Why do newer 737s use two different styles of split winglets?Why can’t more older 737s be retrofitted with more newer winglets?Why don't horizontal stabilizers have winglets?Why do propeller blades not have winglets?Why are there different types of winglets?Why don't airliner winglets have consumer advertising on them?What are some differences that make the new 737 MAX winglets more efficient than a conventional winglet?Winglets vs Sharklets vs Blended wingtipsWhy are downward pointing winglets more efficient?Why has Boeing used mini winglets on the 737-200?Aerodynamics of double wingletsWhy do some airplanes have their winglets at different angles?
The German vowel “a” changes to the English “i”
Instead of a Universal Basic Income program, why not implement a "Universal Basic Needs" program?
Why do tuner card drivers fail to build after kernel update to 4.4.0-143-generic?
Book: Young man exiled to a penal colony, helps to lead revolution
Adventure Game (text based) in C++
Do I need to be arrogant to get ahead?
Do the common programs (for example: "ls", "cat") in Linux and BSD come from the same source code?
Is it true that good novels will automatically sell themselves on Amazon (and so on) and there is no need for one to waste time promoting?
Is "upgrade" the right word to use in this context?
What did “the good wine” (τὸν καλὸν οἶνον) mean in John 2:10?
Why does overlay work only on the first tcolorbox?
Is it normal that my co-workers at a fitness company criticize my food choices?
If I can solve Sudoku, can I solve the Travelling Salesman Problem (TSP)? If so, how?
Are Roman Catholic priests ever addressed as pastor
What is "focus distance lower/upper" and how is it different from depth of field?
Did Ender ever learn that he killed Stilson and/or Bonzo?
Brexit - No Deal Rejection
How could a scammer know the apps on my phone / iTunes account?
How to get the n-th line after a grepped one?
Time travel from stationary position?
How to write cleanly even if my character uses expletive language?
Simplify an interface for flexibly applying rules to periods of time
Min function accepting varying number of arguments in C++17
ERC721: How to get the owned tokens of an address
Why do newer 737s use two different styles of split winglets?
Why can’t more older 737s be retrofitted with more newer winglets?Why don't horizontal stabilizers have winglets?Why do propeller blades not have winglets?Why are there different types of winglets?Why don't airliner winglets have consumer advertising on them?What are some differences that make the new 737 MAX winglets more efficient than a conventional winglet?Winglets vs Sharklets vs Blended wingtipsWhy are downward pointing winglets more efficient?Why has Boeing used mini winglets on the 737-200?Aerodynamics of double wingletsWhy do some airplanes have their winglets at different angles?
$begingroup$
All new 737s use split-tip winglets, which are more efficient than the simpler blended winglets previously used.
However, for no clear reason, they use two different types of split-tip winglet:
- New 737 Next Generations (the 737-700/-800/-900)1 use split-scimitar winglets, which have a main body shaped like a blended winglet, but with its upper tip hooked backwards, and also have an additional scimitar-shaped fin projecting outwards and backwards from the upbend in the winglet.
(Image by Mnts at Wikimedia Commons.)
- The 737 MAX series uses the eponymous MAX winglets, which have a simpler shape than the split-scimitar winglet, looking essentially like if someone decided to put a winglet on the bottom of the wingtip in addition to the one at the top.
(Image by Aka The Beav at Flickr, via Helmy oved at Wikimedia Commons, modified by Altair78 at Wikimedia Commons.)
I don’t get it - why go to the trouble of producing two slightly different styles of winglet alongside each other for two mostly-similar families of the same aircraft? Why not just go with the more efficient style of the two (be it the split-scimitar winglet or the MAX winglet), and use that on both the Next Generation and the MAX?
1: The 737-600 also belongs to the Next Generation family, but it left production long before the Next Generations switched from the blended to the split-scimitar winglet.
boeing-737 winglets
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
All new 737s use split-tip winglets, which are more efficient than the simpler blended winglets previously used.
However, for no clear reason, they use two different types of split-tip winglet:
- New 737 Next Generations (the 737-700/-800/-900)1 use split-scimitar winglets, which have a main body shaped like a blended winglet, but with its upper tip hooked backwards, and also have an additional scimitar-shaped fin projecting outwards and backwards from the upbend in the winglet.
