stuckontarmac
Topic Author
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2013 9:41 pm

Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Sun Aug 18, 2013 4:10 pm

Greetings, I know that in the early 80s a Continental DC-10 was tested with winglets, that led to them being used on the MD-11. From what I understand they were never certified for the DC-10, but with all the testing I don't see how it would have been to difficult to get the paperwork done. Fast forward to the 2000s, with FedEx acquiring a huge fleet of DC-10 10/30, gas prices really jumped off the charts for the first time to sky high numbers. My question is why FedEx did not look into the winglets for their fleet, I figure the cost for certification would have been quite a bit less because of the early 80s test. I know the fleet is on the way out now and it would not be feasible, but would there have been a substantial savings in fuel usage if the winglets had been applied 10 years ago?

[Edited 2013-08-18 09:58:15]

[Edited 2013-08-18 09:59:02]
 
LH707330
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Mon Aug 19, 2013 5:18 am

Quoting stuckontarmac (Thread starter):
From what I understand they were never certified for the DC-10, but with all the testing I don't see how it would have been to difficult to get the paperwork done.

I think you answered your own question there. The initial winglets on the DC-10 were only good for a few percent because they were gen 1 winglets, and there was insufficient demand to justify the STC. Same story with the 734, 736, RR 763ER, and a few other designs.
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:18 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 1):
The initial winglets on the DC-10 were only good for a few percent

Yes, but isn't 'a few percent' actually an awful lot over time?
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17212
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Mon Aug 19, 2013 5:09 pm

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2):
Quoting LH707330 (Reply 1):
The initial winglets on the DC-10 were only good for a few percent

Yes, but isn't 'a few percent' actually an awful lot over time?

Yes, but you need to weigh this against the cost of certification and purchase. It may seem like a good idea today, but probably didn't seem so at the time.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
RussianJet
Posts: 5983
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:15 am

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Mon Aug 19, 2013 7:52 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):
It may seem like a good idea today, but probably didn't seem so at the time.

I suppose it's all relative - both to fuel costs then vs. today, and to the relative competitive advantage gained in the market then as opposed to now.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17212
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:48 pm

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 4):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):
It may seem like a good idea today, but probably didn't seem so at the time.

I suppose it's all relative - both to fuel costs then vs. today, and to the relative competitive advantage gained in the market then as opposed to now.

Absolutely. Also we don't know if there were particular issues with the wing. There's more to it that designing the winglets and bolting them on. The lift distribution changes, which means the stresses on the spars and stringers change, which means the fatigue "pattern" changes. There might have been a strongly negative maintenance cost impact.

On the 737 or 320, where you expect to sell quite literally thousands of frames after the introduction of winglets, the economics of modifying the manufactured wing to take winglets into account are quite favorable. FedEx's MD-10 fleet, while large as these things go, is only about 60 frames, and frames well into their life at that.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
warreng24
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Tue Aug 27, 2013 4:20 pm

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2):
Yes, but isn't 'a few percent' actually an awful lot over time?

Most companies (mine included) use a 5 year pay-back period to justify investments.

At the time the projected fuel expenses in a 5 year future did not outweigh the benefits of the "few percent" reduction in fuel burn.

Remember that FedEx might only fly a few hours a day with the MD-10. It's not a very high utilization rate at all, so fuel burn of a "few percent" really isn't a big deal.
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6447
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Tue Aug 27, 2013 11:56 pm

Quoting stuckontarmac (Thread starter):
...in the early 80s a Continental DC-10 was tested with winglets, that led to them being used on the MD-11. From what I understand they were never certified for the DC-10, but with all the testing I don't see how it would have been to difficult to get the paperwork done.

Certification of the DC-10 with winglets would likely mean a lot more than just paperwork.

The tests on the CO bird 30 years ago were aerodynamic tests. They were likely done with lightweight load so the wing would never be stressed more than an un-wingletted plane at MTOW. And in conditions where the risk of strong turbulence could be ignored. Data was gathered and used for producing the quite substantially modified MD-11 wing.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 5):
There's more to it that designing the winglets and bolting them on. The lift distribution changes, which means the stresses on the spars and stringers change, which means the fatigue "pattern" changes.

Exactly! And in cruise flight in calm air there is a strong inward force on the winglets, which means bending the wingtip substantially more than an un-wingletted wingtip. Add to that strong lateral turbulence. For instance flying through wake turbulence from another plane taking off or landing in front of you may substantially increase those forces.

Wings with winglets must be designed with those forces in mind. The DC-10 wing wasn't.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19287
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: Fed Ex And Why No Winglets For MD-10

Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:37 am

Quoting warreng24 (Reply 6):
Remember that FedEx might only fly a few hours a day with the MD-10. It's not a very high utilization rate at all, so fuel burn of a "few percent" really isn't a big deal.

Good example of that was the 10-year-old UPS A300 that crashed at BHM. It only had 10,000 hours, or slightly less than 3 hours a day over its 10 years in service. Had it been a passenger aircraft it would have flown 3 or 4 times as many hours.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, Francoflier, Rookie87 and 20 guests

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