Tamarack Aerospace Arranged A Flyoff To Promote Its Winglets With AOPA Looking On

Earlier this week two Cessna CitationJet business jets took off simultaneously from Portland, Maine aiming for Palm Beach, Florida. One was equipped with Tamarack Aerospace’s active winglets. The other was a stock or “flat-wing” Citation without winglets. Their mission was to prove, or disprove, Tamarack’s claim that its aftermarket active winglets can dramatically improve fuel efficiency.

The Aircraft Owners and Pilot’s Association (AOPA) put journalists on each aircraft to monitor the flyoff. What happened?

According to Tamarack, the winglet-equipped Citation was able to fly nonstop to Palm Beach in four hours, 35 minutes, while burning 155 fewer gallons of fuel than the unmodified aircraft which had to make a fuel stop in Columbia, South Carolina.

“We had one of our staff on each airplane to photograph, video and monitor the number-taking,” says Mike Collins, technical editor of AOPA Pilot. “I do feel the numbers are accurate.”

Tamarack says the numbers are as follows; The unmodified Citation flew a total of 1,496 miles after being forced inland slightly by weather conditions. It spent 5 hours and 37 minutes in the air, using 3,650 pounds of fuel. The Citation with Tamarack active winglets was able to take a more direct route by virtue of climbing to higher cruise altitude (41,000 feet) and travelled 1,386 miles, spending 4 hours and 36 minutes in the air, and using a total of 2,610 pounds of fuel.

Forbes previously covered Tamarack’s ATLAS active winglet system which the company claims can reduce fuel consumption on the Textron
TXT
-Cessna CitationJet CJ, CJ1 and CJ1+ series business jets for which it has been approved by up to 33% percent.

ATLAS is comprised of a wing tip extension, a winglet, wing loading sensors (located in the aircraft’s fuselage) and a moveable load alleviation surface. The latter looks like a small aileron at the junction of the wingtip and winglet. It’s used to essentially “turn-off” the winglet during short gust or maneuvering events, alleviating aerodynamic loads generated by the winglets. Thus the requirement for a beefed-up wing structure is avoided.

Efficiency gains come partly from the fact that the winglets reduce drag and provide greater lift, enabling Citations so-equipped to fly at higher altitudes.

In a bit of synchronicity, Tamarack’s press release on the flyoff, which took place January 26, mentioned the 33% fuel consumption reduction number as did Tamarack CEO, Nick Guida.

“The CJ with winglets can fly four hours and then land safely. An unmodified CJ with a flat wing is a three-hour airplane,” Guida says. “For the same tank of gas, filled to the top, you can fly over four hours.

Technically, an hour longer would be a 25% improvement, Guida acknowledges. The difference in fuel consumption between the two airplanes from departure to destination (3,650 pounds for the stock Citation vs. 2,610 pounds for the winglet Citation according to Tamarack) works out to about a 28% difference, an impressive figure.

Collins, who flew as one of three aboard the winglet-equipped jet, says he and the other AOPA representative aboard the stock Citation monitored the aircraft gauges/readouts to make sure the numbers were accurate.

“I saw this as a real-world comparison as opposed to something where everything was scripted-out exactly the same.”

The real-world intruded in form of weather as well as minor differences in the airplanes. Far higher than forecast headwinds over the mid-Atlantic and warmer air temperatures aloft (which decrease engine performance/increase fuel consumption) greeted the flyoff participants Tuesday morning. Collins says both flight crews re-jiggered their flight plans and delayed their departures by several hours from Portland to accommodate the weather and keep the flyoff conditions more even.

“For most of the route for both aircraft, headwinds were double to triple what we expected,” Collins confirms. These, combined with the warmer than average temperatures, were factors in the final performance of both aircraft.

“In the case of the winglet airplane, the determination was made to climb to 41,000 feet as soon as possible. The last part of the climb was pretty slow,” he observes

Collins says the weather variability (always a factor) led general aviation enthusiasts following the event to pick apart apart the theoretical apples-to-apples flyoff comparison “before we took off”.

Such criticism doesn’t phase Guida who maintains the flyoff was a true real world scenario, a race to “get three guys [per airplane] with golf clubs to Palm Beach.” He points out that the stock Citation could only climb to 36,000 feet without Tamarack winglets, thus putting it at an altitude where the headwinds were worse.

It’s worth noting that the stock bizjet was flown by Mike Laver, owner of Carolina Turbine Support. The modified Citation was flown by owner Wick Zimmerman.

Laver’s business in Aiken, South Carolina, was named Tamarack’s new East Coast Transformation Center but his decision to participate came before that announcement. AOPA’s Collins, who flew a Mitsubishi MU-2 around the world with Laver in 2013, admits the latter may be perceived as having a personal interest in the outcome but still vouched for Laver.

“I can assure you that he was making a stab at beating us. He would have won if he could have. They managed a 15-minute fuel turn in Columbia which I think is pretty remarkable. ”

Meanwhile, the Tamarack winglet Citation climbed higher and was able to fly over the water, hugging the coast as it cruised south to Florida.

“The point was, we got over top of the weather and were on the golf course while those guys were still a state behind us,” Guida asserts.

Tamarack’s CEO says that his customers make this very trip, flying non-stop routinely. Thus he had high confidence the winglet jet would prevail. Until he saw the weather.

“There were times when I thought, I don’t know if we’re going to make this [non-stop flight]. I wanted to land with 700 pounds of fuel.”

But the flyoff is further proof that Tamarack’s performance claims are real Guida says despite skepticism in the general and military aviation communities.

“This is why we have such a hard time. People have been trained for 20 years [to expect] a 3.5% increase and they’re happy. We’re saying [Tamarack winglets can produce] a 15 to 20% [fuel consumption reduction] on airliners and 33% on a business jet and they’re going crazy because they think we’re just a bunch of snake-oil salesmen.”

The company has plans to sell its winglets/design to the airlines eventually with Guida hinting that it has an unnamed partner with whom it will flight test the devices on an Airbus A320. He also revealed that Tamarack has an ongoing military aircraft project though declined to provide any further specifics. Next up for the bizjet market will be ATLAS system winglets for the Cessna Citation Excel and Bombardier Challenger 604.

Altogether, the demonstration and the company’s expansion/emergence from recent bankruptcy may begin to convince the wary that it has something of value for the aviation aftermarket.

“It’s clear in my opinion that the winglets gave Wick Zimmerman’s airplane an advantage on this particular flight,” Collins says. “If I had a Citation Jet and was only making short trips, the winglets might not be as compelling, particularly if they’re not saving you a fuel stop. But for the right use case – making your CJ into a long-range machine – the benefits are very compelling.”

Guida agrees but adds other use-cases.

“If a customer has a CJ-2 [CitationJet 2] and they put four people onboard, they can fly these short flights and put 800 pounds more weight onboard. If they want to go really far, then they need winglets. If they want to carry a lot of load, then they’ll get our winglets.”

The market will ultimately decide whether the cost-benefit of Tamarack’s active winglet system is favorable enough to generate further demand but Guida says he’s still open to proving doubters wrong.

“We have over 1oo customers verifying our claims and we wouldn’t be afraid of a third party validation.”