WJ Big Announcement?

[Tango Niner]

Rumour mill on the line was that Clive was going to make some kind of announcement today (Sept 15)... anyone else have more info?

T9

[Guest Dxr]

I believe the first 700 with winglets will be on display in the hangar today for employees to have a sneak peak.

[Elfric]

I saw the airplane last night. The way cool factor is way up there.

[Guest M. McRae]

AH FINS....

1948 Caddy began industry's oddest fad

By Richard A. Wright

The cars of every era have a particular look. You might not know what make a car is but you can tell if it's from the 1930s or the '60s or the '90s.

One reason is that state-of-the-art styling considerations weigh heavily on auto designers. What is possible dominates. So cars early in the century were all boxes on boxes, because bodies and chassis were often made by different companies and the main consideration was that they fit together.

The 1952 Cadillac had tailfin taillights integrated into a more fin-like rear fender.

In 1927, General Motors hired Hollywood stylist Harley Earl to design its new Cadillac LaSalle. This created a new profession of auto designer and the shape of cars changed again. Now the whole car was designed as an integral unit.

By 1953, even some small non-luxury cars, like this Henry J, a compact car from Kaiser-Frazer, were sprouting fins.

One of the most curious design influences was the tailfin of the 1950s. The spread of this styling cue led to some of the most distinctive, unusual and, in some instances, beautiful cars ever built.

By 1956, many cars had tailfins which encompassed the entire rear fender, as did this 1956 Dodge Coronet Lancer.

The 1948 Cadillac had small, attractive fin-like curves on its rear fenders to house its taillights. GM styling boss Harley Earl said he was inspired by the Lockheed P-38 twin-fuselage fighter plane.

The tailfin was exclusively Cadillac's for several years, then other makers began putting tailfins on their cars. In one of the most curious automotive fads in history -- the fins had no function whatsoever except as decoration and, of course, to sell cars -- the fin became the symbol of the American car of the '50s, reaching bizarre proportions before it ran its course.

A classic of the era is this 1957 Chevrolet. The body looked similar to the '55, except for the tailfins. Since the '57 is worth more than the '55, one must assume it is because of the fins.

There were other aircraft influences on auto design of that era, but no one copied Studebaker's bullet nose or Buick's fender "portholes." But within a few years all makers began grafting tailfins on their cars -- literally, in some cases, as custom body shops began welding fins on cars for trendy guys who could not wait for Detroit to catch up with this odd customer demand.

It was 1955 before everyone really got on the tailfin bandwagon. Cadillac's fins had stayed small and tasteful, but in 1955 huge sharklike fins were put on the Eldorado. It challenged stylists at all the companies and they began responding in often weird and rarely beautiful ways.

Chrysler Corp.'s "Forward Look" was centered on very large tailfins, as on this 1957 Chrysler 300C.

Ford stylists were not enamored of the fin, but with GM fitting them to all its lines and setting the public tastes with more than half the market, they followed suit with mildly finlike rear fenders in 1955, then went to very distinct and definite fins in 1957. As soon as the fad began to fade, Ford dropped them and only a vestige remained on the '60 and '61 models.

Studebaker added fiberglass fins to its otherwise beautiful Hawk models. American Motors reluctantly began putting fins on its Rambler, which never did look comfortably with them. Even staid Mercedes-Benz added fins, but small and not until the fad had pretty well run its course.

Some tailfins got distinctive treatment, for example, like these from the 1957 Chrysler Imperial with its unusual "bombsight" taillights.

The tailfin looked best on a large car, where the proportions could be made to look right, usually not possible on a small car. British maker Sunbeam brought out its replacement for the elegant Alpine, a short wheelbase big-finned model which eventually had a Ford V-8 stuffed into it and became the Tiger. It looked like a doorstop.

GM went a bit overboard, with strange slanted fins on the Buick, major chunks of chrome on the Oldsmobile and eventually the bizarre "batwing" fins of the '59 Chevrolet.

The 1958 Packard Hawk, basically the Studebaker Hawk with a Packard badge, had tailfins grafted onto its already handsome body.

And Cadillac, which had started the trend, caused its tailfins to soar to the height of parody in its '59 models.

