Saving Energy on Long-Distance Flights: Calculating Mass Impact

  • Thread starter Thread starter akatsafa
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Plane
AI Thread Summary
An airline executive aims to save energy and fuel on long-distance flights by removing paint from planes, which has a mass of 100 kg. To calculate energy savings, gravitational potential energy for lifting the paint to 29,000 meters is determined using the formula ΔE_grav = mgΔh, resulting in approximately 28.4 MJ saved. For the kinetic energy savings when accelerating the paint to cruising speed, the formula ΔE_k = 1/2 mv^2 is applied, leading to the conclusion that energy savings can be calculated based on the paint's mass and speed. The discussion emphasizes the importance of using the correct equations for gravitational potential and kinetic energy. Accurate calculations can significantly impact fuel efficiency in aviation.
akatsafa
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
An airline executive decides to economize by reducing the energy, and thus the amount of fuel, required forlong distance flights. He orders the ground crew to remove the paint from the outer surface of each plane. The paint removed from a single plane has mass 100 kg. (a) If the airplane cruises at an elevation of 29000m, how much energy is saved in not having to lift the paint to that altitude? (b) How much energy is saved per airplane by not having to move the amount of paint from rest to a cruising speed of 230m/s?

I tried these and got 56.84MJ and 31.07MJ, but these are not right. I used the equation E=K+U. I solved for K and then for U, but it's not right. Any suggestions?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
akatsafa said:
An airline executive decides to economize by reducing the energy, and thus the amount of fuel, required forlong distance flights. He orders the ground crew to remove the paint from the outer surface of each plane. The paint removed from a single plane has mass 100 kg. (a) If the airplane cruises at an elevation of 29000m, how much energy is saved in not having to lift the paint to that altitude? (b) How much energy is saved per airplane by not having to move the amount of paint from rest to a cruising speed of 230m/s?

I tried these and got 56.84MJ and 31.07MJ, but these are not right. I used the equation E=K+U. I solved for K and then for U, but it's not right. Any suggestions?

Thanks.
I don't know why you'd use that equation. In lifting something, you give it gravitational potential energy. To give it energy, you have to use energy. The energy you use is the energy it gains. Now, the energy you save by not having to lift the paint is the energy that 100kg of paint would have gained if you had lifted it. Calculate the gravitational potential energy increase for 100kg of paint being raised that distance.

\Delta E_{grav} = mg\Delta h = (100kg)(9.81 J/kg\cdot m)(29000m) = 28.4 MJ

For part (b), you use a similar idea, except this time it is the translational kinetic energy which changes. Paint at rest has zero kinetic energy. Paint moving has some. So for it to have that energy, you've exerted energy to speed it up, so if you remove the paint, the energy saved is the energy it would have needed to speed up to that speed.

\Delta E_{k} = E'_{k} - E_{k}

Where E'_{k} is the final kinetic energy (after speeding up) and E_{k} is the initial kinetic energy (at rest).

\Delta E_{k} = \frac{1}{2}mv^2 - 0

You can figure that out.
 
Thank you. I had those equations written down too, but I thought it was a harder question than it really was. Thanks again.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top