757 Winglets

Corinth2103

Member
Aug 20, 2002
85
0
Chicago
www.usaviation.com
Some handy tips for flying to Europe

Winglets on 757s would let American increase overseas flights


10:26 PM CDT on Thursday, July 7, 2005


By ERIC TORBENSON / The Dallas Morning News


American Airlines Inc., seeking to accelerate its expansion of international flying, appears to be close to buying winglets for its Boeing 757s that would allow the planes to fly from New York to Europe.

The winglets – small, nearly vertical airfoils installed at the wingtips to reduce drag – would give American 757-200s as much as 200 extra miles of range and save 150,000 gallons of fuel per plane each year.


That could help American shift some of the mix of its flying from domestic routes, where it faces stiff competition from low-cost carriers, to overseas flights, which are more lucrative because average fares are higher.

Fort Worth-based American, the world's largest carrier, already uses its 757s to fly from Boston to Manchester, England, and to Shannon, Ireland, and has been pleased with the results.

American is definitely looking at buying winglets for its 757s, said Tim Wagner, an airline spokesman. "We haven't made a decision yet," he said. "We're looking to maximize our aircraft capabilities."

Aviation Partners Boeing has been working with American officials for four years, said Dick Friel, senior vice president of marketing for the Seattle firm that sells the kits.

"I think we're getting pretty close" with American, he said.

The carrier has shopped for winglets on its fleet of 77 Boeing 737-800s, but the interest of late has been for winglets on some or all of its 143 Boeing 757-200s. "We're eager to get something done with them," Mr. Friel said.


Pilots' approval

The word about the likely changes has spread through American's pilots' union. While unable to comment on the potential change, Allied Pilots Association New York domicile chairman Sam Mayer said his pilots would welcome the new aircraft.

"Any additional flying that goes anywhere is a good thing," he said. Rumors about the winglets have been rampant, and the pilots are eager to hear about the potential changes, he said. "It's good to see the trend line reversing."

The modified planes are likely to be flown from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, where American has invested millions of dollars in terminal upgrades.


Countering Continental

That would put American in competition for European travelers in the world's top air market with Houston-based Continental Airlines Inc., which has an international hub at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey.

Continental is the launch customer for the 757 winglets, technology that was approved only last month by regulators.

Continental has added 11 international routes so far this year, including seven from Newark. Four Newark routes are being flown by 757s, spokesman David Messing said.

One analyst applauded American's likely move.

"People want to fly directly instead of connecting to Europe," said Roger King of Credit Sights in New York. The 757 aircraft would help American fly the plane to smaller European markets. But Continental provides formidable competition from Newark, he noted.

With crude oil prices over $60 per barrel, fuel-saving winglets are increasingly popular. Dallas-based Southwest Airlines Co. uses them on its Boeing 737s.
 
I think flying to Birmingham, Edinbirough, Glasgow and other secondary English cities from JFK is a wonderful idea. 757 with a spacious Busniess Class would be great, as New York is the obvious city for such an effort. The English financial industry is spread out a far north as Scotland so flying via London, Paris or Amsterdam is not always a desirable idea.
 
These are apparently all but a done deal, and we may see the first ones for the summer of 2006. They will be used to open some current markets out of Boston (like possibly Glasgow), new markets out of JFK (such as Lyon), and Brazil markets out of Miami (including a return to Belo Horizonte and the first US airline service to Brasilia).

It's too bad the 757s don't have the legs to do Miami/Chicago-Europe.
 
Winglets make much more sense on 757's than 737's, were the average stage length is higher. Winglets really only save fuel during cruise, eh, Winglet?
 
Winglets add to efficiency because they inhibit the formation of wingtip vortices which occur as the higher pressure air on the underside of the wing tries to find its way to the lower pressure on top. Since cruise is the vast majority of the flight, it stands to reason most of the savings is there, but they add to efficiency in climb and descent as well.

At TWA we flew 757's without winglets to Barcelona and Lisbon and sometimes Madrid. The westbound BCN-JFK was scheduled at 9:40 block-to-block and sometimes was even slower. I never made a fuel stop or took a weight restriction on any 757 flight, as was often necessary on the L1011. I'm surprised winglets are deemed necessary on flights to Great Britain.

