Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SIA improves departure proceedure for A380 saving 300kg of fuel per flight

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SIA improves departure proceedure for A380 saving 300kg of fuel per flight

    Recent article found about work done to reduce fuel on take off and landing on SIA A 380.

    Gunners


    KUALA LUMPUR, March 4 (Bernama) -- Heathrow, NATS, which provides air traffic control services to aircraft flying into UK airspace, Singapore Airlines and Airbus have launched an improved departure procedure for the Airbus A380, saving even more fuel, emitting even less carbon dioxide and remaining within the airport's strict noise procedures.

    This new procedure saves an additional 300kg of fuel per flight, equating to one metric tonne of emissions of CO2 on a flight to Singapore, as well as reducing NOx (nitrogen oxides) emissions, Airbus said in a statement here Wednesday.

    The companies worked together over the last year to develop the new airline procedure, which has been put into place immediately.

    A380s departing Heathrow now use less power when taking off, saving fuel and reducing NOx emissions. Once a height of 1,500 feet has been reached, the aircraft uses flexible acceleration up to 4,000 feet, before continuing its journey.

    "The A380 represents the most significant step forward in reducing aircraft fuel burn and resultant emissions in four decades whilst offering greater comfort on board," said Tom Williams, Executive Vice President Programmes, Airbus."In fact, the A380 consumes less than three litres of fuel per passenger per 100 km."

    The A380 is also significantly quieter than other large aircraft. It produces half the noise energy at takeoff and cuts the area exposed to equivalent noise levels around the airport runway by half.

    At landing the A380 is producing three to four times less noise energy, contributing significantly to reduce the noise impact whilst enabling the airline to carry more passengers per flight.

    Jane Dawes, Operational Noise and Air Quality Manager from Heathrow said, "The Airbus A380 is already the most fuel efficient aircraft in commercial service, burning 17 per cent less fuel per passenger than other large aircraft. By 2020 one in 10 flights at Heathrow could use A380s. It is important that we work constantly with our airlines to improve operating processes, and the introduction of these new departure procedures demonstrates our commitment to reducing emissions."

    Said Captain Gerard Yeap, Senior Vice President Flight Operations, Singapore Airlines, "Our cooperation with Heathrow, NATS and Airbus goes to show what can be achieved when stakeholders share the same goal of reducing carbon emissions and fuel burn.

    Singapore Airlines is committed to playing its part in ensuring greener skies and sustainable air travel, and we hope this partnership will serve as a model for airport operators and governments elsewhere in the world."

    NATS provides air traffic control services to aircraft flying in UK airspace, and over the eastern part of the North Atlantic.

  • #2
    Sooo, shall we see a reduction on our fuel surcharges anytime soon ?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Guy Betsy View Post
      Sooo, shall we see a reduction on our fuel surcharges anytime soon ?
      Last time the uncle who sold Chicken Rice beow my block bought a more efficient rice cooker but that didn't quite compel him to reduce the price of the food he was plying.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by SINFJ View Post
        Last time the uncle who sold Chicken Rice beow my block bought a more efficient rice cooker but that didn't quite compel him to reduce the price of the food he was plying.
        And eventhough he did not increase the price of the chicken rice, I noticed a slight reduction in the number of chicken pieces to compensate his increase fixed costs to pay for the 'brand new' rice cooker.

        Comment


        • #5
          Not sure how correct my assumptions are, SQ carries about 18 TO 19 Million Pax a year. Fuel surcharges ranges from SGD 80 to 520 per pax. Based on SGD 100 per pax, this works out about 1.8 Billion in revenue.

          Comment


          • #6
            That's one thing that gets me about some of the initiatives touted to reduce environmental costs (another example: not asking for your hotel towels or sheets to be laundered every day of your stay). The payback to the consumer is purely in terms of the 'feel-good' factor. In this example, that does little to counter the feeling of being gouged by the company's hedging mistakes.
            Last edited by jjpb3; 4 March 2010, 02:13 PM.
            ‘Lean into the sharp points’

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Guy Betsy View Post
              Sooo, shall we see a reduction on our fuel surcharges anytime soon ?
              You wait long long

              Personally, I find this actions are merely to appease the more environmentally aware pax out there and organizations. The fuel savings of 300 kg for an A380 to LHR is minuscule, around 0.1 to 0.2 % per flight. But savings nonetheless. And it could add up significantly for the FY books.

              And i don't think it would be feasible for all flights going out of LHR as it would strain the ATC resources for such a heavily used airport to use such departure procedures for every a/c.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by jjpb3 View Post
                That's one thing that gets me about some of the initiatives touted to reduce environmental costs (another example: not asking for your hotel towels or sheets to be laundered every day of your stay). The payback to the consumer is purely in terms of the 'feel-good' factor. In this example, that does little to counter the feeling of being gouged by the company's hedging mistakes.
                Not forgetting also the SQ staff's wages have been gouged by the company's hedging mistakes. Not sure with the high level of surcharges, the company actually needs to hedge their fuel at such high level?

                Comment

                Working...
                X