Archives

Redundant wing lights removed, lighter materials in use. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23847100/)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/506/SWA.jpgAP - March 25, 2008

Your ginger-ale doesn’t come in a glass anymore on most US Airways flights. On Delta you’ll find yourself in a thinner, lighter seat. If you fly JetBlue cross-country, you’ll get a dainty bag of 100-calorie crisps in place of the original snack box of cookies, crackers and spreadable cheese.

With jet fuel prices so high, airlines have no choice but to scour their planes for ways to lighten the load. There’s no room for even the smallest bits of dead weight, from redundant wing lights to extra wires in the walls. Manufacturers also are using lighter materials in plane construction.

“The pressure is immense” to cut weight, said John Heimlich, chief economist for the Air Transport Association of America, an industry trade group. “Every penny more per gallon adds $195 million to the industry’s expenses per year.

“You simply cannot make all of that up with fare increases.”

Jet fuel, which the Energy Department’s Energy Information Administration tracked at $3.17 per gallon in New York on Tuesday, has doubled since the beginning of 2007. It outpaced labor as the biggest airline expense three years ago. As of September 2007, fuel made up 27 percent of operating expenses for U.S. airlines, according to the latest data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

The industry has struggled to keep up. Carriers have increased fares, cut capacity, parked their gas guzzler planes, charged customers to check a second bag, trimmed staff and pushed as many passengers as possible to automated kiosks.

Airlines also try to exert some control over fuel expenses through hedging, a practice of capping fuel prices months or years in advance with long-term contracts.

But hedging is still a gamble.

“Reducing consumption is a certainty,” Heimlich said. “You’re always going to win by consuming less energy.”

To that end, carriers have pulled out unused ovens, magazine racks and trash compactors during the past few years. Some removed paper manuals in the cockpit and installed electronic maintenance logbooks.

Fort Worth, Texas-based American Airlines created a Fuel Smart Team in 2005 as fuel prices started to go up. Tom Opderbeck, American’s manager of strategic programs, said the team tried to cut weight in places that customers wouldn’t notice.

The team capped electrical outlets in the lavatories and cut the power converters from the wall. It took out phones in seat backs and removed the heavy telephone wiring that was folded inside.

“I always think we’ve come to the end of the list, but we keep on finding new items” to remove, Opderbeck said.

The weight-savings measures were unrelated to the grounding this week of MD-80 planes operated by American, a company spokesman said Friday. American and Delta Air Lines both had to cancel flights after Federal Aviation Administration inspectors questioned whether the airlines had properly performed a modification. A $10.2 million civil penalty imposed by the FAA on Southwest Airlines this month also was unrelated to fuel-saving measures.

Last year, American replaced its silverware on business and first class with another set that was made from a lighter metal… http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23847100/

Now if only the auto industry would get the picture too. There are thousands of small tweaks that could be made to cars for better FE. Unfortunately auto makers don't pay the fuel costs so not much has been done.

As a 35 year employee in the aviation industry, I can tell you that there is no such thing as "redundant wing lights". They are called "navigation lights", and they are definitely necessary for flight safety, as any pilot would agree.

In regard to "redundacy", that is a term also related to flight safety. For example, redundant flight control hydraulic lines can prevent total loss of control should one set of lines fail. The redundancy must be done correctly though. Having redundant hydraulic lines right next to each other can lead to a disaster, as the Sioux City accident (United Airlines Flight 232) has tragically proven. In that situation, a disintegrating engine sliced through all 3 sets of adjacent lines. Thanks to the skills of pilot Haynes and others, many survived the crash landing.

As a 35 year employee in the aviation industry, I can tell you that there is no such thing as "redundant wing lights". They are called "navigation lights", and they are definitely necessary for flight safety, as any pilot would agree.

They're also known as A/C or Anti-Collision lights for a reason.

As a 35 year employee in the aviation industry, I can tell you that there is no such thing as "redundant wing lights". They are called "navigation lights", and they are definitely necessary for flight safety, as any pilot would agree.

In regard to "redundacy", that is a term also related to flight safety. For example, redundant flight control hydraulic lines can prevent total loss of control should one set of lines fail. The redundancy must be done correctly though. Having redundant hydraulic lines right next to each other can lead to a disaster, as the Sioux City accident (United Airlines Flight 232) has tragically proven. In that situation, a disintegrating engine sliced through all 3 sets of adjacent lines. Thanks to the skills of pilot Haynes and others, many survived the crash landing.

Well said.

As a pilot, I find that this is a very dangerous road.

Cutting in passenger comforts is one thing, but compromising safety is disastrous.

However, never fear...the FAA would NEVER let ANYTHING slip (being factitious)
My overall concern is running so dry that when an unexpected event, such as a random micro burst, or something as a ground based disaster, would put passengers and crew in intimidate danger to land, and with a shortage of fuel. I really would not want to know what the end result would be.

"redudancy" saves lives. You want critical back ups.

Perhaps, if the airline(s) would have efficiency and not waste countless millions of gallons of fuel in delays and idles... or perhaps adequate funding to the boys in Air Traffic Control and Traffic Ground Control, perhaps we could streamline. The Airline Industry isn't in it alone.

We need reform.

And I knwo this is a automotive forum, so hers a topic for you. Next time you fly, look at all the support vehicles on your local International Airport's tarmac.

Ford Econovans... Ford F-150s... Alice Chambers F1000 Fuel support trucks... all idling. All going 100 meters then.. stop. Think about the waste in Ground operations alone! The "Hotel" pick ups for one person. The Taxis... the freak'n police "Airport Guestopo" patrolling in Excursions, F-250s, Crov Vics. My personal Fav. The FAA inspectors "US GOVERNMENT PLATES" Subrban going between aircraft, and stopping ever 50 meters.


sorry for the rant, this hits WAY to close to home.

If the airlines want to save on weight, they could start charging passenger fare by the pound rather than by the seat. You would walk across a scale at the loading gate and it would deduct or add to the standard ticket price based on your weight as you board the plane. That would also provide health benefits as well by encouraging passengers to go on a diet to lose a few pounds (and save a few bucks) before an upcoming flight.