MK
 
kirkpatrick said:
Winglets add to efficiency because they inhibit the formation of wingtip vortices which occur as the higher pressure air on the underside of the wing tries to find its way to the lower pressure on top. Since cruise is the vast majority of the flight, it stands to reason most of the savings is there, but they add to efficiency in climb and descent as well.

At TWA we flew 757's without winglets to Barcelona and Lisbon and sometimes Madrid. The westbound BCN-JFK was scheduled at 9:40 block-to-block and sometimes was even slower. I never made a fuel stop or took a weight restriction on any 757 flight, as was often necessary on the L1011. I'm surprised winglets are deemed necessary on flights to Great Britain.

MK
[post="280985"][/post]​


UGGGHHH!!! 9:40 on a 757! :shock:
 
kirkpatrick said:
Winglets add to efficiency because they inhibit the formation of wingtip vortices which occur as the higher pressure air on the underside of the wing tries to find its way to the lower pressure on top. Since cruise is the vast majority of the flight, it stands to reason most of the savings is there, but they add to efficiency in climb and descent as well.

At TWA we flew 757's without winglets to Barcelona and Lisbon and sometimes Madrid. The westbound BCN-JFK was scheduled at 9:40 block-to-block and sometimes was even slower. I never made a fuel stop or took a weight restriction on any 757 flight, as was often necessary on the L1011. I'm surprised winglets are deemed necessary on flights to Great Britain.

MK
[post="280985"][/post]​

Strictly speaking, winglets don't inhibit wingtip vorticies, only reduce them. Also, the addition of winglets effectivley increase wingspan, increasing aspect ratio, decreasing induced drag, while keeping actual wingspan the same. For those interested, induced drag coefficient increases with the square of lift coefficient, inversely with aspect ratio and span efficiency factor. Total drag coefficient is the sum of induced drag coefficient and "profile" drag coeffient( at zero lift coefficient ), also known as a drag polar.
 
StraaightTaalk said:
UGGGHHH!!! 9:40 on a 757! :shock:
[post="280986"][/post]​
I did it many times, with every seat full, two services and Duty Free. Aft galley was particularly challenging. One of the worst problems was trash management.

MK
 
lpbrian said:
Strictly speaking, winglets don't inhibit wingtip vorticies, only reduce them.
[post="280997"][/post]​

Main Entry: in·hib·it
Pronunciation: in-'hib-&t
Function: transitive verb
1 a : to restrain from free or spontaneous activity especially through the operation of inner psychological or external social constraints <an inhibited person> b : to check or restrain the force or vitality of <inhibit aggressive tendencies>
2 a : to reduce or suppress the activity of <a presynaptic neuron can not only excite a postsynaptic neuron but can also inhibit it —H. W. Kendler> b : to retard or prevent the formation of c : to retard, interfere with, or prevent (a process or reaction) <inhibit ovulation>


Dictionary.com
 
kirkpatrick said:
I did it many times, with every seat full, two services and Duty Free. Aft galley was particularly challenging. One of the worst problems was trash management.

MK
[post="281009"][/post]​


I cannot even imagine how challenging that could be. It would be even more difficult on the AA 757s, because, I believe, we have fewer cart positions than on the TWA 757.
 
kirkpatrick said:
At TWA we flew 757's without winglets to Barcelona and Lisbon and sometimes Madrid. The westbound BCN-JFK was scheduled at 9:40 block-to-block and sometimes was even slower. I never made a fuel stop or took a weight restriction on any 757 flight, as was often necessary on the L1011. I'm surprised winglets are deemed necessary on flights to Great Britain.

MK
[post="280985"][/post]​

CO has operated its 757s without winglets transatlantic from both EWR and CLE for many years. Not sure why AA can't do this already.
 
How quickly we forget that flying a 707 or DC8 on a 10 hour segment was pretty common up until the late 70's...
 
kirkpatrick said:
I wasn't going to answer, but I admit "inhibit" probably wasn't the best word, but what the heck, it was late.
[post="281065"][/post]​

Actually, I posted the definition to show that you used an appropriate term.

Inhibit most commonly means reduce, suppress, restrain or suppress, not eliminate.
 

Latest posts