Would these ideas work at NetJets?

[flyipilot]

I would love to see single engine taxi (provided the AFM would allow it). I think we should try and look at ways to save what we can in fuel. Why not do what airlines do and taxi on one. If we access the ramp and movement area and can safely taxi out or into a ramp on one engine, it would save a little.

The other thing that might be possibel is doing flex takeoffs as do the airlines. We can at least do these on 91 repo flights. If climb gradients and runway conditions are met as in the airline world, why not put in an exaggerated temp in the FMS PERF page so that it actually lowers the setting given to N1.

Does anyone think these are possible in our operations? Just trying to think of ways to save some fuel since ever bit helps, even if we do not pay for it.

 

[imacdog]

Getting guys to actually use normal cruise thrust on ferry legs would be a good start.

 

[FLYLOW22]

I asked about the single engine taxi possibilities in 2002. The answer I got was that "many of the planes we fly do not have nose wheels designed for SE taxiing."

I guess it causes damage to the wheels and bearings.

FLEX takeoffs... I'd love it.

It WOULD be a good start to have pilots fly the appropriate cruise power setting on ferry flights.

 

[DO-82 driver]

Gentlemen,

There is soooo muh more to this then you can possibly imagine. Not just SE taxi for fuel savings but many other cost saving ideas that just have to be put on the back burner for now......

A valid attempt was seriously made....

 

[NJA Capt]

Does anyone think these are possible in our operations?

Our ops aren't really conducive to airline style methods. It has been looked at as previously mentioned. Airlines taxi on wide ramps and are usually aimed at the taxiway by a tug. We on the other hand are mostly on congested small ramps. The thrust required to taxi on one engine would be dangerous on such ramps. We also don't have to endure the long waits on taxiways as airlines do where savings could add up.

Flex takeoffs aren't really addressed in corp aircraft. Most of the places we operate are too short to facilitate flex takeoffs and/or climb gradient limitations apply.

Keep in mind that the engines we are using aren't gulping anywhere near what an airliner does. Our passengers are flying to save time. They don't save time by having us slow down.

 

[Seat 0A]

Getting guys to actually use normal cruise thrust on ferry legs would be a good start.

I will start to use NCT on the ferry flights just as soon as they figure the added time into the brief.

It's not uncommon to have a .8 ferry on the brief (which should equal a .6 flight with .1 taxi on each end) only to get a release with a 1.0 flight time which ends up being 1.2 block to block.

Now you have about 30 minutes instead of the briefed hour to get fuel, eat, piss, check weather, etc.

Last time I checked we need to be ready 30 minutes prior to pax. Doesn't work in this case.

Yeah, yeah, I know, take the time you need and let the chips fall where they may. But all this does is screw the Owner.

So is that what we are talking about here? Advocating delaying the owner for the purposes of saving a little fuel?

Like I said, plan my duty line taking into account the NCT ferry and I will be happy to comply. Until then I am taking care of the Owner.

 

[imacdog]

I think you're taking it a little far there, homey. There are plenty of times where you have a ferry leg, only to sit for several hours before doing a revenue flight. Use your freakin brain to decide when getting there a few minutes faster isn't going to disrupt the schedule. You're a big boy, you can do it.

 

[Semore Butts]

Imacdog

Use my brian? Isn't that what Dispatch and the schedulers are for???

I'm not capable of such elevated cerebral activity.

 

[Buckeye]

We used to taxi into the ramp on one engine and do reduced power takeoffs on a Falcon 20. It did equate to alot of savings over one year. It is a case by case basis, some planes can probably do it others may not be able to. And yes short runways or snowy and wet ramps aren't the place for this type of operation. Taxing into a ramp doesn't require excessive thrust or even turning into the good engine..it requires thought. If every aircraft could save 100 pounds of fuel everyday it would all add up.

 

[imacdog]

Sometimes it's required Semore, sorry. Sucks too because usually I only reserve brainpower for color coordinating my chart clips (I'm a little too easily amused).