(Image by Mnts at Wikimedia Commons.)
- The 737 MAX series uses the eponymous MAX winglets, which have a simpler shape than the split-scimitar winglet, looking essentially like if someone decided to put a winglet on the bottom of the wingtip in addition to the one at the top.
(Image by Aka The Beav at Flickr, via Helmy oved at Wikimedia Commons, modified by Altair78 at Wikimedia Commons.)
I don’t get it - why go to the trouble of producing two slightly different styles of winglet alongside each other for two mostly-similar families of the same aircraft? Why not just go with the more efficient style of the two (be it the split-scimitar winglet or the MAX winglet), and use that on both the Next Generation and the MAX?
1: The 737-600 also belongs to the Next Generation family, but it left production long before the Next Generations switched from the blended to the split-scimitar winglet.
boeing-737 winglets
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@ymb1 The 737 FRACTAL will have an infinite tree of smaller and smaller winglets. This will be so efficient, it will land with more fuel in the tanks than when it took off.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
5 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
All new 737s use split-tip winglets, which are more efficient than the simpler blended winglets previously used.
However, for no clear reason, they use two different types of split-tip winglet:
- New 737 Next Generations (the 737-700/-800/-900)1 use split-scimitar winglets, which have a main body shaped like a blended winglet, but with its upper tip hooked backwards, and also have an additional scimitar-shaped fin projecting outwards and backwards from the upbend in the winglet.
(Image by Mnts at Wikimedia Commons.)
- The 737 MAX series uses the eponymous MAX winglets, which have a simpler shape than the split-scimitar winglet, looking essentially like if someone decided to put a winglet on the bottom of the wingtip in addition to the one at the top.
(Image by Aka The Beav at Flickr, via Helmy oved at Wikimedia Commons, modified by Altair78 at Wikimedia Commons.)
I don’t get it - why go to the trouble of producing two slightly different styles of winglet alongside each other for two mostly-similar families of the same aircraft? Why not just go with the more efficient style of the two (be it the split-scimitar winglet or the MAX winglet), and use that on both the Next Generation and the MAX?
1: The 737-600 also belongs to the Next Generation family, but it left production long before the Next Generations switched from the blended to the split-scimitar winglet.
boeing-737 winglets
$endgroup$
All new 737s use split-tip winglets, which are more efficient than the simpler blended winglets previously used.
However, for no clear reason, they use two different types of split-tip winglet:
- New 737 Next Generations (the 737-700/-800/-900)1 use split-scimitar winglets, which have a main body shaped like a blended winglet, but with its upper tip hooked backwards, and also have an additional scimitar-shaped fin projecting outwards and backwards from the upbend in the winglet.
(Image by Mnts at Wikimedia Commons.)
- The 737 MAX series uses the eponymous MAX winglets, which have a simpler shape than the split-scimitar winglet, looking essentially like if someone decided to put a winglet on the bottom of the wingtip in addition to the one at the top.
(Image by Aka The Beav at Flickr, via Helmy oved at Wikimedia Commons, modified by Altair78 at Wikimedia Commons.)
I don’t get it - why go to the trouble of producing two slightly different styles of winglet alongside each other for two mostly-similar families of the same aircraft? Why not just go with the more efficient style of the two (be it the split-scimitar winglet or the MAX winglet), and use that on both the Next Generation and the MAX?
1: The 737-600 also belongs to the Next Generation family, but it left production long before the Next Generations switched from the blended to the split-scimitar winglet.
boeing-737 winglets
boeing-737 winglets
asked 7 hours ago
SeanSean
5,10122565
5,10122565
1
$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@ymb1 The 737 FRACTAL will have an infinite tree of smaller and smaller winglets. This will be so efficient, it will land with more fuel in the tanks than when it took off.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@ymb1 The 737 FRACTAL will have an infinite tree of smaller and smaller winglets. This will be so efficient, it will land with more fuel in the tanks than when it took off.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
5 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
5 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
@ymb1 The 737 FRACTAL will have an infinite tree of smaller and smaller winglets. This will be so efficient, it will land with more fuel in the tanks than when it took off.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ymb1 The 737 FRACTAL will have an infinite tree of smaller and smaller winglets. This will be so efficient, it will land with more fuel in the tanks than when it took off.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
5 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The 737NG was originally introduced with with no winglets. A company called Aviation Partners worked with Boeing to develop the "blended" winglet, originally for the NG-based BBJ (Boeing Business Jet). Customers then had them installed after delivery for a while before Boeing worked their own version into the production line. There is a similar case now with the split scimitar, where Boeing is delivering the 737NG with the "blended" winglet and customers are having it replaced with the split scimitar from Aviation Partners Boeing sometime after delivery if they choose.
One reason for developing a new winglet on the MAX is that it helps differentiate it from the NG and has become part of its "brand."
There also may be a consideration for cost from certifying the new winglets. As the split scimitar and MAX designs are so similar overall, there may not be enough benefit of the MAX design to justify certifying it for the NG, where they needed to do extensive flight testing on the MAX anyway. The split scimitar is also somewhat a modified blended winglet, which may have made certification easier.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Like I said, "styling".
$endgroup$
– John K
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since a winglet is basically a sail generating thrust (lift with a modest forward-tilted vector) from the circulating flow around the tip, it's just adding another sail beside the first one to extract more of the available energy from the flow. Different engineering groups will do studies of different configurations and will say, "hey, if we do this, it'll be some little bit more efficient than if we do that, based on our particular analysis".
If you put different groups of engineers together to attack the problem, they are all going to come out with variations on what they think is the ideal configuration. And so you see seemingly endless permutations that are, really, mostly nibbling at the margins of the major benefit that was achieved when you put one there in the first place.
Plus there is probably a bit of "styling" going on as well. Just to be different.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "528"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f61248%2fwhy-do-newer-737s-use-two-different-styles-of-split-winglets%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The 737NG was originally introduced with with no winglets. A company called Aviation Partners worked with Boeing to develop the "blended" winglet, originally for the NG-based BBJ (Boeing Business Jet). Customers then had them installed after delivery for a while before Boeing worked their own version into the production line. There is a similar case now with the split scimitar, where Boeing is delivering the 737NG with the "blended" winglet and customers are having it replaced with the split scimitar from Aviation Partners Boeing sometime after delivery if they choose.
One reason for developing a new winglet on the MAX is that it helps differentiate it from the NG and has become part of its "brand."
There also may be a consideration for cost from certifying the new winglets. As the split scimitar and MAX designs are so similar overall, there may not be enough benefit of the MAX design to justify certifying it for the NG, where they needed to do extensive flight testing on the MAX anyway. The split scimitar is also somewhat a modified blended winglet, which may have made certification easier.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Like I said, "styling".
$endgroup$
– John K
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The 737NG was originally introduced with with no winglets. A company called Aviation Partners worked with Boeing to develop the "blended" winglet, originally for the NG-based BBJ (Boeing Business Jet). Customers then had them installed after delivery for a while before Boeing worked their own version into the production line. There is a similar case now with the split scimitar, where Boeing is delivering the 737NG with the "blended" winglet and customers are having it replaced with the split scimitar from Aviation Partners Boeing sometime after delivery if they choose.
One reason for developing a new winglet on the MAX is that it helps differentiate it from the NG and has become part of its "brand."
There also may be a consideration for cost from certifying the new winglets. As the split scimitar and MAX designs are so similar overall, there may not be enough benefit of the MAX design to justify certifying it for the NG, where they needed to do extensive flight testing on the MAX anyway. The split scimitar is also somewhat a modified blended winglet, which may have made certification easier.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Like I said, "styling".
$endgroup$
– John K
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The 737NG was originally introduced with with no winglets. A company called Aviation Partners worked with Boeing to develop the "blended" winglet, originally for the NG-based BBJ (Boeing Business Jet). Customers then had them installed after delivery for a while before Boeing worked their own version into the production line. There is a similar case now with the split scimitar, where Boeing is delivering the 737NG with the "blended" winglet and customers are having it replaced with the split scimitar from Aviation Partners Boeing sometime after delivery if they choose.
One reason for developing a new winglet on the MAX is that it helps differentiate it from the NG and has become part of its "brand."
There also may be a consideration for cost from certifying the new winglets. As the split scimitar and MAX designs are so similar overall, there may not be enough benefit of the MAX design to justify certifying it for the NG, where they needed to do extensive flight testing on the MAX anyway. The split scimitar is also somewhat a modified blended winglet, which may have made certification easier.
$endgroup$
The 737NG was originally introduced with with no winglets. A company called Aviation Partners worked with Boeing to develop the "blended" winglet, originally for the NG-based BBJ (Boeing Business Jet). Customers then had them installed after delivery for a while before Boeing worked their own version into the production line. There is a similar case now with the split scimitar, where Boeing is delivering the 737NG with the "blended" winglet and customers are having it replaced with the split scimitar from Aviation Partners Boeing sometime after delivery if they choose.
One reason for developing a new winglet on the MAX is that it helps differentiate it from the NG and has become part of its "brand."
There also may be a consideration for cost from certifying the new winglets. As the split scimitar and MAX designs are so similar overall, there may not be enough benefit of the MAX design to justify certifying it for the NG, where they needed to do extensive flight testing on the MAX anyway. The split scimitar is also somewhat a modified blended winglet, which may have made certification easier.
answered 5 hours ago
foootfooot
53.2k17168321
53.2k17168321
$begingroup$
Like I said, "styling".
$endgroup$
– John K
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Like I said, "styling".
$endgroup$
– John K
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Like I said, "styling".
$endgroup$
– John K
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Like I said, "styling".
$endgroup$
– John K
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since a winglet is basically a sail generating thrust (lift with a modest forward-tilted vector) from the circulating flow around the tip, it's just adding another sail beside the first one to extract more of the available energy from the flow. Different engineering groups will do studies of different configurations and will say, "hey, if we do this, it'll be some little bit more efficient than if we do that, based on our particular analysis".
If you put different groups of engineers together to attack the problem, they are all going to come out with variations on what they think is the ideal configuration. And so you see seemingly endless permutations that are, really, mostly nibbling at the margins of the major benefit that was achieved when you put one there in the first place.
Plus there is probably a bit of "styling" going on as well. Just to be different.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since a winglet is basically a sail generating thrust (lift with a modest forward-tilted vector) from the circulating flow around the tip, it's just adding another sail beside the first one to extract more of the available energy from the flow. Different engineering groups will do studies of different configurations and will say, "hey, if we do this, it'll be some little bit more efficient than if we do that, based on our particular analysis".
If you put different groups of engineers together to attack the problem, they are all going to come out with variations on what they think is the ideal configuration. And so you see seemingly endless permutations that are, really, mostly nibbling at the margins of the major benefit that was achieved when you put one there in the first place.
Plus there is probably a bit of "styling" going on as well. Just to be different.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since a winglet is basically a sail generating thrust (lift with a modest forward-tilted vector) from the circulating flow around the tip, it's just adding another sail beside the first one to extract more of the available energy from the flow. Different engineering groups will do studies of different configurations and will say, "hey, if we do this, it'll be some little bit more efficient than if we do that, based on our particular analysis".
If you put different groups of engineers together to attack the problem, they are all going to come out with variations on what they think is the ideal configuration. And so you see seemingly endless permutations that are, really, mostly nibbling at the margins of the major benefit that was achieved when you put one there in the first place.
Plus there is probably a bit of "styling" going on as well. Just to be different.
$endgroup$
Since a winglet is basically a sail generating thrust (lift with a modest forward-tilted vector) from the circulating flow around the tip, it's just adding another sail beside the first one to extract more of the available energy from the flow. Different engineering groups will do studies of different configurations and will say, "hey, if we do this, it'll be some little bit more efficient than if we do that, based on our particular analysis".
If you put different groups of engineers together to attack the problem, they are all going to come out with variations on what they think is the ideal configuration. And so you see seemingly endless permutations that are, really, mostly nibbling at the margins of the major benefit that was achieved when you put one there in the first place.
Plus there is probably a bit of "styling" going on as well. Just to be different.
answered 7 hours ago
John KJohn K
21.8k13065
21.8k13065
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f61248%2fwhy-do-newer-737s-use-two-different-styles-of-split-winglets%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
5 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@ymb1 The 737 FRACTAL will have an infinite tree of smaller and smaller winglets. This will be so efficient, it will land with more fuel in the tanks than when it took off.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
5 hours ago