
Alaska Airlines said Friday it flew a 737-700 on a test flight last week over Puget Sound using RNP guidance and demonstrated eight continuous descent approaches into Seattle-Tacoma, reducing carbon dioxide emissions "by 35% compared to a conventional landing."
The test flight was conducted in conjunction with the Port of Seattle, Boeing and FAA. "With a landing weight similar to a typical passenger flight, the shorter and more efficient approaches reduced carbon emissions and saved 400 pounds of fuel per approach," Alaska said. The airline added that it "estimates the new [RNP] procedures at Sea-Tac [if approved by FAA and made broadly operational] will cut fuel consumption by 2.1 million gallons annually and reduce carbon emissions by 22,000 metric tons, the equivalent of taking 4,100 cars off the road every year. They will also reduce overflight noise for an estimated 750,000 people living below the affected flight corridor."
COO Ben Minicucci noted that "Seattle has the highest percentage of advanced RNP-equipped planes in the nation" and "could serve as a blueprint for next-generation aviation technology throughout the country."
Alaska's fleet is "completely RNP-equipped" and its crews "fully trained" to operate the new procedures, the airline said. Regional subsidiary Horizon Air's fleet will be fully RNP-equipped by the end of next year.
Discuss this news 3
What % of the typical total
By AnonymousWhat % of the typical total mission fuel burn and CO2 emissions did the 400 lb. and 35% represent?
This has been demonstrated
By AnonymousThis has been demonstrated many times before. If you treat a flight like a presidential flight and move everyone out of the way, you can fly an optimal flight. But It doesn't work that way in real life.
A typical 90 minute flight by
By MartyA typical 90 minute flight by a B737-700 or A320 consumes approximately 8000 lb. of fuel. So 400 lb. represents 5% of the total flight burn. But the 35% is potentially the percentage of fuel saving that could be achieved by flying an unimpeded descent and approach (laterally, vertically and speed) from top of descent compared the to the fuel burnt during the day to day descent with the usual restrictions.
Post new comment