Go to GCC Discussions forum
Twitter headlines« Citroën cuts fuel consumption on models with 1.6L HDi, optimizes DS5 Hybrid4 | Main | Nissan to unveil new fuel cell SUV concept at Paris Motor Show with 3-motor 4x4 powertrain; leveraging LEAF and PIVO »
Airbus’ Sharklets deliver on fuel savings
12 September 2012
Flight testing of A320s outfitted with “Sharklets” wing-tip devices has confirmed the fuel savings expectations for these Airbus wingtip devices. (Earlier post.)
|
|
| A319 with Sharklets. Click to enlarge. |
Unveiled in 2009, the Sharklets—so-named because of their resemblance to a shark’s first dorsal fin—measure 2.4 meters in height, with their 200 kg (441 lbs) installed total weight offset by weight savings being introduced throughout the A320 Family airframe.
The large Sharklets provide aerodynamic improvements that result lower fuel burn, reduced emissions, increased range and payload, better take-off performance and rate-of-climb, higher optimum altitude, reduced engine maintenance costs and higher residual aircraft value.
These new fuel-saving wingtip devices represent the next phase in our ongoing development of the best-selling A320 Family. They will bring significant reduction in fuel burned: at least 3.5 per cent; in fact, our engineers are telling me that with the flight tests we’re completing now, it’s closer to four per cent.
—John Leahy, Airbus Chief Operating Officer – Customers
Leahy made his comments at the 2012 ILA Berlin Air Show during an announcement that AirAsia will become the first operator of a Sharklet-equipped A320, receiving this milestone aircraft in December.
September 12, 2012 in Brief | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef017c31cd94a9970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Airbus’ Sharklets deliver on fuel savings:
Comments
Verify your Comment
Previewing your Comment
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
This is good, but why did it take so long to work this out, especially as Boeing had large blended winglets since 1997 (ish).
Posted by: mahonj | September 12, 2012 at 05:16 AM
I understand they also pressurize the cabin.
Posted by: ToppaTom | September 12, 2012 at 05:35 AM
There are just as slow as the ICEVs industries to upgrade their products to save fuel and reduce cost to end customers. That's one bad side of free enterprise. They don't care about their end customers just about their own bottom line.
Posted by: HarveyD | September 12, 2012 at 08:27 AM
Certification of the airframe modifications is both expensive and time-consuming. A company is going to need considerable demand to justify the investment.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | September 12, 2012 at 03:47 PM
Do you really believe;
"They don't care about their end customers just about their own bottom line."?
Private companies DO care about their end customers and the middle man because they MUST - if they want to stay in busines and improve the bottom line.
Only a gov can unilaterally decide that it need only please a certain voter block and the big donors and make all of us pay for it.
When the corner barber said he was doubling his price and profit margin, he said "Sorry but you will now pay twice as much for your haircut."
I said; "No, your CUSTOMERS will pay twice as much for THEIR haircuts."
I did not even have to move to another country.
Posted by: ToppaTom | September 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM
Too hard to follow?
OK
When Airbus rejected developing winglets to save R & D costs (improve profit margin), US Airways ticket office said "Sorry but we won't be able to match Southwest's prices with our A320, you will have to pay a bit more for your ticket."
I said; "No, your CUSTOMERS will pay a bit more for THEIR tickets."
Do you think Airbus would be ignorant of such things?
Do you think US Airways would not care?
Posted by: ToppaTom | September 14, 2012 at 12:18 PM
The majority is as bad and will not invest a few more $$$ to reduce fuel consumption by 60+%, noise and air pollution by 50+% and reduce life time total cost that they cannot visualize because they have learned to live in a day to day world and impress the neighbors.
Posted by: HarveyD | September 16, 2012 at 12:29 PM