HNLsurfer
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:26 am

Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Wed Jun 27, 2012 7:58 pm

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?
 
B747forever
Posts: 12886
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:50 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:01 pm

I would guess that the 762 is not certified for winglets.
Work Hard, Fly Right
 
brilondon
Posts: 3021
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:07 pm

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!!
 
BMI727
Posts: 11173
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:12 pm

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?
 
rjm777ual
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 11:32 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:46 pm

AA is retiring their 762's soon, so this would be pointless.
Greetings from Dulles!
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:37 am

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 avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 4064
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:49 am

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   
And for my next miracle, I'm gonna turn water into funk!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20147
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 3:58 am

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.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7578
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:23 am

because the winglets are more expensive than the 762s themselves..
Flown to 120 Airports in 44 Countries on 73 Operators. Visited 55 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
User avatar
shengzhurou
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 5:07 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 7:08 am

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 avatar
United_fan
Posts: 6382
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 11:11 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:01 pm

I thought I read a couple years back that AA was going to install winglets on their 762's. I guess not.
Champagne For My Real Friends,and Real Pain For My Sham Friends
 
User avatar
LN-MOW
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2000 12:24 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:52 pm

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.
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 4:51 pm

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
 
FX1816
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:02 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 4:57 pm

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
 
Transpac787
Posts: 1349
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:47 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:10 pm

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
 
citationjet
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:12 pm

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.
 
laca773
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 7:10 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:23 pm

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.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11173
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:23 pm

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 avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20147
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:26 pm

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...
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
BMI727
Posts: 11173
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:33 pm

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?
 
citationjet
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:44 pm

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.
 
atct
Posts: 2472
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:42 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:59 pm

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.
Trikes are for kids!
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20147
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 6:10 pm

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.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
BMI727
Posts: 11173
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 6:15 pm

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?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 4031
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:26 pm

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.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:43 pm

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 24):
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.

More recent Boeing KC-46 images without winglets:

 
FX1816
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:02 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:22 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 25):
Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 24):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.
More recent Boeing KC-46 images without winglets:

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 for other countries don't have the raked wing tips.

FX1816
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20147
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:43 am

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 24):
No they won't That's an old outdated rendition. No winglets on the KC-46.

Why not? What's the drawback?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
ghifty
Posts: 890
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:12 pm

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:18 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 27):
Why not? What's the drawback?

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 winglets for that reason.

2) Like it's already been brought up, adding winglets is complicated. However, the P-8A Poseidon, based on the B737, has raked wingtips.. but I've no clue what, if any, hinderances regarding certification occurred due to that.. All I know is that military aircraft face a different certification process than do civil aircraft.
Fly Delta (Wid)Jets
 
citationjet
Posts: 2259
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:26 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:57 pm

Quoting ghifty (Reply 28):
All I know is that military aircraft face a different certification process than do civil aircraft.

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 bankruptcy, like the airlines are. Fuel efficiency is not top on their list of priorities. The military flies versions of commercial aircraft that are considered obsolete from a commercial business point of view. Look at the KC-135R, C-9s, VC-10s, L1011, KC-10, etc that are still used by the military today.
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.
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:14 pm

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 29):
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 bankruptcy, like the airlines are. Fuel efficiency is not top on their list of priorities.

Not exactly true. The U.S. Military is facing potentially drastic budget cuts, and even besides that, they have become more serious about fuel efficiency. The Air Force especially uses a very large percentage of all fuel used by the military.

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o.../blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=445
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:06 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23):
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.

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.
PHX based
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 20147
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:24 pm

Quoting CitationJet (Reply 29):
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 bankruptcy, like the airlines are. Fuel efficiency is not top on their list of priorities.

They still can use the increased performance. It can stay in the air longer and/or lift more payload.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
LN-MOW
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2000 12:24 am

RE: Why No Winglets On 767-200's?

Sat Jun 30, 2012 12:40 am

Quoting 777STL (Reply 31):
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.

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 decifed to make one available for APB for certification, undoubtably in exchange for a substantial discount.
- I am LN-MOW, and I approve this message.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos