Why do newer 737s use two different styles of split winglets?












3












$begingroup$


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.


Split-scimitar 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.


MAX winglet



(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.










share|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
    $endgroup$
    – ymb1
    1 hour 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
    1 hour ago
















3












$begingroup$


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.


Split-scimitar 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.


MAX winglet



(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.










share|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
    $endgroup$
    – ymb1
    1 hour 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
    1 hour ago














3












3








3





$begingroup$


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.


Split-scimitar 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.


MAX winglet



(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.










share|improve this question









$endgroup$




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.


Split-scimitar 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.


MAX winglet



(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






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 3 hours ago









SeanSean

5,09122565




5,09122565












  • $begingroup$
    I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
    $endgroup$
    – ymb1
    1 hour 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
    1 hour ago


















  • $begingroup$
    I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
    $endgroup$
    – ymb1
    1 hour 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
    1 hour ago
















$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
I wonder if the 737 ULTRA will have two winglets sprouting from each winglet...
$endgroup$
– ymb1
1 hour 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
1 hour 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
1 hour ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

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.






share|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    1












    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      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
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      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









      2












      $begingroup$

      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.






      share|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        2












        $begingroup$

        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.






        share|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          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.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          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.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 1 hour ago









          foootfooot

          53.2k17168321




          53.2k17168321























              1












              $begingroup$

              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.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                1












                $begingroup$

                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.






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  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.






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  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.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 2 hours ago









                  John KJohn K

                  21.7k13064




                  21.7k13064






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      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.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      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





















































                      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







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Statuo de Libereco

                      Tanganjiko

                      Liste der Baudenkmäler in Enneberg