4 ms·
Some more technical information: https://cleantechhub.lufthansagroup.com/en/focus-areas/aircraft-related-hardware/aeroshark.html https://cleantechhub.lufthansag
by massenpunkt 2y ago
Some more technical information: https://cleantechhub.lufthansagroup.com/en/focus-areas/aircraft-related-hardware/aeroshark.html https://cleantechhub.lufthansagroup.com/en/focus-areas/aircr...
- kryptoncalm 2y agoMost relevant part: “By applying a total of 950 square meters of AeroSHARK riblet film to the fuselage and engine nacelle surfaces of a Boeing 777, fuel savings of approximately 1.1 percent can be achieved.”
- bamboozled 2y agoSeems hardly worth it ? 1.1%? What about the cost of application and maintenance ? I’m guessing it’s plastic too, which will pollute the environment somehow.
- Raidion 2y agoThe plane can carry 45,000 gallons of fuel. 2.1 bucks a gallon. So probably 500 bucks of savings a flight since most flights arent full capacity. 130k flights in '23. So ez 65 million in savings a year. Worth doing for the environment even if it's cost neutral probably.
- bamboozled 2y agoWhat are the effects of this stuff on the environment ? I’m not saying this is a negative , just that plastic pollution is a huge issue , I can’t see this stuff making the situation much better.
- r00fus 2y agoThere’s a cost/benefit ratio chart in that link from GP comment. The ROI appears to be 2 years. Considering the application is relatively easy, this looks like a good deal for airlines.
- bamboozled 2y agoVery interested to understand what the maintenance would be like, are these thing essentially industrial grade stickers?
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoExpectation of success or profit = P(success)reward - P(failure)penalty - opportunity cost (TCO) Supposed these panels were $100k/plane. Jet fuel costs $0.36/lbs and a 777 burns about 30 lbs/nm in cruise. Suppose a 777 averages 14,000 nm/day. That's 420,000 lbs/day or $151,200/day. 1% savings would be $1,512/day, so the break even point would be roughly 2 months and would be profitable from then on. Suppose a 2 year lifecycle. That a savings $500k per year per plane. Put a little more thought and data into your comments if you would be so kind.
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoEdit after-the-fact P(success)*reward - P(failure)*penalty - opportunity cost (TCO)
- IshKebab 2y agoYour back of the envelope calculation is off by over 10x, so I'm not sure it's him that needs to put more thought into their comments.
- dredmorbius 2y agoThat provides more information (and visuals) on the technology itself. I've spent a few minutes looking for imagery of the film itself, sufficient to show details. There's surprisingly little, and I suspect the manufacturer doesn't want visual details of the skin itself available. There's a schematic in the link below, which also shows the contrast of the AEROShark film to actual shark skin. The film is more grooves than scales, for those curious. <https://swiss.newsmarket.com/english/press-releases/swiss-adopts-new-aeroshark-riblet-film-technology-to-further-reduce-its-flights--carbon-emissions/s/105eec50-03fe-44c4-8911-c3fdb9db004b https://swiss.newsmarket.com/english/press-releases/swiss-ad...>