It was Chrysler Corp. that eventually demonstrated how good a car could look with large fins with its "Forward Look." Virgil Exner's soaring designs through the late '50s outfinned everyone.

This 1959 Plymouth Sport Fury was well proportioned despite its huge tailfins.

Tailfins on the 1959 Cadillac became an icon of Detroit's age of excess.

http://www.detnews.com/joyrides/1999/tailfins/tailfins.htm

[Guest flyersclub]

did you know that an EPA pilot purchased the very first Mustang off the assembly line ... great story you can read about it in the book written some years ago about the car.

[Guest GT2GO]

The Winglets look amazing, WestJet will be the first airline in North America flying a 737-700 with them. Watch for them soon in a base near you.

[Guest M. McRae]

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737family/winglets/wing3.html

Watch out for low bridges and narrow parking areas..... Got to admit, they do add to the look......

[Mitch Cronin]

I think they're goofy looking appendages. Gives a look that reminds me of 3-tailed old things. I guess they're worth having, and somehow the extra drag must be offset by their action upon vortices or something like that? ... but in my opinion they do nothing to enhance the look of a clean aircraft.

[Mitch Cronin]

From the link Malcolm provided:

"Lower operating costs by reducing block fuel burn by 3.5 to 4.0 percent on missions greater than 1,000 nautical miles

Reduce engine maintenance costs

Increase range up to 130 nautical miles

Improve payload capability by up to 6,000 pounds (.5 to 3 metric tons)

Improve takeoff performance and obstacle clearance

Increase optimum cruise altitude capability

Reduce community noise by .5 to .7 EPNdB (Effective Perceived Noise Level in Decibels) on takeoff and slight improvement on approach

Lower emissions through lower cruise thrust"

Sounds like snake oil to me.

[Guest M. McRae]

Mitch: your critical eye has drawn my attention to :

""Lower operating costs by reducing block fuel burn by 3.5 to 4.0 percent on missions greater than 1,000 nautical miles "

I wonder what the effect is on missions under 1,000 nautical miles. Good, Bad or neutral. Since Boeing is not publishing re under 1000, can we assume (and that is always risky) they degregate performance?

[Guest blizzard]

I was once talking to a Boeing design engineer, and he told me that the only reason that they put winglets on the BBJ was because the customers thought they looked "sexier". For the expected missions of the BBJ, they really didn't add the performance required to justify the cost.

One could assume that the 737 would have the same characteristics. Assuming that the wingletted (is that a word?) airplanes are flying missions of over 1,000 miles only, they will pay for themselves. Once you start using them for short hops, they are a liability. There are reasons why airlines such as Southwest have not retrofitted their airplanes.

[Mitch Cronin]

I dunno Malcolm, I'd guess they'd say it just reduces the savings...

But you know, if they really wanted efficiency, they'd flip that up-side-down wing in the back of the bird right-side-up and stick it in front of the main plane. But they're too chicken to do that.

I think I posted a bit about a conversation I had, over some ale, with a Boeing aerodynamics engineer... He told me that the senior folk at Boeing had stated emphatically they'd never go that route.

Stuck on old ideas. That's what's wrong with Boeing. They build great machines, fantastic machines in fact, but full of old ideas... if it weren't for Douglas, Lockheed, Airbus and other competitors paving the way, Boeing would probably have have stuck with the Stearman.

I don't wonder at all that they killed their "Sonic Cruiser"

[groundeffect]

Question; would the winglets not be more effective in high density altitude situations....such as yyc in the summer?

cheers

[Guest Touchdown]

I did some courses at boeing years ago in performance engineering and we as a class asked the Boeing engineer why they hadn't gone to a side stick.....All he said is....NDH....."Not Developed Here !" It seems to match with your comments regarding the traditional Boeing ways....Not that I'm dissing Boeing.....I love their stuff....

Cheers Touchdown

[Guest windshear]

Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-700 Fleet Takes Wing With Sleek New Look

- Aviation Partners Boeing to Provide 169 Blended Winglets Shipsets - Boeing Offers Blended Winglets on In-Production 737-700s

LEBOURGET, France, June 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV), one of the world's most successful airlines, will add performance-enhancing Blended Winglets to its current and future fleet of Boeing (NYSE: BA) 737-700s.

