What will you learn from this article?
- Is it true that single-engine taxi always gives significant savings?
- How can we prove or deny it?
In the video below, we will show you how we calculate the saving potential, so you know the true and achievable savings, which will help you focus on the initiatives with the highest savings and not waste time on actions that do not bring results.
Single engine taxi – comparison between the market standard approach and the StorkJet approach
The market standard is based on statistical assumptions, while at StorkJet we simulate each flight for each possible decision. For example, with a standard approach, single-engine taxi fuel burn is equal to 50% of the dual-engine taxi fuel burn plus eventual APU fuel burn. At StorkJet we simulate each second of the taxi and how it looks if the pilot would use only one engine. The second example of the difference between the market approach and StorkJet’s approach is discretionary fuel. In the standard approach, the penalty for discretionary fuel is calculated using the generic cost of weight method. At StorkJet, we simulate how the flight would look if it would have a lower take-off weight due to the amount of discretionary fuel. Knowing the actual fuel burn, and the simulated fuel burn, we know exactly the saving potential.
Watch the video and check how we are measuring true savings potential second after second.