View Single Post
Old 03-13-2008, 09:55 PM   #45 (permalink)
cajun98
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Choteau, Montana
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I flew the 50 seat regional jets and the larger turbo props for several years out of Denver. We definitely adhered to company fuel savings procedures. As already mentioned, we usually taxied on a single engine. We had precise climb profiles designed for both fuel efficiency and performance. In cruise we were required to cruise at .76 mach (approx. 440 kts) although the aircraft was capable of much faster. All aircraft parameters are recorded so the company knows if you are pushing up the throttles. If we were really behind, we would speed up to make up time but that was the exception. We also cruised at as high an altitude as we could. A turbine engine is normally aspirated and the higher it flies the less power it makes and thus thte less fuel it burns. For the turboprops, this was usually at 29,000 ft. At that altitude our fuel flows were probably 20% lower than cruise in the upper teens or low 20's. The only problem with the regional jet is that the 50 seaters are gutless at altitudes above the low 30s' in the summer when the temps are higher at altitude. As far as descents go, when assigned a lower altitude, the thrust levers go to flight idle and we descend at the same speed we were cruising. All airliners have spoiler/speedbrakes to help with descents. On landing approach in the landing configuration (gear down/flaps down) you actually have to keep the power up to counter the added drag of the gear and flaps. Power didn't come back to flight idle until 50 feet above the runway. Once on the ground, we usually shut one engine down. Fuel costs are the #1 expense for the airlines and they do what they can to save.

Last edited by cajun98; 03-13-2008 at 09:56 PM.. Reason: sorry for the double post; my bad
  Reply With Quote