Airbus has demonstrated how flying across the Atlantic in formation can save a good amount of fuel, though I question how useful this will be in the real world…
Continue reading: Cool: Airbus A350s Save Fuel By Flying In Formation
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
does this "demonstration" not seem like a waste of fuel to attempt to prove something that is completely impractical? Unless these were delivery flights, they wasted fuel (and added CO2 to the atmosphere) basically for nothing. Kudos Airbus...
I could see major corridor’s implementing this ! I think even with different aircraft there would be savings perhaps not as big but still… obviously safety is the biggest concern here and presumably a global alliance for all using these corridors will need to be established so facilitate the savings equally
So adaptive cruise control for airplanes. If another similar plane is ahead then queue up behind it. Makes sense.
But sadly they wasted more fuel than they saved by having to circle in air to wait to get into formation, then circle on arrival to wait in line to land, as well as deviating from their optimal individual routes. Higher overall fuel burn, longer flight durations, and extra safety concerns. Is this progress? This is an idea that is going nowhere.
Being in the wake updraft of the “leader” aircraft, would the "follower" aircraft undergo additional turbulence?
Yeah my mind went right to turbulence. Would the "follower" have a lot of it, and would the lead aircraft disrupt any naturally occurring turbulent air? Not that any of this matters because there's no way this happens for commercial flights, but still interesting.
They could have asked BA1 and VS3 to do it.
And probably due to "software issues" and not "design issues" Boeing airplane cannot follow another plane.
All these carbon reducing measures over the years, and we're still told it's a crisis and we are in peril. At what point do people start to question this? If it was working, shouldn't we see some results?
It's probably flight control and other pre-delivery tests for newly built aircraft. Probably similar to military flyovers at sporting events where it may seem wasteful, but those pilots and aircraft need to get the flight hours in any way to attain/maintain certification so might as well do something useful with it.
So you are suggesting nothing works and we should keep polluting this planet?
Or you are suggesting climate problem is a hoax and we can still pollute this planet?
Maybe results can't be seen in your lifetime, but that doesn't mean there wouldn't be results.
Dose Fox News ever give you a solution?
Maybe that's why Al Gore was never President. But still works for the get a Noble quick scheme little Greta ('s parents) it trying to pull off.
By the way, what happen to the big hole in the ozone?
Good question. The following aircraft should not experience any additional turbulence (theoretically) as long as the two aircraft maintain a precise speed and distance. Basically, the following aircraft will experience a continuous upward draft allowing it to reduce its air speed, yet maintaining the same amount of lift. Note that the travel duration may be slightly longer in doing this.
Coordinated flights would create more airport crowding and thus longer security lines .
Airspeed is unchanged. The aircraft in the upwash doesn't have to produce as much lift, so it can lower it's angle of attack, creating less drag. This lessened drag allows the aircraft in trail to fly the same speed as the airplane in front at a lower power setting.
Al gore was never president because he didn't carry his own state. Also his "investments" in clean energy made him a very rich man
It’s a start and we should welcome anything which allows air travel to prosper, thanks to more sustainable techniques.
The big question is the separation! How far apart were they, is this practical in the real day to day world?
If this is safe and valid they could use this in major corridors (need not be going to the same destination) and eventually all airlines would benefit, it does not mean they have to calculate who gets a portion of the savings.
Ed, you're not looking at the big picture.
It's when the aircrafts enter the traffic lanes. So it doesn't really matter if it tookoff from LHR CDG or TLS. As long as Shanwick times their entry correctly, which can be done with our current systems already.
These "traffic lanes" are well established over the north Atlantic which means getting planes to follow each other for long distances is not a problem. See Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Tracks.
The air ingested by the follower will have fumes from the lead aircraft's engines. Health and comfort issue?
How questioning the military, the biggest polluter on the planet? That would be goal worth pursuing.
All the negativity in the comments here is so sad - how dare Airbus try to achieve something new! Are you questioning my God-given right to pollute the planet as much as I like? The comments to this thread are basically why I completely avoid watching TV or reading the newspaper every time I’m in the US…
Good initiative! This might lead to "plane trains" or "Air Trains". 😉 So cool!
Yes, I'm sure no one ever thought about calculating those factors. You are truly a deep thinker.
Woruldn't the follower aircraft air intake system be bringing in compromised air for its passengers to breathe??
Ben, I really appreciate how much you know and share about things just beyond aviation.