This could be useful at high-altitude Cruise..

http://www.aopa.org/summit/news/2012/121010active-winglet.html?WT.mc_id=121011epspec&WT.mc_sect=summit

Does it still make it a clown-plane?

Yup

what that plane desperately needs to have equipped is a "brain-active pilot"

it also appears this technology is being developed because the wing isnt strong enough to carry the extra load imposed by the winglet. That gives me a good feeling! Give me a Beech. The wing is plenty strong on those, Lets see someone put Dolly Partons on a SR-22 and fly it.

Where did you read that?

I'm not familiar with the Cirrus, but in the photo of the plane in the linked article it has small ailerons that are both deflected up significantly.
Is this normal for a Cirrus or is it part of the active winglet?

Byron,

Are you trying to start a new OWT? Where is that stated?
There has been no customer base demand for tip tanks on the Cirrus. No enough useful load is my opinion

In terms of the active winglets, do some research would be my suggestion. The active winglets are designed to address known short comings in current winglet designs. At high angles of attack, during climb, approach and a few other flight conditions; the winglets place higher drag, loads and reduce efficiency. The active winglets are designed to address these problems.

Tim

Cite your sources!

Thanks, Steve. you know I am big on citing sources.

I got it from the article. Conventional winglets create an inward force which is translated 90 degrees to lift on the outboard wing panel. On most other airplanes I have seen, you bolt them on. Same with wingtip tanks. On the Cirrus, I gather, the wing cannot tolerate the bending moment on the outboard panel when the wing is "G"d up (such as turbulence), so those little flaps act to dump the lift at a certain "G" load. In effect, limit wing bending. This is the first airplane I have heard of that on.

from the article:
"Current “passive” winglets increase the aspect ratio of aircraft wings and provide greater efficiency in cruise. But the downside is that they can increase aerodynamic loads on the wings, especially in turbulence, and the structural supports required for the heavier loads add weight.

ATLAS winglets sense increasing aerodynamic loads and instantly move to counteract them, effectively “turning off” the winglets. (The winglets aren’t connected to the aircraft controls.)"

Simon,
Those small ailerons are not part of the original design. I speculate they are actually the active part of the active winglet. In other words they load and unload the wing deflecting enough airflow to cause the winglet to be more "or " less effective, dependant on wing loading.

Byron,

Read further, they discuss going after other aircraft; I would not infer anything specific about the Cirrus. Having watched Aerostar aircraft go through the process to get winglets certified for the Aerostar; if they can demonstrate no wing loading they can get the winglets certified on many additional aircraft with a lot less headaches than others have.

Tim

Tim, I read that as the cirrus cannot tolerate the additional wing load without the additional surface out there. I know you can bolt them onto a 737, 767, Gulfstream, or a Baron without the additional complexity of the active aileron.

They claim up to 5% efficiency improvement. So, on a 17 GPH SR-22, thats .85 GPH in cruise. So, assuming 6$ avgas, that $5.10 per hour in savings, or less because many people wont fly at the lower fuel flow. So it costs 59,000$ plus 6 grand in installation labor. Or, in other words, 10,784 hours until it pays itself back.

Interestingly, new Boeing aircraft do not have winglets anymore. Perhaps mostly for looks?

In Australia, the CASA reduces airframe time limits generally by 50% if after-market winglets are added. I don't think it is terribly scientific but the belief is that the altered span-wise loading is detrimental from a fatigue standpoint.

Byron,

Check out what is involved in the installation of winglets on Boeings, Airbus or Cessna Citations. They remove between a quarter to a third of the outer wing section skins to install additional support. Very cool to see, and very scary to know how little metal is out there.
I have never been curious enough to look into the winglets on any Beech product (or even tip tanks) so I have no idea what is involved.

Going forward Boeing stated for the 787 a raked wingtip is more efficient in most situations (5.5 versus 3.5 percent efficiency change). This will be the norm on most new designs (there is some situation where the efficiency reverses, winglet is better than raked but I cannot recall what causes this reversal. You will therefore see some 787 with winglets -- either super long range or short range -- it was one of the extreme variants).

Winglets, are good for retrofits due to the minimal wing redesign effort for some gain.

As for price point, I have no idea why anyone would install them. They do not make enough material difference in terms of range, speed lift or anything else that I would consider them. If I am that close to the plane's range or weight limits where these winglets can make a diference, I think I have the wrong plane.

Tim

If it works, a 5% improvement in efficiency would be a significant step.

Just not so convinced that it actually works....

Not sure they will sell many at those prices.



The Tamarack Aerospace Group’s revolutionary Active Winglet™ is coming soon to an airport near you!
Full price is $56,070, deposit covers $10,000. Certification is expected in early 2013.
You can place an order now by filling out our Deposit Form.
Completed deposit forms should be sent to us via mail:
Tamarack Aerospace Group, Inc.
3717 Omni Parkway
Sandpoint, ID 83864
Please Contact Us if you need information.