Mortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3237 posts, RR: 2 Posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2047 times:
First with 'green landings'
Scandinavian airline SAS has begun novel tests with reduced engine power to reduce noise and pollution.
Scandinavian airline SAS has begun novel tests with reduced engine power to reduce noise and pollution.
Norway's division, SAS Braathens, said that they will likely begin testing such environmentally friendlier landings next year. SAS Sweden began such tests in January 2006.
According to Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet, SAS is the first airline in the world to make such landings, which are similar to a glide into the airport. If all of SAS planes make such landings the company can reduce emissions equivalent to those from 20,000 automobiles in a year.
"We have as yet not carried out such landings in Norway, but we are definitely watching with interest what our Swedish colleagues have done. They can demonstrate very exciting results," SAS Braathens communication director Cathrine Foss Stene said.
The main advantage of such landings are pollution reduction, but noise reduction is also achieved.
"We are now studying the Swedish results to see if this should be tested with us. It may be relevant by next year," Stene said.
Cloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2425 posts, RR: 9 Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1964 times:
Not first in the world - CDA (continuous descent approach) is in use at many other airports - mostly noise sensitive ones like Amsterdam and Heathrow (trial). Engines are left in idle power and no level off instructions from ATC - you basically fly the published vertical profile.
FFlyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 732 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1906 times:
I have experienced a "glide-in" approach and landing a few (?) times on early morning arrivals at CDG from the US. Most often on DL from JFK. Continuous, smooth descent up to the touch-down. This descent was started already some 45 - 60 minutes before the actual landing. Somehow beautiful in an early morning sunrise.
BoeingOnFinal From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 476 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1623 times:
Quoting Jonty (Reply 1): are engines not normally kept at a higher power setting on landing in case the plane needs to go around? in that case could this not be dangerous?
There is a difference between "flight idle" and "ground idle". Talking about 737 in this case, but assuming that this is the same for other aircrafts due to safety. "Flight idle" has a slightly higher N1% than "ground idle", because ,as you mentioned, a go-around might me necessary, and "flight idle" gives faster spool-up time.
Sponsor Message: 
From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3237 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 226 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2425 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 732 posts, 
From India, joined Oct 2005, 217 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
