Register

The Old Conundrum: Time vs. Money

When comparing a high-speed, cruise-power descent against a cruise-speed, reduced-power descent, there are a surprisingly large number of variables in the equation, all pulling in different directions.

Gemini Sparkle

Key Takeaways:

  • The article investigates the complex efficiency trade-offs between high-speed, cruise-power descents and cruise-speed, reduced-power descents, considering factors like airspeed, fuel burn, and flight time.
  • A mathematical model, developed due to the many variables, suggests that a cruise-power descent with a shallow average rate (around 300 FPM) yields the shortest flight time at a slightly higher fuel cost.
  • Conversely, a middling descent rate offers some time savings with minimal additional fuel expenditure.
  • Efficiency savings from specific descent profiles are negligible if the descent begins below 8000 feet or if the aircraft's airspeed difference between cruise-power and cruise-airspeed descents is 30 knots or less.
See a mistake? Contact us.

When comparing a high-speed, cruise-power descent against a cruise-speed, reduced-power descent, there are a surprisingly large number of variables in the equation, all pulling in different directions.

On the one hand, descending at cruise power will guarantee a higher airspeed, but on the other hand it comes at the cost of a higher fuel burn. However, a higher airspeed will reduce the amount of time in the air, and thus overall fuel cost, right? What about true airspeed? True airspeeds are highest at cruise altitudes, and decrease approximately two-percent per thousand feet during the descent, which throws in an another dimension. So which method is truly more efficient?

Ready to Sell Your Aircraft?

List your airplane on AircraftForSale.com and reach qualified buyers.

List Your Aircraft
AircraftForSale Logo | FLYING Logo
Pilot in aircraft
Sign-up for newsletters & special offers!

Get the latest stories & special offers delivered directly to your inbox.

SUBSCRIBE