no wingtip extension!!!

[Guest gooper]

I didn't think that flying without a wingtip would meet the minimum equipment list but then given the current economic state of Air canada I guess some items have to be ignored. i know this is not exactly the forum for this issue but I was wondering if there are any aie maintenance techs who could address why they would allow an aircraft to fly in this state unless of course it fell off during the flight!!http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=414638

[Guest ACA856_at_work3]

That's a real odd one. I have to assume it snapped off in flight.I will check with my ACA contact and see if he heard anything about it.Rob.

[Guest]

My maintenance experience is only from working on flight simulators, but I did dispatch real world DC-9s for over a year.Basically, anything that is not on or functioning as per the manufacture's certification and that could effect the flight of the aircraft will be in the MEL. (minimum equiptment list) While it looks strange, certain aircraft can fly just fine without their winglets. There will probably be some restrictions as to say speed and or range in the case of this 747. Terry

[Guest Matthias1975]

I can

[Guest Ian_Riddell]

"I didn't think that flying without a wingtip would meet the minimum equipment list but then given the current economic state of Air canada I guess some items have to be ignored."Sounds like you're adding insult to injury here, Gooper :-lol (sorry, I don't know your real name).... It has nothing to do with with the economic state of Air Canada. All 747-400 airlines have this in the their MEL/DDG's (or, rather, their CDL's.. Configuration Deviation Lists)."Remarks and Exceptions:1. One may be missing2. With missing Winglet, reduce the performance and structurally limited weights by:Takeoff and Landing - 9435KgEnroute Climb - 4536Kg"The damage is usually caused by...1. Someone towing the aircraft too close to a lightpole, building, etc.2. a large vehicle (set of mobile steps, etc) driving into the wing.The broken section is usually removed in its entirety and the exposed surfaces covered with high speed (aluminium) tape.Hope this helps?Cheers.Ian.

[ACA857]

Duct tape?Say it ain't so Ian :-)Is there anything duct tape can't do?

[Mats_J]

Red Green would love that! :-lolRegards,

[Guest ACA856_at_work3]

"Stole the wingtip off combi fin 341 (fin in picture) for fin 385 (all psgr 400) - to avoid a weight penalty...then we moved them back and forth until we got a new winglet so that we could transfer the dev from fin to fin so that neither would reach the 10 day TX dev (a common trick in the airline industry but one I would prefer you do not advertise!)."Rob.

[Guest Ian_Riddell]

"Is there anything duct tape can't do?"Unfortunately, there are some things which it won't do. E.g. a cargo loader drove under a 767 and ripped off a VHF Comm (large sharkfin-type) antenna (Hope it wasn't his head which hit it???). As no spares were readily available, someone suggested patching over the hole with aluminium ("High Speed") tape.... but then we realised the hole was part of the pressurized area. I don't think the tape would have held on for long with 8psi differential pressure (even though it was only a small hole) ;-)Also, it is not to be used in the cabin if it clashes with the decor :-lolCheers.Ian.

[Dean_EGTC]

"Stole the wingtip...":-lolAnd the following day:"I coulda sworn we had four engines on this bird yesterday Captain"

[Guest ATPBVC]

upon close inspection of the aforesaid image, I have noticed some interesting items.http://www.charityflight.com/744.jpg

[Tabs]

I don't think this is doctored man... why would the rear fuselage need to be spliced if you were going for a missing winglet? The wingtip doesn't look like any of the tips from the other 747 models either - I think this is legit. Airliners.net is probably pretty good at spotting "Photoshop Phakery" by this point too.Ryan

[Guest ACA856_at_work3]

The Air Canada source confirmed the missing winglet was for real.

[Guest Matthias1975]

It

[Guest rhys13]

Hi, Perhaps a dumb question but, do you know why the performance is so much affected by the missing winglet ? The weight loss seems to be quite incredible even for a 744 just because of a missing winglet...>2. With missing Winglet, reduce the performance and>structurally limited weights by:>>Takeoff and Landing - 9435Kg>Enroute Climb - 4536Kg"Could it be due to increased drag on one side ???Dumb question #2 : Do you happen to know if Air Canada had to publisha new DOW (dry operating weight) as a result of this missing winglet ?Cheers