Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Are nonstop flights environment friendly?
In The Environment Equation book of Alex-Shimon Barry he says that nonstop flight is using less fuel than flight with stop at a midpoint airport because takeoff and landing consume more fuel than flight in constant altitude.
However from other sources I have read that nonstop flight consume more fuel, because they need to load double the amount of heavy fuel in plane compared to flight with one refuel stop. And flying with heavy plane consumes lots more fuel.
What's the honest truth?
Which way is most economical and environment friendly way to fly?
2 Answers
- AlexLv 78 years agoFavorite Answer
Landing doesn't require much fuel at all. Takeoff and climb uses the most fuel.
A non-stop is almost certainly more efficient. 2 of the major trends in aircraft design are increasing range and increasing fuel economy. It would be rather counterproductive if those were mutually exclusive.
And while fuel is heavy, having to climb up to cruising altitude twice also requires lifting the weight of the plane and passengers twice as well.
On a Boeing 777-300ER loaded to the max takeoff weight with full fuel tanks, only 42% of the weight is from the fuel. 47% is the empty weight of the aircraft, and the other 11% is the passengers and cargo. So cutting the amount of fuel carried by half only cuts the weight by 20% or so.
It's even less of a fraction on smaller, short range planes. On a CRJ-900, full fuel tanks are only 24% of the max takeoff weight, so cutting the fuel in half would only decrease the weight by around 12%.
Planes are also required to carry a certain amount of reserve fuel, which is mostly unrelated to the length of the flight. It's enough fuel to get to the farthest alternate airport + 45 minutes. A 6 hour flight would need approximately the same amount of reserve fuel as a 3 hour flight.
- DashLv 78 years ago
Nobody cares. They just want to get to their destination quickly with out a bunch of stops along the way.
