Easyjet paint job makes fuel bills less of a drag

[Cobbydaler]

No information on how much it costs or how long it lasts, but surprising that it's Easyjet who've brought it to commercial flight use.

Now Easyjet, one of Europe's largest airlines, thinks it has found a way to save even more money using a technology you cannot even see: a new paint job.
From Monday, it will be the first commercial airline to trial what it calls a "revolutionary nano-technology coating".
Easyjet hopes it will reduce drag as the plane flies through the air, increasing fuel efficiency and, ultimately, saving the airline hard cash.
The idea has been used on US military aircraft for years and the science behind it is relatively simple. The coating needs to be incredibly thin and it also has to be incredibly light.
If it was anywhere near as heavy as the paint on a plane, about 80kg for each of Easyjet's aircraft, then any savings made in fuel emissions would be lost.
The amount of polymer needed adds just 4oz (113g) to the overall weight of each jet.

The manufacturers say it could lower Easyjet's fuel consumption by up to 2%. It may not sound like much, but in aviation terms, it amounts to a planeload.
Last year, 40% of the company's costs were on fuel, a bill of more than £730m. If the polymer had been applied across the company's fleet, and if it had reduced costs by the suggested 2%, Easyjet could have knocked £14m off that.

Link

Wonder why none of the big carriers are using it (or at least haven't publicised the fact)?

[mr_bo]

Don't know if it's the same but a mate of mine was involved in the application of a coating on planes for a company in Poole, Dorset.
But ironically the bigger carriers never took off with this idea as they get a large rebate from fuel companies with the more they spend.
They did however do the leading edge of one wing on a plane that regularly flew from the middle east so they could compare deposits on either wing.

[Taf]

Sounds like Rain-X

[Gary L]

If the polymer had been applied across the company's fleet, and if it had reduced costs by the suggested 2%, Easyjet could have knocked £14m off that.

So if they aren't buying the petrol the oil companies lose out, and have a reason to put the cost up at the pumps? or am I thinking too far ahead?

[Damien]

There are loads of weird stuff like this. Not entirely relevant but I heard of one theory for dealing with incoming asteroids (presuming we saw them in advance) that instead of blowing them up the best technique would be to paint one side of it black. The difference in the energy received from the two sides would be enough to ever so slightly shift the direction of the incoming object but would so gradually and such a difference, early enough, would direct it off it's earth-bound course.