But it should also be pointed out that if the order is big enough, and there is the potential of taking customers from Airbus, you can get 737s at about half the cost, and get the winglets thrown in for free.

Is there at least a single flying 737-600 with winglets? I don't think so.

You cannot get winglets on the 736.

Winglets for me as well.... All other looks stupid in my eyes :b

Is there at least a single flying 737-600 with winglets? I don't think so.

Not that I know of, but they are available for retrofit on the 735 and complement it very nicely!

I've never really liked the look of 737NG winglets, i've always preferred 757 winglets and Airbus winglets.... and yes I also prefer the look of 737NG's without winglets, even if it is less economic Regards,Andy

Winglets have never been certified for the 600 model by Boeing. When WestJet was going to buy some 600s and wanted winglets, they were supposedly stumping up part of the cash to allow the certification process to go ahead, but the deal fell apart so certification never happened.The 600 has significantly different wings to all the other NGs, which amongst other things are made from thicker metal sheeting at the outer edges in order to reduce the flutter the prototype was prone to, and the body fairings are also different because of the shorter fuselage. That sorted the problem of the flutter, but it added more weight too of course, and since the 600 has lower-rated engines than all the other NGs, more weight with the addition of winglets doesn't sound like a great idea.The 600 is not a popular aircraft, being heavy and not as stable in flight as other 737s owing to what is a long wingspan in comparison to the short fuselage and that heavy weight. I suspect the addition of another five feet to the wingspan which tacking on winglets creates, and the additional weight too would probably not improve matters in that regard. With only small numbers in operation, it's unlikely any third party company will develop winglets for the 600 either.Besides all that, there are other aircraft such as CRJs, Airbuses and Embraers which can perform the profile the 737-600 was intended for much better than it, and for less money too, so the 600 is, if not exactly a white elephant, then a fairly pale grey one.Al

On airliners I don't mind either way myself, although on the smaller aircraft I fly, winglets have been around a long time, and I have a bit of a love/hate relationship with them, because I like the efficiency but dislike the way they make things more fragile and awkward when ground handling.Incidentally, there are a few reasons why SAS might have some 737s without the winglets and some with them. In the first place, winglets are not cheap to buy or install either from new or as a retrofit, so an aircraft typically has to be one that the airline is intending to keep and use for long enough to make the investment cost of adding winglets worth paying for. Ensuring winglets are an economical proposition depends on how the aircraft it used: Winglets are heavy, on the climb to cruise they are to a large degree dead weight, since their shape is optimised for the longest phase of the flight (i.e. the high speed cruise in thinner air). For an average 737, the cruise would be between about 800 and 1,500 miles depending on the model, and for something like that, winglets are an economical proposition, but on something like a domestic inter-city shuttle flight, where the aircraft barely even has a cruise phase, having winglets just means hauling some extra (and very expensive) weight up to 21,000 feet.So for some airliners it makes sense to have winglets and for others it just isn't economical to put them on there considering the cost of them versus the savings you'd make. Some of it is pure aesthetics, i.e. to make your airline appear modern to your passengers, but most of it is economics.Al

Really amazing how something so heavy and so exorbitantly expensive can be installed by one man in a matter of a couple of minutes.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWzkUd_xBVk&feature=relatedWatch from 0:30

Winglets :D So I can see them from the VC :D haha Lol

I like winglets on a 75 and 76, but the NG I prefer without winglets. The US Navy 737ng is beautiful

I like winglets on a 75 and 76, but the NG I prefer without winglets. The US Navy 737ng is beautiful

The P-8 has raked wingtips which do look pretty cool! Similar to the 764/77W/77L

Really amazing how something so heavy and so exorbitantly expensive can be installed by one man in a matter of a couple of minutes.

I thought I read somewhere it could take up to a week to get those things on. That video made it sound like you what you said, just about an hour and you have your new winglets.

You know I was going to call you out and say the Navy didn't have any 737 NG's as I have classes over on NAS Jacksonville I drive by them all the time. I looked at their NATOPS though and sure enough they are 737-700NG models.... I figured they were older birds that the airlines dumped on us. Interesting that we actually have a modern airliner. Whenever I had to get flown to Norfolk, VA from Florida to get deployed they always stuck us on the old C-9 Skytrain (DC-9's). I would like one time to go work at one of the VR squadrons, but unfortunately I would have to cross from active duty to the reserves. Thanks for teaching me something new today. :Applause:EDIT: In my research I forgot whether I liked winglets or not. I like them. They add that extra finishing touch to the overall look of the aircraft in my opinion. Is the main reason I though the Navy's birds were older. Cause none of them have winglets, and I thought winglets were standard features on the NG's (I now know they are only standard on the ER). Definately would be a pain to retrofit. As it is not as simple as just taking the wing tip cap off, and bolting it up. Can't believe it costs almost a million to accomplish though. Really need to get cracking on my A&P lisence so I can start doing depot mods. :(

Bit of a difference when it comes to adding some winglets to a 747 compared to a 737. The 747's wing is immensely strong, don't forget it is even tough enough to ferry a spare engine on a special pylon, and when 747s are in storage without their engines, concrete blocks are hung from the engine pylons to avoid them being damaged by not actually having the engine weight on there (as well as avoiding having them sit on their tail). When Boeing considered making a 747 Trijet by adding an engine to the tail area a few years ago, one of the things which stopped them was the fact that removing two engines from the wing would mean it didn't have enough weight on the wings to balance the aerodynamic bending forces..So the 747s wings really can take a lot of weight, whereas retrofitting winglets to a 737 requires strengthening of the wing, and that takes a bit more sophistication than removing the end caps and fetching three blokes and a big hammer LOLAl

That is interesting. So the 737's wing (without the winglets) is pretty close to it's structural design limit? I would of figured it to be an easy (figuratively speaking) airframe modification. Think I have been in helicopters to long. About time to go into big jets and see the difference. Cause most of my airframes changes that come out usually take no longer than a week to incorporate, and at most a depot level modification team. So I look at the winglets, and "assume" that would have been easy. :(

Dunno exactly how close to the edge the 737 is as far as wing strength goes, I'm just aware that it had to be strengthened for the winglet addition. It might be just a 'belt and braces' kind of precaution, although if it wasn't necessary I can't imagine they would have considered it, since the strengthening does add well over 100lbs of weight.Al

The P-8 has raked wingtips which do look pretty cool! Similar to the 764/77W/77L

Wouldn't it be nice if this was modeled as a surprise like the FS9 version modeled the YAL-1 Airborne Laser! Actually I like both the raked and winglets version. However, If I was flying a route where the equipment used was a non-winglet version I would probably de-select the option for realism.