The visually distinctive winglets improve performance by extending the airplane's range, saving fuel, lowering engine maintenance costs and reducing takeoff noise.

"Southwest, the industry's low-cost provider, is keen on finding innovative ways to keep our operating costs in check so we can continue to provide low fares to millions more Americans," said Laura Wright, Southwest's vice president of Finance. "This technology is one way we can gain efficiencies in our operation and save money while we grow."

Aviation Partners Boeing, a joint venture between Aviation Partners Inc. and Boeing, will provide 169 Blended Winglet shipsets to Southwest. It is the single largest sale for the venture since its creation. The first Blended Winglet installation for Southwest is expected to begin October 2003 with all 169 installations to be completed within two years. Southwest has options to acquire 373 additional Blended Winglets through 2012. For an image of the winglets on the Southwest livery, go to http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/press/0306_blended_winglets.html

"Southwest's commitment provides further testament to the aggressive uptick in Blended Winglet sales worldwide," said Aviation Partners Boeing CEO Mike Marino. "This landmark order demonstrates to the airline world, in no uncertain terms, that Blended Winglet technology is not just for the long-haul carriers anymore."

Dallas-based Southwest Airlines currently operates 133 737-700s, and is scheduled to begin receiving in-production winglets in fall 2004 when it will have 373 firm orders, options and purchase rights remaining. Previously offered as a standard option on 737-800s and Boeing Business Jets (BBJ), and as a retrofit on 737-700s and 737-800s, advanced winglets now are available as standard options from Aviation Partners Boeing on 737-700s.

"Southwest Airlines' history of success is built on taking people directly where they want to go, when they want to go," said Carolyn Corvi, 737/757 vice president and general manager. "The aerodynamic benefits of winglets will allow Southwest to serve its passengers with greater efficiency. By expanding this option to in-production 737-700s, Boeing can enhance the value of an already great airplane family."

Boeing continues to assess the applicability of winglets on 737-600s and 737-900s.

Unlike traditional winglets that attach at abrupt angles to the wing, Blended Winglets gently curve out and up from the wingtip, reducing aerodynamic drag and increasing performance. The 8-foot high winglets add about 5 feet (1.5 meters) to the airplane's total wingspan and allow the 737-700 to fly up to 115 nautical miles (213 kilometers) farther and reduce fuel burn. As a result, Southwest is expected to save an average of up to 92,000 gallons (348,258 liters) of jet fuel per airplane per year. Improved performance will permit payload increases out of high, hot and obstacle- limited airports, as well as shorten the time its takes to climb to cruising altitude.

Besides improving range and fuel savings, winglets offer excellent environmental benefits including reduced noise and emissions.

More than 28 carriers currently fly nearly 300 737s equipped with winglets.

Southwest Airlines, the fourth largest domestic carrier in terms of customers boarded, serves 59 airports in 58 cities and 30 states. Based in Dallas, Southwest operates nearly 2,800 flights a day with an all-Boeing fleet of 378 737s that, with an average age of nine years, is one of the youngest pure jet fleets in the domestic airline industry.

To learn more about Aviation Partners Boeing's Blended Winglet Technology see www.aviationpartnersboeing.com . Visit the 737 web site at http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737family/flash.html to learn more about the popular single-aisle jetliner.

Photo and caption are available with this news release on boeingmedia.com

SOURCE Southwest Airlines

[Guest windshear]

I guess it depends what you pay for them don't it?

[Guest M. McRae]

Seems that Boeing has adopted the child....

SEATTLE, Feb. 18, 2000 - The Boeing Company announced today that it is offering Next-Generation 737-800 customers a new, advanced-technology winglet as a standard option.

The winglet will allow a new airplane that already flies farther, higher and more economically than competing products to extend its range, carry more payload, save on fuel and benefit the environment. The first Boeing 737-800 with winglets is expected to be delivered in the spring of 2001. All subsequent 737-800s will be equipped with structurally enhanced wings that will make it easier for owners of standard 737-800s to retrofit those jetliners with winglets.

