Its assembly was already started when Airbus decided to build only -200s and so this plane received the supplementary center fuel tank as well as the wing fences and was delivered as a -200 although it stated its production as a -100.

However, I'd like to know the registration of this plane as well as an somewhat more official confirmation from this than just my memory (and that of my fellow A320 drivers).
 
JetMaster
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:53 pm

Quoting FlySSC (Reply 22):
*Despite what you may read on some website, including A.net, F-GFKQ has never been converted into a -200 and is still referred in AF's manuals as an A320-100.

The official French aviation register also shows the aircraft as a -111 version. Just search for "F-GFKQ":

http://www.immat.aviation-civile.gou...r/immat/servlet/aeronef_liste.html


Regards,
JM
The Journey is my Destination
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13760
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:24 pm

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 13):
The fuel savings would indeed be marginal, but still some airlines are doing it to their 737

If you know everything, why make vague statements? You say some airlines are doing 'it' on the 737. Since you know it all, I guess saying 'it' was a shortcut for 'adding blended winglets, which are very different than wingtip fences and have a greater overall improvement in operations.'

Further, what you "explain" has little to do with anything, and isn't even correct, as it tries to explain the winglet away as compensation for lack of design, yet you then of course confirm it adds lift and aerodynamic efficiency. The A320 could use that, too, if an airline wanted to retrofit them.

The blended winglet adds effective length to any wing. It does more than breaking up wingtip vortexes and improving airflow, which it's obvious you know, but seem to dismiss as only necessary when the engines are underpowered (and you blame it on the Americans, too. bravo.)

It's not that the A320 is far superior and the B 737NG wing is a failure, as you imply. The blended winglet could be added to the A320 with similar effect, though less of an impact on fuel since you'd take off the chevron fence to do it. But if an airline decided it wanted the A320 to have them, to change take-off and landing performance and very slightly decrease fuel burn, it could be done (after being designed and certified, of course). In the same way, a company could design a retrofit wingtip fence for the 737 if airlines wanted to cut fuel burn a bit but not increase length and weight.

And Boeing didn't invent the thing, they contracted it by a third party. It can be applied to any aircraft, so your A vs. B bait is in the wrong ocean. Though it does seem you are trying to get another US/B vs. EU/A war going in a subtle way.

If the winglet concept is so off, why isn't Airbus reworking the wing of the A350 to eliminate it, despite the new engines that will be more than powerful enough? And if it is such an "boeing failure" why are they not using it on the 772LR, 773ER, 788, 789 and 747Adv, but are using it on the 783?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:43 pm

calm down Ikramerica, you'll get yourself in hospital if you continue like this...

Winglets -contrary to wing fences-are no hint at any design failure at all, they just show that the wing itself is in need of some help to achieve highly appreciated performance specifications which on its own it could not obtain.

For a clean sheet design, the wing can be pretty much designed in such a way that it does actually include all these performance specifications and thus all that is needed is a fence to eliminate the vortex.

That's why you will hardly ever find it on clean sheet designs; they almost always show up later on, be it in a very late stage of the design (like for the A340/A330) or in the case of the 737 after many years of operation.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:19 pm

Oh, by the way Ikramerica, I wonder, did you actually READ my reply fully or just jumped on the 'reply' button because somebody dare to say a negative thing about those beautiful blended wings of the 737? Because you have asked me questions which I answered already in the post you refer to...

Also I'd like to know where exactly did I tell anything wrong like you say?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 25):
You try to explain the winglet as a way to compensate for lack of design, yet you then confirm it adds lift and aerodynamic efficiency. The A320 could use that too.

Why on earth would the A320 need more lift for? To reduce the take off and landing roll by lowering approach and lift-off speeds? You are aware that Lift ALWAYS induces Drag and that the aim is to minimize drag in the first place, do you? The reason the 737 could use some help is because over the years it has grown bigger and heavier, thus started eating up more and more runway and it was becoming weight limited at certain spots of its operating envelope. The A320 wing however has been designed with a heavier model in mind and thus copes very well without lift producing aka drag inducing tip devices so far...


Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 25):
The blended winglet could be added to the A320 with similar effect, though less of an impact on fuel since you'd take off the chevron fence to do it. But if an airline decided it wanted the A320 to have them, to change take-off and landing performance and very slightly decrease fuel burn, it could be done (after being designed and certified, of course).

Again, no airline in its right mind will add weight, drag and cost to a design which is in no need for it...
The A320 is not performance restricted as much as the 737NG is, it does not pose a speeding problem to ATC at MLW, it doesn't eat tremendous runway lengths for its category of plane and the fences reduce the vortex drag to an absolute minimum.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 25):
If the winglet concept is so off, why isn't Airbus reworking the wing of the A350 to eliminate it, despite the new engines that will be more than powerful enough? And if it is such an "Boeing failure" why are they not using it on the 772LR, 773ER, 788, 789 and 747Adv, but are using it on the 783?

I think I've answered all that in my post you refer to. You might want to actually read it.
Alternatively, If the winglet concept is indeed such a good idea and comes without any of the penalties I've mentioned, then why does the A380 design never featured them, despite struggling with weight problems, wake turbulence and lift issues for a long time then??? Are they really that daft at Toulouse according to you???

[Edited 2005-10-16 16:21:49]
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:38 pm

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 19):
Iin fact at one stage Airbus played with the idea of NOT giving them the large A340 style wing lets, but in the end it was decided that it was easier to stick to the one-for-all option and now we see them on the A350 too, all because of commonality.

Half true... the A350 is going to feature an all new winglet configuration, so it won't be common with the A330 and A340.

N
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:57 pm

Are they going to use that advanced winglet design test flown on the compny A340-200 on the A350 after all then? That sure looked very nice and I remember it had some very good data too...
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: Air France Airbus A320 Without Winglets...?!

Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:02 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 23):
oh I know, the only A320-100 converted to -200 standards is -as far as I know- the first plane for LH.

The LH A320 with the lowest MSN that I could find is D-AIPA, named Buxtehude; this is MSN 69, which had it's first flight in 2 August 1989. There are quite a number of A320-200s with lower MSNs which flew before this one, so, unless Airbus assigned the plane a new MSN when they converted it to a -200, I don't think that the converted -100 is in service with LH.

Regards,
Frank
Smile - it confuses people!