There's nothing wrong here, so this doesn't qualify for the What's Wrong With This Picture series. However, there is something peculiar here. Who has a sharp eye?
Haven't seen the upper/lower winglet until now nor the garland underneath the face on the tail. I thought 24L was a landing runway except for freighters and the occasional jumbo. It looks like he is turning to takeoff from it.
He is about to depart off 24L. It sounds like you may have the two runways reversed: Ry 24L (the "inboard") is mostly used for departures, with occasional use for arrivals as well. Ry 24R (the "outboard") is nearly exclusively used for arrivals, with the rare departure (assuming, that is, that 24L is open - we had 24L closed on Saturday morning, and so 24R was getting more departures than it usually does). The garland is actually a Hawaiian lei, and it appears on some Alaska B737-800s to commemorate Alaska's service to Hawaii (although not from LAX).
My wildest guess is that some sort of a tropical flower wrapped around the neck of a smiley native Alaskan on the rudder there ( To keep the man warm I supposed). Thanks again Captain Vector for the beautifully high quality photos.
Hmm, Mr. Eskimo Face wears a garland, the aircraft has split-scimitar winglets, and it also displays jetway rash. Now, what would be actually peculiar about one of those? I suppose N557AS is one of the first aircraft with those new-fangled devices.
(I recall in a previous quiz on this blog I thought it quite unremarkable to see two Boeing 777-300ERs at T2! )
I hope the beancounters also took account of repair costs when one of them is hit by a ground vehicle. The downtime alone could negate any gains in fuel burn. Perhaps, like the winglets on the 747-400, it is possible to fly without one?
I would imagine that the plane is flyable without one of the winglets. Don't forget that the B737 originally didn't have winglets at all, and they are not control surfaces. That said, it certainly wouldn't be optimum, since the lack of one winglet would create an asymmetric drag situation. I too wonder about the likelihood of damage on the ground. It certainly seems likely . . .
Hello CaptainVector........Ughhhhh I've been gone too long......funny and peculiar.....or one or the other....or both......Wait......Wait...oh yea.....the F/O has 2 different pok-a-dot socks on.........Mmmm....as always, I love your blog...its simple even a nutcase Aviation geek such as my self........can have a little....fun....too......!!....I hope you get some comments with hints or hey you can post a hint.....I'm fixing to put new 'post' ....on my blog.......so I'll be checking in.......Have a great weekend........!!
and to think.........as a pathetic Aviation geek.....I always try to leave my options open............I saw the winglet's and yes they looked different, perhaps.......a new style..........but it didn't seem 'Funny'....and Mmmm...about the 'comeonIwannaleiyou'...seemed to stick out.....around the Alaskan man's neck......(hey, to each his own...ha)....One 'Sad point'..here, I want to mention.....is the fact that I'm NOT riding 'JUMP' seat...on this flight....(tears)....so this this Friday......I declare it.... ""Nag a Pilot, till he lets you ride Jump"".........day......big smile..........then....I'll know there is an "Aviation God"........LOL>........Everyone have a great Aviation week.!!!!!!!!!!!!
Scimitar Winglets!
ReplyDeleteOther than the fact that the Inuit on the tail got leied, are you referring to the split winglets that they're just starting to roll out?
ReplyDeleteGreg
Split-scimitar winglet.
ReplyDelete2 obvious, 2 AL. At last, one I can answer :)
ReplyDelete737 MAX winglet
ReplyDeleteNew split scimitar winglets.
ReplyDeleteSplit Scimitar
ReplyDeleteAre you referring to the "split-scimitar" winglets?
ReplyDeleteSplit Scimiter winglets.
ReplyDeleteScimitar winglets
ReplyDeleteThey have the new winglets!
ReplyDeleteSchmiter winglets
ReplyDeleteschimeter winglets
ReplyDeleteSplit scimitar winglets? I thought they would look worse than they do. But not so bad at all when seen on an actual aircraft.
