Jump to content

Aéroport Montréal-Trudeau (YUL) - Discussion générale


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, santana99 said:

YUL doit redémarrer. IL y a un an que ça dure ! Tous ces avions immobilisés sur les tarmacs des aéroports depuis des mois et des mois, ça fait mal au coeur !

Ya moins de pollution! Yipee!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
4 hours ago, Alexcaban said:

Then newer planes these days cause far less pollution then other means of travel.  

(Per seat-km)

An AC A220-300 with all 137 seats full burns approximately 1380 litres of fuel to go 540 km YUL-YYZ, or about 1.85 l/100 km per passenger; if those same 137 people all drove individually, even in 137 Priuses, they’d use around 3200 litres (4.4 lhk). But planes don’t always fly 100% full, especially not on shuttle routes like YUL-YYZ, and not everybody travels alone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, SameGuy said:

(Per seat-km)

An AC A220-300 with all 137 seats full burns approximately 1380 litres of fuel to go 540 km YUL-YYZ, or about 1.85 l/100 km per passenger; if those same 137 people all drove individually, even in 137 Priuses, they’d use around 3200 litres (4.4 lhk). But planes don’t always fly 100% full, especially not on shuttle routes like YUL-YYZ, and not everybody travels alone.

What’s always fun about the marketing nerds’ claims about aircraft fuel efficiency and “greenness” is that they fail to reveal just how dirty commercial aviation is overall. Sure, that CSeries is one marvel of technology and aeronautical engineering, but all the logistics involved in keeping it clean, mechanically sound, maintained, catered, loaded, boarded, de-iced, etc etc etc… Dorval airport is by far the most polluted and un-green “employment pole” in the metropolis, way worse even than Montréal-Est.

25 minutes ago, caribb said:

Another interesting option we may have in the future...

Airlander is promoting another low carbon option for routes the distance of Montreal-Toronto. It would be interesting if this actually works as proposed. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SameGuy said:

What’s always fun about the marketing nerds’ claims about aircraft fuel efficiency and “greenness” is that they fail to reveal just how dirty commercial aviation is overall. Sure, that CSeries is one marvel of technology and aeronautical engineering, but all the logistics involved in keeping it clean, mechanically sound, maintained, catered, loaded, boarded, de-iced, etc etc etc… Dorval airport is by far the most polluted and un-green “employment pole” in the metropolis, way worse even than Montréal-Est.

 

Good point. What about fuel dumping? I can't imagine that's any good for the environment either but I'm curious if the effects are worse than the plane engines actually burning/consuming it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is definitely worse, but more localized. That said, it doesn’t happen as often as one would think. Most modern aircraft can land with a fairly heavy fuel load.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Countup


×
×
  • Create New...