 

[Seat 0A]

I think you're taking it a little far there, homey. There are plenty of times where you have a ferry leg, only to sit for several hours before doing a revenue flight. Use your freakin brain to decide when getting there a few minutes faster isn't going to disrupt the schedule. You're a big boy, you can do it.

Unfortunately I already have to do the job of about 10 different people at B'way. So I will fly AS BRIEFED. Eventually they will figure it out and TALK TO EACH OTHER upstairs. Once they are on ONE PAGE this machine may run pretty smooth.

 

[Seat 0A]

I think you're taking it a little far there, homey. There are plenty of times where you have a ferry leg, only to sit for several hours before doing a revenue flight. Use your freakin brain to decide when getting there a few minutes faster isn't going to disrupt the schedule. You're a big boy, you can do it.

By the way, I think it was you who proclaimed:

"Getting guys to actually use normal cruise thrust on ferry legs would be a good start".

Maybe what you meant to say was "getting guys to actually use normal cruise thrust under those occasions where it will not reduce a turn time below 1 hour when there is a pax leg following said ferry". But I don't know, it sure sounded like you were admonishing guys for not using NCT on ferrys. I could be wrong.

 

[imacdog]

I think most rational people on this board understood it the way I meant it. Of course, on flightinfo, someone will always take what you say and try to make something out of it that it's not.

 

[gutshotdraw]

Use my brian? Isn't that what Dispatch and the schedulers are for???

I'm not capable of such elevated cerebral activity.

That much was obvious:laugh:

Seriously, how did you know two of our schedulers are named Brian?
















Just bustin' your chops, Semore.

 

[Diesel]

At NJA I'd use cost savings measures when NJA schedulers did the same. I could save fuel, taxi on one engine, wash the plane, wipe the struts, and steal fuel sample off of 152's for a year.... until scheduling has me ferry from lax to teb to back up a plane going to ack.

Until that time........

 

[gordon24]

Amen to what Diesel said. I'm not getting paid by the hour, so, you can kiss that NCT on ferry flights goodbye.

As far as the leg times, the other day our brief showed 2.4 and the filed flight plan showed 3.2. Needless to say, the owners were not happy as they had based their arrival time on the brief. I even ran the numbers based on zero wind and it was still around 3.0.

 

[Thedude]

Keep in mind that the engines we are using aren't gulping anywhere near what an airliner does. Our passengers are flying to save time. They don't save time by having us slow down.

Flex or reduced power take-offs are not for reduced fuel consumption but for extending engine life. By the way, do any fracs do engine trend monitoring?

 

[CA1900]

By the way, do any fracs do engine trend monitoring?

NetJets does, yes.

 

[RCA]

SE Taxi in the 680 is possible, however you only have one primary hyrdaulic pump on the operating engine.
If the FADEC shuts the operating engine down, or the pump failed, I hope you saved at least $17 million dollars in fuel, cause you a'int stoppn.

As previously posted your lucky if you can complete the taxi check before tower is calling you with a T/O clearance. Even in LGA I once had a 3 minute taxi, you know becuase we have priority over the airlines, thanks in part to our happy champagne sipping excecutive. REF. CNN Cheers.

 

[Fozzy]

I would love to see single engine taxi (provided the AFM would allow it). I think we should try and look at ways to save what we can in fuel. Why not do what airlines do and taxi on one. If we access the ramp and movement area and can safely taxi out or into a ramp on one engine, it would save a little.

The other thing that might be possibel is doing flex takeoffs as do the airlines. We can at least do these on 91 repo flights. If climb gradients and runway conditions are met as in the airline world, why not put in an exaggerated temp in the FMS PERF page so that it actually lowers the setting given to N1.

Does anyone think these are possible in our operations? Just trying to think of ways to save some fuel since ever bit helps, even if we do not pay for it.

$Why?$