"The key to product leadership is to create a superior product, then continually improve it in ways that add value to customers," said John Hayhurst, vice president and general manager, 737 programs. "With this new winglet, the Next-Generation 737 will remain the most advanced airplane family in its class for the 21st century, just as it was for the 20th."

A Next-Generation 737-800 equipped with the new winglet will be able to fly farther, burn 3 percent to 5 percent less fuel, or carry up to 6,000 pounds more payload. Other benefits include a reduction in noise near airports, lower engine-maintenance costs, and improved takeoff performance at high-altitude airports and in hot climate conditions.

The winglets weigh about 120 pounds each. They are made of high-tech carbon graphite, an advanced aluminum alloy and titanium. The winglet is eight feet long and tapers from its four-foot wide base to a width of two feet at the tip. Unlike traditional winglets typically fitted at abrupt angles to the wing, this new advanced "blended" design gently curves out and up from the wing tip, reducing aerodynamic drag and boosting performance.

The 737-800 winglet was developed initially for the Boeing Business Jet (BBJ), which also features the state-of-the-art 737-800 wing. This winglet will be available initially as an option on the 162-passenger 737-800. Formal availability of the winglet will follow quickly on other models that feature the 737-800 wing, including the 737-700C and the 737-900. The applicability of the winglet to Next-Generation 737-600 and 737-700 models is being assessed.

The blended-winglet technology was developed by Aviation Partners Inc. of Seattle. In 1999, during the design of the BBJ winglet, Aviation Partners and The Boeing Company formed Aviation Partners Boeing (APB), a joint venture that completed and owns the design. APB is developing the capability to make the winglet available as a retrofit for airplanes already in service.

[Guest Stone]

Winglets may not save as much fuel as one would think. Check out the MEL...if a winglet is missing, is there a fuel penalty? I know that on the 747-400 there is no fuel penalty for a missing winglet, therefore I can only assume it doesn't save any fuel.

[Guest M. McRae]

I see that Boeing et-al are promoting these as a new type of winglet (The winglets weigh about 120 pounds each. They are made of high-tech carbon graphite, an advanced aluminum alloy and titanium. The winglet is eight feet long and tapers from its four-foot wide base to a width of two feet at the tip. Unlike traditional winglets typically fitted at abrupt angles to the wing, this new advanced "blended" design gently curves out and up from the wing tip, reducing aerodynamic drag and boosting performance. ) so perhaps they do provide the benefits described. I imagine that our posters from Westjet will provide us with data when it becomes available and of course Southwest has signed on with a major order... guess only time will tell.

[Steam Driven]

I remember a good number of years ago an ad for the Falcon line of business jets and how you would NEVER find a winglet or fences on one of THEIR wings. Accompanying the ad was a photo of a Peregrine Falcon in flight.

The implication being that nature did not put winglets on our feathered friends so why would Falconjet. Unless the wing was "substandard".

Not too long after, it was noted by another manufacturer that the feathers on the tips of the Peregrine (and other birds for that matter) "flow" upward on the down sweep of their wings to, in fact, form a type of winglet.

Very interesting and clever comparison.

Cheers! (

[Guest Sawbones]

That story sounds vaguely familiar, but I've forgotten the details .... any idea which EPA pilot it was who bought the first Mustang?

[Guest LOCBCVORDME1rwy33]

Of course you don't like them mitch, who would ever think you would like something that doesn't belong to the all mighty ACA

[Guest leftbase]

Huh?! Kiddin' around, right?

I think what Mitch is trying to say is, if it ain't a DC-10, fuggediboutit...

But seriously, to each their own. I happen to think winglets are pretty cool...maybe some reminder of planes of my youth of the paper variety that ALWAYS had to have 'em.

Ok, y'all go back to that fascinatin' discussion about winglet aerodynamics...yawn...

[Mitch Cronin]

Heck no, have you ever got me pegged wrong!

I'm just a weirdo who loves the clean lines of a fine flying machine... And those winglets look to me like odd protrusions, or obstructions to those clean lines.

[Guest blizzard]

I stand (sit??) corrected.

(Hang head in shame)

[The economy stuff is still valid though, SW is doing a lot more trans-con now]