Perhaps aviation biggest challenge....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: UAE
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps aviation biggest challenge....
Im surprised that I have not seen discussion on the obivous challenge that is ahead of aviation. While global environment challenges seem very real and science backed - the aviation industry is still talking about growing over the coming decades. New markets, new routes, more planes and pilots - yet at the same time scientists almost all say our only hope is to cut drastically on emissions.
Are we talking about this fact yet - or is it just too uncomfortable?
your thoughts....
ps: Im an airline pilot - love my job - hope generations to come can too
Are we talking about this fact yet - or is it just too uncomfortable?
your thoughts....
ps: Im an airline pilot - love my job - hope generations to come can too
Last edited by Mach1.; 22nd May 2019 at 09:17.
Journalists and "consultants" who believe that they are the ultimate authority when something goes wrong
I don’t think people in the industry are too concerned at a daily level. Even the futurists are working on a Mach5 project requiring very thirsty propulsion.
A few percent gain here and there keeps the punters happy.
Realistically a full aircraft presently uses less fuel than would be used if each passenger drove his car the same distance solo. That gets forgotten in the climate debate.
A few percent gain here and there keeps the punters happy.
Realistically a full aircraft presently uses less fuel than would be used if each passenger drove his car the same distance solo. That gets forgotten in the climate debate.
The climate “debate” is being argued by anti-vaxing flat-earthers. It's hard to make predictions,especially about the future*, but:
It doesn’t take much imagination to see a day when private aviation, pleasure motor boating, needless journeys and any heavy carbon footprint activity will become both heavily taxed and socially unacceptable.
I can also imagine heavy tarrifs levied by many countries against others seen to be non compliant with whatever crisis accord is ruling the day, because by the time there is any global consensus actual action will be critical.**
*Yogi Berra
**Spare me the idiot rebuttals.
It doesn’t take much imagination to see a day when private aviation, pleasure motor boating, needless journeys and any heavy carbon footprint activity will become both heavily taxed and socially unacceptable.
I can also imagine heavy tarrifs levied by many countries against others seen to be non compliant with whatever crisis accord is ruling the day, because by the time there is any global consensus actual action will be critical.**
*Yogi Berra
**Spare me the idiot rebuttals.
In our house, we have reduced our road emissions to the minimum, generate all of our net electricity and try to source as much local food as possible. It barely makes a difference.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop listening CEO speeches to the public... There is no concern about emissions on daily basis anywhere in airline industry. Related things are however important: less fuel burn means less money spent. Less fuel burn means less payments for emission quotas (Europe). Those two are measured in real money, taken care of, and subsequently environment benefits from it. Next question?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I started in this business I would load 10900 KG of fuel on to a HS Trident to fly 160 pax from LHR to GLA or EDI.
Now I put a that sort of fuel load on a B737-800 to fly 189 pax LGW to CFU.
I think that marks the gains in efficiency the industry has made and will continue to make.
Now I put a that sort of fuel load on a B737-800 to fly 189 pax LGW to CFU.
I think that marks the gains in efficiency the industry has made and will continue to make.
Last edited by A and C; 22nd May 2019 at 19:07.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Weedon, UK
Age: 77
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the biggest challenge facing aviation and every other "climate-destroying" industry and activity is that the "tree-huggers" can't see anything other than a "ban it" approach. The eventual solution will undoubtedly have to come from an engineering source, using technology to remove the carbon we have poured into the atmosphere over the last 250 years.
There has been some very promising progress on possible techniques in Canada recently, and Cambridge University have set up a dedicated department looking at possibilities, but the activists still think that stopping everything now is a viable position, and that is taking a lot of attention (and resources) away from a realistic approach to the problem.
There will undoubtedly have to be elimination of the worst polluters - burning lignite to produce electricity to charge electric cars makes absolutely no sense at all - but for many human activities the ultimate solution will probably be to find ways to effectively remove the pollution post-event rather than to stop the activity completely.
There has been some very promising progress on possible techniques in Canada recently, and Cambridge University have set up a dedicated department looking at possibilities, but the activists still think that stopping everything now is a viable position, and that is taking a lot of attention (and resources) away from a realistic approach to the problem.
