Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Reduced climb thrust B757-200


Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Reduced climb thrust B757-200

Old 14th September 2002 | 00:47
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Reduced climb thrust B757-200

Is is economical to use Climb2, Climb1 & Climb and save engine overall cost or use Climb only and save fuel for a small operator with only two B757s. Please advise.
Sonicflyer is offline  
Old 14th September 2002 | 15:43
  #2 (permalink)  

Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 1999
Posts: 1,295
Likes: 0
From: UK
Most UK RB21 operators use CLB 2 and CLB1 rather than full climb power. When they use one or the other depends on individual company preference.
sky9 is offline  
Old 16th September 2002 | 12:35
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
From: KUL
i'm not an expert but i guess if boeing says reduce thrust saves engine cost though burning a little more fuel then they must be right regardless if one operates a large fleet or a small one. one must wonder though what was the fuel price when they did the research? as for me personally, i'd go for saving engine. more for reliability reason than cost!

SR
SuperRanger is offline  
Old 16th September 2002 | 21:19
  #4 (permalink)  
100 Countries Visited
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 25
From: ME
if boeing says reduce thrust saves engine cost though burning a little more fuel then they must be right regardless

Methinks that you are putting a little bit too much in Mr Boeing...... but if he happens to answer that little question IN DETAIL, i would love to hear the answer..........


Mutt
mutt is offline  
Old 20th September 2002 | 02:24
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
From: West
Here is some guidance my company has provided concerning the P&W equipped 757:

757s do not normally use derated climbs unless airport specific procedures dictate otherwise. This procedure reduces total trip fuel burn, and also reduces the amount of time spent in the N2 speed range in which additional stress may be placed on the HPC.

I cannot imagine company would do anything against the recommendation of Boeing......however, there seem to be many surprises I learn about this industry regularly.
None is offline  
Old 20th September 2002 | 08:35
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
From: Costa del Thames
I think most replies so far goes for the RB211..
Brenoch is offline  
Old 20th September 2002 | 16:01
  #7 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 238
Likes: 1
From: UK
My Company SOP's (E4's) are to use assumed temp. T/O where conditions permit with CLB2 selected. When rate of climb falls below 1500fpm select CLB1 then select CLB when rate of climb is once again below 1500fpm. However, the Boeing Flight Crew Training Manual suggests approximately 750fpm for the maximum benefits of a reduced climb.
EPRman is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.