Do airline pilots hypermile?

[diesel_john]

that lift takes a lot of power, that's why i don't like lift on my car.

my car can haul about 18 tons 1 mile on a gallon of fuel. (net)

a semi can haul about 175 ton miles per gallon. (net)

a train can haul something like 400 ton miles per gallon. (net)

what is the ton miles/gallon for a cargo plane. (net)

[RH77]

Originally Posted by diesel_john

that lift takes a lot of power, that's why i don't like lift on my car.

my car can haul about 18 tons 1 mile on a gallon of fuel. (net)

a semi can haul about 175 ton miles per gallon. (net)

a train can haul something like 400 ton miles per gallon. (net)

what is the ton miles/gallon for a cargo plane. (net)

From the source I could find, (and if I'm reading the info correctly) the latest figures show

6 ton-miles per gallon (which has improved from near 2-3 since the 70's).

This Wiki entry really deserves some attention in passenger/cargo load per conveyance.

RH77

[8307c4]

Originally Posted by diesel_john

that lift takes a lot of power, that's why i don't like lift on my car.

my car can haul about 18 tons 1 mile on a gallon of fuel. (net)

a semi can haul about 175 ton miles per gallon. (net)

a train can haul something like 400 ton miles per gallon. (net)

what is the ton miles/gallon for a cargo plane. (net)

I do know from simulators, on take off a 90% throttle setting saves a noticeable if little amount of fuel vs. 100% thou all take off procedures I know of call for full throttle at least initially... So whether commercial airline pilots do this is another story, airlines may have changed the procedure thou private small plane pilots (owner-operators) might.

It might save fuel but at some point one questions the integrity of the procedure, it's one thing for a private pilot to do it because of familiarity with the plane he can always give it more or less based on his own judgment... But from a commercial stand point I am not so sure if airlines would allow this.

[elhigh]

I read just a couple weeks ago about a new concept for ATC that would have the planes flying much more directly than the current "airlanes" dictate, and would permit direct approaches as opposed to the current "stacking" model. That would eliminate a lot of unnecessary mileage right there.

I don't know as much as I'd like to about flying - esp. hang gliding - but if you want to read up on the best hypermiler jet pilot I've ever heard of, Google "Gimli Glider."

[MetroMPG]

Ah! Yes, the Gimli Glider!

I forgot to post the article here after I read it, but that plane was just retired about a week ago.

Air Canada held a special "reunion" for the crew in Montreal and/or Toronto prior to flying down to its final resting place somewhere in the US southwest.

[RH77]

Originally Posted by 8307c4

I do know from simulators, on take off a 90% throttle setting saves a noticeable if little amount of fuel vs. 100% thou all take off procedures I know of call for full throttle at least initially... So whether commercial airline pilots do this is another story, airlines may have changed the procedure thou private small plane pilots (owner-operators) might.

It might save fuel but at some point one questions the integrity of the procedure, it's one thing for a private pilot to do it because of familiarity with the plane he can always give it more or less based on his own judgment... But from a commercial stand point I am not so sure if airlines would allow this.

I can't be considered an expert by any means -- just an enthusiast and frequent flier (including simulation).

From what I've read, to save fuel and prevent potential failures, a "FLEX" takeoff procedure is often adopted to set the throttle at a percentage of "less-than-full", based on ambient temps, takeoff weight, wind speeds, runway length, etc. etc. (FLEX is the term used by Airbus, Boeing calls it something else, but it looks like the term is interchangeable).

Most engine failures occur at full-throttle, so in addition to fuel savings, it's a safety/longevity issue as well.

I've heard that quite a few Regional Jet operators allow FLEX T/O. For larger airliners I think the flap setting can also effect it -- some aircraft are equipped with an infinite "slider" in certain ranges, instead of a notch for 1, 2, 5...etc. which may alter throttle setting. A real pilot can speak more about it...

RH77

[Lazarus]

From the article that RH77 posted a couple of post back. That show they do care about fuel.

On the operational front, many airlines:

employ single-engine taxi procedures during normal operations and selective engine shutdown during ground delays
reduce and measure more accurately onboard weight while redistributing belly cargo
tanker extra fuel on certain flights to avoid refueling at more expensive locations
cruise longer at higher altitudes and employ shorter, steeper approaches

In terms of planning for fuel usage, airlines may:

optimize flight planning for minimum fuel-burn routes and altitudes

work with FAA to change en-route fuel reserve requirements to reflect state-of-the-art navigation, communication, surveillance and wind forecast systems

employ self-imposed ground delays to reduce airborne holding
modernize their fleets with more fuel-efficient airplanes
invest in winglets to reduce aircraft drag and thereby increase fuel conservation
redesign hubs and schedules to alleviate congestion
advocate expanded and improved airfield capacity
use airport power rather than onboard auxiliary power units (APUs) when at the gates
change paint schemes to minimize heat absorption (which requires additional cooling)
pool resources to purchase fuel in bulk through alliances with other carriers

Rick is correct on the reduced power takeoff if all the factors will allow a safe takeoff.

[diesel_john]

It looks those winglets keep the air from falling off the end of the wing. If that reduces the drag, Would that same logic apply to a splitter on the bottom of the air dam on a car?

[RH77]

Originally Posted by diesel_john

It looks those winglets keep the air from falling off the end of the wing. If that reduces the drag, Would that same logic apply to a splitter on the bottom of the air dam on a car?

I think these apply mostly to airfoils and lift. Some advanced spoilers for ultra-high speed operation (such as the upward extension of some rear spoiler for 100 MPH+ operation -- similar to winglets). These decrease FE with downforce: a trade for traction.

Experts in Aero can attest, reducing frontal area and drag is of the utmost. Winglets likely will not accomplish either in lower-speed applications.

RH77

[MetroMPG]

To answer the original question... (sort of)...

Yes, Virginia, some pilots DO hypermile...