270 Turning departure speed
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 59
From: OZ
I expect that it is more efficient to increase speed and hence turn radius when you are pointing more or less in the direction you want to fly. Assuming the 270* turn roughly aligns you with required track to next way point, make it as slow/tight as possible. This should save time/fuel but probably not enough to matter.
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 96
Likes: 9
From: SS Enterprise
It depends on what you call cheaper? Minimum fuel or minimum total cost?
As an example min fuel for take off is TOGA thrust, minimum total cost is FLEX. Airbus say FLEX take off and acceleration ( as soon as possible) to the ECON climb speed is the most efficient departure. Getting creative will require an analysis by someone smarter than a pilot!
As an example min fuel for take off is TOGA thrust, minimum total cost is FLEX. Airbus say FLEX take off and acceleration ( as soon as possible) to the ECON climb speed is the most efficient departure. Getting creative will require an analysis by someone smarter than a pilot!
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 936
Likes: 67
From: USA
mustafagander
Only looking at the fact that we're pointing the direction we want to go quicker (i.e., not burning fuel flying the wrong way), then yes. However, offsetting that is that by doing this, we're also spending more time with more drag (and in the lower less efficient altitudes). Which one wins? Probably none of us able to calculate.
Only looking at the fact that we're pointing the direction we want to go quicker (i.e., not burning fuel flying the wrong way), then yes. However, offsetting that is that by doing this, we're also spending more time with more drag (and in the lower less efficient altitudes). Which one wins? Probably none of us able to calculate.
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 234
Likes: 12
From: SW1A 2AA
Rate one turn of 3 degrees per second will take the same time whether clean or flaps extended. Assuming you want minimise fuel burn then you would be better to clean up as soon as your procedures allow.
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,343
Likes: 822
From: Tring, UK
mustafagander
I think that’s probably the best answer. You’ll be climbing at not far off the same rate but reducing the distance = time = fuel for the entire flight.
Running the numbers at 220kts and 160kts with 25deg AoB, by the end of the turn you have saved ~4miles, which I would suspect far outweighs any extra drag from takeoff flap while you are in the turn. It’s what I normally do when, say, taking off south to go north or something like that. Also, as the actual rate of turn is ~40% quicker at the slower speed, you spend less time with the increased wing loading and drag from that. If you hold takeoff config as opposed to going to 250kts, it’s about 7nm saved.
I think that’s probably the best answer. You’ll be climbing at not far off the same rate but reducing the distance = time = fuel for the entire flight.
Running the numbers at 220kts and 160kts with 25deg AoB, by the end of the turn you have saved ~4miles, which I would suspect far outweighs any extra drag from takeoff flap while you are in the turn. It’s what I normally do when, say, taking off south to go north or something like that. Also, as the actual rate of turn is ~40% quicker at the slower speed, you spend less time with the increased wing loading and drag from that. If you hold takeoff config as opposed to going to 250kts, it’s about 7nm saved.
Joined: Sep 2010
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 884
Likes: 233
From: by the seaside
Making it complicated chaps and chapies..was at Farnborough when the Blackbird set the transatlantic speed record, started its turn overhead and passed over the Dutch coast before returning...simples.
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 3,204
Likes: 2
From: Seattle
But you're only flying away from the destination for the first (slowest) 2/3 of the turn)... Getting rid of drag and climbing into thinner air are the goals.
Another data point: In a heavy 747 Classic on a hot day, it didn't climb well at all at Flaps 20; you had to accelerate and get to Flaps 10 to make any progress at all. You took off at Flaps 20 because the runway wasn't long enough for a Flaps 10 takeoff. HOWEVER, the hard part was transitioning from Flaps 1 to clean; bank was further limited to 20° until at V2+100 KIAS (well over 250 KIAS). Hence, climbing at Flaps 1 until out of the turn was often the best case.
Another data point: In a heavy 747 Classic on a hot day, it didn't climb well at all at Flaps 20; you had to accelerate and get to Flaps 10 to make any progress at all. You took off at Flaps 20 because the runway wasn't long enough for a Flaps 10 takeoff. HOWEVER, the hard part was transitioning from Flaps 1 to clean; bank was further limited to 20° until at V2+100 KIAS (well over 250 KIAS). Hence, climbing at Flaps 1 until out of the turn was often the best case.
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 936
Likes: 67
From: USA
Intruder: "But you're only flying away from the destination for the first (slowest) 2/3 of the turn)..."
That may be so, but any amount of flying-away that exists, has an effect that when considered, knocks the optimal clean up time (or speed to fly) away from what it would be if it wasn't considered (however little of a difference that may be)
That may be so, but any amount of flying-away that exists, has an effect that when considered, knocks the optimal clean up time (or speed to fly) away from what it would be if it wasn't considered (however little of a difference that may be)
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
From: Asia
Question for a performance engineer wizard
The scenario is a 270 degree turning departure starting at 400 agl
What results in overall Lower fuel burn ?
- Immediate acceleration to clean maneuvering and retract flapslats
What results in overall Lower fuel burn ?