Inruder. Your questions are very relevant, here are a few answeres. I realize that there are not anough space here to go through all details, and my ambition with the thread was originally to get some input and ideas on how we could fly cleaner and greener, and that applies of course also to flight related actions. Txs TUI and KLM/AF and others...Aviation is not a dirty industry, but there are of course stuff that any industry can do to add to an overall greener society. That is what I want to tell my kids, anyway...
Since there is no illustration of the criteria used in the curved and traditional approaches into Stockholm, there is no way for us to tell how that curved approach supposedly saves fuel.
Idling on approach saves fuel and emissions, and the curved approach contributes to that by at the same time avoiding urbanized areas, eliminating/lowering noiselevel for people living close to airports.
Also, you have not addressed the offset in fuel burn for the case where an "efficient" airplane is given priority and another airplane has to delay because of it. How is Novair "green" by suggesting that other airplanes burn excess fuel instead of themselves?
This is a general discussion that goes on, and the idea is to make it imperative for airlines to equip planes so they can perform environmentally better. Initially there will, as you demonstrate, be no difference...