ReplyDeleteHaven't seen the upper/lower winglet until now nor the garland underneath the face on the tail. I thought 24L was a landing runway except for freighters and the occasional jumbo. It looks like he is turning to takeoff from it.
ReplyDeleteHe is about to depart off 24L. It sounds like you may have the two runways reversed: Ry 24L (the "inboard") is mostly used for departures, with occasional use for arrivals as well. Ry 24R (the "outboard") is nearly exclusively used for arrivals, with the rare departure (assuming, that is, that 24L is open - we had 24L closed on Saturday morning, and so 24R was getting more departures than it usually does). The garland is actually a Hawaiian lei, and it appears on some Alaska B737-800s to commemorate Alaska's service to Hawaii (although not from LAX).
DeleteI got 24 and 25 mixed up. Given the time I spend at Clutter Park watching 25L and 25R, that's pretty bad!
DeleteNew Winglets?
ReplyDeleteMy wildest guess is that some sort of a tropical flower wrapped around the neck of a smiley native Alaskan on the rudder there ( To keep the man warm I supposed). Thanks again Captain Vector for the beautifully high quality photos.
ReplyDeleteHmm, Mr. Eskimo Face wears a garland, the aircraft has split-scimitar winglets, and it also displays jetway rash. Now, what would be actually peculiar about one of those? I suppose N557AS is one of the first aircraft with those new-fangled devices.
ReplyDelete(I recall in a previous quiz on this blog I thought it quite unremarkable to see two Boeing 777-300ERs at T2! )
I hope the beancounters also took account of repair costs when one of them is hit by a ground vehicle. The downtime alone could negate any gains in fuel burn. Perhaps, like the winglets on the 747-400, it is possible to fly without one?
--Filip
I would imagine that the plane is flyable without one of the winglets. Don't forget that the B737 originally didn't have winglets at all, and they are not control surfaces. That said, it certainly wouldn't be optimum, since the lack of one winglet would create an asymmetric drag situation. I too wonder about the likelihood of damage on the ground. It certainly seems likely . . .
DeleteHello CaptainVector........Ughhhhh I've been gone too long......funny and peculiar.....or one or the other....or both......Wait......Wait...oh yea.....the F/O has 2 different pok-a-dot socks on.........Mmmm....as always, I love your blog...its simple even a nutcase Aviation geek such as my self........can have a little....fun....too......!!....I hope you get some comments with hints or hey you can post a hint.....I'm fixing to put new 'post' ....on my blog.......so I'll be checking in.......Have a great weekend........!!
ReplyDeleteActually, the F/O has one polka-dot sock and one striped one!
DeleteOMG...........LOL..
DeleteSplit Scimitar Winglets? Among the first on an Alaskan aircraft?
ReplyDeleteFirst Alaska 737 with new split scimitar wingtips. Also, this is one of AAs ETOPS rated 737s. (notice the lei on the Eskimo)
ReplyDeletehttp://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/02/18/uniteds-new-plan-for-saving-fuel-more-wings/
The new split scimitar winglet
ReplyDeleteNew winglet style on this 737. Those are the 737 max split winglet.
ReplyDeleteThe flowers around the image on the tail?
ReplyDeleteand to think.........as a pathetic Aviation geek.....I always try to leave my options open............I saw the winglet's and yes they looked different, perhaps.......a new style..........but it didn't seem 'Funny'....and Mmmm...about the 'comeonIwannaleiyou'...seemed to stick out.....around the Alaskan man's neck......(hey, to each his own...ha)....One 'Sad point'..here, I want to mention.....is the fact that I'm NOT riding 'JUMP' seat...on this flight....(tears)....so this this Friday......I declare it.... ""Nag a Pilot, till he lets you ride Jump"".........day......big smile..........then....I'll know there is an "Aviation God"........LOL>........Everyone have a great Aviation week.!!!!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteSooooooooooo......the answer Please.......!!!
ReplyDelete