There will undoubtedly have to be elimination of the worst polluters - burning lignite to produce electricity to charge electric cars makes absolutely no sense at all - but for many human activities the ultimate solution will probably be to find ways to effectively remove the pollution post-event rather than to stop the activity completely.
Im surprised that I have not seen discussion on the obivous challenge that is ahead of aviation. While global environment challenges seem very real and science backed - the aviation industry is still talking about growing over the coming decades. New markets, new routes, more planes and pilots - yet at the same time scientists almost all say our only hope is to cut drastically on emissions.
Are we talking about this fact yet - or is it just too uncomfortable?
your thoughts....
Are we talking about this fact yet - or is it just too uncomfortable?
your thoughts....
https://www.safran-electrical-power....t-power-future
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you must worry about CO2 rather than fuel cost.
Take aircraft type, normal fuel burn for flight, divide by number of miles flown, divide by number of revenue pax. Most modern twins will return better than 120mpg per revenue passenger.
No infrastructure is needed to be built and maintained between departure and destination - no rails or tarmac
Other 'incidentals'
Cost of passenger time traveling is also reduced.
Some journeys are only practicable by air.
The eventual solution will undoubtedly have to come from an engineering source, using technology to remove the carbon we have poured into the atmosphere over the last 250 years.
remove the carbon we have poured into the atmosphere over the last 250 years
I’m all for cleaning up our act a bit but not sure why CO2 has such a bad name.
Can anyone explain with a bit of data ?
Cheers
Moderator
It doesn’t take much imagination to see a day when private aviation, pleasure motor boating, needless journeys and any heavy carbon footprint activity will become both heavily taxed and socially unacceptable.
The "private" path has one difference to the military or career path training, being a lot more self directed, with the pilot making more of their own decisions (particularly go - no go), and solo flying - perhaps in a modest "experience builder" plane. I have seen that pilots who emerge from the self directed path, and have flown a lot of solo, are confident decision makers. The airline passengers of the future would like to be flown by pilots who are well motivated, and confident decision makers. That's not to speak less well of military or career path pilots, we need a mixture of all types of pilots.
As private flying becomes more costly, and less socially welcome, the opportunity will be lost for new pilots to fly hundreds of hours of personal experience building, and solo decision making. Airliners will be flown (or watched form the pilot's seat) by pilots who have passed the training to the minimum requirements, and perhaps had little opportunity to make solo piloting decisions, and carry out the outcome of their decisions.
I hope that the career path training ramps up to produce very experienced entry level airline pilots, 'cause they won't be coming from the "private" path so much in the future.....
It is refreshing to see some science being applied to the issue as opposed to believing that school children egged on by pushy parents are the world experts
Aviation is 4% of UK CO2 production, and 2% globally. Both aviation and shipping have applied science to reduce pollution per unit cargo mile, but volumes have increased. Banning transportation will not solve anything.
The biggest issues are:
The big polluters. China produces 100 times the CO2 that the UK does and has increased by 17% ie one other country has increased CO2 production by 17 times the total UK CO2.
Developing countries particularly Poland and Indonesia who are churning out coal, building coal fired power stations and refuse to come to the table
Corruption, which has led to deforestation especially in South America and mass poverty in sub saharan Africa. The latter perpetuates wood burning for fuel and prevents eg hydroelectric development in the DRC
The west IMHO needs to address these ongoing issues and promote technology such as carbon capture to sell / give to to developing countries.
Aviation is 4% of UK CO2 production, and 2% globally. Both aviation and shipping have applied science to reduce pollution per unit cargo mile, but volumes have increased. Banning transportation will not solve anything.
The biggest issues are:
The big polluters. China produces 100 times the CO2 that the UK does and has increased by 17% ie one other country has increased CO2 production by 17 times the total UK CO2.
Developing countries particularly Poland and Indonesia who are churning out coal, building coal fired power stations and refuse to come to the table
Corruption, which has led to deforestation especially in South America and mass poverty in sub saharan Africa. The latter perpetuates wood burning for fuel and prevents eg hydroelectric development in the DRC
The west IMHO needs to address these ongoing issues and promote technology such as carbon capture to sell / give to to developing countries.
I’m all for cleaning up our act a bit but not sure why CO2 has such a bad name.
Can anyone explain with a bit of data ?
Can anyone explain with a bit of data ?
Greenhouse gasses
It was an established module on my engineering course over 40 years ago